New range of simple to assemble 00/EM gauge pointwork kits - EM B7 Prototype - First Look

[NFWEM57]

5 minutes ago, Wayne Kinney said:

I dread what people will think when my 'point rodding' kits turn out to be cosmetic additions only, and don't actually function...LOL

Please, O gauge points before the Z gauge point rodding.....!

[Wayne Kinney]

Just now, NFWEM57 said:

Please, O gauge points before the Z gauge point rodding.....!

Sorry Patrick, T Gauge kits but with scale flangeways and working scale stretcher bars first!

 

[RBAGE]

2 hours ago, Wayne Kinney said:

Sorry Patrick, T Gauge kits but with scale flangeways and working scale stretcher bars first!

 

And a set/goggle?

[Wayne Kinney]

9 minutes ago, RBAGE said:

And a set/goggle?

Yes, exclusive to T gauge...

[gordon s]

I guess I have a foot in both camps here. I build my own turnouts and over the years the much welcomed advice from Martin on both prototypical practice and Templot has been invaluable. Equally so I am excited about this new product from Wayne as once C10’s and possibly B7’s are available in 00SF, it may well be I will hang up my soldering iron and transfer across to chaired track as of course, I recognise it looks so much better. Soldered construction is very strong and easy to adjust, but if chaired turnouts are available as kits and all the hard work has been done for me, then I see no reason not to change over to Wayne’s kits in the future.

 

If I now put on my commercial hat, I assume Wayne has invested considerable personal funds and will be looking for a return on his investment. We can all see the excellence of the product and of course we want it to follow prototypical practice as closely as possible. There’s nothing wrong with that as a goal from the outset, but perhaps commercial reality is more important. Those of us who build our own track fully understand set in turnouts, but I suspect we are alone in that understanding. Of course these are simple estimates and I have no accurate numbers, but I’m guessing that less than 10% of potential customers will know about set, let alone be able to see it in the finished product. 
 

The market for this product will surely be the Peco customer base and new modellers who are looking for a product that works straight from the box. Of course if set can be achieved with no additional costs or production difficulties, then I would include it, but not if it meant moving away from commercial reality. Those of us who understand set, will be pleased and those that don’t won’t care anyway.

 

To me the worst of both worlds is to supply a product that works, is inexpensive and way better than the competition, but then to add a note regarding set and how it can be accomplished, would be a huge mistake. As a modeller who buys track off the shelf, it would introduce a doubt regarding the product. If it was that essential then why wasn’t it included by the manufacturer or does this mean I may have a problem with these turnouts as it hasn’t been included.

 

I guess the bottom line for me is if set can be included without any financial penalties or production difficulties, then include it, but Wayne should not lose the opportunity to secure a huge market share by trying to make a product without compromise, particularly where the other 90% of the market are blissfully unaware and just want a better product than anything currently available.

 

In this day and age of Social Media, word of mouth is so important. Show the market a great product, gain positive acceptance over the competition and the only problem you will have is fulfilling the demand.

 

I really wish you well Wayne and just for clarity, I’m not against including set, but we all know compromises often have to be made. If you can build turnouts that work every time and are better than anything the market has to offer, then you deserve every success that is coming to you.

Edited April 4, 2021 by gordon s

[Enterprisingwestern]

8 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

I have posted this diagram so many times over the years it is nearly worn out:

 

 

It has the advantage of making a perfectly symmetrical bend, more sharply located than is possible with pliers and fingers. But any method is better than no set at all.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

 

See, I told you us expert track builders use hammers, I was right all along!

 

Mike.

[martin_wynne]

44 minutes ago, gordon s said:

I’m not against including set, but we all know compromises often have to be made.

 

Hi Gordon,

 

Agree your remarks for the Standard 00 16.5mm range, selling to the Peco market, where the kit needs to be as quick and simple as possible, and a bit of under-gauge through the switch won't matter much.

 

But disagree for the EM and 00-SF range, where I regard a proper prototypical switch as a necessary part of the track standard. Especially if you want to take advantage of the possibility of curving these kits.

 

It seems the set is optional, so there can be no commercial cost to it at all. All it needed was a mention in the instructions for the EM and 00-SF kits. Anyone who has chosen EM or 00-SF is surely capable of making one simple small bend in one rail.

 

It's interesting that John put a set in his rail without even thinking about it, and it was only after I asked about it that he noticed it wasn't mentioned in the instructions. But it could be the reason that his curved turnouts work faultlessly, and someone else's curved turnouts don't.

 

But we are where we are. It means that every time someone asks on here about curving the EM and 00-SF turnouts, we shall have to go through the rigmarole of explaining yet again about the need for a set in the stock rail -- I think I could write this stuff in my sleep now. And no, it's not mentioned in the instructions.

 

However, I don't want to detract from the well-deserved success of these kits from Wayne, so I shall now shut up about it.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Edited April 4, 2021 by martin_wynne
typo

[gordon s]

No disagreement from me Martin....

 

I had my commercial hat on and as the bulk of the sales are going to be to those modellers currently using Peco or similar products, I was always referring to 00. 
 

Those building in 00-SF or EM should be aware of the requirement for set and there it should be included in the instructions for those unfamiliar with the process.

 

 

[Jack P]

20 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

Anyone who has chosen EM or 00-SF is surely capable of making one simple small bend in one rail.

 

You may be severely overestimating my ability.. 

 

While I agree with much of what has been written, I think it's discussion like this that encourages me to try. I've not built track before, but I see Waynes kit as being an excellent starting point in that arena. If the range expands to cover everything I need - Fantastic! If there's something more complex, it will probably encourage me to give it a go.

[Wayne Kinney]

47 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

where the kit needs to be as quick and simple as possible, and a bit of under-gauge through the switch won't matter much.

The kits result in no 'under gauging' through the switch without a set bend. I have previously mentioned that I have designed it not to go under gauge...

 

Regarding curving the turnouts. I did do a test on curving an EM Gauge B7. I curved a B7 in Martin's excellent Templot software until it said minimum radius was reached. I then printed this out.

 

Currently I believe the best method to creating a curved turnout from my kits, is to insert both stock rails through the base to give strength to it before cutting the webbing. Once stock rails are in place, the builder can then cut the webbing of the ‘inner curve’ leaving the ‘outer curve’ webbing in place. Also, no webbing should be cut around the 4 timbers of the crossing V.

 

Once cut, the turnout can be curved much like flexi track. Offer the base of to the template (or even just a curved line drawn) and match the curve as best as possible.

 

It would need pinning and gluing on the template paper and left to dry so that it holds its shape.

 

Once dry, the build can continue assembly as normal.

 

With the turnout curved as much possible to minimum radius, and without any set bend, my test bogies and 0-6-0 free rolling chassis with AG drivers go through incredibly smoothly.

 

Edited April 4, 2021 by Wayne Kinney

[NFWEM57]

1 hour ago, gordon s said:

I guess I have a foot in both camps here. I build my own turnouts and over the years the much welcomed advice from Martin on both prototypical practice and Templot has been invaluable. Equally so I am excited about this new product from Wayne as once C10’s and possibly B7’s are available in 00SF, it may well be I will hang up my soldering iron and transfer across to chaired track as of course, I recognise it looks so much better. Soldered construction is very strong and easy to adjust, but if chaired turnouts are available as kits and all the hard work has been done for me, then I see no reason not to change over to Wayne’s kits in the future.

 

If I now put on my commercial hat, I assume Wayne has invested considerable personal funds and will be looking for a return on his investment. We can all see the excellence of the product and of course we want it to follow prototypical practice as closely as possible. There’s nothing wrong with that as a goal from the outset, but perhaps commercial reality is more important. Those of us who build our own track fully understand set in turnouts, but I suspect we are alone in that understanding. Of course these are simple estimates and I have no accurate numbers, but I’m guessing that less than 10% of potential customers will know about set, let alone be able to see it in the finished product. 
 

The market for this product will surely be the Peco customer base and new modellers who are looking for a product that works straight from the box. Of course if set can be achieved with no additional costs or production difficulties, then I would include it, but not if it meant moving away from commercial reality. Those of us who understand set, will be pleased and those that don’t won’t care anyway.

 

To me the worst of both worlds is to supply a product that works, is inexpensive and way better than the competition, but then to add a note regarding set and how it can be accomplished, would be a huge mistake. As a modeller who buys track off the shelf, it would introduce a doubt regarding the product. If it was that essential then why wasn’t it included by the manufacturer or does this mean I may have a problem with these turnouts as it hasn’t been included.

 

I guess the bottom line for me is if set can be included without any financial penalties or production difficulties, then include it, but Wayne should not lose the opportunity to secure a huge market share by trying to make a product without compromise, particularly where the other 90% of the market are blissfully unaware and just want a better product than anything currently available.

 

In this day and age of Social Media, word of mouth is so important. Show the market a great product, gain positive acceptance over the competition and the only problem you will have is fulfilling the demand.

 

I really wish you well Wayne and just for clarity, I’m not against including set, but we all know compromises often have to be made. If you can build turnouts that work every time and are better than anything the market has to offer, then you deserve every success that is coming to you.

Gordon

 

You are absolutely spot on and you have outlined the issue most eloquently.  Very wise words. 

 

And surely the holy grail is an uncomplicated but prototypical alternative to the 'rest of the world' products that PECO, a UK based company, have decided that is all the UK markets deserves.  I emailed them last year about more realistic products but received short, but polite, shrift.  To be honest, PECO could care less about the UK market, I feel sure 90% of their sale are overseas.

 

If Wayne's turnouts, OO or EM, work for the 90% then satisfying the set issue for the 10% is up to the 10%.  I am delighted and honoured to have been involved with Wayne's products in some small way and, for me, they give me the opportunity to expend more time on RTR conversions and critically, pass on what I have undertaken and learnt to others.

 

Pecos' biggest market is not the UK and Wayne's new products will probably diminish its UK market still further.

 

Once again, well said.

 

Patrick

[NFWEM57]

21 minutes ago, Jack P said:

 

You may be severely overestimating my ability.. 

 

While I agree with much of what has been written, I think it's discussion like this that encourages me to try. I've not built track before, but I see Waynes kit as being an excellent starting point in that arena. If the range expands to cover everything I need - Fantastic! If there's something more complex, it will probably encourage me to give it a go.

Everybody,

 

Give it a go, it was an absolute doddle to assemble...!

 

Patrick

 

PS - I am not on commission - just glad Wayne took the initiative and, boy, what a long overdue product. 

Edited April 4, 2021 by NFWEM57

[RBAGE]

The EM market is tiny and the 00-FS probably less so.

Standard 00 is by far the most popular gauge for modelling and frankly, that's where new products should be targeted if you want to at least recoup any investment.

Any possibility to develop product for the less popular gauges will be on the back of standard 00. 

 

00-SF will never be a popular gauge because the vast majority of 00 modellers do not want to start messing around with their stock.

As I suggested in an earlier post, some modellers who currently get all of their track out of a box, ready made, are likely to try their hand and if the kits build as easily and reliably as it sounds, they are likely to stay and maybe recommend the product. The transfer of out of the box modellers to a new product like this will be slow, very slow. 

So, to a very great extent, the product will sell to people who already make or have made their own. Or to people who have modified out of the box to something more realistic. Still, a very small market but enough to keep this product going. 

 

The discussion over set or not to set is pointless (sorry) for this product. It can be built with a set and the people who want to build this way most likely already know what they are doing. The people who don't, most likely don't care.

For the few might change, what's the problem with answering the same question from time to time. Have a look through any topic you choose. It happens all the time. 

 

It looks as though the bloke has come up with a fantastic product, why complain about the lack of comment in the instructions about a bent bit of rail.

 

I'd rather talk about when I'm going to get my hands on it and how the range will expand. 

[Philou]

May I ask @Wayne Kinney if a set can be made by those that wish to, without affecting the kit as supplied?

 

If the answer is 'Yes', can I make a suggestion that once all the leaflets have been used up and/or the tooling become worn, then it would be an opportunity to alter the instructions to reflect the making of the set? A Mk1 and then a Mk2 version if you will. After all, despite compromises that have to be made modelling in 00, should we not be striving to achieve as near to prototype as is practically possible? It's what most RTR loco manufacturers seem to be doing. If a set can be achieved by means of a tap of a hammer on a simple jig by those that wish to, why not?

 

I for one shall be interested in these new points, especially if they can be curved! (Modelling GWR, I think I'll leave the joggle alone!)

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

PS: Is 'flair' correct? I thought it was 'flare' as in flaring. You Wayne have flair, but your check rails need a flare.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Philou

[gordon s]

41 minutes ago, RBAGE said:

 

00-SF will never be a popular gauge because the vast majority of 00 modellers do not want to start messing around with their stock.

Not sure I understand your comment on 00-SF......

 

All the turnouts on Eastwood Town are 00-SF and I can’t recall ‘messing around’ with any of my stock. I run Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, many kit built loco’s with Romford/Markit wheels and finally several loco’s with Ultrascale wheels. All if these run smoothly through 00-SF, so I cannot understand what you mean.

 

Just curious where it’s come from........

[RBAGE]

36 minutes ago, gordon s said:

Not sure I understand your comment on 00-SF......

 

All the turnouts on Eastwood Town are 00-SF and I can’t recall ‘messing around’ with any of my stock. I run Hornby, Bachmann, Heljan, many kit built loco’s with Romford/Markit wheels and finally several loco’s with Ultrascale wheels. All if these run smoothly through 00-SF, so I cannot understand what you mean.

 

Just curious where it’s come from........

Mostly from comment on this website from people who know considerably more about track standards than I do.

I assume you don't understand my comment about "messing around". I actually meant checking stock back-to-back dimensions and taking action to reduce the variation experience on product from RTR manufacturers. Something which might be best practise for standard 00 gauge but which is more critical for 16.2mm and reduced flangeways.

My point was, that the vast majority of railway modellers don't do this because the standard 00 gauge will accommodate most of this variation. What is more important, the majority of modellers don't expect to have to undertake checks or make adjustments.

 

[Jack P]

2 hours ago, RBAGE said:

00-SF will never be a popular gauge because the vast majority of 00 modellers do not want to start messing around with their stock.

 

I don't know if I agree entirely with that. I feel like if someone is interested enough to have a go at building their own points, might also be interested enough to have a fiddle with back-to-backs if it improves running. It also requires much less commitment than EM or P4. 

 

Anyway - Waynes product looks excellent, and the imminent release will no doubt quell many questions and queries mentioned thus far.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Jack P

[Jeff Smith]

Just some questions for the two Waynes.  There was some discussion early in this or the parallel thread about the possibility of making kits like this for P4, which was dismissed.  I'm just wondering at the variability (tolerance) of the gauge, ie, if you measure 10 assembled points what the spread would be and whether this would be anywhere near to being useable for P4.  The Scalefour track and wheel standards shows the gauge to be min of 18,83 and maximum for gauge widening, at a radius of 528mm, of + 0,22.  The trouble is there is no tolerance up from the 18,83 for straight track as this is stated to be achieved using construction gauges.  It seems to me that if the variability was no more than say 0,10 or even 0,15, it might be achievable.  Comments?

[gordon s]

5 hours ago, RBAGE said:

Mostly from comment on this website from people who know considerably more about track standards than I do.

I assume you don't understand my comment about "messing around". I actually meant checking stock back-to-back dimensions and taking action to reduce the variation experience on product from RTR manufacturers. Something which might be best practise for standard 00 gauge but which is more critical for 16.2mm and reduced flangeways.

My point was, that the vast majority of railway modellers don't do this because the standard 00 gauge will accommodate most of this variation. What is more important, the majority of modellers don't expect to have to undertake checks or make adjustments.

 

If we followed that principle we’d be talking about a whole new range of turnouts based on Brio standards.....

 

You only have to read the various calls for help on RMweb with derailments and you quickly realise that 99% of cases are always poorly laid track or wheels where the back to backs are incorrect. 
 

The problem is rarely, if ever, poorly made RTR turnouts, but more often than not a rogue set of wheels which do occasionally slip through. Of course you only check any wheels where there appears to be an issue and there is no need to do anything with 99% of stock. To suggest you have to undertake more checks to run on 00-SF is a fallacy.

 

I’m sorry but the Holy Grail you refer to for the bulk of modellers is never going to happen if we wish to improve appearance and running quality.

 

I repeat, I probably have over 100 loco’s from various manufacturers and I suspect 300-400 items of stock. They are all modern items and none are more than 20 years old, yet I cannot recall having to reset poorly set wheels or if I have, certainly no more than I would have done with 00.

 

This is one of the downsides of forums and social media. An uniformed comment is made which is then circulated as gospel and then becomes folklore.

[jollysmart]

Surely the 00 "universal" standards are to allow the older steamroller wheel equipped models to run through the turnouts, where flange depths and wheel treads are significantly greater than those on the current and mainly recent stock available? Hence the code 100 rails in universal trackwork and the warnings that older stock may not run through the code 75 equipped trackage systems, bumping along the chairs for example?

[gordon s]

I thought we were all talking about a new product which is way ahead of anything in the market at present. If you are expecting a range of turnouts that will accept every wheel known to man over the last 50 years then I suspect you are going to be disappointed.....

The attention to detail in sleeper spacing, common crossing and moulded chairs is phenomenal and this will be a step change for those modellers who want better looking and performing turnouts, yet do not want to build their own. I’m certain they will accept all modern RTR stock straight from the box, but it doesn’t matter if you are talking about turnouts, computers, cameras or music media, every new product doesn’t mean back compatibility with everything that went before.

They will work straight from the box. They will look great and are much better than anything seen before. Let’s look forward not back and enjoy what’s on offer.......

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by gordon s

[KeithHC]

A silly question but do Peco put a set in any of there turnouts in 4mm?

 

Keith

[hayfield]

10 hours ago, RBAGE said:

The EM market is tiny and the 00-FS probably less so.

Standard 00 is by far the most popular gauge for modelling and frankly, that's where new products should be targeted if you want to at least recoup any investment.

Any possibility to develop product for the less popular gauges will be on the back of standard 00. 

 

00-SF will never be a popular gauge because the vast majority of 00 modellers do not want to start messing around with their stock.

 

 

Forget the mention of 00FS, and your statement that 00 gauge modellers have to start messing about with their stock is very wide of the mark.

 

Wayne choosing to call it "Finescale" is aimed at 00 gauge modellers who require something better, for the most part modern 00 gauge stock will run on this turnout without any alteration, the few modern items and the older non compatible stock will probably be not in the target markets interests anyway, if it is wagons and coaches, they can easily be adapted by buying readily available drop in replacement wheels already available and used!!

 

Those wanting coarse scale 00 gauge are already catered for.

[hayfield]

10 hours ago, Philou said:

May I ask @Wayne Kinney if a set can be made by those that wish to, without affecting the kit as supplied?

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

 

PS: Is 'flair' correct? I thought it was 'flare' as in flaring. You Wayne have flair, but your check rails need a flare.

 

Philip

 

The simple reply is yes, the turnout works equally well is you do and don't (its designed to work without doing it)

 

Don't let this muddy the water

[RBAGE]

2 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Forget the mention of 00FS, and your statement that 00 gauge modellers have to start messing about with their stock is very wide of the mark.

 

Wayne choosing to call it "Finescale" is aimed at 00 gauge modellers who require something better, for the most part modern 00 gauge stock will run on this turnout without any alteration, the few modern items and the older non compatible stock will probably be not in the target markets interests anyway, if it is wagons and coaches, they can easily be adapted by buying readily available drop in replacement wheels already available and used!!

 

Those wanting coarse scale 00 gauge are already catered for.

My point is that the vast majority of 00 gauge modellers never consider course scale or finescale. They would consider that getting replacement wheels as an unnecessary and unexpected expense. As you say, that part of the hobby is catered for.

This majority of modellers would never consider checking back to back dimension, thinking the industry will have taken care of that. Not an unreasonable assumption.

If it is considered necessary for 00-FS, as some well positioned contributors assert, why is that if measurement and adjustment is not necessary?

My comments are not based solely on the advice of the great and the good but that advice isout there.

 

Anyway, this is not the place to discuss gauge standards. Apologies to Wayne.