Peco O Gauge Set Track

[Jack]

On 30/07/2019 at 20:07, ossygobbin said:

my Dapol 57xx kept jumping off the track or going down the wrong road at the points

 

Do you have a 7mm back-to-back gauge you can check it with?

 

I presume your 14xx is a kit, what are the back-to-backs like on that?

[Jack]

OK, here are my findings from today ... tested with all 6 laid points.

 

1 Jinty has good back-to-backs, the other are about 0.5mm out.  The good one stalls only occasionally on DCC, the other frequently.

 

They only stall going through the curved direction, never the straight one.

 

As they go though the curve the rear wheels are making a glancing contact with the straight rail between the frog and the blades.  This is enough to trip a DCC system.  Both locos run fine on analogue.

 

I think the solution is to trim a little bit from the top and inside of the straight rail by the frog, but I'm not prepared to test it on a newly installed point, so I will try and get hold of a spare.

 

I have spoken to Peco about this and they say this is the first they have heard of this (they don't appear to be avid RMWeb followers), although they are aware of some of the other problems users have experienced.  So if you are also struggling with this, maybe you could give the Technical Advice chaps a call, so they are more aware of the running issues?

 

Apparently all O gauge points are tested with a Dapol Jinty before they leave the factory ... I'm guessing its only analogue though, and maybe from a batch with correct back-to-backs.

[Dava]

So the problem is with the incorrect back-backs on some Dapol locos, rather than the points?

 

I wouldn't be happy with this either, but maybe the loco drivers need to be gently eased in?

 

The points do have some known problems, again arising from variability in manufacture, as I pointed out 2 years ago. 

 

Dava

[Jack]

1 hour ago, Dava said:

So the problem is with the incorrect back-backs on some Dapol locos, rather than the points?

 

I wouldn't be happy with this either, but maybe the loco drivers need to be gently eased in?

 

The points do have some known problems, again arising from variability in manufacture, as I pointed out 2 years ago. 

 

Dava

 

Sort of. I think the combination of tight radius and unifrog means there is no room for error. The Jinty with good back to backs still causes a bit of shorting.

 

i have certainly not experienced any manufacturing issues with the current batch though, so hopefully that issue is resolved.

[Jack]

Another running session today.  My Minerva Victory and Peckett both ran through like a dream (especially the Victory which has to be one of the best runners I won).  A friends kit bit steam sentinel also went through no problems (slaters wheels we think).

 

Oddly another friends Golden Age merchant navy struggled ... ... however, since the loco barely fitted on the layout thats no great surprise.

 

Waiting for a spare point to arrive from my favourite purveyor of modelling goodies, then I'll get on with testing a solution to the shorting issue.

[F-UnitMad]

On 21/08/2019 at 16:33, Jack said:

Oddly another friends Golden Age merchant navy struggled ... ... however, since the loco barely fitted on the layout thats no great surprise.

I'm not surprised it struggled - it won't have been designed to run through such tight radius curves in the first place.

[mervyn]

 Have exactly the same problem as you .Sent one set of points back to Peco got another set to try exactly the same derailing with my Dapol Pannier so have sent it to DCC Supplies to have look at hopefully they can sort it !

[Andrew Young]

48 minutes ago, mervyn said:

 Have exactly the same problem as you .Sent one set of points back to Peco got another set to try exactly the same derailing with my Dapol Pannier so have sent it to DCC Supplies to have look at hopefully they can sort it !

 

The problem is more likely that you’re trying to run a Loco with too long a wheelbase (57xx Panniers and Jinties) through point work that is just too sharp for them, unless it is laid like a billiard table.

 

Whilst the Minerva Victory is a large Loco, it’s industrial origins are such that it has a relatively short wheelbase for the size of Loco to help it negotiate sharp curves such as the PECO set track.

 

if you’re running the larger panniers and jinties, you really need to use the larger radius points that PECO produces.

 

Andrew

[Jack]

As said before, the minerva pannier runs through ok. I think it is a combination of long wheel base and poor back to backs ... although as Andrew said, if you have long wheel base stock then use 6’ radius points.

 

I have an idea for a fix, I’m just waiting on a spare point to test it on. The plan is to file down the top of about 3mm of rail on the straight rail on the toe side of the frog (next to the plastic), then in fill and smooth off with araldite. This should create a short isolated section for problematic locos. As long as the frog is live it shouldn’t affect the running of 4 wheel locos.

 

This only needs to be done on the straight rail as stock going through in a straight line appears to be ok.

 

I’ll post pics once i’ve tried it.

[Jack]

On 24/08/2019 at 19:46, F-UnitMad said:

I'm not surprised it struggled - it won't have been designed to run through such tight radius curves in the first place.

 

There was no way it would run through, but it was interesting to see how far it got!

[81A Oldoak]

3 hours ago, Andrew Young said:

 

The problem is more likely that you’re trying to run a Loco with too long a wheelbase (57xx Panniers and Jinties) through point work that is just too sharp for them, unless it is laid like a billiard table.

 

Whilst the Minerva Victory is a large Loco, it’s industrial origins are such that it has a relatively short wheelbase for the size of Loco to help it negotiate sharp curves such as the PECO set track.

 

if you’re running the larger panniers and jinties, you really need to use the larger radius points that PECO produces.

 

Andrew

All Minerva locos including the GWR 57XX/8750 0-6-0PT are designed specifically to negotiate Peco Setrack curves, including the points. We hope to achieve this with the forthcoming Class 14 0-6-0DH, but it will be a challenge. 

Edited August 26, 2019 by 81A Oldoak
Missing definite article.

[Happy Hippo]

The old fashioned 'normal' electro-frog points don't seem to suffer from this problem, because the crossing nose and the wing rails are all the same polarity, but require a micro switch to ensure the correct polarity is selected when the switch rails move.

 

Peco want the new uni-frog points to do it all without switching making it simpler for plonk and play specialists to install.

 

One could always take a piercing saw and a soldering iron to the new style point and rework it if the problem won't go away. 

 

However, I accept that i'm lucky in being able to build my own pointwork, so such a conversion holds no fear for me.  It's a different kettle of fish if you have to do this to £40+ of track and you've never attempted such before.

[Jack]

After having to wait ages to get hold of a spare point, I have finally had a test.  Below are a couple of pictures of the very small amount of rail which has been ground away next to the frog.  This appears to have cured the problem and the jinty drives through without shorting now.  Please note, this is on the straight rail only ... when the jinty heads straight through the point it doesn't catch the curved rail, even with poor back-2-backs.

 

When I come to do the actual pointwork on the layout I will fill in the small gap with a drop of araldite to insulate it and keep things smooth, although the slight drop made no difference to performance.

 

Whilst it is annoying that I had to do this at all, it does seem to widen the scope for the amount of stock which can negotiate these points.

 

 

[Jack]

All 6 points on the layout have had a small piece of rail removed with the mini-drill grinder and some araldite inserted and rubbed down with a track rubber, then tidied up with a craft knife.  I have also added some wire between the blades and the stock rails so that when I come to spray the track paint doesn't isolate bits I don't want isolated.  Took most of the day but I think in the long run it will be worth it.  Everything running like a dream, including the Jinty with the poor back to backs.

 

[Jack]

Well, having fixed the shorting, I still can't get the Terrier to push a wagon through the crossovers bunker first (due to the overhang) ... after much thought I'm not prepared to start phaffing around with bits of wire or larger buffers etc. on stock to try and solve this.  The 4 points making up the crossovers are being replaced (the other two into the sidings are as they don't form a reverse curve).  Lesson learnt.

 

 

[MarcD]

Stupid question. When wiring standard frog points you normally have to fit insulated fish-plates at the frog end. With the new uni frog do you need to fit them?

Marc

[Jack]

1 hour ago, Furness Wagon said:

Stupid question. When wiring standard frog points you normally have to fit insulated fish-plates at the frog end. With the new uni frog do you need to fit them?

Marc

 

Nope, no need for insulation as this is all done around the frog and the power is transfered to the correct rails using thin wire underneath.  Just use metal fish plates all around.

 

I have now removed 4 out of the 6 from Gough's Yard.  Basically the 2 crossovers have had to go as I was getting buffer locking on anything other than a Peckett and 4-wheelers.  The buffer locking seemes to be caused by the fact the diverging line continues on a curve through the frog, unlike on the streamline points where the diverging line straightens out before the frog.  2 pairs of bog standard 6' points just about fit ... should have used threm from the start!!  The set track points are still fine for the sidings because they don't form a reverse curve. 

[MarcD]

That's what I thought. I have pushed some of my stock over the track work. No locking at all even through the two reverse curves. Having said that I'm using 16ft long on 9ft wheel based maximum sized wagons. This is the joy of working with pre-grouping wagons and small locos.

 

Marc

[hartleymartin]

7 hours ago, Jack said:

 

Nope, no need for insulation as this is all done around the frog and the power is transfered to the correct rails using thin wire underneath.  Just use metal fish plates all around.

 

I have now removed 4 out of the 6 from Gough's Yard.  Basically the 2 crossovers have had to go as I was getting buffer locking on anything other than a Peckett and 4-wheelers.  The buffer locking seemes to be caused by the fact the diverging line continues on a curve through the frog, unlike on the streamline points where the diverging line straightens out before the frog.  2 pairs of bog standard 6' points just about fit ... should have used threm from the start!!  The set track points are still fine for the sidings because they don't form a reverse curve. 

 

The trick is designing the sidings so you don't get reverse curves. Minories is a great example of this.

[Jack]

On 25/10/2019 at 07:12, hartleymartin said:

 

The trick is designing the sidings so you don't get reverse curves. Minories is a great example of this.

 

Fine if you're building Minories, bit limiting in a lot of other respects.

 

Still, it's been an interesting learning experience ...

[Sturminster_Newton]

Peco do also supply their smerty-two at tighter radius (R1 and R0) perhaps the smerty-two set track points 30" radius are what is needed worked down to suit O gauge rail.

 

They would be about R1.25 in O-gauge set-track terms, and possibly too tight for all but dock or tramway use until you read the track standards for 32mm tramways when 6"-9" radii are banded about as freely as mainline muddlers declare that 60-80" is the ruling radius for 32mm motive power.

 

The wish lists for production needs modellers to buy large numbers of their specific day-dream, but the small number of units sold annually and the return on the investment on tooling means not much will change for many years.

 

It would be nice to have a diamond crossing to match the R2 geometry, but that is probably as dead in the water as a R2 3-way or a single/double slip.

 

Would anyone settle for a 'barry' slip?

 

Which would possibly be more easily produced as the majority of the machined rail parts are stock items. But it's £100ks of moulding cost to recover from a unit sale of £95 to the end customer. I doubt very much that there is a 2-300,000 annual market for a R2 'barry' slip.

 

But that is always a consequence of cheque book muddling and the endless wish list, not the preserve of track builders who will wonder why all the fuss.

 

I will declare that I am sited in the former camp and can only admire the later.

[Simond]

Building track is not difficult, it much cheaper than RTP, and hugely satisfying.  Anyone that can use a pair of rail snips, a file and a soldering iron can do it.

 

I'd recommend buying a Marcway point kit and building that, then try a DIY copperclad version, then there'll be no stopping you. 

 

Once you've mastered copperclad, it's only a small step to C&L chairs and wooden sleepers.

 

Anyone wants any help, I, and others on here, have loads of experience and are willing to chip in, I'm sure.

 

atb

Simon

 

[dunnyrail]

I only discovered The new (ish) Peco Setrack last night when a friend told me about it. He could not quote the Radius but I found from adds that it is considerably larger than I thought. Back in 1978 when 0 gauge was not so fashionable as now I was messing about with a Lima Bogie bodged into a Steam Tram kit. running on Lima Track with a radius of  2-2’6” I think. I subsequently started making my own track as I found the geometry 2  limited for the Light Railway that I was trying to fit on 18” boards. Thus like Simon says I built my own track using hand cut Copper Clad Sleepers every 5-6 sleepers with hand cut matching thickness ply ones in between. Cheep, cheerful, easy and perfect for a Col Stephens type Light Railway.  I also scratch and kit built quite a few locomotives my smallest being Shannon of the Wantage Tramway and that is a small loco indeed. These days I am predominantly working in G Scale in the Garden but my 0 layout sits in the loft in its storage boxes as do the stock unused since the last trip out of  the layout probably some 10 years ago now at Swindon. I did offer the layout for sale at that show with what appeared to be a serious taker that prompted me to take the sign down, never heard from him again! Complete time waster.

 

I think if I were using the points I would be investigating making the curved bit turn into a straight as soon as possible after the frog but allowing sufficient for a suitable distance between 2 tracks. Yes this would be bodging by hey who does not bodge with Model Railways? Even the P4 guys do a bit, but would rarely admit to it!

 

Oh does the Dapol Terrier run OK through these points? I know I do not need to worry about my other 2 kit built Terriers as they run through my 2’6” points quite happily.

Edited January 7, 2021 by dunnyrail

[PaulRhB]

3 hours ago, dunnyrail said:

Oh does the Dapol Terrier run OK through these points? I know I do not need to worry about my other 2 kit built Terriers as they run through my 2’6” points quite happily.

Yes it does Jon and so does their 08. There were some issues with jinty’s but I think it was their long wheelbase and the curved switch rail not being curved correctly being a bit tight or loose to gauge, I can’t remember which now, but tweaking it to the correct gauge solved that on a friends ones. 
 

Edited January 8, 2021 by PaulRhB

[meatloaf]

Does the Dapol pannier run ok thru these points?