DCC Concepts - OO Gauge bullhead turnouts

[Kiwi]

Sorry but whats a ' blog' !!!

The Oxford English Dictionary says the noun "blog" is

"A regularly updated website or web page, typically one run by an individual or small group, that is written in an informal or conversational style."

 

This site (RMWeb) provides the ability to have and maintain your own: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blogs/

[No Decorum]

Or you can do it separately--glue down track, wait until totally dry (test it, play, whatever), then when you're ready, paint in undiluted PVA in 6" sections, dump ballast on, vacuum excess off a minute later. You can catch the excess in a pair of pantyhose.

 

Quentin

Don’t forget to remove the woman first!

[mightbe]

Don’t forget to remove the woman first!

My boyfriend did give me a quizzical look when I brought home a pair from the dollar store. 

[Richard Johnson]

*** But rather than assuming, have you actually tried to use the SS Rail?

 

As a "hands on modeller" that builds lots of track usability was important to me and I tested extensively before investing... as did others. Latterly we have built many prototypes for pointwork and in general we find it no different to work with than NS... with demonstrable advantages in other areas.

 

The simple designation "SS" isn't actually valid term anyway.

 

There are LOTS of very different stainless alloys and they are massively different in how they "work" . SO - In reality the SS grade matters and the one chosen is, VS Nickel Silver, no harder to "Hand Machine" as you call it.

 

Regards

 

Richard

 

------------------------------

 

You said: I must say , at this stage , I don't see the point of stainless steel rails. I've found it very difficult to work manually , and given that to fully exploit this new more accurate 00 track, we will have to build most of the point work ( certainly until we get to a collection of rtl points and crossings ) , this leaves us with the difficulty of hand machining stainless , not a nice task.

 

Really with the availability of HiNi track, the colour difference is such as to really sideline the steel rail issues and we retain the excellent workability of nickel silver.

 

As to the market viability of 4 ready to lay providers of 00 plain track, I wonder where this market will end up. My odds are with PECO , even if it takes them a few years to flesh out the point work.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Richard Johnson

[JZ]

In a few week time, I will be making a start on an Isle of Wight layout, using this track. For points, I will be using SMP plastic point bases with Legacy rail as space requires me to use 3ft radius.

[Stephen Freeman]

Hi,

I would rather say, cutting the rail and making vees/blades calls for a slightly different approach. The rail itself is quite soft, my xuron cutters didn't but that's probably because they are in need of replacement, they just squashed it. Cutting with a piercing saw was slow going (may have been the blade that was about to go). No problem using a minidisc though or minigrinders. I use a 5 inch industrial rated bench grinder for roughing out, the greenstone wheel seemed to work best.

 

Certainly happy with the resulting crossover.

[Junctionmad]

 

*** But rather than assuming, have you actually tried to use the SS Rail?

 

As a "hands on modeller" that builds lots of track usability was important to me and I tested extensively before investing... as did others. Latterly we have built many prototypes for pointwork and in general we find it no different to work with than NS... with demonstrable advantages in other areas.

 

The simple designation "SS" isn't actually valid term anyway.

 

There are LOTS of very different stainless alloys and they are massively different in how they "work" . SO - In reality the SS grade matters and the one chosen is, VS Nickel Silver, no harder to "Hand Machine" as you call it.

 

Regards

 

Richard

 

------------------------------

 

You said: I must say , at this stage , I don't see the point of stainless steel rails. I've found it very difficult to work manually , and given that to fully exploit this new more accurate 00 track, we will have to build most of the point work ( certainly until we get to a collection of rtl points and crossings ) , this leaves us with the difficulty of hand machining stainless , not a nice task.

 

Really with the availability of HiNi track, the colour difference is such as to really sideline the steel rail issues and we retain the excellent workability of nickel silver.

 

As to the market viability of 4 ready to lay providers of 00 plain track, I wonder where this market will end up. My odds are with PECO , even if it takes them a few years to flesh out the point work.

You mentioned it was 3 series stainless and I've worked with most of the common 300 grades including 303 316 304 etc inc "L" options , by comparison nickel silver is easier in my opinion

 

But basically I don't really see what problem is being solved

Edited August 18, 2016 by Junctionmad

[hayfield]

CRW_7793.jpg

 

Here is another picture taken outside this time for more light and a larger depth of field

 

Is it me or the photo, but the rail seems not to be sitting in the chairs properly as there seems to be a gap on the bottom inside of both chairs ?

[ColHut]

The Oxford English Dictionary says the noun "blog" is

"A regularly updated website or web page, typically one run by an individual or small group, that is written in an informal or conversational style."

This site (RMWeb) provides the ability to have and maintain your own: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blogs/

As in "Web Log".

 

Regards

[ChrisG]

In that I have already purchased material to meet my track building requirements for the foreseeable future, I am literally disinterested in this development. Nevertheless, I am curious as to why two manufacturers have announced (and now one has produced) flexible steam-era bullhead plain track when that corner of the market was already satisfied, and the market for compatible ready made pointwork is wide open, and I imagine something of a crying need which is preventing many people from taking the plunge with finer track. 

 

I can well understand there is probably an enormous difference in the initial investment required to launch plain track versus turnouts, but nevertheless a couple of standard-ish turnouts and a diamond might have been a better starting point?

 

Chris Gardner

Alton

[ChrisG]

In a few week time, I will be making a start on an Isle of Wight layout, using this track. For points, I will be using SMP plastic point bases with Legacy rail as space requires me to use 3ft radius.

Hooray - the World needs more Isle of Wight layouts! Which part of the network are you tackling? 

 

Chris

[martin_wynne]

Nevertheless, I am curious as to why two manufacturers have announced (and now one has produced) flexible steam-era bullhead plain track when that corner of the market was already satisfied

 

Hi Chris,

 

My guess is that the cost of getting the rail section rolled is a significant investment, with a large minimum order, and you get a return on that much sooner selling boxes of flexible track than pointwork.

 

In addition, there are differences:

 

The Peco track has vertical rails for easier sharp curving (and insert-moulding) and with a modified rail section for use with conventional rail joiners and connection to their Code75 flat-bottom range. Closer to a mass-market product.

 

The DCC Concepts track has stainless steel rail, and a reduced track gauge more suitable for use with 00-SF (4-SF). Whether this is by design, or because of the pronounced inclined rail isn't clear.

 

SMP Scaleway has thin sleepers and underscale rail width. It has been on the market for over 40 years and a remarkable survivor.

 

C&L flexible has thick sleepers for deep ballasting with exposed sleeper ends where wanted for sidings. Also inclined rail, but hardly noticeable.

 

Whether there is sufficient market to support all four is moot. Almost certainly not until some RTR pointwork arrives, and then the one which matches it will win.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[gismorail]

Thanks for info on 'blogs' ......so if as with most social media I've got something to say quickly I go to The 'blog bog '

[ChrisG]

Martyn - I'm sure you are right about the return on investment. It certainly makes sense. Meanwhile we have potentially a watering down of the profit to be made by each of the manufacturers, whilst the modeller doesn't have what he/she really wanted in the first place. That's business I guess!

 

Like you I am left wondering whether the reduced gauge was intentional!

 

Chris

 

Hi Chris,

 

My guess is that the cost of getting the rail section rolled is a significant investment, with a large minimum order, and you get a return on that much sooner selling boxes of flexible track than pointwork.

 

In addition, there are differences:

 

The Peco track has vertical rails for easier sharp curving (and insert-moulding) and with a modified rail section for use with conventional rail joiners and connection to their Code75 flat-bottom range. Closer to a mass-market product.

 

The DCC Concepts track has stainless steel rail, and a reduced track gauge more suitable for use with 00-SF (4-SF). Whether this is by design, or because of the pronounced inclined rail isn't clear.

 

SMP Scaleway has thin sleepers and underscale rail width. It has been on the market for over 40 years and a remarkable survivor.

 

C&L flexible has thick sleepers for deep ballasting with exposed sleeper ends where wanted for sidings. Also inclined rail, but hardly noticeable.

 

Whether there is sufficient market to support all four is moot. Almost certainly not until some RTR pointwork arrives, and then the one which matches it will win.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[ChrisG]

Is it me or the photo, but the rail seems not to be sitting in the chairs properly as there seems to be a gap on the bottom inside of both chairs ?

 

Gosh - the slope really does look odd!  Is it really right?

[AndyID]

Gosh - the slope really does look odd!  Is it really right?

 

I'm not trying to put words in Richard's mouth, and 3D printing is a lot different from injection moulding. I intended the rails to be vertical on my attempts at printed track and turnouts but I found the rails have a natural tendency to tip inwards.

 

In my case it's because of the asymmetrical nature of the chairs. To clear wheel flanges the inside jaw isn't very prototypical, and it's not made of cast iron either. Consequently the outside jaw tends to exert a turning moment on the rail.

 

This may (or may not) explain why the outside jaw on SMP track seems to be rather underscale.

[Vistisen]

Gosh - the slope really does look odd! Is it really right?

oh dear, I really didn't want to start this. I have taken a few bad quality pictures. Please don't judge the product on that basis. Buy a sample for your selves. I like what I see. And will definitely be buying more.

[martin_wynne]

To clear wheel flanges the inside jaw isn't very prototypical, and it's not made of cast iron either. Consequently the outside jaw tends to exert a turning moment on the rail.

 

Hi Andy,

 

Another reason for Peco's thin modified rail foot. It allows for more material in the inner jaw. They have been doing 0 gauge bullhead that way for many years. Also the vertical rail and flat base is more stable than a proper bullhead radiused foot on inclined rail.

 

My first impression of those DCC Concepts track pictures was that it has been damaged in transit. But it may simply be close-up lens distortion.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[martin_wynne]

oh dear, I really didn't want to start this. I have taken a few bad quality pictures. Please don't judge the product on that basis. Buy a sample for your selves. I like what I see. And will definitely be buying more.

 

Please could you try curving it to a sharp radius, say 24" (600mm) radius, and then taking another end view? With only a plastic base, it is not possible for the rail to remain inclined at those radii, it will straighten up. If your picture still shows it inclined, we will know that it is an optical effect of your photos and not a defect in the product.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[bertiedog]

oh dear, I really didn't want to start this. I have taken a few bad quality pictures. Please don't judge the product on that basis. Buy a sample for your selves. I like what I see. And will definitely be buying more.

My own observation was not based on the picture. but from using an angle measuring microscope I own. The inclination is excessive at 1;15 and it tallies across all the samples I have.

I think it is due to the shape of the chair and the forces of the grip by the mouldings on the bullhead section, which is scale profile, not a flat, and allows the rail to adopt a position a little more inclined than intended.

The track is fully usable and looks right from a top view.

But I still have reservations about the invention of yet another 4mm gauge, and a strange attitude to standards, which ,yes, are vague in 4mm anyway.

Anybody can design straight track, it's the points that are the make or break of a new track makers product.

Stephen

[bertiedog]

Please could you try curving it to a sharp radius, say 24" (600mm) radius, and then taking another end view? With only a plastic base, it is not possible for the rail to remain inclined at those radii, it will straighten up. If your picture still shows it inclined, we will know that it is an optical effect of your photos and not a defect in the product.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

I have tried it curved to 2 foot and the inner rail alters to 1;20 whilst the outer remains about the same. Measured on Zeiss micro angle checker, with slip gauge superglued to rail sides to do measurement against surface plate.

Still within working amount of usability, but I suspect that Peco's coming version will remain more in gauge, because of the ftatbottom section to the bullhead rail giving more grip.

I am a touch concerned that the sleepers are very thin, and have to be glued down very carefully to keep the track flat and level across the track width.

Weight on the rails whilst the glue is setting tends to curve the sleeper ends upwards, and any attempt to pin it down curves the ends up.

So pins must be used on the outside sleeper ends, and contact adhesive is really needed to grip the whole sleeper width with glueing.

All these points are relatively minor as long as they are known about and allowed for.

I must say I await the Peco with interest.

Stephen

Edited August 18, 2016 by bertiedog

[mightbe]

Please could you try curving it to a sharp radius, say 24" (600mm) radius, and then taking another end view? With only a plastic base, it is not possible for the rail to remain inclined at those radii, it will straighten up. If your picture still shows it inclined, we will know that it is an optical effect of your photos and not a defect in the product.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

At the risk of suggestion something that may not have been intended.. If the extreme incline is intentional and the gauge a bit narrower than 16.5 mm, wouldn't automatic gauge widening occur when the track is curved? Hasn't someone already marketed their track as having this feature? C&L long ago maybe? 

 

I'm thinking maybe this is what Richard means when he says improved running--the slop is (mostly) taken up on the straights but when curved sufficiently the gauge opens up as the rails move to vertical.

 

Quentin

Edited August 18, 2016 by mightbe

[martin_wynne]

I have tried it curved to 2 foot and thr inner ail alters to 1;20 whilst the outer remains the same.

 

Hi Stephen,

 

I'm puzzled by that, if the track is remaining flat.

 

If inclined rail is sharply curved, the head of the rail describes a slightly different radius from the foot, and either the head or the foot must therefore stretch to fit. This requires considerable force, unlikely to be imposed by thin plastic. What happens instead is that the rail deforms the chairs and straightens up to equalize the head and foot radii. C&L originally made a virtue of this by claiming automatic creating gauge-widening on sharp curves.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[bertiedog]

I suspect the slight gauge widening, from an already tight gauge is not entirely intentional, as the widening is so slight, barely reaching full 16.5 in fact at 2 foot.

If your very pedantic the inner rail rises a bit as well, working against super elevation, but if elevation is used it would overcome this anyway.

Stephen

[martin_wynne]

At the risk of suggestion something that may not have been intended.. If the extreme incline is intentional and the gauge a bit narrower than 16.5 mm, wouldn't automatic gauge widening occur when the track is curved? Hasn't someone already marketed their track as having this feature? C&L long ago maybe? 

 

I'm thinking maybe this is what Richard means when he says improved running--the slop is (mostly) taken up on the straights but when curved sufficiently the gauge opens up as the rails move to vertical.

 

Hi Quentin,

 

Posts crossed.

 

When I suggested as much on the MRF forum, Richard pooh-poohed it, claiming that the rail was soft enough to remain inclined when curved. He has made a big feature of the inclined rail, claiming it improves running and pickup for coned wheels.

 

regards,

 

Martin.