00-P A track and wheel compromise standard with a lot of potential and practical support

[Andy Reichert]

 

Having always planned to run both US HO and British 4mm scale models over common track sections on my current test and eventual scenic layouts, I found myself initially using the Proto:87 standard for HO, but wanting to have similarly near scale wheels on my UK stock.

 

In looking further into how that might work, I remembered that in the early days of planning the US version of Proto-87, the SIG considered proposing the P4 flange way and wheel standards, but adjusted only as necessary to run on HO standard 16.5 mm gauge.  As we know, this was not eventually adopted, but due to the closeness in scales, it is perfectly practical to run both P:87 and P4 profile wheels on 16.5 mm gauge track with P4 flange way dimensions and an appropriate B-B setting.

 

While it is unlikely that many UK modellers would need (or want ) to have any stock with P:87 wheels, the fact remains that a standard that uses P4 wheels and a P4 flange way, but using a 16.5 mm track gauge, does have some very interesting and attractive compromise advantages for modellers who wish, sooner or later, to go beyond the scale appearance limitation of RTR models with their deep flanges and wide wheels.

 

As some of you may be aware, I've devoted much of the last 19 years to slowly developing and then manufacturing many parts and systems to make Proto:87 more practical for less skilled modellers. Eventually my ambitious goal, if I live long enough,  is to make Proto:87 a both simple and inexpensive "skill-free upgrade" to HO RTR, so that it's realism is available to all. At least, for the post steam era.

 

Proto:87 of course has the major scale modelling advantage of a realistic track gauge, and is thus the ultimate stage of near scale modelling in HO scale. Clearly the equivalent of that in 4mm scale would be P4, rather than anything based on 16.5 mm gauge. So I'm not suggesting that 00-P would or should necessarily be the final destination of most scale-minded UK modellers. But it may may well serve as a useful and enjoyable part way stepping stone to more realism, while enabling much more "fun running" to take place far easier and earlier than would be the case of a complete transition to P4. Or if P4 is the eventual goal, then not having to go to P4 "all at once".

 

So I'll use follow on postings this topic to explain the advantages I've found, along with some practical and completely sound solutions for anyone else interested in this modelling direction. I use the name "00-P" as a short cut to describe this as a "Standard" as it is short and sweet and seems to me to fairly obviously indicate it's origins an and structure.. If it already exists with another name, (and what doesn't by now), then I apologize for not crediting the author(s), but I'm not aware myself of anything in the popular section of this hobby. So I'll keep on using it for now and for this purpose.

 

More later

 

Andy

Edited June 20, 2015 by Andy Reichert

[martin_wynne]

Hi Andy,

 

It's difficult to see much advantage in this. Changing every wheel while retaining the 16.5mm gauge, and then rebuilding all the pointwork so that no other 00 models can run on it, doesn't look like a half-way house to anywhere. If rebuilding all the track you may as well be doing it in P4.

 

Before I can put 00-P as a pre-set in Templot I need to know your proposed flangeway gap. There are currently several dimensions in use:

 

S3.5 (Proto-87 USA and UK): 0.53 - 0.58mm

 

P-87 (Proto-87 Europe): 0.60mm

 

S4: 0.58mm

 

P4: 0.68mm

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Edited June 22, 2015 by martin_wynne

[Jeff Smith]

Hi Andy,

 

It's difficult to see any advantage in this. Changing every wheel while retaining the 16.5mm gauge, and then rebuilding all the pointwork so that no other 00 models can run on it, doesn't look like a half-way house to anywhere. If rebuilding all the track you may as well be doing it in P4.

 

Andy - obviously what you are wanting to do is a very niche market scheme; I have some notion as I am wanting to run UK O-16.5 and US On30 over both Peco and  code 70 ME 16.5mm track and am encountering some compatibility problems.

 

Nevertheless, have you tried re-gauging some P4 wheels to 16.5mm (is that what you picture shows?) as you may find the prototypical wheel thickness of P4 wheels will give an even narrower-gauge appearance........

[28XX]

Arrrggghhhh!!!!! NOOOOOO!!!! Not another ba57ard!!!

[martin_wynne]

Arrrggghhhh!!!!! NOOOOOO!!!! Not another ba57ard!!!

 

Why not? No-one is under the slightest obligation to adopt it.

 

All options have some pros and cons. This one allows 3.5mm/ft and 4mm/ft models to run together on the same track with much finer flangeways than H0 or 00. I'm thinking not many will want to do that, but for those who do the finer flangeways can make it easier to create complex track formations such as tandems and slips.

 

The more choices the merrier. The only important point is that each one should have its own name, and Andy has obviously considered that as a priority to avoid confusion.

 

Martin.

[28XX]

The more standards you have the more confusion it causes. Things cost more, because production runs are shorter, because the same spend is spread over more versions of the same prototype.

 

With respect, Martin, you make your living from catering for all the different standards, and we all look up to your intimate, authoritative knowledge of them, but for the average modeller, it just makes the hobby more intimidating and obscure.

[Jan]

The more standards you have the more confusion it causes. Things cost more, because production runs are shorter, because the same spend is spread over more versions of the same prototype.

 

With respect, Martin, you make your living from catering for all the different standards, and we all look up to your intimate, authoritative knowledge of them, but for the average modeller, it just makes the hobby more intimidating and obscure.

I have to disagree. What this does is propose a solution to those that are looking for one in this area. I sincerely doubt that 00-P will ever be the concerted focus of a groundswell of production support (I'm happy to be proved wrong... it's happened with P4..).

 

As for making the hobby less accessible, I think it has never been easier to take the plunge in this hobby. There's a shedload of stuff out there (and on here ) catering for everyone from "shake-the-box: blimey, it's a layout" to "my model portrays Manningham Sidings on Saturday, August the 19th, 1961 at about half past two in the afternoon, just after a rainstorm" (I'm one of those people, I think... ). The hobby can be as obscure - or as transparent - as you want it to be. Sites like this go a long way to supporting all interested parties by providing answers to questions on the railway (both real and model).

 

Cheers

 

Jan 

[martin_wynne]

The more standards you have the more confusion it causes. Things cost more, because production runs are shorter, because the same spend is spread over more versions of the same prototype.

 

With respect, Martin, you make your living from catering for all the different standards, and we all look up to your intimate, authoritative knowledge of them, but for the average modeller, it just makes the hobby more intimidating and obscure.

 

What production run? This is a track standard for modellers to use when building their track in the privacy of their own workshop. If they want to. Or not if they don't. There is nothing to be produced.

 

You seem to know more about my living than I do.

 

I'm retired, have been for several years, and my only "product", Templot, is available free of charge for anyone to use.

 

Martin.

[BG John]

As there's an ever growing selection of OO options in Templot, can you add just one for 4mm broad gauge please Martin? Or maybe two to keep those who use EM wheels happy! Oh, and 7mm too!

[Andy Reichert]

To Martin:

 

The flangeway gap for 00-P should match that of P4. I don't have any curve gauge widening spec in mind yet. So let's stick to 16.5 mm for the gauge dimension for now..

 

To all:

 

I'll start with some cons (which however do have some pros within them), so we can get these out of the way early. This is also a test for later contrary posters, to see if they read the early posts first

 

1. The gauge isn't any more to scale than 00. So end on, it will look much like 00, but somewhat pro, with considerably closer to scale end on wheel widths. Nice end on flange ways tho'.

 

2. Unless you have nearly perfectly flat track, you will most likely need working suspension on all your upgraded vehicles. Somewhat pro, is that properly laid commercial track IS FLAT.

 

3. You'll need to replace the wheels on your upgraded vehicles. So add that extra cost plus wheel re-fitting work. (only same cost as for P4 though).

 

4. Some 4mm bodies may be a tight width fit inside for the slight extra B-B setting needed for using P4 wheels. But we are still talking 2.33 mm more space than true scale with P4 wheels require, so that shouldn't be a particularly common problem. A lot of EM and P4 steam model inside clearance issues, like splashers and cylinders and make not be any problem at all.

 

5. Turnouts need to have modified flange ways and check rails.  (but only turnouts - and not any re-gauging there or anywhere else)   Potential Pro Hint - This might mean hand made track or turnouts are not an absolute requirement. (much more on this later)

 

5A. Normal RTR 00 Trains or Trains with mixed vehicles of 00-P and regular 00 won't be able to run through track with turnouts. (but they can be displayed, placed or run on track with no turnouts, or between turnouts.)

 

6. The minimum radius for some upgraded vehicles is going to be in the P4 range, if you have long wheelbase, non bogie vehicles with more than four wheels. (But no worse than P4).

 

I'll think I'll pause at this point so any more cons that others can think of can be added.

 

Andy

[martin_wynne]

The flangeway gap for 00-P should match that of P4.

 

OK. But in that case it won't be compatible with Proto-87, which I thought was your intention?

 

00-P check gauge = 16.50 - 0.68 = 15.82mm.

 

S3.5 check gauge = 16.48 - 0.58 = 15.90mm.  (NMRA is 15.88 to 15.95)

 

P-87 check gauge = 16.50 - 0.60 = 15.90mm.

 

I think most P4 users would say that if starting again the flangeway could have been 0.58mm, the same as S4. I think that might be a better choice for 00-P.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Junctionmad]

P4 or P87 wheels on 00 track , what's the point , it's like suggesting putting a Ferrari engine into a hillman imp.

 

I'm sure we could postulate the need to run N -wheels or 5" on 00 gauge and invent another track and wheel combo , but seriously Andy

Edited June 22, 2015 by Junctionmad

[martin_wynne]

P4 or P87 wheels on 00 track, what's the point

 

The point is that Andy is desperately keen that everyone continues to use 16.5mm track, and sees the trend to 16.2mm (00-SF) as a threat to his Proto-87 product range.

 

16.2mm in the UK doesn't really affect him, but if it takes off in the USA (H0-SF, and Terry Flynn) for use with the increasingly popular code 88 wheels, Proto-87 would be all but dead. Its main selling point is that it uses the same track gauge as regular H0.

 

Also in the USA is the notion that turnouts can be changed from one standard to another by replacing the crossing and check rails, leaving the track gauge the same. No one in the UK would dream of doing that, we would just build a new one. But we don't have the massive layouts with hundreds of turnouts in situ which are common in the USA.

 

There's maybe a niche market of a handful of users for 00-P in the UK, so we may as well get the dimensions sorted out.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[mightbe]

I can see a benefit of this that no one's said:

 

If your models are close to eve-level and you have most track within 20 degrees of  parallel to the fascia (or perpendicular to the viewing areas; take your pick), the wheels will look much lighter and prototypical. The end-on view might be slightly stomach churning but the finer wheels will really improve the looks of the wheels even from side-on (though the effect will be best from an angle).

 

Since most of us are already resigned to the wheels being a bit "deep" in comparison to the real thing I don't see this as any worse. 

 

At the same time, the view of the fine pointwork isn't very good from eve-level, and it seems slightly self-defeating in that respect if not for the better wheels that these turnouts allow. 

 

It'll probably look quite good in pictures. It won't from above (at least, it will look equally as bad as regular 00 from above, but with the right layout this is a sensible alternative.

 

Personally I'd just go to P4. If you want interoperability with P87 stock it's really just a much finer version of OO-SF.

 

(on that topic has anyone ever built anything non-British/Irish in P4? Something French or Dutch or German or even N. American?)

 

Quentin

[trisonic]

Maybe the point is that Andy has a P87 layout and simply wants to run 4mm scale on it too?

 

I do wonder what proportion of US modelers build their own track compared to the UK? I have noticed around here that the basement filling “Empires” in HO are on the decline - even where room is available.

 

Dunno if that is the Lance M. philosophy hitting home or just a different generation of modelers?

 

Best, Pete.

[Jeff Smith]

Maybe the point is that Andy has a P87 layout and simply wants to run 4mm scale on it too?

 

This is what Andy implied in the OP

[Pacific231G]

The point is that Andy is desperately keen that everyone continues to use 16.5mm track, and sees the trend to 16.2mm (00-SF) as a threat to his Proto-87 product range.

 

16.2mm in the UK doesn't really affect him, but if it takes off in the USA (H0-SF, and Terry Flynn) for use with the increasingly popular code 88 wheels, Proto-87 would be all but dead. Its main selling point is that it uses the same track gauge as regular H0.

 

Also in the USA is the notion that turnouts can be changed from one standard to another by replacing the crossing and check rails, leaving the track gauge the same. No one in the UK would dream of doing that, we would just build a new one. But we don't have the massive layouts with hundreds of turnouts in situ which are common in the USA.

 

I'm confused by this. Surely the reason why nobody in the UK would do this is isn't because they would have less track to convert but because conversion from 00 or even EM standards to P4 requires a change of gauge, the conversion from H0 to Proto87 does not and I've seen several P87 layouts that use Peco code 100 for hidden track.

 

Surely the main selling point of Proto-87 is to use wheelsets with scale flanges and tyres on dead scale track. P4 uses a gauge of 18.83 mm because that's what 56.5 inch (1435mm) standard gauge track scales to at 4mm/ft. The equivalent gauge for 1:87 scale is 16.494 mm which is, within any sensible tolerances,16.5mm. There should therefore be no need to change the actual gauge used for dead scale track but the frogs and guard rails would need to be changed.

 

I thought the point of the 0.3mm gauge reduction in HO-SF was to be able to use off the shelf code 88 HO wheelsets with trackwork that includes much finer frog and guard rail (crossing and check rail) clearances but where the rolling stock would still be compatible with "normal" H0. 

 

Am I missing something?

Edited June 23, 2015 by Pacific231G

[mightbe]

Maybe the point is that Andy has a P87 layout and simply wants to run 4mm scale on it too?

 

I do wonder what proportion of US modelers build their own track compared to the UK? I have noticed around here that the basement filling “Empires” in HO are on the decline - even where room is available.

 

Dunno if that is the Lance M. philosophy hitting home or just a different generation of modelers?

 

Best, Pete.

 

I think there's an economic-generational tie to layout size. Baby Boomers grew layouts into basement or garage empires and their children and their children's children are finding that homes are costing relatively more now. The average size of a new house has been slowly shrinking since the 1990s according to an article I read a while back. No doubt the more recent recession has left an impact as well. The recession probably also directly slowed the construction of new large layouts. At the same time MR has been pushing smaller and intermediate sized layouts/plans with lots of articles from Mindheim and the like about simplifying and studying prototypical operations.

 

I would gladly welcome a change in mindset, but I think Mindheim's influence will be felt more and more over the next 20-30 years.

 

I wonder what would happen if Mindheim ever tried P87 (I don't know if he has already)...his plans certainly seem like good candidates. Modern era, simple layouts, few turnouts, no gradients, superdetailing. Food for thought.

 

Quentin

[martin_wynne]

Maybe the point is that Andy has a P87 layout and simply wants to run 4mm scale on it too?

 

He could do that simply by putting Proto87 wheels on his 4mm models, using the existing Proto87 standards. There would be no reason to create a new 00-P standard.

 

00-P would be essentially the same standard as Proto87, but in 4mm/ft scale. So 4mm/ft scale rail, sleepers and spacings. And presumably UK-style bullhead chairs, pandrol clips and baseplates, REA switches, double-track spacing, etc., if it is to be called a variant of 00.

 

Which suggests that Andy wants to build a P4 layout for 4ft-1.5in gauge, but run his 3.5mm/ft scale models on it.

 

Either way, I don't believe there are many who would want to do the same. 4ft-1.5in gauge is popular in the UK, but primarily so that modellers can use RTR 4ft-1.5in models straight out of the box. Not many would want to stick with 4ft-1.5in gauge when re-wheeling such models with exact-scale wheels.

 

Martin.

[Grovenor]

 

He could do that simply by putting Proto87 wheels on his 4mm models, using the existing Proto87 standards. There would be no reason to create a new 00-P standard.

He couldn't because P87 wheels are not available in the required diameters for 4mm scale UK practice.

Keith

[martin_wynne]

He couldn't because P87 wheels are not available in the required diameters for 4mm scale UK practice.

 

Bit of a jump there to assume the wheels have to be available commercially. Andy is an engineer, he can surely turn some wheels to Proto-87 profile? If he is modelling Proto-87 he is probably doing that already.

 

Martin.

[martin_wynne]

As there's an ever growing selection of 00 options in Templot, can you add just one for 4mm broad gauge please Martin? Or maybe two to keep those who use EM wheels happy! Oh, and 7mm too!

 

Well only 2 for 00 in the menu short list, 00-SF and 00-BF. I suspect many users never delve further than that.

 

I'm reluctant to add pre-sets to the main list for other than standard gauge. Otherwise we would have a flood of narrow-gauge and broad-gauge variants, overwhelming the list entirely, which is already more than long enough. I added another standard gauge option only yesterday (P-32).

 

But any gauge or scale can be created as a custom setting in Templot, and shared with other users by means of Templot files.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[BG John]

Well only 2 for 00 in the menu short list, 00-SF and 00-BF. I suspect many users never delve further than that.

 

I'm reluctant to add pre-sets to the main list for other than standard gauge. Otherwise we would have a flood of narrow-gauge and broad-gauge variants, overwhelming the list entirely, which is already more than long enough. I added another standard gauge option only yesterday (P-32).

 

But any gauge or scale can be created as a custom setting in Templot, and shared with other users by means of Templot files.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

There are 5 under Other Gauges! And you've got Irish broad gauge! I can see the point with narrow gauge, but there are only 4 official broad gauge standards covering 3 scales, so there won't be a proliferation.

http://www.broadgauge.org.uk/modelling/models_standards.html

[martin_wynne]

And you've got Irish broad gauge! I can see the point with narrow gauge, but there are only 4 official broad gauge standards covering 3 scales, so there won't be a proliferation.

 

I'll think about it.

 

The point is though that they are all GWR-specific, and if I start adding pre-sets for specific prototypes the list will never end. Already we have the GWR switches in the switch list.

 

The Irish ones are a legacy of my own interest, and in any event 5ft-3in is regarded as standard-gauge in Ireland.

 

The best way would be for folks to create custom settings and then share the Templot .box files. For example this would be a natural thing for the Broad Gauge Society to do, and you could then include the baulk timbering at the same time. Templot .box files can be posted here on RMweb and also on the Templot Club forum.

 

The list in Templot was only ever intended to be a few convenient pre-sets, any others being created as custom settings. The list seems to have got out of hand.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Siberian Snooper]

I thought that Great Western 4mm scale standard gauge was 28mm ie 7ft X 4mm.

 

Hat and coat left behind as it's to warm for them, bye!