Peco Bullhead code 75

[Markhalsall]

Hi all, I’m new to this group and wanted to ask a couple of questions and advice please 

 

I’ve been a modeller for a few years and have completed several code 100 layouts in flexi.

 

Im now starting an end to end medium size layout in Peco Code 75 Bullhead 

 

it came as quite a shock when the points and track arrived, just how fine everything is and in all honestly, just how beautiful it is also.

 

I wondered, given it’s fine nature, if anyone had any tips on soldering such a small rail underside.?

 

I usually ‘juice’ the frog, is it necessary with bullhead points or should I just use out of the box so to speak.. ?

 

also, what should I look out for whilst laying track.. tips and advice would really be appreciated.
 

Thank you in advance 

 

mark

 

 

[Harlequin]

Hi Mark,

 

If you make sure you take the dropper wire from the Unifrog frog through to the underside of the baseboard then you can decide later whether you need to power the frog or not. The frog is very small and there's less chance of locos losing contact when wheels fall into flangeways than with Code100 so it might not be necessary to power the frog.

 

Watch out for the sleeper alignment on the Bullhead flexitrack going wonky - it seems to be more prone to that than the old Code100/75 flexitrack because there is less webbing underneath.

 

Not sure about soldering because I have always soldered to the side of the rail in as inconspicuous a way as I can manage. Someone else might have a clever tip for soldering underneath the rail.

 

Edited November 24, 2021 by Harlequin

[Markhalsall]

Hi Harlequin. Thank you for your advice and for taking the time to answer me

 

yes good shout on the frog wire 

 

I know what you mean about them being slightly wonky.. I’ll defo watch out for this. 
 

I did think about soldering on to the sides.. I know a lot of folk do.. it would be a lot easier on terms of concentrating on the track work without the two droppers soldered to the underside getting in the way. I always found it a bit of a faff poking droppers through, whilst attempting to join two pieces of track…. Plus with the minute rail joiners this could be even more tricky… 

 

you’ve made me have a good think about that as I may try a few solders to the rail sides.. 

 

appreciate the food for thought .. 

 

Mark

[ikcdab]

hi Mark, its amazing what a difference the bullhead rail makes after streamline. i use scaleway, but the principle is the same.

i usually cut away the web between the sleepers underneath and solder a copper wire dropper. this is just salvaged core from waste house power cable.

i bend over a couple of mm at the end of the dropper at right angles. tin everything, then in and out quickly with a hot fine tip. 

I di think it is important to wire up each section of track. Don't rely on the railjoiners for continuity. I have done that in the past and had awful difficulties with continuity. On my current layout, i have ensured a power feed to each section of rail and have had no power feed issues at all.

Ian C

[brossard]

Agree with Ian about soldering wire under the rails.  As long as the parts are clean and pretinned, the joint will make almost instantly.  No worries about melted sleepers/timbers.  Also important to put droppers on EVERY piece of track.  Rail joiners may work at first but over time they will tarnish and loosen.

 

I had a read about Unifrog the other day and TBH, it made my head spin. 

 

https://dccwiki.com/PECO_Unifrog

 

It seems pretty complicated.  I have built a lot of turnouts, copper clad and chaired in both 00 and 0 and I have always used the simple method.  This is to build the crossing in one piece and isolated from the rest of the turnout.  It is connected to something that will switch polarity. (I use Tortoise and Wabbit combos).

 

For our club layout, after considerable debate and discussion, it was decided to use Peco BH track, but to build our own turnouts.  The reason for this is the cost and availability of Peco T/O's.  Building our own costs next to nothing since the components are already to hand.

 

John

[Pete the Elaner]

3 hours ago, Markhalsall said:

 

 

I usually ‘juice’ the frog, is it necessary with bullhead points or should I just use out of the box so to speak.. ?

 

 

 

As mentioned earlier, you don't actually need to decide in advance.

Unifrog will work out of the box & you should have no issues with point blades failing to connect. The dead section itself is very small so whether you need to feed this from a switch or leave it dead will depend on what you run. Twin bogie diesels will be fine but 0-6-0s may not.

If you are used to points feeding sidings depending on which way they are set, then you will need a re-think because Unifrog points keep sidings live at all times. If you are in the habit of using small sections & always isolating then re-feeding sidings (which most DCC users & also some DC users do anyway) then you can use insulating joiners like before.

[rob D2]

I would wire it if you want stuff like 08s to run well.

Its surprisingly open to stalling I’ve found 

[Markhalsall]

Thank you all very much for this Information.  
 

i will definitely be running  a few shunters so it may be wise to liven the frog rails.I used to modify my peco electro frog which in all honesty was a bit of a faff…but with the majority of the rails being live on the bullhead turnout I’m hoping for a more tidy point without the need for modification. 
 

I’ve soldered literally 1000’s of droppers but only ever to a nice flat bottom rail so it will be good to steady my hand for the much smaller bullhead rail.. better lay off the gin the night before I’m soldering …. 
 

Thank you all for your input and help, very much appreciated 
 

 

[Quarryscapes]

20 hours ago, brossard said:

Agree with Ian about soldering wire under the rails.  As long as the parts are clean and pretinned, the joint will make almost instantly.  No worries about melted sleepers/timbers.  Also important to put droppers on EVERY piece of track.  Rail joiners may work at first but over time they will tarnish and loosen.

 

I had a read about Unifrog the other day and TBH, it made my head spin. 

 

https://dccwiki.com/PECO_Unifrog

 

It seems pretty complicated.  I have built a lot of turnouts, copper clad and chaired in both 00 and 0 and I have always used the simple method.  This is to build the crossing in one piece and isolated from the rest of the turnout.  It is connected to something that will switch polarity. (I use Tortoise and Wabbit combos).

 

For our club layout, after considerable debate and discussion, it was decided to use Peco BH track, but to build our own turnouts.  The reason for this is the cost and availability of Peco T/O's.  Building our own costs next to nothing since the components are already to hand.

 

John

 

This is exactly what the Unifrog does. 

[brossard]

Scrolling down the Wiki link gives you this:

 

 

I'm a bit smarter now.

 

John

[rob D2]

Unifrog merely gives the option of being like an old insulfrog but with better looks , or going the whole hog and using it as electro frog.

 

I always avoided anything not insulfrog until these came out , as I didn’t understand polarity switches etc or want to get involved with them esp as my layouts always relied on push rods to change the points.

 

It was only with the ease of use of DCC cobalts strapped on to them that I took the plunge with bullhead and unifrog 

[Markhalsall]

Thank you Rob

 

i may take the plunge and go cobalts… I just need to sell a kidney first lol.. 

 

thanks for the message 

 

mark

[Harlequin]

1 minute ago, Markhalsall said:

Thank you Rob

 

i may take the plunge and go cobalts… I just need to sell a kidney first lol.. 

 

thanks for the message 

 

mark

Mark, Have a look at MTB MP1s before you plump for Cobalts.

 

[brossard]

5 minutes ago, Markhalsall said:

Thank you Rob

 

i may take the plunge and go cobalts… I just need to sell a kidney first lol.. 

 

thanks for the message 

 

mark

 

To my mind, slow motion motors are the way to go, whether you choose Tortoise, Cobalt or other.  Reliable and polarity switching without a lot of futzing.  Combined with stationary decoders, layout operation is easy.  I used Tortoise and Wabbit decoders which I had on hand from about 20 yrs ago but still work great.  SD's can be operated using the handset, but that is a pain.  An easier method is to install momentary push buttons on the fascia.

 

John

Edited November 30, 2021 by brossard

[Markhalsall]

I’ve always gone for solenoid due to the cost implications. One of my layouts had 40 points.. 

 

but this new layout is going to be about 20-25 points and may well be my last layout as my hands aren’t what they used to be.. 

 

I have used momentary switches in the past but thought I may go with using the gaugemaster accessory switches on the handset but in all honesty, I have been worried about messing about keying switches and running loco’s on one handset, and I may still opt for momentary switches on a control board.. it feels easier than messing about with the controller to find the right point to switch.. 

[brossard]

3 minutes ago, Markhalsall said:

I’ve always gone for solenoid due to the cost implications. One of my layouts had 40 points.. 

 

but this new layout is going to be about 20-25 points and may well be my last layout as my hands aren’t what they used to be.. 

 

I have used momentary switches in the past but thought I may go with using the gaugemaster accessory switches on the handset but in all honesty, I have been worried about messing about keying switches and running loco’s on one handset, and I may still opt for momentary switches on a control board.. it feels easier than messing about with the controller to find the right point to switch.. 

 

No question solenoid motors are cheaper.  For our club layout, the main section uses SEEPs and we have found on several occasions that the polarity switching failed, requiring intervention.  In addition, the aggressive throw can damage tie bars.  TBF, we've only seen that a couple of times and with copperclad handmade turnouts.

 

As we refurbish and enlarge the club layout, Cobalts and DCC Concepts SD's will be used.

 

Yes, fiddling about with buttons on the handset is not viable to me and push buttons are the way to go, at least for simplicity.  I put the buttons on the fascia adjacent to the turnouts and on both sides so the layout can be operated from either side.  This eliminates the need for a control panel. 

 

 

The green buttons operate the SD.  Note also the fascia panels for DCC (NCE in my case).  This was taken quite a long time ago, the layout is much further advanced now and operational.

 

I don't have a lot of turnouts so if you do have a large number, you may find it necessary to do something different.

 

John

[Pete the Elaner]

18 minutes ago, Markhalsall said:

I’ve always gone for solenoid due to the cost implications. One of my layouts had 40 points.. 

 

but this new layout is going to be about 20-25 points and may well be my last layout as my hands aren’t what they used to be.. 

 

I have used momentary switches in the past but thought I may go with using the gaugemaster accessory switches on the handset but in all honesty, I have been worried about messing about keying switches and running loco’s on one handset, and I may still opt for momentary switches on a control board.. it feels easier than messing about with the controller to find the right point to switch.. 

 

The handset is just 1 way to switch points with DCC. It is convenient for some because it already exists.

I would not like it on anything with more than about 4-5 points though.

 

Mimic panels (which look & feel exactly like to the classic style) can still be configured to send the switching commands to the system....or you can use the handset...or a computer...or a panel of levers. You can even use more than 1 method, even identical panels at each end of the layout.

The panel itself may be a little more to configure but will save on the vast amount of wiring you will need for a traditional panel.

[Markhalsall]

23 minutes ago, brossard said:

 

No question solenoid motors are cheaper.  For our club layout, the main section uses SEEPs and we have found on several occasions that the polarity switching failed, requiring intervention.  In addition, the aggressive throw can damage tie bars.  TBF, we've only seen that a couple of times and with copperclad handmade turnouts.

 

As we refurbish and enlarge the club layout, Cobalts and DCC Concepts SD's will be used.

 

Yes, fiddling about with buttons on the handset is not viable to me and push buttons are the way to go, at least for simplicity.  I put the buttons on the fascia adjacent to the turnouts and on both sides so the layout can be operated from either side.  This eliminates the need for a control panel. 

 

 

The green buttons operate the SD.  Note also the fascia panels for DCC (NCE in my case).  This was taken quite a long time ago, the layout is much further advanced now and operational.

 

I don't have a lot of turnouts so if you do have a large number, you may find it necessary to do something different.

 

John

That’s very kind of you to respond with a pic too.. looks great to me.. and I like to idea of of making things easier in operation.. the clunking sound puts me off solenoid but I may experiment with a small piece of closed cell foam under the solenoid to damper the sound. I’m also going to weigh up the cost between the two for formats which may be considerable.. that said a bullhead point at £30 may well warrant the extra expenditure.. I’ve already spend £600 on points alone… thank you very much 

[brossard]

You might have noticed that the track bed I use is closed cell foam from Woodland Scenics.  Full disclosure, the layout is 0 gauge.

 

In our discussion about code 75 turnouts for the refurbed club layout we have tentatively decided to make our own.  Two reasons, one is current availability and the second is cost.

 

John