RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 10, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 10, 2020 I notice from the C&L web site this recent statement, which doesn't make sense: "I have taken the specification for the code 125 bullhead rail in house and from source original drawings produced scale 7mm drawing of 95LB bullhead rail and supplied this to our rail manufacture who in turn have created matching engineering drawings for new tooling to produce our own in house bullhead rail exclusively to C & L." But the correct scale size for BS-95R bullhead rail at 7mm/ft scale is CODE 131, not Code 125. Yet Code 125 seems to be universally accepted as the scale size for 0 gauge rail. How did this come about? BS-95R 95lb/yd bullhead rail is 5.23/32" high. That scales to 3.336mm = 0.1313" = Code 131. So the question is, what is the size of this new C&L rail? It is still quoted as Code 125 on the C&L ordering page, and in the above statement. Slaters used to supply Code 131 bullhead rail, and mention that size in their old trackbuilding manual. Unfortunately they now deny all knowledge of it -- even though I remember using it and have a bit left somewhere (I wish I could find it). Their 0 gauge rail is now code 125 the same as everyone else. It's all a bit of a mystery. Is there anyone here who has purchased C&L 0 gauge rail recently, knows that it's from the new tooling, and can measure it accurately, and report back? Also the width (should be 1.6mm). Alternatively, who supplies proper Code 131 rail? Many thanks, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddys-blues Posted December 10, 2020 Share Posted December 10, 2020 I think the owner should just concentrate on improving his Customer communication & Customer service satisfaction ................ pulling teeth springs to mind !!! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartleymartin Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 The difference is 0.006" or approximately 0.16mm. I don't think it is worth worrying about. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Hi Martin, I have some i'll measure today with some digital calipers. I received it from C&L in September. I assume this is within your timeframe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hal Nail Posted December 11, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 11, 2020 I took the main point of this statement to be that they are now making their own rail. (I seem to recal it was unavailable at one point) On that basis the likelihood is it will be sized to fit their chairs! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 11, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 11, 2020 The main point is that the statement doesn't make sense. "scale 7mm drawing of 95LB bullhead rail" can not be "the specification for the code 125 bullhead rail" because a scale 7mm/ft version of BS-95R bullhead rail would be code 131. Martin. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 11, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 11, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, woodyfox said: Hi Martin, I have some i'll measure today with some digital calipers. I received it from C&L in September. I assume this is within your timeframe? Thanks. It would be good to know the size of that. Is it specifically labelled "code 125"? However the statement on the web site about new tooling was dated 31st October 2020, so your rail is likely to pre-date it. cheers, Martin Edited December 11, 2020 by martin_wynne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Hi Martin, Mine measures at. 131mm height and 1.6mm rail top width. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 11, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 11, 2020 4 minutes ago, woodyfox said: Hi Martin, Mine measures at. 131mm height and 1.6mm rail top width. Cheers Many thanks. Is that a typo for 0.131" (131mm would be over 5" ! ) What size is stated on the label? cheers, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 They came loose packed Martin. I typed.. 131mm meaning 0.131mm but the predictive text moved the point! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 11, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 11, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, woodyfox said: They came loose packed Martin. I typed.. 131mm meaning 0.131mm but the predictive text moved the point! Hi, Thanks, but did you mean 0.131 inches? Martin. Edited December 11, 2020 by martin_wynne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyfox Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 Hi Martin, measured again now i'm awake and it's 3.13 mm and 0.125 something or other imperial. Apologies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 11, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 11, 2020 Ok thanks. I have edited my previous posts. Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted December 12, 2020 Share Posted December 12, 2020 On 11/12/2020 at 07:31, woodyfox said: Hi Martin, I have some i'll measure today with some digital calipers. I received it from C&L in September. I assume this is within your timeframe? May still be the older stock, though the outer height and width may well be much the same, I think its a more of a better profile of the head and foot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted December 12, 2020 Share Posted December 12, 2020 On 11/12/2020 at 07:33, Hal Nail said: I took the main point of this statement to be that they are now making their own rail. (I seem to recal it was unavailable at one point) On that basis the likelihood is it will be sized to fit their chairs! I think C&L have always owned their own tools, both 4 & 7 mm tools were showing their age so new ones were ordered Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted December 12, 2020 Share Posted December 12, 2020 On 11/12/2020 at 07:44, martin_wynne said: The main point is that the statement doesn't make sense. "scale 7mm drawing of 95LB bullhead rail" can not be "the specification for the code 125 bullhead rail" because a scale 7mm/ft version of BS-95R bullhead rail would be code 131. Martin. I think its a case of knowing a little, but not enough For what ever reason code 125 has been adopted as the standard for 7mm scale, introducing what many would think was a new size may be a step too far with some modellers (many of us are stuck fast in what we believe is correct) plus the code 131 may not fit either the existing ranges of C&L or Exactoscale, certainly Phil has to support his existing customers and the cost of running 2 ranges side by side would be a waste of limited resources 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 12, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2020 I give up. The only solution is to order some of the new rail, measure it myself, and then send it back. Explaining that I'm are returning code 125 rail because it measures 0.125" is going to be tricky. But maybe, just maybe, it's an accurate 7mm/ft scale replica of BS-95R section as claimed, and it will be 0.131". Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted December 12, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2020 Sorry if I am stating the "bleeding obvious", but ,131 equals the dimension of new rail. After a few years, the rail would wear down, so .125 might be appropriate for many models of locations where the rail was not newly laid. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall5 Posted December 12, 2020 Share Posted December 12, 2020 Maybe I'm missing something, and apologies if I am, but didn't the Code 124/5 originate with Peco who basically gave their existing 00 F.B. rail extra height in the web and width in the head i.e. it isn't truly Bullhead in section? It was a compromise at the time back in the 70's. A truly Bullhead cross section would, indeed be 'taller' and .131 sounds about right to me. Ray. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 12, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2020 20 minutes ago, Marshall5 said: A truly Bullhead cross section would, indeed be 'taller' and .131 sounds about right to me. The point is that we did have code 131 bullhead rail. I remember having C&L 0 gauge flexi-track with code 131 bullhead rail, and needing to make an adjustment when connecting it to Peco code 125 flexi. I think I have a bit of it left somewhere, and I'm going to turn my workshop upside-down until I find it -- just to prove that I'm not dreaming. The Slater's old track manual: https://www.slatersplastikard.com/publications.php#Section1 specifically refers to their code 131 rail, but when you ask them about it they deny all knowledge, and say they have only ever supplied code 125. Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34006 Posted December 12, 2020 Share Posted December 12, 2020 (edited) Hi Martin,perhaps you will have to send a copy of the track manual and ask for an explanation? atb Phil Edited December 12, 2020 by 34006 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium njee20 Posted December 12, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted December 12, 2020 10 hours ago, martin_wynne said: Explaining that I'm are returning code 125 rail because it measures 0.125" is going to be tricky. Of course, that’s not an issue - you’re entirely welcome to return an item for any reason whatsoever, and may not be charged for the pleasure, except for a bit of postage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted December 12, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2020 Just to be totally pedantic the Peco website lists their bullhead as what they refer to as Code 124. (not 125) But it's not bullhead but a weird form of flat bottom rail. It's certainly not compatible with anything other than their own track making components. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gismorail Posted December 12, 2020 Share Posted December 12, 2020 One would ask the question which one works best 125 or 131 .........if one is bullhead and the other is flat bottom would it be the same code or different Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted December 12, 2020 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted December 12, 2020 22 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said: But it's not bullhead but a weird form of flat bottom rail. Hi Richard, It was done that way in order to use the standard Peco 00 rail joiners. Martin. 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