PECO NEW POINTS QUESTION.

[lennie]

I am relaying part of my layout, and replacing a number of points with live frogs.

On the Peco Packet it says. " With DCC no modification is required " That suits me fine.

Any comment Guys.

[Ian Morgan]

O, N, Z, OO9, HOm or OO?

[meatloaf]

Ive used them without any modifications just use insulated fishplates at the frog ends and power feeds where needed

[lennie]

Ive used them without any modifications just use insulated fishplates at the frog ends and power feeds where needed

Insulated of course. Power is to the Toe.

O, N, Z, OO9, HOm or OO?

OO.

[WIMorrison]

You should put power feed into the frog otherwise you are relying on point blades for contact - not reliable

[Alcanman]

They are designed to be used straight out the box and I've used them for many years without problems without modification.

 

However, as mentioned, best practice is to power the frog for complete reliability. This , of course ,requires some sort of switch.

 

The choice is yours.

[RBAGE]

For DCC I would always modify them so that the switch blades are isolated from the frog and add a connection between stock rail and blades so you're not relying on the blade contact.

This arrangement also avoids the risk of a short between wheels and open blade. 

[Crewlisle]

They are designed to be used straight out the box and I've used them for many years without problems without modification.

 

However, as mentioned, best practice is to power the frog for complete reliability. This , of course ,requires some sort of switch.

 

The choice is yours.

 

Lennie,

 

I agree entirely with your first sentences.  As I have stated on many forums on the subject of wiring up Peco Code 100 points,  THERE IS NO NEED TO DO ANYTHING.  By many on these forums who say you MUST use polarity changing point  motors or switches I am considered to be a heretic & should be burnt at the stake!

 

 1.  The point springs are strong enough for positive electrical contact providing the inner faces of the movable blades are kept clean & clear of bits of ballast.  The number of polarity failures I have had over the  last 30 years can be counted on one hand & that has only been on unimportant sidings.  The only polarity switch on my layout is for the live diamond.

 

 2.  To prove it I have a total of 30 Code 100 Electrofrog points ranging from small radius Y points up to large radius curved points on my 'Crewlisle' DCC exhibition layout.   I only started having to renew them about 8 years ago as they had ‘worn out!  I use Peco solenoid point motors powered via a capacitor discharge unit controlled with their simple stud & probe operating system on a mini track diagram.

 

3.   It may be different with Code 75 Electrofrogs as there is a smaller contact area between the point blades & stock rail.  But with Code 100, use them straight ot of the box using insulated rail joiners iaw the instructions. 

 

Peter

Edited October 26, 2018 by Crewlisle

[kevinlms]

Lennie,

 

I agree entirely with your first sentences.  As I have stated on many forums on the subject of wiring up Peco Code 100 points,  THERE IS NO NEED TO DO ANYTHING.  By many on these forums who say you MUST use polarity changing point  motors or switches I am considered to be a heretic & should be burnt at the stake!

 

 1.  The point springs are strong enough for positive electrical contact providing the inner faces of the movable blades are kept clean & clear of bits of ballast.  The number of polarity failures I have had over the  last 30 years can be counted on one hand & that has only been on unimportant sidings.  The only polarity switch on my layout is for the live diamond.

 

 2.  To prove it I have a total of 30 Code 100 Electrofrog points ranging from small radius Y points up to large radius curved points on my 'Crewlisle' DCC exhibition layout.   I only started having to renew them about 8 years ago as they had ‘worn out!  I use Peco solenoid point motors powered via a capacitor discharge unit controlled with their simple stud & probe operating system on a mini track diagram.

 

3.   It may be different with Code 75 Electrofrogs as there is a smaller contact area between the point blades & stock rail.  But with Code 100, use them straight ot of the box using insulated rail joiners iaw the instructions. 

 

Peter

Burning at the stake is an overreaction.

 

There is no NEED to do anything else. However, if you want more reliable conductivity, then IMO some additional switching is better.

Edited October 26, 2018 by kevinlms

[hobbyhorse]

These are my mods, it insures 100% reliable operation. Yes it's a belt and braces approach but for the sake of 5 minutes work before laying the track it's definitely worth it, especially the feeds to the switch blades, don't rely on the contact spring or the fixing at the pivot point. Polarity change is by the switch machine.

 

Simon

[kevinlms]

These are my mods, it insures 100% reliable operation. Yes it's a belt and braces approach but for the sake of 5 minutes work before laying the track it's definitely worth it, especially the feeds to the switch blades, don't rely on the contact spring or the fixing at the pivot point. Polarity change is by the switch machine.

 

SimonIMG_4117.JPGIMG_4116.JPGIMG_4115.JPG

Absolutely, its MUCH easier to do the soldering/cutting work at his stage, rather than try to fix it at a latter date.

[smokebox]

Is the OP, Lennie, referring to the new Unifrog points?

[Marcyg]

Is the OP, Lennie, referring to the new Unifrog points?

That's kind of what I understood. Didn't PECO state all their points will eventually become Unifrog?

[WIMorrison]

That's kind of what I understood. Didn't PECO state all their points will eventually become Unifrog?

Perhaps in 25 years they will be - they haven't changed most of the designs for many, many years

[lennie]

Thanks Guys for the input. I try to avoid to much wiring, I do however feed the point blades with an xtra bridgeing wire as in the past it  was the only way to get realiable power from a dodgy contact as you have said, saves problems later.

There are about 40 Points on the layout, not all are powered. Those that are some are wired to a colour light signal Berko, wired from TT 300 motors.

On the two track hidden storage sideing these are fitted with ZTC 302s with LED indicators to show point direction, a collision here would cause XXXXXXX from me.

Others are TT 300s, only this time the signals are TrainTech, legs cut off and wired under, (Leaving the legs a bit train settish.)

Signals are programed to the same address as the point, Simple.

So, there you are, She is out with her mates tonight, perhaps I might go and play with my trains,

[newbryford]

For DCC I would always modify them so that the switch blades are isolated from the frog and add a connection between stock rail and blades so you're not relying on the blade contact.

This arrangement also avoids the risk of a short between wheels and open blade. 

 

The myth is that the modification is to make them DCC friendly. The modification makes them more electrically friendly - DC or DCC.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[lennie]

The myth is that the modification is to make them DCC friendly. The modification makes them more electrically friendly - DC or DCC.

 

Cheers,

Mick

Wonder why  Peco dont do it anyway ?

[WIMorrison]

The reason Peco hasn't changed is that it costs money to change the designs and as I said earlier Peco isn't known for changing, or updating, any of the production designs - once made it tends to remain that way - forever, especially when the original item still sells well.

[Pete the Elaner]

Wonder why  Peco dont do it anyway 

Because then they could not be sold as ready to run. Any modellers who currently choose not to modify them would be likely to choose to buy pointwork from another manufacturer.

[Oldddudders]

Because then they could not be sold as ready to run. Any modellers who currently choose not to modify them would be likely to choose to buy pointwork from another manufacturer.

Exactly. The mods to the wiring to isolate the frog then need an external switch of some sort, meaning the price per point increases. Not everyone wants to add a motor, still less a switch or electronic gismo. Out of the box they work in absolute terms.

[kevinlms]

Exactly. The mods to the wiring to isolate the frog then need an external switch of some sort, meaning the price per point increases. Not everyone wants to add a motor, still less a switch or electronic gismo. Out of the box they work in absolute terms.

Correct, they do work straight out of the box. The question is if people want more reliable operation, then the best thing to do is modify the points BEFORE laying them.

 

No, it isn't compulsory to do so, but there are many threads here on RMweb and elsewhere from people, wondering why their points have intermittent power issues.

 

But of course this topic has been discussed many times and will continue to do so.

[RBAGE]

The myth is that the modification is to make them DCC friendly. The modification makes them more electrically friendly - DC or DCC.

 

Cheers,

Mick

It's no myth. It does make them DCC friendly but yes, of course it is a general electrical improvement for specific uses.

However, for DCC it is more of an issue and potentially more costly.

[kevinlms]

The reason Peco hasn't changed is that it costs money to change the designs and as I said earlier Peco isn't known for changing, or updating, any of the production designs - once made it tends to remain that way - forever, especially when the original item still sells well.

I don't think that's a fair comment at all. Peco have an extensive range of OO points, about 25 I believe in Code 100, including many available as Insulfrog & Electrofrog.

 

Then there is their code 75 range of about the same.

 

Code 83 (OK not strictly British, as designed for the US market), but similar numbers.

 

Bull head?

 

Plus Set track.

 

So a vast range, many of which are recent tooling. A huge investment I reckon, so not surprising it takes a number of years to upgrade, albeit many components are common.

[Izzy]

Wonder why  Peco dont do it anyway ?

They have done. The new unifrog design has the switch blades bonded to the stock rails, and also to the rails past the crossing. So in effect they are now a insulfrog/electrofrog hybrid which can be used straight away, but now need a switch if the very tip of the crossing is to be fed current. They are as a result no longer self-isolating to the track not selected by the set of the blades, so are truly DCC Sound friendly.

 

The new bullhead points are already unifrog and others are becoming so, the latest production of N code 55 medium radius use them. No doubt more in the different types/scales will follow as tooling is replaced. If you look at Peco track you will find if you compare items from different times that it is often subtly altered when this is done.

 

Izzy

[Pete the Elaner]

It's no myth. It does make them DCC friendly but yes, of course it is a general electrical improvement for specific uses.

However, for DCC it is more of an issue and potentially more costly.

The problem is that comments like this have often been mis-interpreted into "I am now using DCC so need to do something extra to my pointwork which was never required with DC", which is incorrect.

 

Modifying your points "for DCC" is a bit like saying that you must wear a cycling hat to ride a bike in the UK. The benefits are not as obvious but most who understand them agree that it is a good idea, but you can usually get away without it & some may argue that they have never needed one before, so why should they need now?

Edited October 29, 2018 by Pete the Elaner