PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO

[martin_wynne]

I do find it strange that for someone who from day one of this thread was being critical of the product

 

I'm utterly baffled. I just can't see how that is being critical? in fact I'm really pleased with this product and I think it's great that Peco have finally produced something like this. If it encourages more modellers to take track seriously, so much the better.

 

But what I'm not going to do is to pretend that the turnout is a model of any known prototype, or that I wouldn't have preferred better geometry introduced for the mass market.

 

The plain track however is an excellent scale model of 4ft-1.5in gauge UK-pattern bullhead railway track, if we disregard the vertical rail and reduced chair jaws (which can't be changed by users) and the lack of jointed 60ft track panels (which could be).

 

Martin.

[Russ (mines a pint)]

I dont see why we should say anyone is  or isnt a proper modeller just because of what they produce or dont and how they achieve that. 

We all have our different interests, if you are fanatical about correct track then enjoy building your own, for others it is the loco's or rolling stock and for some it is simply running things straight out of the box as soon as you buy them , just because it might irk you personally, went to an old friends recently- didnt even know he was intrested in trains but he had an attic empire of 4 track roundy ran all sorts of stuff together that didnt go together and got great enjoyment from such - he only had basic scenery so far and was baulking at buildings cos of the price of rtp.

I mentioned that one of my high points of the hobby was making my own buildings from plans of real ones.  It seemed he hadnt thought that this might even be possible, where do you get the plans etc, it is quite possible that many people, not even new-comers are open to the fact that you can build your own stuff?

-I havent bought a mag lately but does build your own (anything) get promoted- to newcomers to the hobby ?

Edited October 1, 2017 by Russ (mines a pint)

[NHY 581]

Apologies. I failed to notice until now that this topic is in the Trade & Products Zone. That's not an area of RMweb where I often take part.

 

Perhaps we need a separate topic in the modelling zone to discuss the merits of these new turnouts for modelling.

 

Martin.

 

 

No. One thread is bad enough.  

 

 

I'm utterly baffled. I just can't see how that is being critical? in fact I'm really pleased with this product and I think it's great that Peco have finally produced something like this. If it encourages more modellers to take track seriously, so much the better.

 

But what I'm not going to do is to pretend that the turnout is a model of any known prototype, or that I wouldn't have preferred better geometry introduced for the mass market.

 

The plain track however is an excellent scale model of 4ft-1.5in gauge UK-pattern bullhead railway track, if we disregard the vertical rail and reduced chair jaws (which can't be changed by users) and the lack of jointed 60ft track panels (which could be).

 

Martin.

 

Continually refering to the gauge of the track work as '4ft 1.5in' is tedious by now. We all know OO gauge track is under scale width but really, move on. That particular record is worn out.

 

 

PECO are finally producing OO gauge trackwork for the British market with the sleeper spacing that modellers have been after for years. Hats off to them for doing so.

 

I for one don't give a rats ar*e that the points will not follow a paticular prototype or company but will certainly have a look when they hit the shops.

 

On a much more positive note, future releases of points and crossings etc. will keep the wafflers occupied for many years to come.

 

Me, I'll buy some when I need it, lay it as best I can and enjoy playing trains.

 

 

Rob.

[martin_wynne]

I don't see why we should say anyone is  or isn't a proper modeller just because of what they produce or dont and how they achieve that.

 

I have completely lost track of this topic. I can't see anywhere that anyone has said that anyone isn't a proper modeller. Certainly not me. What I said is that RMweb is for modellers. Which would mean that anyone posting here is a modeller.

 

Some here seem to be determined to feel criticised, even when there is not a shred of evidence to support it.

 

Martin.

[Russ (mines a pint)]

I have completely lost track of this topic. I can't see anywhere that anyone has said that anyone isn't a proper modeller. Certainly not me. What I said is that RMweb is for modellers. Which would mean that anyone posting here is a modeller.

 

Some here seem to be determined to feel criticised, even when there is not a shred of evidence to support it.

 

Martin.

Not at all Martin and it was also partly Pauls post (about the 20 thousand lol)  ? 

- but we understand that some people have different interest some people are more interested in track , some in stock, some in scenery & some just opening the box and playing with it.   

 

- I think if the new track appeals to the shake the box market the hobby will have moved on a bit , even if its not what some of us would call faithful track

 

I remember the old 'improving peco points' thread from way back its still a long way from a prototypical point but its an acceptable compromise if you are short of time or skills, and gets results quickly.

 

Edited October 1, 2017 by Russ (mines a pint)

[bertiedog]

Railway modellers, or Playing trains, a layout in a day, from the land where three rail lives on.....

 

No Peco involved here, but it provides some thing many UK users forget, a bit of fun.....

[Dunsignalling]

Railway modellers, or Playing trains, a layout in a day, from the land where three rail lives on.....

 

No Peco involved here, but it provides some thing many UK users forget, a bit of fun.....

Different people have different ideas of what constitutes fun.

 

Playing with toys from a bygone era or modern recreations thereof (is it just me that finds the retro stuff extremely twee?) is probably something I'd enjoy now and again, but it's not something I'd fancy doing every week.

 

John

Edited October 2, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[martin_wynne]

Continually refering to the gauge of the track work as '4ft 1.5in' is tedious by now

 

All 00 rolling stock is made to a gauge of 4ft-1.5in. It makes sense therefore to run it on 4ft-1.5in track. Peco have now made that very track available, and I for one think it is great. It's just what I wanted.

 

Why so many folks are taking offence at this is beyond me -- especially when they go on to say that they are going to buy it anyway, but pretend it is something else. I don't imagine Peco mind one way or the other, provided folks buy it.

 

Martin.

[Gilbert]

 "I think if the new track appeals to the shake the box market the hobby will have moved on a bit"

 

Interesting statement - I think it's a bit more complex than that - in 7mm for example I use Peco track and points but build some of my locos from Brass kits or JLTRT, in HO I use Peco track and build craftsman buildings and scratch build rolling stock or use the excellent laser cut wood kits for my cabooses.

 

We all have our own ways of creating our model railways and I personally am less offended by track that is not prototypically correct than others. Having said that Pixash Lane - my 4mm layout now sold on to the Bentley Group - used SMP track and Marcway track as even I recognised the visual short-comings of the Peco 4mm product.

 

I will now contradict myself again by stating that as used on layouts such such as Albion Yard or Shelfie by Paul Marshall Potter the Peco product looks perfectly acceptable because of the way the layouts are built and presented.t... I suppose I'm definitely in the "theatre" rather than "engineering" camp I'm afraid...

 

I'm just off for an argument with myself...

 

ATB

 

Chris

[Gilbert]

and I've just used the existing Peco Code 75 product to get something running as I had nowhere to use my BR 4mm stock.....

[Roy Langridge]

and I've just used the existing Peco Code 75 product to get something running as I had nowhere to use my BR 4mm stock.....

 

I have done likewise, an inglenook layout that I have knocked together whilst waiting for the bullheads points to become available. It started life as somewhere to run Pecketts and Austerities but gets used for far more.

 

As for modelling, I don't have much time to enjoy my hobby and that, therefore, constrains what I spend my time modelling. I agree there has been some people intimating that if you don't build your own track (and possibly to P4 at that) you are not modelling. That is just not on and, to be honest, quite offensive. At the moment my modelling is limited to fitting lights / sound to ready to run models, constructing buildings, scenery work and building a few Parkside wagons. No track. Does that mean I am a modeller or not?

 

Edit: and yes, constant referrals to 4ft-1.5in does wear thin. Given plenty of models, even to P4 standards, are not to scale, perhaps I should start referring to beautiful scale models as having 6 inch thick bodywork? No, I think not.

 

Roy

Edited October 2, 2017 by Roy Langridge

[Gilbert]

and I've just used the existing Peco Code 75 product to get something running as I had nowhere to use my BR 4mm stock.....

and due to a withdrawal it's now going to a show  Cheltenham 28/29 October - Dock Street Sidings - will start a thread soon...

[Gilbert]

and due to a withdrawal it's now going to a show  Cheltenham 28/29 October - Dock Street Sidings - will start a thread soon...

 

http://www.cheltmodrail.org.uk/preview.php?ExKey2=39

[Dunsignalling]

Two tribes?

 

Tribe 1

 

Accepts that 4mm/OO is inaccurate for perfectly good historical and practical reasons and will just enjoy the new products for what they are: an improvement (for some of our purposes) upon what went before. Some aspire to something more accurate but lack one or more of the assets required to do something about it, or just aren't sufficiently offended by 16.5mm to bother.

 

Tribe 2

 

For some reason seems to need a reassurance that they own "accurate models" even if they represent an collection of accurate (or near accurate) components in an arrangement that doesn't exist in prototype form. i.e. a UK railway built to a gauge of four feet, one-and-a-half inches.  

 

 

Maybe the only end to the argument will come when Tribe 2 gets together and builds a real railway to their notional gauge. 

 

John (firmly in Tribe 1)

Edited October 2, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[Joseph_Pestell]

Railway modellers, or Playing trains, a layout in a day, from the land where three rail lives on.....

 

No Peco involved here, but it provides some thing many UK users forget, a bit of fun.....

 

I could certainly have fun with her. Not sure that trains would be involved...

[bertiedog]

Only two tribes? in the UK there used to be estimated that over 20 different gauge, scale groups were at each others throat so to speak, and they disregarded the toy train users, who tend to get dismissed, unlike outside the UK.

 

There are few so forthright in their views than a proponent of a particular combination of scale and gauge, and it shocks US visitors and was the basis of hours of discussion with Lin Westcott and John Allen, when I meet them on a visit to the UK for the London NMRA convention. Mr Pritchard was there in the evening and joined in the talk about the hobby in general, and how difficult it was to design products for such an un0organised group of enthusiasts, yes we are enthusiastic, and unfortunately a lot are also unaware of the difficulties in making items for sale in the UK, where independence is somewhat treasured at the expense of setting standards that can be followed.

 

Go on, admit ypu play with trains, that fine models of any type interest you, have fun, and let others run things other ways as well. But at the core should be standards that stop makers from making incompatible items, and press for improvements at all times.

Peco have improved the track with the bullhead, it will sell widely, and maybe they will change the rest to better spacing etc over the years.

 

If pioneers had put their foot down 00 would never have happened at all, and we would all be following H0 to every bodies benefit, instead we still have carping remarks about scale  /gauge relationships nearly 90 years on from it's inception.

 

Now wonder new comers are still confused s as to what is going on. Try turning up at a Model club asking for membership with  set of three rail equipment, see the reactions in the UK, off-putting and very condescending to say the least, and risks putting the newcomer off for life.

 

It happens in the States as well, but far less than here. Look at the giant toy train at Xmas market in the States, it is still there despite people saying it is fading, locos and tracks around trees and Winter displays of models etc. It supports a lot of the hobby trade in the US, but the market is almost non existent in the UK, mainly because we still look down on toy trains, with the exception of Thomas.

 

It is not an insuperiority complex here, it is a superiority complex that drives UK modelling, a curious inability to see the joy of a hobby, by replacing the joy with an over earnest attitude about the modelling, perhaps typified by remarks about nice models but I would not buy it because it was not used on my line, group or company. There are none so partisan than railway enthusiasts, and it gets worse with track and gauge issues.

 

Re stating the obvious problems with 00 on here may not be lelpful, it opens old wounds too much, and does raise the hackles of some on here to say the least, live and let live is better in the hobby on this point, as unpicking 90 years of the mess is plainly impossible..

 

 At least Peco is having a darn good try with the track.........next should be deliveries on time from the rest of the trade......

Stephen.

[lapford34102]

This is all getting deeply philosophical for this early on a Monday morning. As for what tribe i am perhaps a sample of DNA sent off to the labs will answer that one.

Well done to Peco for the points and track.Will get a couple of points even though have no immediate use for them but support your local sheriff and all that seems to be applicable here.

Mildly surprised there hasn't been more comments regarding the price. When I spoke to Steve Flint at Shenfield he indicated a £30+ price but with a street price of 30ish it's OK even though at the very top end of my budget.

Magazine reviews will be of interest.

 

Stu

[Junctionmad]

All 00 rolling stock is made to a gauge of 4ft-1.5in. It makes sense therefore to run it on 4ft-1.5in track. Peco have now made that very track available, and I for one think it is great. It's just what I wanted.

 

Why so many folks are taking offence at this is beyond me -- especially when they go on to say that they are going to buy it anyway, but pretend it is something else. I don't imagine Peco mind one way or the other, provided folks buy it.

 

Martin.

Nope , all 00 rolling stock is made to a gauge of 16.5mm , there is no direct prototype. The prototype is standard gauge track, which means that 00 gauge track is under scale as far as gauge goes. Many things on a model railway do not accurately reflect the prototype scaled down. Edited October 2, 2017 by Junctionmad

[martin_wynne]

If pioneers had put their foot down 00 would never have happened at all, and we would all be following H0 to every bodies benefit

 

H0 is an daft idea, and thank goodness the pioneers had the sense to see it.

 

If you want to use an overscale wheel profile for RTR, you need to reduce the track gauge. Otherwise the wheels won't fit inside splashers, behind valve gear, inside axleboxes, behind bogie side frames.

 

All H0 models are over scale width in the running gear for this reason. For UK-outline steam locomotives the result is particularly noticeable, with steam locomotives way over scale width across the splashers.

 

Using exact-scale 16.5mm gauge in H0 with much overscale NMRA Code 110 wheels is an utterly bonkers idea, and it is the sort of thing you end up with if there is a self-appointed body of so-called experts such as the NMRA trying to force their ideas on everyone else. Thank goodness we don't have such a body in the UK, where anyone and everyone can innovate and progress the hobby, instead of being stuck in the 1950s, where much of the USA hobby still is.

 

Martin.

[martin_wynne]

Nope , all 00 rolling stock is made to a gauge of 16.5mm , there is no direct prototype. The prototype is standard gauge track, which means that 00 gauge track is under scale as far as gauge goes. Many things on a model railway do not accurately reflect the prototype scaled down.

 

There is always a prototype. You measure the model, multiply it by the scale ratio, and there's your prototype. What you mean is that the prototype may not actually exist. Fair enough. Provided the prototype could exist, you have a convincing model.

 

Martin.

[chris p bacon]

Only two tribes? 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sty65gnx3SQ

 

Couldn't resist it.

[Junctionmad]

Only two tribes? in the UK there used to be estimated that over 20 different gauge, scale groups were at each others throat so to speak, and they disregarded the toy train users, who tend to get dismissed, unlike outside the UK.

 

There are few so forthright in their views than a proponent of a particular combination of scale and gauge, and it shocks US visitors and was the basis of hours of discussion with Lin Westcott and John Allen, when I meet them on a visit to the UK for the London NMRA convention. Mr Pritchard was there in the evening and joined in the talk about the hobby in general, and how difficult it was to design products for such an un0organised group of enthusiasts, yes we are enthusiastic, and unfortunately a lot are also unaware of the difficulties in making items for sale in the UK, where independence is somewhat treasured at the expense of setting standards that can be followed.

 

Go on, admit ypu play with trains, that fine models of any type interest you, have fun, and let others run things other ways as well. But at the core should be standards that stop makers from making incompatible items, and press for improvements at all times.

Peco have improved the track with the bullhead, it will sell widely, and maybe they will change the rest to better spacing etc over the years.

 

If pioneers had put their foot down 00 would never have happened at all, and we would all be following H0 to every bodies benefit, instead we still have carping remarks about scale  /gauge relationships nearly 90 years on from it's inception.

 

Now wonder new comers are still confused s as to what is going on. Try turning up at a Model club asking for membership with  set of three rail equipment, see the reactions in the UK, off-putting and very condescending to say the least, and risks putting the newcomer off for life.

 

It happens in the States as well, but far less than here. Look at the giant toy train at Xmas market in the States, it is still there despite people saying it is fading, locos and tracks around trees and Winter displays of models etc. It supports a lot of the hobby trade in the US, but the market is almost non existent in the UK, mainly because we still look down on toy trains, with the exception of Thomas.

 

It is not an insuperiority complex here, it is a superiority complex that drives UK modelling, a curious inability to see the joy of a hobby, by replacing the joy with an over earnest attitude about the modelling, perhaps typified by remarks about nice models but I would not buy it because it was not used on my line, group or company. There are none so partisan than railway enthusiasts, and it gets worse with track and gauge issues.

 

Re stating the obvious problems with 00 on here may not be lelpful, it opens old wounds too much, and does raise the hackles of some on here to say the least, live and let live is better in the hobby on this point, as unpicking 90 years of the mess is plainly impossible..

 

 At least Peco is having a darn good try with the track.........next should be deliveries on time from the rest of the trade......

Stephen.

 

I think this is rather unfair criticism. Most MR clubs have a broad range of members, with the majority being in the 00 set track camp. the number of Finescale , ie p4/s4 modellers is actually quite small.

I see little animosity between groups of modellers, beyond a few internet warriors. I know several modellers that have both 00 gauge and a p4 plank for example.

 

As for people modelling a line, region and time epoch, like my myself, yes that excludes a huge range of models , but I certainly recognise good models of any era and likewise will be critical of bad models of whatever era , line, time and place etc.

 

 

I also disagree that the lack of a standards body or the presence of one , would have made much difference to U.K. outline modelling. if anything it could have simply perpetuated what we have today.

There are very good reasons why 00 , EM , P4 and S4 exist ( and similarly in 0 Gauge ), modellers are made of people of differing abilities and interests. Building a layout to exacting prototypical dimensions like S4 is often beyond many modellers interest and possibly skill level , hence the step back to EM and ultimately 00. Take my case , the layout is a prototypical track plan , with the time frame in 1975-1985 ( because they kept modding the buildings and the track work ) but my layout is compressed and trackwork heavy. Equally I don't want to rewheel lots of rolling stock, particularly my engines, all of whom are running well.

 

 

There is no evidence that a standards body would have made a lot of difference, if anything it could simply have led to a breakaway EM and p4 section even earlier, because all it may have done is standardised around 00 . ( there were very good reasons at the time to raise the scale to 4mm )

 

I certainly see no " superiority " complex here , there will always be " armchair modellers " who love to point out deficiencies etc, but they are just that " armchair modellers " , there is nothing superior in a " armchair modeller "

[martin_wynne]

Tribe 2

 

For some reason seems to need a reassurance that they own "accurate models" even if they represent an collection of accurate (or near accurate) components in an arrangement that doesn't exist in prototype form. i.e. a UK railway built to a gauge of four feet, one-and-a-half inches.

 

As the sole member of tribe 2 in these parts, I can tell you that it is nothing to do with reassurance. Nor is about owning anything. It is about ease of constructing a model. If you want to build a scale model of something, you have to know two things -- the size of the prototype and the scale of the model. How on earth do you know how far apart to fix your rails if you don't know the gauge of the prototype? Whereas if you know that your prototype has a gauge of 4ft-1.5in, and you are modelling it at 4mm per foot, you can immediately work out that you need to place the rails 16.5mm apart.

 

You then notice that a great many others are doing the same, and can only conclude that modelling of 4ft-1.5in gauge railways is very popular in the UK.

 

Martin. 

[Junctionmad]

There is always a prototype. You measure the model, multiply it by the scale ratio, and there's your prototype. What you mean is that the prototype may not actually exist. Fair enough. Provided the prototype could exist, you have a convincing model.

 

Martin.

By definition the prototype must exist , otherwise the term is wrong , the prototype for 00 track is standard gauge . No more then the prototype for 18mm EM is equally standard gauge , even though it's also incorrect

 

Like wise there is no direct prototype for tension lock couplings , x04 motors , buffers that don't spring , platform figures that dont walk or signal boxes whose levers never move. The prototypes for these, are the " real thing " and the model is an attempt at a " representation " of that " real thing ". Note clearly the term " representation "

 

 

Like wise 00 gauge track is a " representation " of the real thing , in this case 4'8"½ standard track.

Your analogy is simply incorrect

Edited October 2, 2017 by Junctionmad

[NHY 581]

Good grief..........