Jump to content

New range of simple to assemble 00/EM gauge pointwork kits


NFWEM57
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Not 00 related, and I know I've been a little quiet on here lately, but I've been quite busy working on the 2mm Finescale & 3mm test kits:

Wayne - what's new please compared to the previous 2mm kits? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dpgibbons said:

Wayne - what's new please compared to the previous 2mm kits? 

You mean my Finetrax 2mm kits compared to what the 2mm Scale Association are currently offering?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Wayne Kinney said:

You mean my Finetrax 2mm kits compared to what the 2mm Scale Association are currently offering?

Yes. And will these be sold through the 2mmSA shop or direct by you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, dpgibbons said:

 

Yes. And will these be sold through the 2mmSA shop or direct by you?

Thanks. The current 2mmFS kits are supplied with a base with predrilled holes and sprues of 'chairs'. The chairs need cutting off the sprue and inserting into the holes on the base one by one.

 

In contrast, the new Finetrax kits includes a timber base with all the chairs pre installed as one piece. It also comes with a pre made cast crossing V/frog and pre machined switch blades with pins already soldered on them, ready to insert into pre drilled holes on the provided tie bar.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Thanks. The current 2mmFS kits are supplied with a base with predrilled holes and sprues of 'chairs'. The chairs need cutting off the sprue and inserting into the holes on the base one by one.

 

In contrast, the new Finetrax kits includes a timber base with all the chairs pre installed as one piece. It also comes with a pre made cast crossing V/frog and pre machined switch blades with pins already soldered on them, ready to insert into pre drilled holes on the provided tie bar.

Hi Wayne, 

 

Just to clarify, did you mean the current N gauge kits or do you already sell 2FS kits to the 2SA?

 

Will the N gauge range be available in the new format at some point in the future?

 

Excellent products for the 2mm and 3mm community.  Well done.

 

Patrick

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

Hi Wayne, 

 

Just to clarify, did you mean the current N gauge kits or do you already sell 2FS kits to the 2SA?

 

Will the N gauge range be available in the new format at some point in the future?

 

Excellent products for the 2mm and 3mm community.  Well done.

 

Patrick

Hi Patrick,

 

I was comparing to the kits that the 2mmSA currently sell, which are similar to my current N Gauge kits (plug 'n' hole system).

 

I'm hoping that the new format can transfer to the N Gauge kits, waiting on feedback on the 2mmFS kits first.

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/07/2021 at 08:54, Harlequin said:

Hi Wayne,

 

I have a question about combining your kits into formations: Using your template for the OO B7 turnout I notice that there isn't a simple way to form a crossover between tracks at the scale track-centre-to-centre measurement of 45mm.

 

If the turnouts are left unmodified and the sleeper spacing is maintained then the track spacing is too big at ~49.7mm (blue rectangle):

254449559_FTOOB7crossing1.png.903e0e96e7ee9a2ca4368858044b2a64.png

 

On the other hand, to maintain the required 45mm track spacing (green rectangle), the templates have to be overlaid so that they interfere with each other quite seriously and the sleepering doesn't align:

735677913_FTOOB7crossing2.png.1b6115a12f7c82ae116b36350dc9a44c.png

 

So what is the recommended method for forming a crossover at 45mm track spacing? And will it also apply to the forthcoming crossings?

 

Thanks.

 

Phil

 

Whilst my kit is in EM gauge I have printed out the middle part of a crossover and I think with careful splicing two kits could easily be joined together

 

521.jpeg.48931d642ebf993026d79dcf7e5dac1b.jpeg

 

Placing my turnout over the template clearly shows the possibility of joining two turnouts together without having to buy too many other bits (4 chairs)

 

522.jpeg.a0296a4e7b9db4dcab3576c566f11790.jpeg

 

Its got to be measure very carefully and cut  trying to preserve the chairs, you will be leaving yourself some interesting interlacing of plain track, or  you could buy some timbers and chairs  to continue the long timbers

 

523.jpeg.006ea2b0eff6ffcc8f4b824aebf359eb.jpeg

 

I have just realised a better cut is as shown as it retains the original chairs and no extra parts are needed

 

The interesting would be to do this with a slip, but I guess we have to wait 

  • Like 4
  • Informative/Useful 6
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, hayfield said:

Whilst my kit is in EM gauge I have printed out the middle part of a crossover and I think with careful splicing two kits could easily be joined together

 

521.jpeg.48931d642ebf993026d79dcf7e5dac1b.jpeg

 

 

 

What works nicely (fortuitously?) in EM won't work in other gauges because the sleeper positions are defined relative to the location of the crossing (timber under the tip of the vee) and for a given track centre-to-centre distance, the distance between the crossings will change as the gauge changes - the wider the gauge, the closer the crossings.

 

With a slip or diamond, I suppose the timbers will be orthogonal to the longitudinal centre line, so at an angle relative to the point timbers - 1:14 for a 1:7 crossing. 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

What works nicely (fortuitously?) in EM won't work in other gauges because the sleeper positions are defined relative to the location of the crossing (timber under the tip of the vee) and for a given track centre-to-centre distance, the distance between the crossings will change as the gauge changes - the wider the gauge, the closer the crossings.

 

 

It does look nice and tidy but I wonder if the people in the finance department would approve of using so many long timbers. Wasn't there a tendency to use as few of them as possible by interleaving shorter timbers?

 

(Certain Scottish companies who shall remain nameless did tend to take this to extremes :))

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 minutes ago, AndyID said:

 

It does look nice and tidy but I wonder if the people in the finance department would approve of using so many long timbers. Wasn't there a tendency to use as few of them as possible by interleaving shorter timbers?

 

(Certain Scottish companies who shall remain nameless did tend to take this to extremes :))

 

Hi Andy,

 

It mostly depends on the site and traffic. A crossover in a fast main line will have a lot of long timbers. A crossover in a goods yard will have only one or two.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Hi Andy,

 

It mostly depends on the site and traffic. A crossover in a fast main line will have a lot of long timbers. A crossover in a goods yard will have only one or two.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

OK, as long as it doesn't look like some of the earlier offerings from Wrenn :D

 

(Younger readers probably have no idea what I'm on about.)

  • Like 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy, you may be interested to know that I just started a build of interlaced Scottish stuff and yes regrettably I am old enough to remember what Wrenn churned out, if only my father had not listened to that nice man in the Bassett-Lowke Manchester shop, we wouldn't have wasted so much time, energy and money on it.

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, hayfield said:

Wayne

 

Looks great, but please remind me. Is it 16.2 through out the turnout or through the common crossing only

I went with everybody's recommendation of 16.2mm through the entire turnout :) 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I went with everybody's recommendation of 16.2mm through the entire turnout :) 

 

Wise decision and I doubt if anyone will notice the transition when plain track is joined to it, how many will actually bother to make a transition piece ?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
35 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Wise decision and I doubt if anyone will notice the transition when plain track is joined to it, how many will actually bother to make a transition piece ?

16.2 to 16.5 - that's just 0.15mm per rail, I doubt I can lay track that accurately anyway!

 

Am I right in understanding that the vast majority of modern RTR stock should run through OO-SF quite happily with no modification, and that only older stuff might need either rewheeling or back-to-backs adjusting?

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Nick C said:

16.2 to 16.5 - that's just 0.15mm per rail, I doubt I can lay track that accurately anyway!

 

Am I right in understanding that the vast majority of modern RTR stock should run through OO-SF quite happily with no modification, and that only older stuff might need either rewheeling or back-to-backs adjusting?

 

If you had the correct set of gauges you would be able, otherwise 00SF would not exist !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Nick C said:

Am I right in understanding that the vast majority of modern RTR stock should run through OO-SF quite happily with no modification, and that only older stuff might need either rewheeling or back-to-backs adjusting?

 

Hi Nick,

 

Yes if you add UK 00 to "modern RTR stock", i.e. not necessarily all H0 RTR. But the operative words there are "vast majority". It's not absolutely guaranteed and you might find the odd model which needs tweaking of wheel back-to-backs. They should be in the range 14.3mm - 14.4mm. Some very modern RTR wheels have thinner flanges more akin to kit wheels and can be 14.5mm back-to-back.

 

Older RTR models will need re-wheeling, just changing the back-to-back won't work, the wheel flanges are likely to be too thick.

 

More about wheels for 00-SF at: https://85a.uk/00-sf/setting_00_wheels.php

 

Note that 00-SF is intended for typical finescale layout radii, say 30" / 750mm minimum radius. It won't work at trainset and set-track radii.

 

For modellers who run only RTR models and need sharper curves, Wayne also produces Standard 00 pointwork kits to the DOGA-Intermediate standard.

 

All you need to know about 00-SF is at: https://85a.uk/00-sf/

 

Martin.

Edited by martin_wynne
  • Thanks 2
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)

Thanks Martin - I think I'll order a couple of OO-SF points then and try some of my stock through them, it's mostly fairly recent stuff anyway - I'm hoping to keep minimum radius to 36", but it might have to drop to nearer 30" to get the curve into the fiddle yard in and still have long enough fiddle roads - that'd just be plain track though, so will be 16.5mm.

 

I've not got any HO stock, at least not yet - that might change when the new Piko EN-57 comes out, if they do one in the right livery.

Edited by Nick C
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, Nick C said:

that'd just be plain track though, so will be 16.5mm

 

Hi Nick,

 

16.5mm gauge track effectively has 0.3mm gauge widening built-in, to make it suitable for curves down to train-set radius.

 

My remarks about 00-SF radius referred to 16.2mm plain track.

 

If handbuilding 00-SF plain track, 3-point gauges are available from C&L to provide automatic gauge widening on sharp curves.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

Wise decision and I doubt if anyone will notice the transition when plain track is joined to it, how many will actually bother to make a transition piece ?

Plastic-based track will take care of that itself.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Plastic-based track will take care of that itself.

 

Admittedly the 0.3mm wider gap will make little difference, but if this transitioned over 5 or 6 sleepers it would stop the possibility of some stock twitching over a joint. or align the outer rails where the effect will be generated

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Wayne,

Will the 2mm finescale points be available direct from you or via the association?

Do you have an approximate time?

Regards,

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...