Why Would I Choose 00-SF ?

[Albert Bridge]

Martin - your post noted, - the "push" has come more from your followers than yourself and I think part of what is happened is that you haven't quite realised from the inside how the

 

 

Welcome to OO, I'm afraid. There have been OO modellers and modelling for very many years - but the cry of "there are no standards for OO" has been endemic for decades.

 

 When some people set up a society to address this problem , and sought to produce standards codifying coherent internally consistant figures which would be suitable for the different groups of modellers in OO , they simply didn't come across anyone working to 16.2mm gauge , despite about 5 years of widespread consultation with OO modellers. Nobody in the many many hundreds of past and present DOGA members has ever mentioned a 16.2mm gauge or ever worked to it. Why adopt  a standard for which there is no demand?

 

On the other hand , there was a big demand for a wheel standard for modern RTR to be defined , and the manufacturers pressed to adopt it. There was also overwhelming support for that standard to be RP25/110 . And there was a demand for a proper track standard for OO track that would match RTR properly. That was also drawn up.  There was also a need for standards to be published to cover handbuilt track. People were working with products from "finescale sources" with no defined standard or coherent definition

 

( I joined in the early days because it all sounded like a good idea and was strongly supported in print by Iain Rice in a piece for MORILL so I remember the history)

 

It's all about producing a datasheet with a coherent set of standards for modellers already working in that area of fineness/standard to use

 

DOGA was always going to define several standards for different groups in OO. (The key development was finding that the track standard defined for RTR wheels actually matched the practice of most people handbuilding OO pointwork)

 

It's just not sensible to start defining standards when there is no user base for them

 

 

If there is no demand for 00-sf, why are so many following this thread, or is the fact that the numbers adopting it are now getting to the point that DOGA are frightened of losing out.

[martin_wynne]

Martin the "push" has come more from your followers than yourself

 

Hi Ravenser,

 

I do not have any "followers" and certainly do not want any. My only contribution ha been to provide the Templot software and I'm pleased that many modellers find it useful. In explaining 00-SF over the years I have simply been explaining what is in Templot.

 

 

It's just not sensible to start defining standards when there is no user base for them.

 

I can't follow that at all. There isn't a user base for any standard until it is defined. When the P4 standards were first proposed in the mid 1960s there was no user base, just a few modellers conducting experiments.

 

When Roy Miller first told me of the "EM minus 2" idea in the early 1970s, no-one was actually using it, not even him. That didn't stop me adopting it for my 00 products after trying it and finding it to my liking.

 

I would be very happy if even now DOGA added 00-SF to its set of standards. There is no reason not to if it claims to represent the full range of 00 modellers.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

If there is no demand for 00-sf, why are so many following this thread, or is the fact that the numbers adopting it are now getting to the point that DOGA are frightened of losing out.

 

 

And why are the gauges selling out so quickly ?

[hayfield]

Is it just me or is there a degree of unwarranted paranoia present in some of theses postings? Not to mention elements of ageism.

 

I really just don't get it, a few modellers sharing their experiences of a particular interest and we're a bunch of wrinkled, crumbling, cult members intent on world domination. I think I must have missed something somewhere.

 

 

Take me to your leader !!!

[hayfield]

As DOGA have a stand at a number of shows including Ally Pally, St Albans and Peterborough you don't need to write to them. One of the layouts I mentioned, Belmont Road , will be at Shenfield  in 2 weeks - that's close to you

 

There is a scale society for OO ......

 

 

Now I wonder why I have never stopped and had a chat ? 

[Arthur]

Remember last years 00-SF convention chaps?

 

The committee meetings, what fun

 

 

The happy few patiently waiting to enter the convention hall.

 

 

My goodness, the hullabaloo when that chap with the DOGA lapel pin was spotted.

 

 

And the farewell march, Martins image everywhere,

 

 

Roll on next years.

[Siberian Snooper]

Is it just me or is there a degree of unwarranted paranoia present in some of theses postings? Not to mention elements of ageism.

 

I really just don't get it, a few modellers sharing their experiences of a particular interest and we're a bunch of wrinkled, crumbling, cult members intent on world domination. I think I must have missed something somewhere.

 

Arthur. are you a closet member of SPECTRE?

[Arthur]

 

No, but we do have a cat and a pond full of piranha (well, carp).

[Siberian Snooper]

If DOGA are so good at setting standards, why do they have to have several, whereas all the other standard setters only have one set of  standards for track and wheels, which they have got adopted by the manufacturing and supplier support that they get.

 

00-sf is a track standard that allows us to pretty much run toy trains, either RTR or kit built,  using wheels to whatever wheel standards the trade decides it wants to make.

[lapford34102]

 

Ye Gods, isn't this fun! I was mildly amused with the age angle of Ravenser's comments. I've thankfully recently made it to retirement (whether visibly that age you'll have to ask someone else) and with a bit more time on my hands doing things I never managed to get round to whilst working but probably should have. Making my own track was one of those things.

 

In discussing 00-SF it has never occurred to me that anyone would be unaware of other 00 modelling using handbuilt track

Ravenser, a moments reflection on Martin's comment about people not realising about "other" OO solutions might be in order. I know there are OO layouts with "better" trackwork out there, I was next to one at Canterbury this year. I know there are DOGA stands at various shows. But to be brutally honest those promoting the Association are light years behind EM and P4 at getting the message out there. Is there a DOGA presence here for example.

OO-SF seems to be slowly pulling in people from both the RTL camp and to some extent from the "finescale" community. As a track solution it has attracted a deal of interest and that may well be due to the way information is being disseminated, the web. It's seemingly been around for years but it's only now is getting a wider audience. To some extent I can understand why it's sudden prominence would rankle members of a long standing and honourable group but I don't think your approach is helping anyone.

Please can we get back to the original topic.........

Stu

[gordon s]

Hi Ravenser, I'm sure if we met over a few beers in the pub, we would both laugh about this situation and wish each other well. I've no axe to grind about DOGA or anyone building their own track to whatever standard they choose so am at a loss to understand why these arguments occur.

 

You're quite right in your assessment of my own position. I'm 67, retired and working hard to stay alive. I was a member of the North Middlesex MRC back in the 60's and was pleased to have been part of the same club as Ray Hammond and Frank Dyer. Of course in those days as a teenager I was brought up to be 'seen and not heard' but was able to pick up a ton of info from watching my elders. I operated at Central Hall many times and worked on Saturdays at the Southgate Hobby Shop with a certain Colonel Beattie, so I guess you could say model railways are in my blood.

 

It wasn't until a few years before retirement that I found I had the space and money to build a layout and Eastwood Town was born.

 

These days my memory is nowhere near as fast as it was when working, so I had to trawl back through my own thread to find out how I got into 00-SF.

 

It made for interesting reading and surprised me. I hope you won't mind me copying some posts from those early days in 2010.

 

 

Member

• 
• Members
• 
• 2,549 posts

Posted 12 May 2010 - 22:45

Hi Dan, my hand has virtually recovered now and I started work on the layout proper once again this afternoon. Thanks for your best wishes...

 

Gauge wise, I started off with DOGA fine as a standard which is 14.5mm between check rails and 1mm flange gap. Those are the steel gauges in the second picture. I still use them for setting plain track as the gauge is unchanged at 16.5mm. The problem I had is that I have a reasonable quantity of RTR locos from Hornby, Bachmann and Heljan, all of which would have needed to be opened out to 14.8mm B2B. That I could have coped with, but I also have several DJH kits fitted with Romford wheels and axles. These are 14.4mm B2B and to be honest I'm not sure how to change the B2B's on these locos. Whether you have to fit different axles or have the wheels skimmed or fit spacer shims, I don't know and in any case, I didn't want to mess around with these locos.

 

I decided the easy way out would be to adopt the DOGA Intermediate standard which is 14.1mm between check rails and 1.2mm flange gap. This meant a minor downgrade in appearance and the odd click and clatter with some fine wheels as they cross over the frog, but was the easiest way out. The brass gauges you see in the first pic are to that standard. The flat on the gauge allows you to still use the gauge over the top of checkrails and yes, the four grooves allow you to set check rails. I also use a 1.2mm flat shim for setting check rail gaps.

 

I'm still learning to build pointwork and every so often I do make mistakes and have to go back and check dimensions and perhaps tweak some of the gaps until all types of stock run through without problem. When I started I gauged the check rails from the outer rails and found I did have problems. The critical dimension for me is the distance between the check rails, so I do the check rails first and then gauge the outer rail from the check rail. Once that is set, I work back from the check rail position to make sure I have a nice flowing curve and finally gauge the switch rail from the outer stock rails. I know this probably sounds back to front to some, but it just happens to work for me.

 

If you read the various posts on RMWeb about track building you will see there are many different ways of approaching it. This just happens to be the one that suits me. Try several different methods and then adopt what you feel comfortable with.

 

I was considering building a couple of turnouts in 00-SF, but sadly the guy who made the track gauges died a few months back and a new supplier has not yet come on stream. Once they are available I may get some to see how they compare.

 

Hopefully I'll be able to post a further update in the next couple of weeks. I've just started today on the high level goods relief road, where various industrial buildings will be set. I've also decided to remove the cutting wall on the inside of the layout so that opens up that complex and allows a much better view of the trains passing though. It will also allow some low level scenic work, perhaps a footpath at lineside or even a water filled gully. It's great to have a little flexibility and it's impossible to plan a layout to the n'th degree and get everything just so. Sometimes the reality is not quite what you envisaged.

 

I hope that helps. Feel free to ask as many questions as you want...

 

Member

• 
• Members
• 
• 2,549 posts

Posted 24 July 2010 - 16:40

Pleased to say I've put away the paint and weathering powders to get back on construction proper of the layout. Weathering the Ivatt 4 and 9F proved a welcome break from carpentry and track building, but there are other decisions that need to be made. Some time back I expressed an interest in 00-SF as I could certainly see the benefits and the new terminus layout meant building new turnouts anyway, so I thought, why not give it a try. Easier said than done as sadly Russ Simpson who was producing the 00-SF gauges died suddenly in the States and no gauges were available. Eventually with thanks to Rodney Hills of the 00-SF forum, I managed to borrow some gauges and set about constructing a turnout this morning.

 

The benefits of improved running on both RTR stock and kit built chassis was a huge plus, but I had some concern as to whether the change from 16.5mm down to 16.2mm through the frog and check rails, would be visible. So I set to this morning and built the main parts of the turnout to 16.2mm and flared out the rails to 16.5mm to match up with the SMP Code 75 bullhead rail that I'm using. So far, so good and I have to say the improved appearance is certainly worthwhile and I'm not aware as yet of the gauge narrowing. First tests with RTR and scale wheels have been very positive and I'm certainly considering going down the 00-SF route.

 

Haven't seen Martin Wynne for a while, but I'm sure he'll be pleased that I've finally been able to build some track and evaluate the running qualities.

 

Here's a couple of pics with 00-SF with 16.2mm gauge and 1mm check rails gaps, versus my old build standard of 16.5mm gauge and 1.2mm gaps.

 

 

Member

• 
• Members
• 
• 2,549 posts

Posted 26 July 2010 - 16:53

Thanks Brian. Mail went off to you this afternoon. Payment will follow just as soon as I hear from you.

 

Chuffed to bits with 00-SF and will certainly go down that route. I really can't understand why the subject got so heated when last discussed. Shame was it clouded the issue and I have to admit, put me off somewhat.

 

Having now built a turnout and connected it up to SMP, the improvement in running quality is great and all my stock runs through smoothly. RTR from Hornby and Bachmann plus scale wheels from Markits no problem. I even got the thinner Gibson wheels to run run through smoothly once I had adjusted the B2B to achieve the correct BEF distance.

 

It looks better than 00, runs better and has more than met my expectations. If you are going to build your own 00 track and don't want the EM/P4 standard, this is a great option.

 

 

Apologies for the formatting. That was out of my control, but the gist of it is there for all to see. I started ET in DOGA Fine and then moved to DOGA Intermediate. It was the purchase of a FIAtrains 10000/10001 and the associated running problems that took me into Ultrascale wheels and 00-SF.

 

At the time I had no knowledge of 00-SF and did not take part in the arguments that were mentioned in July 2010*. Without trawling back through the whole of RMweb, I cannot be sure, but suspect those criticism's came from non 00-SF users as at that time Martin Wynne and maybe a couple of others were the only ones talking about 00-SF. I took up 00-SF at that time to solve a problem and frankly to see for myself what everyone else was up in arms about.

 

I have no axe to grind and respect everyone else's right to model in whatever gauge or standard they wish. It is not for me to criticise other's choices and all I ask is to be left alone to share this hobby of ours in whatever standard I wish.

 

If asked I will tell others of my experience and it is then their choice to take up which ever standard they choose.

 

Why does it create so much ill feeling and animosity from others whenever 00-SF is mentioned? It is clear to see the arguments pre date my interest, so not guilty….:-)

 

*Edit: Curiosity got the better of me and trawling back through RMweb I found the discussion on 00-SF and found to my surprise I did contribute to the thread and asked questions about wheel standards etc. However, in my defence, they did not cause violent disagreements, but polarised my thoughts to try 00-SF.

 

Read the thread here.....

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/14753-162mm-gauge-who-uses-this-and-why/

Edited September 5, 2015 by gordon s

[gordon s]

Sitting here watching the rugby and undergoing my fortnightly medical treatment, means I'm sat here with a couple of hours to kill. Surfing the web is great fun and one page lead to another and low and behold 00-SF arguments in 2007....:-)

 

It's a trip down memory lane with many names from the past.....

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6685

Edited September 5, 2015 by gordon s

[Siberian Snooper]

As soon as someone just mentions 00-sf, someone goes off on one and throws their toys out of the pram.

[martin_wynne]

It's a trip down memory lane with many names from the past.....

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6685

 

Hi Gordon,

 

Thanks for that. Reading it again one point of detail has struck me which was not made at the time, and hasn't been made much of since. It was David Honner who drew attention to it:

 

The maximum BEF for 00-SF, and 00-BF, and DOGA Intermediate is all the same -- 15.2mm (see: http://www.doubleogauge.com/standards/commercialwheels.htm )

 

This means that if RTR wheels need closing up on back-to-back for 00-SF, then they also need closing up for 00-BF and DOGA Intermediate.

 

If as is being reported some RTR wheels are in the range 14.5 - 14.6mm back-to-back, then DOGA Intermediate has no advantage over 00-SF. Both would require the wheels to be adjusted. And both by the same amount, because both have the same maximum BEF of 15.2mm (see the above link).

 

It is only where RTR wheels are closer than 14.3mm back-to-back that 00-BF and DOGA Intermediate have an advantage over 00-SF.

 

A further point to note is the minimum wheel width in the above link. It is 2.75mm. Romford/Markits wheels are 2.54mm wide, most other kit wheels are 2.3mm wide. So none of these wheels are suitable for DOGA Intermediate. They all run fine on 00-SF.

 

I can hardly believe that 8 years later I am still posting dimensions about 00-SF.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[gordon s]

Reading the posts from 2007 amazed me with some of the views expressed. It was though we were in the dark ages and most of the posters simply dismissed something that we now know works. Some of the names are familiar, but in those days there were just a few willing to try something new and against the views of many.

 

If it wasn't for those who step outside the box we'd never have most the technology we enjoy today. I'm not suggesting 00-SF is the invention of the century, just applauding those who stuck with it in the face of dozens saying why or that won't work....

 

There are some quotes that make me chuckle and I suspect some may feel some reddening of their cheeks some eight years later. I'd probably feel the same reading my views from 2007.

 

Thankfully we mellow with age and experience...

[AndyID]

Contrary to any implications that I am a member of a international secret society composed of octogenarians who concoct their evil schemes for the ultimate overthrow of 16.5 mm gauge in the darkest, smoke filled corners of the web, I have nothing against the DOGA standards. If they work for others modelers, that's great.

 

It's pretty obvious that eight years of proof by loud assertion is having little effect. Its antagonists are only attracting more attention to 00-SF. Keeping schtum might be a better strategy

[polybear]

It's just not sensible to start defining standards when there is no user base for them

I would humbly suggest that if there were "no user base for them" then the whole subject of 00-sf wouldn't exist, nor would this thread...

[hayfield]

Perhaps we should thank Ravenser for keeping 00-sf in the spotlight, another 4 pages of advertising. On the other hand he may be a secret 00-sf agent who Martin is paying to publicize 00-sf  

[Ravenser]

If DOGA are so good at setting standards, why do they have to have several, whereas all the other standard setters only have one set of  standards for track and wheels, which they have got adopted by the manufacturing and supplier support that they get.

 

00-sf is a track standard that allows us to pretty much run toy trains, either RTR or kit built,  using wheels to whatever wheel standards the trade decides it wants to make.

 

 

The Gauge O Guild ( O gauge coarse and O gauge finescale) and the 3mm society (2 standards for 12mm , one for 13.5mm and one for 14.2mm)  have defined multiple track and wheel standards . There are probably other examples (Gauge 1 MRA?) . Your "All the other standard setters" means in practice S4Soc, EMGS and S Scale , and possibly 2mmAss - none of whom are dealing with major RTR manufacturers , and who in many cases are commissioning products themselves from specialist suppliers  

 

Compliance in 3mm is helped by the fact that the society itself is one of the major suppliers of wheels. Compliance in 7mm seems to be a moveable feast - Slaters wheels  apparently do not match the relevant GOG standard, and 7mm track standards are now (in practice on the ground) a chaotic situation with 5 different track gauges now in use

 

DOGA is a scale  society for all OO modellers , not for a particular small subset of them . Defining more than one standard is a natural response to that situation , and I for one am glad they went down that root

[Semi Fast]

 

DOGA is a scale  society for all OO modellers , not for a particular small subset of them . Defining more than one standard is a natural response to that situation , and I for one am glad they went down that root

Excellent! Sounds like DOGA will be including 00-SF in it's selection of standards in the future (now that there is an acknowledged user base and clear enthusiasm for the convention).

[Joseph_Pestell]

 

 

There is a scale society for OO ......

 

Pardon! OO is a gauge not a scale. And you seem very determined that it should only be 16.5mm. I can see a logic to that. Perhaps 16.2mm gauge should not be described as OO at all.

 

But do any of us care that much what it is called? It works and some people prefer it (for reasons that I can certainly identify with), just as others prefer EM and S4.

 

Equally, why should any of us care so much that others have chosen other solutions that work for them?

[Ravenser]

Hi Gordon,

 

Thanks for that. Reading it again one point of detail has struck me which was not made at the time, and hasn't been made much of since. It was David Honner who drew attention to it:

 

The maximum BEF for 00-SF, and 00-BF, and DOGA Intermediate is all the same -- 15.2mm (see: http://www.doubleogauge.com/standards/commercialwheels.htm )

 

This means that if RTR wheels need closing up on back-to-back for 00-SF, then they also need closing up for 00-BF and DOGA Intermediate.

 

If as is being reported some RTR wheels are in the range 14.5 - 14.6mm back-to-back, then DOGA Intermediate has no advantage over 00-SF. Both would require the wheels to be adjusted. And both by the same amount, because both have the same maximum BEF of 15.2mm (see the above link).

 

It is only where RTR wheels are closer than 14.3mm back-to-back that 00-BF and DOGA Intermediate have an advantage over 00-SF.

 

 

 

Martin.

 

 

Martin ,

 

The reason nobody has taken any further notice about that point is that it's not relevant in a British context

 

While it seems from a previous  posting (see post 10 in this thread for link)  that US HO manufacturers are drifting towards a wider back to back and probably towards code88 wheels as well (and dragging the NMRA along in their wake) , it isn't happening in Britain. I can't recall ever finding a wheelset on a British OO RTR model over 14.5mm - if one turned up it would clearly be a rogue set  .

 

Our issue is with RTR wheelsets that are tight , not wide. You acknowledge that OO Intermediate shows an advantage when wheelsets are below 14.3mm - such wheelsets aren't compatible with OO-SF unless they are opened out (they'll jam) .

 

However the reality is that there are quite a few such wheelsets floating around on British RTR . Heljan certainly used/use 14.2mm on a lot of stock (what they are doing on current production is an open question - the Garrett seems to be 14.5mm? but whether all the other models have been opened out I don't know). "Tight" wheelsets down to 14.3mm or even slightly lower are quite common on Bachmann. Dapol were supplying plastic wheels in their kits and with their coaches - I retrieved 3 examples from a box the other evening and the back to backs were 13.6mm, 14.2mm and 14.5mm.....  (These are the old Mainline wheels - chunkier than RP25/110)  They are now supplying metal wheels in their ex Airfix wagon kits, which seem to be a metal version of the plastic wheels. Back to back 14.3mm and wheel thickness 2.85mm , which is thicker than RP25/110,. And for several years Hornby rolling stock has routinely turned up with a `14.1mm back to back. 

 

Add to this Airfix/Mainline and Dapol models , many of which were excellent mouldings and some of which are still in production (ythough much cheaper second hand...) - these older models had a 14.1mm B2B

 

This is quite a large amount of RTR which will run on OO Intermediate without adjustment but which won't run on OO-SF at all unless the B2B is eased  

 

Gordon has kindly supplied me with the reference I couldn't find for the claim which was initially being made in support of OO-SF - ie that all wheelsets would run with no adjustment to B2B , and indeed that Dreadful Things would happen if you ever touched the B2B  (I couldn't find it because it was on an earlier version of RMWeb...)

 

 

(from Meandmytrains)

 

Method 2 [= OO-SF]seems a lot better to me because you don't have to mess about with the wheels. When you buy new trains. If you do that it means you would invalidate the guarantee. And no one will ever want to buy them if you decide to sell them. If you pull the ready made wheels out by 0.3mm they will very likely go wobbly. Or get loose. Some trains you can't do it on anyway. Such as Bachmann. If you use Romford wheels and axles I don't know how you can get them more than 14.5mm apart.

 

 

Against this set Arthur's perfectly sensible comments  in the other thread:

 

It's considered good practice to check, and tweak if necessary, the BtoB on any wheelsets irrespective of the track standard adopted. So having to do it for 00-SF [or OO Intermediate for that matter - my comment] is neither here nor there, I'd be doing it anyway. As has been said, anybody building their own turnouts is certainly capable of this simple check.           

 

The comment on this issue from 2007 seemed bizarre at the time - I've never had the slightest difficult selling on stock because of back to back adjustment - and it hasn't improved with time.... I'm glad it's no longer being advanced as a claimed advantage of OO-SF.

 

However the thread from 2007 prompts one other reflection. Eight years on from that thread , it seems there are still only 2 exhibition layouts in existance built to OO-SF standards.

 

 

(As for ageism - it was Gordon S who raised that at post 48: criticising another group as "a bunch of old guys" is odd coming from a group of posters most of whom are no longer working and have time to post on this subject all day)

[polybear]

However the thread from 2007 prompts one other reflection. Eight years on from that thread , it seems there are still only 2 exhibition layouts in existance built to OO-SF standards.

 

 

I don't see any relevance whatsoever as to how many 00-sf layouts there are on the exhibition circuit.  Perhaps modellers are quite happy to build and operate layouts in the comfort of their own homes.  Which in no way is a disrespect to those who do wish to build and operate exhibition layouts, of whatever scale or gauge, for their own enjoyment and for the enjoyment of others - and long may it continue.  I do recall Gordon's excellent layout "Eastwood Town" featuring in Model Rail Magazine - I believe it was the Centenary Edition if my memory serves correctly?  Does that count for anything?

[martin_wynne]

Our issue is with RTR wheelsets that are tight , not wide. You acknowledge that 00 Intermediate shows an advantage when wheelsets are below 14.3mm - such wheelsets aren't compatible with 00-SF unless they are opened out (they'll jam) .

 

Agreed. They will jam unless opened out.

 

Ravenser, we are going nowhere, just round and round in circles in topic after topic. How about a truce?

 

I will agree, in capital letters if you wish -- RTR MODELS WITH BACK-TO-BACK LESS THAN 14.3mm WILL NOT RUN ON 00-SF. BUT THEY WILL RUN ON DOGA INTERMEDIATE.

 

(In fact I have never suggested otherwise. I have no control over what other RMweb members choose to say, or said 8 years ago.)

 

If you will agree that KIT WHEELS NARROWER THAN 2.75mm ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR DOGA INTERMEDIATE. BUT THEY ARE SUITABLE FOR 00-SF.

 

An important point of course is that wheels which are too close can be opened out to make them compatible with 00-SF. There is nothing that can be done to a kit wheel to make it compatible with DOGA Intermediate.

 

I have always been careful to refer to "most", "modern", RTR models in talking about 00-SF. My understanding was that most such RTR models do now have wheels wider than 14.3mm back-to-back. If you are now saying that is not the case I'm happy to accept that -- I can't possibly measure the entire UK RTR wheel production. Perhaps we need a survey on the subject, but preferably related to production volume. Saying that a particular model has a narrower back-to-back is hardly significant if the total production run was 100 units 10 years ago.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[dasatcopthorne]

Pardon! OO is a gauge not a scale. And you seem very determined that it should only be 16.5mm. I can see a logic to that. Perhaps 16.2mm gauge should not be described as OO at all.

 

But do any of us care that much what it is called? It works and some people prefer it (for reasons that I can certainly identify with), just as others prefer EM and S4.

 

Equally, why should any of us care so much that others have chosen other solutions that work for them?

 

Ha ha.

 

You all fall for it when Ravenser posts!

 

I don't need to read his posts any more because I can tell by others reactionsto them.

 

Why bother. We know 00sf so why continue to argue our case.

 

He, Ravenser, thrives on it all.

 

No disrespect but sorry guys, you've been suckered.

 

Dave