EM Gauge - Less hassle than P4?

[workev2000]

Folks,

 

I hope that this is the right area of the site for this question.

 

I have been looking to move up from OO gauge to EM or P4. Having joined the Scalefour Society I have realised that there is much more time needed to model in this scale due to the complexities of re-wheeling everything and the need potentially for reworking loco chassis and rolling stock.

 

I spoke to Norman Solomon at Warley at the weekend and he suggested that EM may offer a much easier route, with less toloerance required for track building and also in rolling-stock conversion (over simplified statement, but a summary of what we discussed... )

 

I know there are lots of great EM gauge layouts out there, Wibbdenshaw being the obvious from the weekend; but what are people's exeriences in the move to EM?

 

I will be joining the EM Guage Society as well to read the manual; but in the meantime any thoughts or views would be gratefully received!

 

Ian

['CHARD]

I have been looking to move up from OO gauge to EM or P4.

 

Move up?

 

In width, one assumes!

[Ian Fisher]

Who am I to argue with Mr Solomon but correct gauge track has to be constant in any scale guage combo. Ok just re-read the post above and yes its simplistic..

 

Now what is possible is the opprtunity to reuse some of the more recent models running gear (years) where wheels can be eased out.

 

An option which isnt available in 18.83 that does require a finer tyre profile.

 

Ian

[Penlan]

Stand by, Jim S-W will be along soon.....

[Mod6]

Who am I to argue with Mr Solomon but correct gauge track has to be constant in any scale guage combo.

 

Let's not go down the 'accuracy' route again please, it's been done many times before. The OP is asking about experience in moving to EM (at the moment at least).

[The Fatadder]

Are you modelling steam or diesel?

 

With the latter I'd say there is minimal extra work for p4, (springing is only really required for long wheelbase wagons, though in any gauge (inc oo) a sprung wagon will look better when moving over track discrepencys)

 

With steam it gets a bit more work, and a lot more expense for p4 given in em you can reuse rtr driving wheels. And that some form of compensation seems more desireable on locos

 

As for track building, I'd say with p4trackco p4 is the easier gauge

In both gauges the track gauge sets your width so don't worry about those points of a mm

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

There is no one answer. Some EM conversions are a five minute 'bump out the wheelsets to new gauge' operation; but elsewhere there is a collision caused by the use of overscale wheelsets within fixed structure on vehicles: which was the major factor in the development of the OO compromise in the first place.

 

I would argue that if prepared to go down the 'extra effort' route in 4mm, then leap all the way to P4, for the appearance of the track alone. Give it a trial with whatever will prove most demanding, to test whether it lies within your skill set comfort zone.

[workev2000]

Blimey, I wasn't aware that I had to be so accurate in my question (CHARD)!

 

Moving up is in terms of realism for clarification; and Norman Solomon was stating that in EM things are not as "strict" in terms of gauging for smooth running in terms of check rails, etc because of the wheel profile.

 

As the Moderator says, I just would like some thoughts; especially with regards to re-wheeling stock (and what modifications are required if any)!

 

Ian

[Pugsley]

Personally, I believe that EM is easier than P4. As has already been noted, some locos can be converted merely by easing out the existing wheels, others are easily converted without bringing springing or compensation into the equation. Depending on what era you model, uncompensated long wheelbase stock (such as VGA vans) will run fine through fairly tight points (A5's) wihout derailing (although you have to watch for buffer-lock with scale coupling when propelling).

 

The deeper flanges also compensate for ropey track - I'm certain that if I'd built Chittle to P4 standard I'd have had stock derailing constantly as my track laying left a lot to be desired!

 

As someone once said to me (I can't remember who) - EM is 80% of the appearance for 20% of the effort.

[Ian Fisher]

Er Dear Mod I wasnt putting one against scale gauge combo against another as you seem to suggest, merely I was pointing out that correctly gauged, what ever the chosen gauge still has to be right, bit of a myth that hand built track can be built less tolerant than any other gauge scale combo what ever it is!

 

You buy your gauges and in what ever gauge you use em! if you dont you have issues.

 

As I stated you have the option in EM to reuse wheels in some instances..

 

Ian

 

 

Let's not go down the 'accuracy' route again please, it's been done many times before. The OP is asking about experience in moving to EM (at the moment at least).

[br2975]

Personally, I believe that EM is easier than P4. .............................................................

As someone once said to me (I can't remember who) - EM is 80% of the appearance for 20% of the effort.

 

I wish I'd thought up that comment, sums it up a treat for me !

 

Brian R

[Penlan]

I'm EM, but I've been there since the 1950's. so I can't in all honesty say what would be the better for you,

it depends if your a 'layout every other year' modeller, or like me in for the 'long haul',

current layout 22 years, previous 20+ years.

If short term, a new layout in a couple of years time, then EM and the next one's trackwork can be P4,

the experiance in EM will help to hone your skills for changing the wheels, compensation etc., to P4.

 

If your in it for the long term, the layout design etc., is exactly what you want, then be prepared

to spend some time on it and try P4, some of us EM people will still be here in a few years to welcome you back if all's not well....

[kipford]

I model in EM but help out with clib P4 layouts occasionally. Pugsley hit it on the nail with his 80/20 rule. P4 track is not very forgiving with the near scale wheel flanges used. The P4 track company point kits certainly help but they are of limited use if you are building bespoke formations. The point kits are not designed for curves and the pre-made crossing vees whilst a great time saver are very short and can give problems particularly near to the baseboard joints (we have had to build new vees in few instances in order not to compromise the design. With regards to wheels unless absolutley necessary I always re-wheel in EM as the flange thicknesses on some RTR wheels can cause problems through the check rails. The extra width required for P4 wheels makes some RR conversions that more difficult.

 

If I had the choice again. HMMMMMMMMMMM! Probably P4 because I want to see If I can make it work and I get the chance to exhibit at two exra major scale exhibitions.

 

Dave

[Mod6]

Er Dear Mod I wasnt putting one against scale gauge combo against another as you seem to suggest, merely I was pointing out that correctly gauged, what ever the chosen gauge still has to be right, bit of a myth that hand built track can be built less tolerant than any other gauge scale combo what ever it is!

 

 

OK I misunderstood your first comment.

[t-b-g]

The best P4 modellers (and I have worked with some very good ones indeed!) work to those standards because they enjoy the challenge, not because it is easy.

 

I work in EM and have done for 30+ years and I wouldn't consider a change now because converting all those locos and stock (and adding springing/compensation as most are rigid) would be expensive, time consuming and would only make a small difference visually. If I was starting again and making the choice, I would still go for EM because I can produce results very much more quickly than folk I know manage in P4. As an example, Ken Hill and I built Narrow Road in 12 months (www.narrowroadlayout.co.uk) it isn't perfect but it is an ambitious, fully operational layout and I haven't seen anything of that sort of scope in P4 that was done in anything less than many years by lots of people.

 

The answer to EM - less hassle than P4? is an emphatic yes from me.

[bike2steam]

As Penlan sez, I've dabbled in all 'disciplines' of 4mm, taking 00 out of the equation, EM is the easiest, unless you have bags of spare time best enjoyed in a group or club of likeminded souls. I don't have enough spare time, and like to have my own layout, so as a compromise I have to stick to 00, - such is life .

[iL Dottore]

I had considered going EM when I first jumped back into railway modelling, the problem is that access to EM supplies, from Switzerland, is very problematic and I didn't want to find myself in the situation of running short of supplies and being at the mercy of postal delivery for essential material - especially as I tend to model in spurts or sessions. I also wasn't keen on the idea of scratchbuilding track and turnouts, although my "take" on this has changed as my modelling skills have developed. So I decided to stay with HO/OO track (readily available here) but go with best quality available (IMHO Tillig Elite) and lay, paint, dress and weather the track to the highest possible standard - so that to the naked eye it looks as authentic as possible.

 

However, with ready access to EM supplies and one or two modelling chums to "hold my hand" when laying track or converting any loco with a chassis more complicated than a 0-6-0 tank, I'd certainly plunge into EM.

 

F

[Jol Wilkinson]

Having never worked in EM - I went straight form 00 to P4 - I can't objectively comment on the difference between the two in terms of how hard or easy they are compared to each other. I think that the same applies many others that have only built layouts to one of these gauges. Too often people are willing to make definitive statements but without the benefit of actual experience.

 

Having just built the trackwork for two new baseboards - 11' X 2' in total - I don't think that buiding it to EM standards would have been any different. The trackwork components exist for all three 4mm gauges and then it's all about using the appropriate jigs/gauges. The processes and techniques are the same.

 

The only thing that differs, as far as I can see, is the question of locos and rolling stock. Building from kits doesn't seem to make much difference. I know some modellers that don't use compenstation or springing in P4, while some EM modellers use them because it gives smoother running. Converting from RTR is clearly different and that might be the major factor in making your decision.

 

I'm unlikely ever to model other than P4 in 4mm scale. If I did, it would be EM, not 00 and I would still apply much of what i've learnt while working to P4 standards. For example I would always build steam outine locos with compensation/springing because they run better than any of the rigid chassis 00 locos I built.

[Snow White]

I have been looking to move up from OO gauge to EM or P4. Ian

 

Seems to me there are 3 options for you, not two. OO is a perfectly valid gauge to model in and nothing to be ashamed of. Just look at Chris Nevard's models, for example.

 

The question of gauge is just one aspect of modelling. Far more important is the overall realism of your layout. Many P4 and EM modellers are exceptionally gifted, which may give the false impression that just by changing gauges you will be able to achieve the same.

 

You mention Wibdenshaw, but to my eye what makes it so good is the overall quality of the modelling. No offence to the owner, but I really doubt if many people would notice it was an EM layout unless they took a really close look.

 

You have to weigh up the time, your level of ambition, cost, skill required and satisfaction you will get to really understand what will work best for you.

 

In an ideal world, we might all model to the highest standards, in gauge as well as everything else. Unfortunately, we live in the real world so we have to be pragmatic about our capabilities. For some, P4 and EM are definitely the right choice, but I would not for a moment treat OO modellers as in any way inferior just because of the gauge they use.

[Mike G]

Hi

Like Jol (LNWRmodeller) I went from OO to P4. Why? Well I suppose it was down to appearance, both of wheels and track. Have I ever regretted it..no. But then I enjoy a challenge. Been building P4 locos, coaches for 15 years and only recently got into track building with the new club layout.

 

http://www.newportmrs.com/littlemilljunction.htm

 

I have not found it any more intolerant than building hand made OO track. Gauges are gauges are gauges. In the end it's a personal preference and what you're comfortable doing. I would say that hand built track/point work in any 4mm gauge is demanding if you want it to work robustly and faultlessly, which is what we all want.

 

Mike

[Guest oldlugger]

Hello Ian,

 

I think you would find P4 more hassle (and time consuming) than EM; the track in P4 has to be very well laid for the most reliable and frustration free results. Gauge tightening (on curves in particular) which can happen if you're not vigilant whilst constructing track, will cause endless derailments due to the minimal flange on P4 wheels. The limited RTR side of things is also worth considering, especially if you spot a nice new release in OO from the trade; you are then reliant on manufacturers like Ultrascale to produce replacement wheel sets several months down the line, or not at all. If you model diesels then P4 should be no more demanding than EM or OO; steam locos are more of a challenge. However, if non of the above bothers you and you want the ultimate in track realism and wheel standards, especially if you opt for a prototypical location, give P4 a go! You won't regret the move. I've found that modelling in P4 also changes your perception of how you model; you will look at everything you do through new eyes and aim for the best, from the humble lineside hut to the signalling, etc. It is a hassle but worth it.

 

Cheers

Simon

[brossard]

A great discussion! I have been 00 since I started but now want to do something finer. For practice, if you will, I have built several points in code 100 and some in code 75 BH and my skills are definitely improving. There is a small subset of folk in my club that have a similar interest and EM is the consensus. The EMGS is a great resource. I recognise that modern RTR wheels are fine for EM. My intent is to replace the axles on my small stud of RTR steam locos with those from EMGS - which I have already procured. I also got myself a set of trackmaking jigs and tools from EMGS. They now take Paypal which is a great step forward. I think I read somewhere (probably Rice) that EM has the same standards/tolerance as Finescale 00 with a wider gauge.

 

P4 looks wonderful, but it does seem to be more challenging amd time/labour intensive.

 

John

[Kenton]

I used to model in EM - as principally a kit builder I found it easy (relatively) to model in EM than OO (though I have always kept a layout in OO). But this was many years ago and I became very frustrated by the track far more than the difference between OO and EM just the DIY needed on part of a layout building that held no significant interest. P4 was never really an option in those days.

 

I now find myself building kits for OO, EM and P4 but without anywhere to test / play with them in EM/P4 ao find myself contemplating something just like you in the "finer" track gauges.

 

Now, as hard as I try I cannot see the difference between the two on layouts and still think it is one of fanaticism or PC (Pointwork Correctness) in which way to go. I think I am correct that in P4 the pointwork tends to be longer but other than that the differences are small indeed. These days very good kits are available for both so I am sure that is not a factor and building one or the other in terms of track should not be a problem.

 

I think I will be dipping a toe in P4. Nothing wrong with EM just that's the way it goes. Ask me about this time next year and I will have a better idea.

[Guest oldlugger]

I used to model in EM - as principally a kit builder I found it easy (relatively) to model in EM than OO (though I have always kept a layout in OO). But this was many years ago and I became very frustrated by the track far more than the difference between OO and EM just the DIY needed on part of a layout building that held no significant interest. P4 was never really an option in those days.

 

I now find myself building kits for OO, EM and P4 but without anywhere to test / play with them in EM/P4 ao find myself contemplating something just like you in the "finer" track gauges.

 

Now, as hard as I try I cannot see the difference between the two on layouts and still think it is one of fanaticism or PC (Pointwork Correctness) in which way to go. I think I am correct that in P4 the pointwork tends to be longer but other than that the differences are small indeed. These days very good kits are available for both so I am sure that is not a factor and building one or the other in terms of track should not be a problem.

 

I think I will be dipping a toe in P4. Nothing wrong with EM just that's the way it goes. Ask me about this time next year and I will have a better idea.

 

Very true Kenton. I think the most "obvious" differences between EM and P4 point work are the clearances on check rails; crossing vees and between the stock rail and switch rails. It is probably almost impossible to see the wider gauge of P4 compared to EM when viewed from a reasonable distance. Close up you will see the flange difference between the two gauges, and possibly the tyre width.

[billbedford]

Just a few points to consider on choosing P4 or EM

1/ Most of the people who have advocated EM made their commitment to that gauge 15, 20 or more years ago when what was available in P4 made the decision much easier. The technology behind P4 has come on a great deal in the last 15-20 years. which leads to -

2/ Most of the people working to advance the hobby in general, work in P4. You only have to think of CLAG and Exactoscale to see what I mean.

However -

3/ The one thing you need more than anything else to model successfully in P4 is space. All things being equal, the bigger the minimum radius on your curves the better your layout will run. And yes I know many people who have P4 layouts with A5 turnouts and other sharp corners, but if they were really honest with themselves I have no doubt that they would wish to have the space to ease the sharpest radii.