Jeff Smith Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) This stuff of course will not be available in the US, perhaps via Canada though.... I'm wondering whether with a bit of work spacing out the sleepers, this, and the inevitable points, would be of any use for the O-16.5 narrow gauge lines that used BH chaired track? Edited January 28, 2016 by Jeff Smith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekstuart Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Hello Martin Can I ask if that photo is yours and if so, can I download it? If it's not yours, would you be able to tell me who it belongs to please?It has an, ahem, very interesting mix of colours and shades of timbers that would provide a good example for testing paint combinations. Thanks. I don't know why you call it nasty. It's true that loose-heel switches are a bit daft in heavy-rail flat-bottom track. But for bullhead track on branch and secondary lines, in yards and sidings, the old-style loose-heel switches are fine: highley_switch.jpg The difficulty is that for models other than P4 there is insufficient flangeway clearance at the heel joint. This means that the moving switches need to be made longer than scale length to gain sufficient clearance. Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spannerman Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Thanks to all for the replies about third rail. Atb Nik Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) Even if the estimated dimensions are correct, the sleeper spacing will only be a gnat's more than SMP, depending on whether the thin webs below the latter's rails are sitting flat or are bowed. It looks close enough to me to be falling-in with the established SMP standard, including sleeper sizes as near as dammit, rather than providing a new alternative look. (My bold) Except that it isn't. The sleeper to gap ratio of SMP track is 0.62 (3.4/5.5) Assuming Peco isn't pulling a fast one, the sleeper to gap ratio of their BH track is 0.55 (3.3/6.0) That's a difference of 13% and it will be readily apparent to a one eyed gnat who hasn't got a ruler to his name. EDIT: BTW, I do prefer the look of the Peco track. Edited January 28, 2016 by AndyID 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 This is going to be interesting. For a great many years Peco 00 track has been the "standard" for many (the majority?) of 00 modellers who have moved beyond the limitations of the various set track products available in the UK market. SMP has been around for a very long time too, but it's always been considered a bit "boutique" (for want of a better word) by a great many modellers, so they tended to stick with Peco for many good reasons. By effectively endorsing "proper 00" track, Peco just threw a large monkey wrench into the market. To quote Lonnie Donegan, "We fooled you! We fooled you!" Suddenly, "proper 00" track is mainstream. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Great news! Will certainly be considering this product for future projects. By page 7, everything else has been said, methinks... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 By page 7, everything else has been said, methinks... "You have to look on the bright side.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'CHARD Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 This is going to be interesting. For a great many years Peco 00 track has been the "standard" for many (the majority?) of 00 modellers who have moved beyond the limitations of the various set track products available in the UK market. SMP has been around for a very long time too, but it's always been considered a bit "boutique" (for want of a better word) by a great many modellers, so they tended to stick with Peco for many good reasons. By effectively endorsing "proper 00" track, Peco just threw a large monkey wrench into the market. To quote Lonnie Donegan, "We fooled you! We fooled you!" Suddenly, "proper 00" track is mainstream. I agree with most of this Andy, and better still I had to consult Urban Dictionary to wring every last nuance out of it. PS: monkey wrench is excellent - now I understand the FOO FIGHTERS track; careful with the definition of 'boutique' though !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Great news! Will certainly be considering this product for future projects. By page 7, everything else has been said, methinks... Agreed on both counts. However, I have a sneaky feeling this thread will grow and grow and go round in a circle or two. I'll certainly use it and I still firmly believe pointwork will follow. Almost immediately or after a year or so? Who knows. I'm a huge fan of the thicker sleepered Exactoscale bases in OO but plain track and matching pointwork in one coherent range is great news. Peco already have a massive market share despite some quarters constantly telling us their track is "rubbish". Each to their own, I guess. Some won't buy it, but thousands more will. Sign me up. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted January 28, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 28, 2016 There were very few 9ft sleepers left in the period most users will be modelling, and H0 scale sleepers would be 2.92mm wide. As far as I can tell it is 4ft-1.5in gauge track with 8ft long sleepers at 2ft-4in centres, at 4mm/ft scale: Martin. No Martin, it is 00 track. 00 and scale are not good bed fellows, but who cares. It is what I model and in my little world this new track will be wonderful. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 careful with the definition of 'boutique' though !!! Ah, nothing strange about that! I was in Carnaby Street in July 1966 (during the World Cup) and I was wearing a kilt. There are photographs, but they are well hidden. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Lee Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 It will also be interesting to see what sort of price this bull head track is going to be marketed at when you consider the much high prices that have to be paid for 'scale' track. As others have said, C&L sleepered thick flexible track is about £6.50 per metre. SMP (according to the Marcway website) is currently £43 for a box of 10 yard lengths, so £4.30 per yard. I understand that if if you visit the Marcway shop in Sheffield, it is sometimes possible to buy odd numbers of lengths. Sadly, that would be difficult for me to test. I was lucky in that a friend was able to buy a couple of boxes on my behalf and bring them over for me. SMP has thin sleepers, of course. It is easier than I imagined to match up height of thick and thin sleepered track, but it is still an extra faff. Is that bit of cardboard that you glued where you want the flexi track to go really dry yet? Is it going to swell up when you ballast? SMP (and also, I presume, the old C&L thin sleepered) match the height of Marcway points well. I didn't need to do any padding underneath when I did my larger layout. If the next layout that I do uses Marcway points, then I would, by preference, use SMP. On the other hand, if I use Peco Code 75 or Code 75 Bullhead points, I would almost certainly prefer the new Peco flexible track. If I was going to try and follow Hayfield in making points from C&L/Exactoscale components then I suspect that I would try to push the boat and and go for C&L flexible track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
t8hants Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Well I'm not going to buy it, but not because I have anything against it, it sounds very interesting and could be the cusp of a seed change in British railway modeling if I understand things correctly. I have just laid my new layout in code 100, because with a very limited budget I was advised at the time this would be the best for my largely second hand rolling stock. Being new to the game I cannot envisage how it would be possible to partially convert the layout to the new track, so a complete change would be required with several old friends of locos retired, to be replaced with new stock and even their second hand prices would make stock replacement a slow process. Again as I understand things, it is thought unlikely that it would ever appear in code 100, which would allow a slow but rolling conversion for a modeler like myself. However should it take off, I am sure that it will influence the market as a whole, which is something to look forward to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 No Martin, it is 00 track. 00 and scale are not good bed fellows, but who cares. It is what I model and in my little world this new track will be wonderful. Clive, Obviously you do care. Why else would you post editorial comments criticizing a fellow modeller? Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anglian Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 I very strongly suspect that PECO have done all the design and CAD work for a full range of point work, slips and crossings and they have already decided to produce them. In this case I think the 'we'll only do them if we sell enough plain track' is just a marketing ploy that will of course help ensure sales of the new track but really I think they've made the commitment already. I've seen exactly the same tactic used by a plastic kit maker who launched an ultra niche range of kits, just two to start with, in a range that within less than a year – grew to about a dozen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Someone mentioned a page or two ago that it may be possible that Peco have rushed out CAD drawings in response to developments from competitors. A while back, there was a discussion in another thread about the possibility of Peco developing more prototypical track. The discussion dissolved into argument, so I decided to contact Peco and ask them outright. I received a reply (copied below) and posted it on said thread. It was shouted down and mocked and the arguments continued. I then promptly forgot all about it. The date of the letter I received from Peco? January 6th, 2014. I think it's fair to say this has been in the pipeline for a little while... Dear Mr. Sharps, Thank you for your letter regarding a more prototypical OO track range. We have looked at this on a number of occasions and we haven’t seemed to have been able to come up with compromise that keeps enough people happy. We have, in the meantime, been working on making efficiencies with our tool making that could allow us to make more specialist track efficiently. So we are actually in the process of drawing up some plain track with the correct sleeper spacing. We will have to see where this leads... but I am hopeful we can achieve a satisfactory compromise. Thank you again for taking the time to write and if we can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact us. Kind regards, Ben Arnold Engineering and Development Director Pritchard Patent Product Co Ltd. 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oakydoke Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 I also remembered that letter from Peco being posted a while back in that other thread. I was only thinking about looking for the post you've quoted, last night. It also came to light at that time, that Peco have been modernising and replacing it's production machinery and development processes over the last couple of years. They should now be in a position to react more rapidly to market changes, with more efficient and cheaper production methods. I have no doubt that the matching BH turnouts and crossings are "in the pipeline" and that they wouldn't have gone ahead with the plain flexi-track if they haven't got the other track components ready, or under design at the moment. Flat bottom rail next please Mr. Peco. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted January 28, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 28, 2016 Hello Martin, Can I ask if that photo is yours and if so, can I download it? Hi Derek, Yes it's mine, and yes you can download it. Thanks for asking. I'm glad you like it. regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigw Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 No Martin, it is 00 track. 00 and scale are not good bed fellows, but who cares. It is what I model and in my little world this new track will be wonderful. Clive, you imagine it is 4' 8.5" gauge track while Martin imagines it is a fictional 4' 1.5" gauge track. In reality, neither of you are accurate for different reasons. Does it really matter? Craig W Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Agreed on both counts. However, I have a sneaky feeling this thread will grow and grow and go round in a circle or two. If the people at Peco are reading all this, they won't have time to make the stuff! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted January 28, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 28, 2016 No Martin, it is 00 track. Thanks Clive. No is a far more interesting word than Yes. But I'm not clear of its meaning here, because I haven't said the new Peco product is anything other than 00 track. regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted January 28, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 28, 2016 I'm a huge fan of the thicker sleepered Exactoscale bases in OO Have those Exacto Bullhead sleepers I sent converted you . . . . . . . Burn the sinner... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF51 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 This stuff of course will not be available in the US, perhaps via Canada though.... Walthers is a full Peco distributor here in the US. Unless things have changed in the last few years, they can order in anything Peco makes, even if the do not stock the item on a regular basis. Much of the O gauge track components are listed as Special Order. When I inquired a little over a years ago, I was told there was no extra cost, just extra waiting time. I suspect one will be able to get it from Model Railway Imports and Britannia Models, 2 Canadian shops, at decent prices. However, even if one had to order this track from some place like Hatton's, I'd be willing to bet total cost would still be less expensive than the equivalent order from C&L It's on my future shopping list. Jim F Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 I haven't said the new Peco product is anything other than 00 track. But Peco have! It's described as OO/HO in here. https://gallery.mailchimp.com/447cc01a867103118302481e1/files/PECO_News_Spring_Rep_2016.pdf 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 But Peco have! It's described as OO/HO in here. https://gallery.mailchimp.com/447cc01a867103118302481e1/files/PECO_News_Spring_Rep_2016.pdf I suspect they're probably sticking to the joint 00/H0 label, so as not to queer the patch for the pre-existing 00/H0 labelled lines. On the other hand, maybe they're now trying to pull the wool over H0 modeller's eyes, just like they've been doing for 00 modellers over the years. p.s. Unifrog seems to be gradually being applied on more turnouts too. . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts