Jeff Smith Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 I don't think it got mentioned but whether you choose code 75 or 100 make sure you request live frog points (Electrofrog), and where possible to fit jumpers between stock rails and closing (point) rails. This improves reliability by not having to rely on electrical contact when the points operate. This contact is what can be lost when ballasting with diluted PVA. Are any of your old stock steam locos as these may represent a real problem to re-wheel! 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallpaul69 Posted October 29, 2020 Author Share Posted October 29, 2020 18 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said: I don't think it got mentioned but whether you choose code 75 or 100 make sure you request live frog points (Electrofrog), and where possible to fit jumpers between stock rails and closing (point) rails. This improves reliability by not having to rely on electrical contact when the points operate. This contact is what can be lost when ballasting with diluted PVA. Are any of your old stock steam locos as these may represent a real problem to re-wheel! Hi Jeff, Re the points you make fair comments. I am not buying the points, my layout builders will be doing that, but I will check that they are getting electrofrogs and fitting jumper wires. The only old steam locos I would want to run would be a HB00 8 freight, a standard 4 tank, and a West Country. Tender drives are a nono and I have already disposed of most of them. Cheers Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PMP Posted October 29, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 29, 2020 (edited) So I’ve assumed that 2nd radius is going to be worst case and arranged an S series of Hornby set track C100 2R curves and ran some me candidates through it. I did a check with a Q1 and concur it doesn’t run well through 2nd radius. It’s unusual in that it drives off the centre axle and there is limited lateral movement on the outer axles. This makes it bind through the curves. The tender doors also foul on the cab. No issue for H 61xx(current) 52xx Black5 B 45xx/57xx’s/64xx/1F/3F Jinty+tender/56xx/2MT It gets more difficult with the Bachmann ‘standards’ and is likely to be the same with the Fowler 2-6-4 and other similar chassis types.(Stanier/Fairburn) The proble area is when you fit details such as cylinder drain pipes, and steps. These foul leading and trailing wheels with binding and derailments. You can see The problems highlighted here. Removing or not fitting the steps and drain pipes allows these types to run through 2R reasonably well. I also use finer wheels, retaining the original wheels compounds the issue due to their size. On 2R I would keep the originals. A good number of contemporary locomotives have the option to close couple the tenders. On 2R this can foul the footplate, so use the long setting. This is a typical overhang for a Black 5, you can assume similar results for Standard 4’s and 5’s as well as 8F, Scots/Patriots etc. A pair of Bachmann 9F’s couldn’t negotiate this, but I suspect a Hornby 9F could, their chassis’s have more side play. If these 2R curves are off stage, make sure you can easily access them there’s clearly potential for issues. If running 90’s era stock ensure that there’s sufficient distance between the tracks at the 2R section, longer vehicles carry a greater risk of over hang on the inside of the curve with risk of hitting things. Edited October 29, 2020 by PMP Timing out... 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted October 29, 2020 Share Posted October 29, 2020 It is a fact of life that fixed long wheelbase locomotives are not suited to tight curves. The RTR manufacturers do the best they can but simple geometry says they will overhang at both ends and will have to have compromised clearances. This is a quart into a pint pot situation. Even bogie equipped locos, coaches, etc, overhang and look bad but do usually go round! It's just one of the many choices modellers have to deal with - where would the fun be otherwise! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PMP Posted October 29, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 29, 2020 4 minutes ago, Jeff Smith said: It is a fact of life that fixed long wheelbase locomotives are not suited to tight curves. Yup, agreed, the OP specifically mentioned longer types in his original post as well as 90’s stock, so best to look at them in a degree of detail. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejstubbs Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 9 hours ago, Jeff Smith said: whether you choose code 75 or 100 make sure you request live frog points (Electrofrog), and where possible to fit jumpers between stock rails and closing (point) rails. Bear in mind that if jumpers are fitted between stock and switch rails then the frog must be isolated from the switch rails (otherwise you'll get a dead short) which in turn means that power must be provided to the frog via an external polarity switch synchronised with the movement of the tie bar. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 22 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said: I believe Peco is based on a North American prototype. Since British modellers make up a smaller market & the track looks reasonably ok, they chose to use the same tooling. Maybe the others (Hornby etc) have similar reasons? Sleeper spacing on straight track can be modified. It costs are only in the amount of time it takes. Don't experiment on your layout. Buy a small quantity of track, cut it into small sections, stick them on some off-cuts of wood & ballast it. Find a method which works for you. Your ballasting will now be a lot tidier & you'll be ready to apply it to your layout. Peco Streamline was indeed designed for the American market and the sleepers are thus H0 size. (This can be clearly seen in the pictures with the BR tank.) Tri-ang/Hornby sourced their System 6 track from Roco initially, so this ended up H0 too. Increasing the spacing improves the appearance, but doesn't help with the undersized sleepers. Gem and Graham Farish both made 00 track in the sixties, but Peco's sales clout resulted in their withdrawal from the market, so we are stuck with H0 track, unless you count the specialised manufacturers SMP and C&L. I used the former in my EM days (life's getting short... .) (Usual disclaimer). http://www.marcway.net/smp.php https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/15117-smp-track-vs-cl-track-help-please/ 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 (edited) Sorry to be pedantic above, but I have two pet hates: 00 models on H0 track (My American stock runs on Streamline code 100) and Buffers set about 2mm too high - the culprits know who they are.... I can live with the narrow track gauge. It's a necessary price to have British* models that can negotiate sharp curves and not require scale thickness wheels (my limited skills are not up to P4!). *Continental and American models have a bit more space to play with. Edited October 30, 2020 by Il Grifone 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Tomlinson Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 (edited) 19 hours ago, Jeff Smith said: I don't think it got mentioned but whether you choose code 75 or 100 make sure you request live frog points (Electrofrog), and where possible to fit jumpers between stock rails and closing (point) rails. This improves reliability by not having to rely on electrical contact when the points operate. This contact is what can be lost when ballasting with diluted PVA. Are any of your old stock steam locos as these may represent a real problem to re-wheel! Another vote for live frog points. I never did do the jumpers and have managed to get away with it for nearly 20 years, relying on blade contact. This does require a bit of careful cleaning from time to time - not often though - and on one section my ballasting was a bit soggy and needed some careful removal of glue afterwards! It might be worth pointing out that in my experience Lima locos, certainly the later ones, do run OK on Peco Code 75. They may not however do so on other makes of Code 75 as the issue is the distance between the top of the rail chair and the top of the rail, which isn't how the "Code" is measured. It must be a close thing on the Peco track, and if other makes have a taller chair then there would be an issue. John. Edited October 30, 2020 by John Tomlinson typo 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 I think Peco was quite clever in designing the Code 75 BH. The outside part of the chairs look full height but the inner part is reduced in height, presumably in an effort to accommodate older wheels. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 3 hours ago, Il Grifone said: Buffers set about 2mm too high - the culprits know who they are.... Is this really buffers set too high or whole body set too high? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 1 hour ago, Jeff Smith said: Is this really buffers set too high or whole body set too high? The whole body of course! It's just the buffers are the first thing one notices.... Even so, they are sometimes in the wrong place on the buffer beam as well. Next one the list is the wrong wheelbase through 'one size fits all' chassis. I'm none too keen on tension lock couplings either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tallpaul69 Posted October 30, 2020 Author Share Posted October 30, 2020 (edited) Tension locks are fine (apart from distance between wagons etc.), provided the stock is kept in fixed rakes! Other wise you need Kadees or one of the doit yourself couplers along the same lines. Wrong wheelbase:- how wrong does it have to be to be noticeable? If there is a reasonably priced "correct" alternative then, wrong'uns should be replaced as soon as possible! But sometimes it's that or nothing! But each to their own, it would be boring if we all liked the same thing? Meanwhile, back on code 75v code 100, where this thread started, how reliable are the transition tracks sold from code 75 to code 100? Code 100 for mains (especially if also running a modern version of the layout), and code 75 for the sidings , sounds attractive? Cheers All Edited October 30, 2020 by Tallpaul69 Spelling!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Grifone Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 I can't say how well or otherwise adaptor tracks function, but I'd just solder the rails together. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted October 30, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 30, 2020 9 minutes ago, Tallpaul69 said: Meanwhile, back on code 75v code 100, where this thread started, how reliable are the transition tracks sold from code 75 to code 100? Peco used do an adaptor joiner which is plastic but can have a small brass insert added if it is needed to conduct. These are what I used on Ravensclyffe and have been in place with no issues for 15 years. Unfortunately they seem to have dropped them from the range. The biggest problem with mixing the two types is that you need to put packing under the code 75 at the transition as there is a significant difference in overall height. I can't see why the current transition tracks should give any problems https://peco-uk.com/products/transition-track?_pos=2&_sid=3dd95c03f&_ss=r Andi 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PMP Posted October 31, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 31, 2020 On 30/10/2020 at 10:06, Il Grifone said: Peco Streamline was indeed designed for the American market and the sleepers are thus H0 size. (This can be clearly seen in the pictures with the BR tank.) Tri-ang/Hornby sourced their System 6 track from Roco initially, so this ended up H0 too. Increasing the spacing improves the appearance, but doesn't help with the undersized sleepers. Gem and Graham Farish both made 00 track in the sixties, but Peco's sales clout resulted in their withdrawal from the market, so we are stuck with H0 track, unless you count the specialised manufacturers SMP and C&L. I used the former in my EM days (life's getting short... .) (Usual disclaimer). http://www.marcway.net/smp.php https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/15117-smp-track-vs-cl-track-help-please/ Peco’s Streamline track was designed for the ‘world’ market and used broadly British/European influence. Sleeper size and spacing being roughly HO ‘typical’ European, with a definite chair/clip representation of track fixing. This in Code100 was their ‘universal’ standard. Around the late 80’s they introduced Code75 Streamline, and for a short period there were three derivatives available. The code 100 was upgraded around the same time and the ‘coarse’ code 100 was withdrawn. It was of course sold worldwide and was/is popular in N. America. It wasn’t until the early noughties that Peco designed a US market product with their C83 range using A.R.E.A. Data for correct number of ties/sizes/fixings and being NMRA compliant. This is being increased with a range of Code70 trackwork. Peco also produce their Code75 bullhead range which is an excellent alternative to the SMP/C&L/DCCC ranges. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted October 31, 2020 Share Posted October 31, 2020 Am excellent summary. Bullhead track is used by some Continental modellers also; the irony here is OO track being used with HO rolling stock! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now