Wright writes.....

[Nickey Line]

13 hours ago, Chamby said:

Can I ask a basic question please?  I am having a little trouble with a Peco bullhead rail turnout that shorts out occasionally.   If you are familiar with the product there are some notable design differences with their previous streamline offerings, mostly to do with their new ‘Unifrog’ concept which appears rather more sensitive to shorting out around the throat.

 

As a result I am looking more closely at the back-to-back’s of both my loco and rolling stock wheelsets, and as expected have found some variance across RTR stock.  Can I ask the more experienced builders on this thread what back-to-back measurement you normally use?  14.5; 14.75 or 14.82mm?   The latter is for RP25 standards, I believe.

 

My layout currently has a mix of Peco & C&L bullhead rail trackwork, but also some code 100 streamline used off-scene, which probably doesn’t help matters!

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Phil.

 

 

 

The 14.82 quoted here would be wider even than so-called 00 fine-scale, the BB being 14.7

Either way, wheels set to this value will give serious trouble on RTR trackwork.

[Tony Wright]

22 hours ago, Chamby said:

Can I ask a basic question please?  I am having a little trouble with a Peco bullhead rail turnout that shorts out occasionally.   If you are familiar with the product there are some notable design differences with their previous streamline offerings, mostly to do with their new ‘Unifrog’ concept which appears rather more sensitive to shorting out around the throat.

 

As a result I am looking more closely at the back-to-back’s of both my loco and rolling stock wheelsets, and as expected have found some variance across RTR stock.  Can I ask the more experienced builders on this thread what back-to-back measurement you normally use?  14.5; 14.75 or 14.82mm?   The latter is for RP25 standards, I believe.

 

My layout currently has a mix of Peco & C&L bullhead rail trackwork, but also some code 100 streamline used off-scene, which probably doesn’t help matters!

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Phil.

 

 

My apologies for not replying sooner, Phil,

 

Are the new Peco points configured in the same manner as their earlier live-frog points? By that, I mean, is the frog polarity not switched as a complete unit? 

 

I modify all my Peco live-frog points in the manner shown below. 

 

 

The first part is to permanently bond the stock rails to their respective switch rails. This also has the advantage of maintaining constant current to the switch rails - the little collecting tabs will fail to pass electricity over time. 

 

 

Then gap the switch rails using a slitting disc.

 

 

The polarity of the frog is then switched by a separate micro-switch. The frog itself is isolated by insulated fishplates between it and the diverging roads. 

 

Back-to-backs? I use a 14.5mm b-t-b gauge from Markits, and mainly Romford/Markits/Jackson wheelsets. Some wagons have Gibson/Maygib wheelsets, which work, though they have a tendency to drop into the Peco frogs. 

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

May I ask, please, what an as-new Hornby rebuilt 'MN', 35028 CLAN LINE might be worth, please? It's got DCC 'on board'. 

 

I've figured out prices for the other items donated by Juke, but I'm struggling with this one.

 

Thanks in anticipation. 

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

May I ask, please, what an as-new Hornby rebuilt 'MN', 35028 CLAN LINE might be worth, please? It's got DCC 'on board'. 

 

I've figured out prices for the other items donated by Juke, but I'm struggling with this one.

 

Thanks in anticipation. 

It is quite a 'common' loco Tony so I would estimate about £80/90.

Phil

[Legend]

Might be a bit more than that , if buying second hand Id say easily £100. That's not , of course, what you would get if selling to a dealer

[gr.king]

Isn't any discussion or recommendation of a "standard" back-to-back setting somewhat misleading or meaningless without simultaneous consideration of flange widths and tread widths? Without standardisation of the latter two, which I suspect few of us in OO actually achieve, variations in b-t-b may have to be adopted in order to get the best compromise, perfection will be elusive, and some stock may have to be subject to route restrictions.

If you have all flange widths narrow enough and you are willing / able to set all b-t-b figures wide enough to suit, you can endeavour to further refine running of finer and more modern wheels through code 100 turnouts (if it happens to be convenient / necessary to use the coarse-scale things) by adding thin facing strips to the check rails so as to reduce the flangeways. Styrene strip will super-glue to the (lightly abraded) plastic check rails and pre-tinned nickel silver strip can be successfully soldered in-situ (with care) onto the cleaned metal faces.

[Chamby]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

My apologies for not replying sooner, Phil,

 

Are the new Peco points configured in the same manner as their earlier live-frog points? By that, I mean, is the frog polarity not switched as a complete unit? 

 

I modify all my Peco live-frog points in the manner shown below. 

 

 

The first part is to permanently bond the stock rails to their respective switch rails. This also has the advantage of maintaining constant current to the switch rails - the little collecting tabs will fail to pass electricity over time. 

 

 

Then gap the switch rails using a slitting disc.

 

 

The polarity of the frog is then switched by a separate micro-switch. The frog itself is isolated by insulated fishplates between it and the diverging roads. 

 

Back-to-backs? I use a 14.5mm b-t-b gauge from Markits, and mainly Romford/Markits/Jackson wheelsets. Some wagons have Gibson/Maygib wheelsets, which work, though they have a tendency to drop into the Peco frogs. 

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks to all for the informative replies, they are much appreciated.

 

The Peco OO bullhead turnouts usefully come with the switch rails already bonded to the stock rails: 

 

 

The difference with the 'Unifrog'is in the positioning of the electrical break between the switch rail and the frog...  Peco have attempted to keep the electrified frog section as small as possible so that, as well as working like their 'electrofrog', you can also elect to leave the frog electrically dead and use it in the same way as their 'insulfrog' products.  The problem is that, in order to minimise the dead section, the electrical break between the frog and the switch rail is practically in the throat itself, leading to a potential short:

 

I have about a dozen of these turnouts installed on my layout and the majority work fine.  Just a couple of them have shorting issues, probably something to do with the angle of the approach track setting how the wheels ride the rails as they run through the turnout.  As well as needing to check the back-to-backs, I have also found that the bizarre double-pivot pony truck arrangement used by Hornby (as in their L1, P2 and O1 locomotives) causes the pony wheels to 'crab' on curves.... this also causes shorting with these turnouts when running in the forward direction, but not in reverse due to the way the pivot behaves differently depending whether the pony is being pulled or pushed.

 

I am coming to the conclusion that the easiest solution will be to either modify the affected turnouts and reposition the electrical break further down the switch rail, or substitute hand-built points in these locations.  It does surprise me that this design passed the pre-production testing at Peco though!

 

There has been extensive discussion about these points in the Peco section of RMweb, for those interested.

 

Phil.

 

[Headstock]

On 13/02/2019 at 10:04, Atso said:

That teak coach is absolutely brilliant Headstock! Your teak effect is exceptionally good!

 

I've just taken the third generation test print of the Howlden coach off the printer. I've been forced to integrate the roof with the body and add the interior to the under frame section (not visible in the picture!). The under frame needs a couple of minor revisions to the design. I tried to represent the beading that is present at the very bottom of the body (below the lowest panel beading) but this is very thin and prone to warping so I think it'll be better if I remove it from the CAD - will anyone notice as it trundles along the layout? I also need to remember to add some supports for the tops of the windows on the next one (notice the slight curves!). Not as nice as an etched coach, but much lighter and I think, once I've finished playing with the design, it'll serve as a suitable 'layout coach'.

 

 

Now I just need to be patient and wait for the drawings for the other coaches to arrive!

 

 

Afternoon Steve,

 

that's a smashing little beastie. Only Bill bedford seems to bother with the equvalent bottom edge beading on 4mm LNER stock, it's very small. Most manufactures don't bother and sometimes it is missing off the real things, at least in preservation.

[Atso]

19 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Afternoon Steve,

 

that's a smashing little beastie. Only Bill bedford seems to bother with the equvalent bottom edge beading on 4mm LNER stock, it's very small. Most manufactures don't bother and sometimes it is missing off the real things, at least in preservation.

 

Thank you Andrew. I've removed it from the CAD file now and I think that its omission is far less noticeable than the wavy version pictured above.

 

I've also been working on the next coach in the formation, a GN Diagram 183 lavatory composite brake. I'll need two of these and I've found that its length is just about the maximum I can squeeze onto the build plate for my printer.

 

 

[Headstock]

That would be the 58' stock? I think they are the nicest looking of the GN carriages.

[juke]

6 hours ago, Legend said:

Might be a bit more than that , if buying second hand Id say easily £100. That's not , of course, what you would get if selling to a dealer

They seem to be listed starting at £89 on Ebay, though this one has a Lenz Gold decoder on board. A new Lenz Gold sells at £35ish, this one is not the latest series but is virtually unused so should add c.£15 to the price, or at least make it more desirable to some modellers.

 

Syd

[Atso]

45 minutes ago, Headstock said:

That would be the 58' stock? I think they are the nicest looking of the GN carriages.

 

That's the one Andrew. Personally, I like the early Gresley bow end/roof stock best but I need two of the D183s for the 2.04pm express. Interestingly the remaining coaches are all vestibule types but the clerestory third leads the rake while the other two (both ex-GN D248D thirds) are the forth and fifth coaches in the formation.

[St Enodoc]

7 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

Thanks to all for the informative replies, they are much appreciated.

 

The Peco OO bullhead turnouts usefully come with the switch rails already bonded to the stock rails: 

 

 

The difference with the 'Unifrog'is in the positioning of the electrical break between the switch rail and the frog...  Peco have attempted to keep the electrified frog section as small as possible so that, as well as working like their 'electrofrog', you can also elect to leave the frog electrically dead and use it in the same way as their 'insulfrog' products.  The problem is that, in order to minimise the dead section, the electrical break between the frog and the switch rail is practically in the throat itself, leading to a potential short:

 

I have about a dozen of these turnouts installed on my layout and the majority work fine.  Just a couple of them have shorting issues, probably something to do with the angle of the approach track setting how the wheels ride the rails as they run through the turnout.  As well as needing to check the back-to-backs, I have also found that the bizarre double-pivot pony truck arrangement used by Hornby (as in their L1, P2 and O1 locomotives) causes the pony wheels to 'crab' on curves.... this also causes shorting with these turnouts when running in the forward direction, but not in reverse due to the way the pivot behaves differently depending whether the pony is being pulled or pushed.

 

I am coming to the conclusion that the easiest solution will be to either modify the affected turnouts and reposition the electrical break further down the switch rail, or substitute hand-built points in these locations.  It does surprise me that this design passed the pre-production testing at Peco though!

 

There has been extensive discussion about these points in the Peco section of RMweb, for those interested.

 

Phil.

 

A thin phosphor-bronze wire centring spring on the pony trucks should do the trick and improve running everywhere, not just on points.

[Manxcat]

In clearing some of the accumulation of less than useful bits and pieces from my railway room today I stumbled across the first photo below and thought some of you might like to see it and know the back story, so to speak. I started modelling railways when I was in my teens, which is over 40 years ago now. This is an image of my first attempt at a layout. It was in N gauge and, since I was a dyed-in-the-wool GWR enthusiast at that time, the loco is a Graham Farish GWR pannier tank; one of only a very small handful of ready to run N gauge locos at that time.

 

There are a lot of things about this layout which were, shall we say, less than satisfactory. Notice the lengths of piano wire bent to an L shape at the edge of the baseboard used to change the points. There is no fascia to the layout, just the bare chipboard edge. There is a backscene for only part of the layout. The cattle dock was made using a proprietary rustic fencing and there are no gates on it for the livestock to get on or off the dock!

 

On the other hand, there are elements which made me happy at the time. There are working lights, even though the grain of wheat bulbs are grossly overscale. I was an avid signalling fan and added representations of the proper signals. I scratch-built the water tower and the terrace of houses. I also stuck a bit of cotton wool in the GWR pannier tank’s chimney and blew it about a bit while I took a long exposure, to represent steam.

 

At that time there were few types of plasticard other than plain available but there was 4mm scale brick. I decided it would do and inspired by the terraces on Eastbourne, built by Vivien Thompson and in the Railway Modeller at that time. I made the terrace. A fellow modeller called at my house to see the layout and said "Those houses must have taken an age to build.". I asked why he thought that and he said "Scribing all those bricks and so perfectly too.". I didn't enlighten him for a few days but eventually confessed!

 

 

Looking back today I thought about how my modelling skills have developed. Even at the time of the photo my skill at making buildings was ahead of my other modelling skills. Have a look at the second photo, taken by Nigel Burkin, which I hope will show how they have developed. My desire to properly signal all my layouts stays with me to this day and I now use MSE signal kits to make them.

 

The layout gave me great enjoyment and railway modelling has always been a passion of mine. As has been said so many times on this wonderful thread, give it a go, you might surprise yourself.

 

 

[trustytrev]

Hello.

       I am in the process of doing a Comet rebuilt Scot/Patriot chassis. I Am using some Gaugemaster Brass Flux from years ago with 60/40 tinmans solder. The solder on the parts does not shine as brightly as some demonstrated in your Locomotive Kit Building Guide video. Also the solder tip gets crusty and dirty extremely quickly making picking solder up on it very limited. I note you seem to be able to melt and pick solder up much easier and longer than I can manage . I am having to flux the iron tip virtually every time I want to melt and pick up solder to transfer to the joint.The dirty tip/flux issue is causing tips to erode prematurely. I assume the combination of flux and solder you use is the solution to my problem. Could you advise the solder and especially the flux you use as I am not entirely satisfied with the results thus far.

Thank You.

trustytrev.:)

[gr.king]

I'd be interested to hear some convincing explanation of what is actually happening to trustytrev's iron, flux and solder, as opposed to simply hearing suggestions and recommendations of alternative solders and fluxes. It may be a completely different problem, but I notice on those relatively few occasions when I use a 60 watt iron rather than my usual 25 watt iron, that my usual flux is rapidly cremated on the tip of the iron, which ceases to tin properly, also suffers erosion and needs vigorous cleaning. I can only work with paste flux using this iron, liquid flux containing phosphoric acid simply being vaporised from any joint before it has time to act. The fouling and erosion of the tip of this hotter and more powerful iron has always been such that it lost its plating at a very early stage and can now only be made fit for use with a file!

[jamie92208]

I tend to work with a 60w iron and use either phosphoric acid flux or paste flux that I can't remember the name of (Little plastic tub, black body and red top).  I find that if I forget to clean the soldering iron before I put it on the rest it gets covered in some sort of cremated gunk very quickly.  However I keep a scrunched up piece of kitchen roll, pre soaked in water nearby and before use just wipe the tip and the silvery tinned tip is exposed like magic.   If I'm doing a lot of work I try and clean it after every short use but don't always do that.  The tip doesn't seem to have eroded in the past 6 months.

 

Jamie

[St Enodoc]

14 minutes ago, gr.king said:

I'd be interested to hear some convincing explanation of what is actually happening to trustytrev's iron, flux and solder, as opposed to simply hearing suggestions and recommendations of alternative solders and fluxes. It may be a completely different problem, but I notice on those relatively few occasions when I use a 60 watt iron rather than my usual 25 watt iron, that my usual flux is rapidly cremated on the tip of the iron, which ceases to tin properly, also suffers erosion and needs vigorous cleaning. I can only work with paste flux using this iron, liquid flux containing phosphoric acid simply being vaporised from any joint before it has time to act. The fouling and erosion of the tip of this hotter and more powerful iron has always been such that it lost its plating at a very early stage and can now only be made fit for use with a file!

I'm reluctant to trespass in the Soldermaster's domain but I try to keep my iron tip clean and flux-free as far as possible. To that end I wipe it on one of those curly brass thingies before and after making every joint. I put the flux on the joint not the iron and I don't tin the iron but try to keep the original plated finish intact.

 

Regarding Trev's problem. I've never used Gaugemaster flux so I can't help there directly.

[jwealleans]

Mine is a 60W too and I'm using Carr's either Green or yellow label flux.  I have one of those stands with a piece of sponge which I dampen and wipe the iron on regularly during use.  When I'm done, I stick it in a little tin of 'tip cleaner' which I think came from Eileen's.  Bits do wear out, but not as quickly or badly as what Trev is describing.

 

I am one of those bodgers who picks solder up on the tip of the iron rather than cutting pieces off and dropping them in place on the joint - maybe that keeps the tip better tinned?

 

Edit - I also flux the joint (with a cheap paintbrush) before applying heat.  Is there a suggestion you should flux the iron?

Edited February 15, 2019 by jwealleans

[St Enodoc]

4 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

Mine is a 60W too and I'm using Carr's either Green or yellow label flux.  I have one of those stands with a piece of sponge which I dampen and wipe the iron on regularly during use.  When I'm done, I stick it in a little tin of 'tip cleaner' which I think came from Eileen's.  Bits do wear out, but not as quickly or badly as what Trev is describing.

 

I am one of those bodgers who picks solder up on the tip of the iron rather than cutting pieces off and dropping them in place on the joint - maybe that keeps the tip better tinned?

 

Edit - I also flux the joint (with a cheap paintbrush) before applying heat.  Is there a suggestion you should flux the iron?

Not suggesting that you should but Trev says that he does:

 

11 hours ago, trustytrev said:

Hello.

       I am in the process of doing a Comet rebuilt Scot/Patriot chassis. I Am using some Gaugemaster Brass Flux from years ago with 60/40 tinmans solder. The solder on the parts does not shine as brightly as some demonstrated in your Locomotive Kit Building Guide video. Also the solder tip gets crusty and dirty extremely quickly making picking solder up on it very limited. I note you seem to be able to melt and pick solder up much easier and longer than I can manage . I am having to flux the iron tip virtually every time I want to melt and pick up solder to transfer to the joint.The dirty tip/flux issue is causing tips to erode prematurely. I assume the combination of flux and solder you use is the solution to my problem. Could you advise the solder and especially the flux you use as I am not entirely satisfied with the results thus far.

Thank You.

trustytrev.:)

Yes, I often pick up the solder on the iron, for convenience, but like you I always try to flux the joint.

[Jol Wilkinson]

1 hour ago, gr.king said:

I'd be interested to hear some convincing explanation of what is actually happening to trustytrev's iron, flux and solder, as opposed to simply hearing suggestions and recommendations of alternative solders and fluxes. It may be a completely different problem, but I notice on those relatively few occasions when I use a 60 watt iron rather than my usual 25 watt iron, that my usual flux is rapidly cremated on the tip of the iron, which ceases to tin properly, also suffers erosion and needs vigorous cleaning. I can only work with paste flux using this iron, liquid flux containing phosphoric acid simply being vaporised from any joint before it has time to act. The fouling and erosion of the tip of this hotter and more powerful iron has always been such that it lost its plating at a very early stage and can now only be made fit for use with a file!

 

I use an Antex TCU and have found that setting the temperature at 100 deg. more than the solder's temperature rating minimises build up of "crud" on the tip. I also use one of the "scrub bud" type tip cleansers (from Hobby Holidays) which is very effective in keeping the tip clean.

 

I suspect that using a standard - non temperature controlled - soldering iron, which probably operates at around 400 deg. it is "oxidising" the lead in solder and/or causing some reaction with the flux that creates a (usually black) residue on the tip. With resin cored solders for electrical work which generally melt at 210 - 215 deg. , this is probably not an issue as they are now lead free. 

 

While I also use the tip to carry solder to the job, I also cut off small pieces of solder wire with a craft knife  (145deg. 1.0mm dia)  and put that on the joint after applying liquid  phosphoric acid flux. This helps to get a clean joint without excessive solder and also keeps the tip clean. 

 

Edited to add.

The "quality" of your 60W iron may also have a bearing. Antex tips are, in my experience quite tough and long lasting (although some users have difficulty tinning them initially). The same probably applies to other manufacturers of soldering irons and equipment for professional use. Low cost irons from Amazon, Ebay, etc. probably don't have such robust tips, which may cause them to deteriorate rapidly.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Jol Wilkinson
Additional text

[Guy Rixon]

I suspect that some fluxes - those that are not simple acids - behave badly at high temperatures. Anything that can burn is potentially in trouble at 400C. The rosin in cored solder could give problems. Carrs' Red flux is sometimes described as "organic" and it generates much crud if used at too-high temperatures. It seems to me that any flux in the "no need to wash" category is likely to be chemically complex and likely to burn. 

[Tony Wright]

16 hours ago, trustytrev said:

Hello.

       I am in the process of doing a Comet rebuilt Scot/Patriot chassis. I Am using some Gaugemaster Brass Flux from years ago with 60/40 tinmans solder. The solder on the parts does not shine as brightly as some demonstrated in your Locomotive Kit Building Guide video. Also the solder tip gets crusty and dirty extremely quickly making picking solder up on it very limited. I note you seem to be able to melt and pick solder up much easier and longer than I can manage . I am having to flux the iron tip virtually every time I want to melt and pick up solder to transfer to the joint.The dirty tip/flux issue is causing tips to erode prematurely. I assume the combination of flux and solder you use is the solution to my problem. Could you advise the solder and especially the flux you use as I am not entirely satisfied with the results thus far.

Thank You.

trustytrev.:)

Trev,

 

I use 12 percent phosphoric acid flux for all my constructional soldering. 

 

The solder is either 70 degree low-melt or 145 degrees constructional solder, both available from Hobby Holidays or Eileen's Emporium. 

 

I use a 60Watt temperature-controlled iron or a 50Watt Antex temperature-controlled one. The bits do get cruddy from time to time, but, by using 'pints' of flux, they keep fairly clean. One thing I have noticed, is that I can never solder really successfully when using other folk's tools/materials. 

 

I hope this helps.............

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Tony Wright
to add a point

[Mallard60022]

5 hours ago, jwealleans said:

Mine is a 60W too and I'm using Carr's either Green or yellow label flux.  I have one of those stands with a piece of sponge which I dampen and wipe the iron on regularly during use.  When I'm done, I stick it in a little tin of 'tip cleaner' which I think came from Eileen's.  Bits do wear out, but not as quickly or badly as what Trev is describing.

 

I am one of those bodgers who picks solder up on the tip of the iron rather than cutting pieces off and dropping them in place on the joint - maybe that keeps the tip better tinned?

 

Edit - I also flux the joint (with a cheap paintbrush) before applying heat.  Is there a suggestion you should flux the iron?

Yup, try to keep a nice, shiny tinned bit tip before during and after, for all work, using that little Eileen's Tip Tinner can, wet sponge or brillo-pad type mentioned above. However I have not had to use anything more than a 25W iron (temp controlled) for quite some time as I have not been soldering that many battleship plate thickness, brass frames that came with old DJH kits for example.  I also use a variety of fluxes including a cream flux that is handy for keeping parts in place on some occasions; needs more cleaning afterwards though. I'm not sure I really like the really acidy fluxes as they really attack the bits.

Phil

[micklner]

On 12/02/2019 at 12:57, Headstock said:

 

Afternoon Jonathan,

 

the brake has comet sides on MJT, the compo is MJT only. Nobody etches hinge holes for me, unfortunately. I drill them out and file a slot. I don't have too much of a problem with Comet sides, the beading is a little clunkier than MJT but because the etching is quite deep it doesn't really show on the painted model. I've only used the sides of the end door thirds and the above two brakes from the Comet range, ooh and one compo, the only cross over with the MJT range. I will always use the MJT components if I have the choice.

 

With regard to the drop lights, there is a half etch cusp in the window opening on the comet sides, I file this out, allowing the larger MJT droplights to fit in the opening. It makes a big difference. The Comet sides compo mentioned earlier, lacks the airy appearance of this new build because of the little windows and armor plated droplights. I have moor issues with some of the Bedford sides, obviously working off the same drawings as Kirk. Below is one of the Comet end door thirds, when painted I think that the beading looks fine.

Beautiful work !!!

Edited February 15, 2019 by micklner
showed previous reply ??