RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted February 27, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 27, 2016 so straight track ends up having a substantially wider gauge than it really needs. Hi Andy, Likewise a lot of curved track above the typical train-set radii. Which makes it sensible to reduce the gauge a bit, to say 16.2mm, where the gauge widening isn't needed. More info at: http://4-sf.uk regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Hi Andy, Likewise a lot of curved track above the typical train-set radii. Which makes it sensible to reduce the gauge a bit, to say 16.2mm, where the gauge widening isn't needed. More info at: http://4-sf.uk regards, Martin. Are you some sort of deranged radical? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trustytrev Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Hello, I was going to reply to this topic then decided not to.Just thought I would let everyone know. trustytrev. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp1 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Hello, I was going to reply to this topic then decided not to.Just thought I would let everyone know. trustytrev. If we all follow your excellent example it will save about 40 pages of argument....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted February 27, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 27, 2016 If we all follow your excellent example it will save about 40 pages of argument....... But not the 14 pages already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekstuart Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 That's the first time on RMW I have ever clicked "funny" for four posts in a row. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevejjjexcov Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Just finished reading through this topic (only took an hour) and guess what folks I'm still none the wiser, why do we as modellers have to argue about this lifes to short and yes I have built track in both oo and em using C and L chairs tail and gauges. Did it by guess,luck and Mr Rice,s book on track building and it worked!!! So my thoughts are pick one standard/set of rules and stick to em. If anyone tells you your wrong tell them its my track and it works! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Steve The trouble is that the average modeller thinks anything with 00 in its title is the same, do try and simply explain the differences of each subset, their eyes quite naturally glaze over Having said that, quite rightly the average modeller wants a standard that accepts the stock they buy without alteration/adaption and works Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightbe Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 So my thoughts are pick one standard/set of rules and stick to em. I know you didn't intend it this way, but advising people to stick to "em" (in the 18.2 mm way) is terrific advice. One modern track standard that accepts numerous wheel profiles. And no more RTR BTB headaches (the advice given as intended is just as good--catholic and wise) Quentin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.