Attention 00-SF track builders

[trustytrev]

Here is one that works and its even got 3 chaired copperclad timbers in it

 

aa33.jpeg

 

If you want to play it will be at the South West Herts MRC show in Bushey this coming Saturday

Hello John,

              If you extended it with three peices of C&L or SMP flexi track and connected to power you could challenge people to try their 00 gauge models on and through it. If you made a list of the results it could be the basis of a scientifically proven data base. I think it would be a most useful assistance for the less informed railway modellers and put an end to much of the negative comments 00-SF receives.It could be really interesting  if not entertaining to see what lengths some of the more vociferous oponents of 00-SF would resort to then.

trustytrev.

[Junctionmad]

Hello John,

              If you extended it with three peices of C&L or SMP flexi track and connected to power you could challenge people to try their 00 gauge models on and through it. If you made a list of the results it could be the basis of a scientifically proven data base. I think it would be a most useful assistance for the less informed railway modellers and put an end to much of the negative comments 00-SF receives.It could be really interesting  if not entertaining to see what lengths some of the more vociferous oponents of 00-SF would resort to then.

trustytrev.

The " negativity " against 00-SF is entirely manufactured by one or two people that persist in producing theoretical arguments , h0 standards or down right spurious arguments to deflect away from the fact that many people are using it and achieving the results they want. It's a manufactured argument in the face of a successful practical application.

[Andy Reichert]

Yes I know, but it's a superb illustration of the difference, and what can be achieved with not too much effort

 

Its more the difference between apples and oranges.

 

 

 

 

 

Believable comparisons should only be between two turnouts that are other wise identical. As in the above examples. In your case, between hand laid UK 16.5 and Handlaid UK 16.2 , without labelling either of them.

 

Just as an experiment, I wonder if any of those 16.2 mm gaugers who can see easily notice the difference between 1 mm flange ways and 1.25 mm flange ways can identify what width all the above are.

 

Andy

[hayfield]

Hello John,

              If you extended it with three peices of C&L or SMP flexi track and connected to power you could challenge people to try their 00 gauge models on and through it. If you made a list of the results it could be the basis of a scientifically proven data base. I think it would be a most useful assistance for the less informed railway modellers and put an end to much of the negative comments 00-SF receives.It could be really interesting  if not entertaining to see what lengths some of the more vociferous oponents of 00-SF would resort to then.

trustytrev.

 

trustytrev

 

That's not a problem, but just read Gordon's ET thread 

[gordon s]

Thanks John.  It's far from scientific, but I did make some short videos of various types of stock running through 00-SF pointwork a while back.  Happy to post them here if anyone is interested.

 

It won't prove anything, but will give those that are considering 00-SF some idea of what to expect….but then no one has provided proof it won't work either…..

[polybear]

 

Hello John,

              If you extended it with three peices of C&L or SMP flexi track and connected to power you could challenge people to try their 00 gauge models on and through it. If you made a list of the results it could be the basis of a scientifically proven data base. I think it would be a most useful assistance for the less informed railway modellers and put an end to much of the negative comments 00-SF receives.It could be really interesting  if not entertaining to see what lengths some of the more vociferous oponents of 00-SF would resort to then.

trustytrev.

They (he) would still moan....

 

Not sure if the published 00 and EM wheel profiles are identical, but for many years Alan Gibson has been selling wheels as "00/EM". Haven't heard too many (any?) complaints, which is good enough for me. It works - that's all I need.

 

polybear

[hayfield]

I don't know if it was this thread or another where I posted this, but worth repeating.

 

I was advised by an EM gauge modeller to set all wheelsets using the same back to back gauge (if you use Romfords then but a Markits gauge)

[martin_wynne]

I was advised by an EM gauge modeller to set all wheelsets using the same back to back gauge (if you use Romfords then but a Markits gauge)

 

Hi John,

 

Well maybe, but who was this EM gauge modeller? Anyone can advise anything, as we have seen in these topics.

 

If you want to set everything to the same back-to-back in 00-SF, it should be 14.4mm. This is the normal factory setting for RTR models. I don't know where you would obtain such a back-to-back gauge, maybe DOGA?

 

But the important dimension is not back-to-back, which varies with the flange thickness.

 

The important dimension is back-to-flange, from the back of one wheel to the front of the flange on the other wheel. It's not easy to measure, but you can easily make yourself a wheel-testing fixture as shown below.

 

Here's some information which I have posted several times on RMweb. Here it is again:

 

The optimum back-to-back dimension varies with different wheels. Do you have a digital caliper? If you are not sure which wheels you are dealing with, measure the width of them:

 

For 00-SF:

 

Wheels 2.8mm wide -- back-to-back 14.4mm MAX.  (RTR wheels)

 

Wheels 2.5mm wide -- back-to-back 14.5mm MAX.  (Markits loco wheels)

 

Wheels 2.3mm wide -- back-to-back 14.6mm MAX.  (wagon kit wheels)

 

For 00-SF the MIN back-to-back is 14.3mm for all of them.

 

If you don't know which wheels you have, make the back-to-back 14.4mm.

 

In practice, if you have bought an 00-SF check gauge, you can do better than using back-to-back gauges by building yourself a wheel-testing fixture, like this:

 

This is how to use the gauges to create a wheel testing fixture:

 

Thanks to Dave (Acklam) for this picture.

 

 

 

1. Fix this rail first. It represents the crossing vee. There is a flat on the check gauge so that it can be used where the vee won't fit in the slot.

 

2. Fix this rail second, using the check gauge tool. It represents the check rail.

 

3. Fix this rail third, using the 1.0mm shim. It represents the wing rail. it doesn't engage with the check gauge tool.

 

4. Fix this rail last, anywhere you like. Its sole purpose in testing the wheels is to support the wheel. It represents the opposite running rail. A good way to identify it in future is to fix it upside down, or make it longer or shorter than the other rails.

 

Mark which rail is which. Don't get rails 1. and 4. muddled up.

 

In using the fixture,

 

1. hold the back of one wheel against rail 2.

 

2. gently lower the other wheel onto rail 1.

 

3. the wheel flange should just clear the side of rail 1. without rubbing, but ideally leaving only a fraction of daylight showing between them.

 

4. the back of that wheel should easily clear rail 3.

 

With care, a testing fixture like this if accurately made is a better way of setting the wheels than using a back-to-back gauge, because it allows for different flange thicknesses, and the actual track you are building.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

Martin

 

Thanks, I think/know he was saying set all the wheels to the same dimensions, so that if one item works then all will

[martin_wynne]

Thanks, I think/know he was saying set all the wheels to the same dimensions, so that if one item works then all will

 

Yes but only if they are all the same sort of wheels. It's no good finding the best back-to-back for kit wheels, and then setting RTR wheels to the same back-to-back.

 

Martin.

[Andy Reichert]

SNIP

 

The optimum back-to-back dimension varies with different wheels. Do you have a digital caliper? If you are not sure which wheels you are dealing with, measure the width of them:

 

For 00-SF:

 

Wheels 2.8mm wide -- back-to-back 14.4mm MAX.  (RTR wheels)

 

Wheels 2.5mm wide -- back-to-back 14.5mm MAX.  (Markits loco wheels)

 

Wheels 2.3mm wide -- back-to-back 14.6mm MAX.  (wagon kit wheels)

 

For 00-SF the MIN back-to-back is 14.3mm for all of them.

 

SNIP

 

So setting the RTR wheels back to back "best" value between 14.4 mm (max) and 14.3 mm (min) for 16.2 mm gauge is good,

 

but the idea of the NMRA setting a "target" value for RTR wheels back to back between 14.6 mm (max) and 14.37 mm (min) is a "Dog's Breakfast"???

 

This sounds very much like calling  "a rose by any other name". . . . . . .if you don't happen to like it.

 

And BTW, those two different numbers for RTR B-B don't match.

[martin_wynne]

I cant help but think...this does need to have some defined standards...

 

Hi Mickey,

 

I've posted all the information anyone could need over and over again on RMweb over the years, in dozens of different topics.

 

What is it you need to know?

 

I will update the page at http://00-sf.org.ukshortly with a list of dimensions.

 

All anyone really needs to know is:

 

1. for track, refer to the EMGS web site and subtract 2.0mm from the dimensions.

 

2. for wheels, take the model out of the box.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[martin_wynne]

So setting the RTR wheels back to back "best" value between 14.4 mm (max) and 14.3 mm (min) for 16.2 mm gauge is good, but the idea of the NMRA setting a "target" value for RTR wheels back to back between 14.6 mm (max) and 14.37 mm (min) is a "Dog's Breakfast"???

 

The optimum back-to-back varies for different wheel types. A target value on a spec sheet applies to all wheels. My dog's breakfast remark was in discussion of the track dimensions, not wheels. I think I've had enough of this. No-one is under the slightest obligation to use 00-SF if they don't like it.

[gordon s]

Martin, you must have the patience of a saint….

 

I have no idea why, but it seems every time this subject is brought up, the same old faces bring up the same old arguments.  

 

When will the penny drop.  We're quite happy with our choice of gauge and we have no more intention of changing to DOGA whatever, than you have of changing to 00-SF. Irrespective of gauge, it's still modelling and that is something we should all share and admire.

 

Do us all a favour guys and stop wasting all of our time with pointless arguments.

[Tase]

Well said that man!

 

Not only that but for those of us without vast amounts of technical knowledge or experience in hand built track it's all terribly confusing and off putting frankly!

[highpeak]

So setting the RTR wheels back to back "best" value between 14.4 mm (max) and 14.3 mm (min) for 16.2 mm gauge is good,

 

but the idea of the NMRA setting a "target" value for RTR wheels back to back between 14.6 mm (max) and 14.37 mm (min) is a "Dog's Breakfast"???

 

This sounds very much like calling  "a rose by any other name". . . . . . .if you don't happen to like it.

 

And BTW, those two different numbers for RTR B-B don't match.

I think you have to be deliberately obtuse to fail to see the point Martin is making.

 

If I took a stick and dipped it in a bucket of track grease, which end are you going to grab hold of? It's about as obvious.

[sp1]

Its more the difference between apples and oranges.

 

 

 

 

 

Believable comparisons should only be between two turnouts that are other wise identical. As in the above examples. In your case, between hand laid UK 16.5 and Handlaid UK 16.2 , without labelling either of them.

 

Just as an experiment, I wonder if any of those 16.2 mm gaugers who can see easily notice the difference between 1 mm flange ways and 1.25 mm flange ways can identify what width all the above are.

 

Andy

It's not 'Apples & Oranges' - your pictures are of H0 track: we have enough of that from Peco - the picture I referred to showed the difference between handmade track which anyone modelling UK (or British!) could do for themselves against the alternative 'H0' products available 'off the shelf' , ok, so it's not P4 (or P87 or whatever modellers if 'FOREIGN' railways call it) but it's a big step forward and a lot better looking if you are modelling on this side of the pond!!!

 

Ps why don't you start a thread in this section on American H0 track ? : I am genuinely interested, and suspect you are very knowledgable (I am aware of your products) - but many of your posts on what we are modelling with regards to track are of little relevance to what we are doing and are very tiresome....

[sp1]

The optimum back-to-back varies for different wheel types. A target value on a spec sheet applies to all wheels. My dog's breakfast remark was in discussion of the track dimensions, not wheels. I think I've had enough of this. No-one is under the slightest obligation to use 00-SF if they don't like it.

Martin,

Not only do you have the patience of a saint, but you need to purchase a crash helmet - banging your head against a wall is not good....

[Andy Reichert]

A far better specification of a  "Dog's Breakfast"

 

Andy

[hayfield]

A far better specification of a  "Dog's Breakfast"

 

Andy

 

 

Andy I would eat cereal if I were you, much healthier !! 

[hayfield]

Here is one that works and its even got 3 chaired copperclad timbers in it

 

aa33.jpeg

 

If you want to play it will be at the South West Herts MRC show in Bushey this coming Saturday

 

 

Well nobody came and tried it, which is a bit of a shame as I was hoping some of the doubters would want to have proved their theories.

 

The general public were curious of both the hand made turnouts v a Peco turnout (never mentioned anything about 00sf) and the various makes of tracks available (including both EM & P4 gauges)

 

 After the ballasted comparison between a hand made 00sf turnout and the Peco turnout, my thoughts after the challenge was to make a long thin test track for a loco to run along/through. Either a turnout, facing crossing or a turnout and slip, perhaps in the region of 4' long.

 

Whilst I do not want to be a standard bearer for 00sf I might be available to demonstrate at shows local to me hand built track and or track building which would include a simple show piece, happy to listen to ideas of what may be of use etc