Why Would I Choose 00-SF ?

[Junctionmad]

If you think that's bile, you've led a sheltered life

 

What attracts me to the 00-SF space - as I have said repeatedly - is to seek understanding on how to apply the use of finer appearance track to my next major project.

 

However, what occupies much of the space is a kind of smart-arse tennis between a few members, deliberately goading others - you goaded Ravenser very specifically by name. This provides no more enlightenment than my ironic definition of goading: my post was as a direct result of the despair I feel every time I have to trawl through all this meaningless $hit.

So why do it. Again what do you hope to achieve.

 

For those of us using or contemplating 16.2 there are issues that are useful to discuss ,

 

For example there has been a spirited discussion wheel drop on gauge flaring etc , but for those of you that have stated you have no interest , why post here it's just trolling

Oh junction mad- your name is half right.

 

I too do not use 16.2. I also do not model LSW Railway circa 1886, but I've just enjoyed reading a thread about it.

 

I do not personally enjoy reading your comments at all- (especially as you write multiple posts together)- but I accept you have the right to post your views. As does 'chard.

 

There is civil war in a dozen or so Countries at the moment with people fighting about all sorts. I would not be surprised to learn that some are fighting over this thread.

FFS , I despair, as was pointed out , all there is here is a discussion on aspects of 16.2 track. Into that discussion, certain people with no interest in the gauge just sit on the sidelines and throw hand grenades.

If you have just an interest , then just read the thread. If you have something Meaningful , for or against the various points being debated then by all means contribute.

Edited September 28, 2015 by Junctionmad

[bgman]

Please gentlemen

 

['CHARD]

Am I right in thinking that 00-SF is now 16.2mm plain track not 16.5mm?

Edited September 28, 2015 by 'CHARD

[Junctionmad]

Beginners seldom jump straight into complex formations, and if they do their margin of error is likely to be more than .3mm anyway.

 

Also there is a huge amount of information available to beginners (even if they have to wade through pages of cr4p to find it), so people will surely be aware of this point.

I would counter by saying that " beginners " rarely touch hand built track at all. But those that want to access this part of the hobby, are most likely not true beginners.

 

Most want to build track be use it lets then more closely approximate the flow and complexity of prototype track work. Things like points on curves , proper geometry of junctions etc.

 

Hence a simple discussion on the appropriateness of gauge flaring ( or gauge transistion ) is useful. Gordon S has illustrated his particular concepts in that regard

 

My own point was simply that 00-SF should or could contain guidelines as to how it handed gauge transitions. Whereas for the 4 -SF modeller it doesn't apply

 

Regards

Dave

[Junctionmad]

Am I right in thinking that 00-SF is now 16.2mm plain track not 16.5mm?

00-SF was always 16.2 gauge

Am I right in thinking that 00-SF is now 16.2mm plain track not 16.5mm?

00-SF was always 16.2 gauge, that's what the track gauges were made to Edited September 28, 2015 by Junctionmad

['CHARD]

So what is a piece of SMP flexi?

[Derekstuart]

Track. It is definitely track.

 

I hope that helps

Derek

So what is a piece of SMP flexi?

[Junctionmad]

So what is a piece of SMP flexi?

16.5 ( well the 00 version is )

['CHARD]

16.5 ( well the 00 version is )

 

Fantastic.  Matching C&L's ready to lay S&C then.  Excellent, you have answered my beginner's question, so I will continue this dialogue in another thread.  It's not 00-FS, so it must be something else.

[The Stationmaster]

I think what Chard would like to see Cand so would I) is a sort of beginner's guide to 00-SF/4-SF.  Starring with what it means as far as those who are actually using it and building it are interpreting it and achieving results.  At the moment 'gauge wars' and semantics apart, let alone willy waving and incredible amounts of data about what is or isn't possible, is leading to the.reads in which the wood is lost among the trees.

 

It would appear that the gauge is either consistently 16.2mm or there is a version where it is normally 16.5mm but that goes with 16.2mm through point crossings with a reduced flangeway as well.  All we want (sorry to speak for what I think Chard wants) is a simple explanation of all this - please.  What we do not want is someone telling us it's underscale (we aren't that dumb), someone going into realms of drawings about flange root angles, someone telling us that it isn't any other acronym from DOGa t S4 to P4 to Em to whatever - we (sorry Chard) aren;t interested in all of that carp6. we  (sorry again Chard) just want a nice straightforward thread giving us examples and showing us how it's done and how we might do it.

 

As I've said on one of the existing innumerable, and frequently unintelligible, threads under this heading the main thing which puts me off it is finding developing or whatever achieving the skill needed to do it or possibly even finding the necessary wherewithal.  Nothing else please - just practical advice and relevant information.  And if anyone starts chucking in any of the irrelevant carp which has appeared in some of the already extensive threads I shall have the greatest of pleasure in polishing my friendly neighbourhood Exocet missile launcher and letting fly in the appropriate direction - no wonder Andy Y has a non-hirsute appearance.

[Derekstuart]

I think it fair to say that I was referring to beginners to the world of track building.

 

I do think you are right that it would help to have a reference point where people can read up on such things- even if it is a case for yes, a case for no and a case for yes, but...

 

As a relative beginner (starting a year or so ago, but with a big gap of several months) I have read an incredible amount of information from many different people. The problem is that I can't remember where half of it is. A directory of links to forum pages etc is even a good start.

 

 

As it happens, this is something we can ALL help with. We might not have the technical know how to actually advise people on things (and I for one feel a little guilty taking so much help and advice and then turning my back on others needing help- purely because on occasions I have given bad advice). If we find XYZ useful, being able to add a very brief description, a title/ search term and a link to an appropriate discussion page might not be a bad idea- and all could help from those with huge brains to people like you and I (haha just joking).

 

Opinions?

I would counter by saying that " beginners " rarely touch hand built track at all. But those that want to access this part of the hobby, are most likely not true beginners.

Most want to build track be use it lets then more closely approximate the flow and complexity of prototype track work. Things like points on curves , proper geometry of junctions etc.

Hence a simple discussion on the appropriateness of gauge flaring ( or gauge transistion ) is useful. Gordon S has illustrated his particular concepts in that regard

My own point was simply that 00-SF should or could contain guidelines as to how it handed gauge transitions. Whereas for the 4 -SF modeller it doesn't apply

Regards
Dave

[gordon s]

Hi Chard.  I'll try to answer your question as I recently posted a diagram on how I build 00-SF pointwork.  I use 16.5mm 00 gauge flexible track from SMP on Eastwood Town.  You could use any other make of flexi track if you wish, but obviously it would make sense to use the same rail section.  The 16.2mm gauge is used in the crossing section only and then I flare the track gauge out from 16.2mm to 16.5mm to join the flexi track.  If I'm building a crossover or a more complex arrangement I would use 16.2mm right through the crossing.

 

I know you can work this out for yourself, but 0.3mm is roughly 13 thou, so each side is flared out by 6.5 thou or one and a half times the thickness of a human hair.  Those with A1 vision may well say they can spot the change in gauge.  Sadly my eyesight is not that good, so I can't notice it at all.  I suspect no one would notice unless they were told what to look for.

 

I'll happily answer any questions you may have, although I would stress my knowledge is limited to practical experience of building turnouts.

 

I've had a quick look to come up with some pics for you to see 00-SF pointwork and the transition to flexi and this is one to start with.

 

 

 

 

 

[polybear]

Am I right in thinking that 00-SF is now 16.2mm plain track not 16.5mm?

For me (and I stress that point, since others may have other views - fair enough) it always has been so. Though gauge widening may be used as appropriate using 3-point gauges - it's still 00-SF, in the same way that EM (or P4) are still EM/P4 if similar gauge widening has been incorporated.

If the use of 16.5mm flexitrack has been used (for practical purposes, such as on Eastwood Town, or simply thru' personal choice) then is the layout still correctly described as being 00-SF?  Good question - one which probably doesn't have a "correct" answer - each will have their own opinion.

However, if you were to build EM turnouts and use them with P4 flexitrack (not that I'm suggesting for a moment that such a thing would be sensible/would work) then do you have an EM or P4 layout?  Now there's a question....I'm off.

Cheers,

Brian

[gordon s]

That's an interesting point you raise, Brian.  I use 16.5mm flexi to save time and also not to worry about gauge widening that may be required for long wheelbase loco's and smaller radii on curves.  It's never been an issue for me as I have a minimum radii of 36" through ET, so the only reason in my case is time saving.

 

Perhaps it's my mistake in calling it 00-SF….:-)

[polybear]

Perhaps it's my mistake in calling it 00-SF….:-)

Hi Gordon,

If you say Eastwood Town is 00-SF, then it most definitely is 00-SF

Your exploits on RMWeb with E.T. have, to my mind, been possibly the most beneficial thing to happen regarding the much wider acceptance of 16.2mm since the glorious days of the early gauge wars

Now then, if you were to finish ET then perhaps you could convince the remaining handful of dissenters (or should that be Trolls...).

Cheers,

Brian

[martin_wynne]

what exactly is British outline 00 hand built track

 

Hi all,

 

In Templot:

 

1. select 00-BF gauge.

 

2. click real > plain track options > rail lengths and sleeper spacings... menu item.

 

3. select 60ft rails / 24 sleepers per length. Click OK.

 

4. Print a plain track template.

 

That is traditional 00 Gauge track to the BRMSB standard. Many layouts were built using this before Peco introduced Streamline.

 

(Actually the standard is for fixed 10mm sleeper spacing. What you see has proper jointed track panels, but the average spacing is 10mm.)

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[martin_wynne]

I think what Chard would like to see (and so would I) is a sort of beginner's guide to 4-SF.

 

Hi Mike,

 

Have a read of this page: http://4-sf.uk

 

Essentially 4-SF means:

 

1. if you run only RTR models you don't need it. Although you can of course use it if you like the improved appearance.

 

2. if you also run models with kit wheels, 4-SF will improve the running of those.

 

3. check that your back-to-backs are within the range specified on the above page. That means none less than 14.3mm. For RTR wheels not more than 14.4mm. For most modern models you won't need to adjust them.

 

4. build pointwork using the track gauges available from C&L (labelled 00-SF). The track gauge for 4-SF is 16.2mm, fractionally narrower than 00.

 

5. for your plain track, use whatever you would currently use for an 00 layout.

 

6. if you are building a small layout you might like to handbuild some 16.2mm plain track with full prototype detailing. You can mix it up with 00 flexi-track on the same layout. You can also use Peco pointwork on the same layout if you wish (for example in the fiddle yard).

 

I do think all this talk of transitions and gauge-flaring has confused the issue beyond measure and been no help to anyone. If you have built your pointwork to 4-SF using the gauges, you can very easily attach 00 flexi-track to it. Just connect it. It may buckle a bit. Warm the rail ends with a soldering iron to soften the rail fixings. Hold it down flat while it cools.

 

Once I have the next Templot update released I will have a bit more time to write more about 4-SF.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Junctionmad]

Yes Martin

 

But today , what is the common 00 hand built track standard. I'm genuinely interested. Would it be DOGA fine , even inadvertently , given the turnout kits.

 

Personally I know of so few modellers that choose 00 hand built. Most live with PECO. The hand builders have mostly gone to p4 it seems

Edited September 28, 2015 by Junctionmad

[Junctionmad]

I've said it s few times , too much of this debate is about semantics. Templot has even added to that semantic confusion by replacing the 00-SF with 4-SF. ( for good reasons , but it still adds to the confusion )

 

In reality both Brian and Gordon are using 00-SF or 4-SF standards, even if they are implementing such standards n a different way.

 

I've presented a case that you could separate the two methods by using the two monikers in separate ways 00-SF to represent the use of gauge narrowing at the common crossing to get many of the claimed benefits, the moniker indicates that the track work is predominantly 00 gauge

 

4-SF as Martin rightly States is not 00 in the accepted sense it's a different gauge like EM or P4. A modeller working in 4-SF would be normally expecting to build all the track work to the 4 SF standard.

 

Hence Gordon, hayfield , myself etc are modelling in 00-SF , ie track work that is a derivative of 00 , Brian ( poly bear ) is therefore modelling in 4-SF , which is a derivative , as Martin points out , a derivative of EM

 

Dave

[RichardS]

This post is (largely) (without) mischief. (delete as applicable). It is completely without malice (because I'm not like that.) But it is written with annoyance and frustration.  

 

Surely the question raised by Andy Riechert in post #1 was answered by Martin in post #5.

 

This means that every subsequent post (some utterly irrelevant) has been superfluous to the topic (yes, including this one) and has largely revolved around the same old arguments being recycled. That is to say recycled arguments here and in every other post that has the misfortune to have the words/letters/mnemonics OO-SF or 4-SF somewhere in the text - to no advantage and for no purpose other than, so far as I can tell, for the antagonists to see their name on the internet again, and again, and again. ('Whoo look Mum I'm on the Interweb thing' (again). "That's nice dear. Come and eat your rissoles")

 

Frankly guys it's boring. (As is the preoccupation with anonymity - we've all got proper names so why not use them?) (IT security is not a valid excuse - if you think hackers will only try to get your ID from RMWeb you're very naïve indeed)

 

This topic should have been locked after post #5. The remaining discussion should be under another heading altogether.

 

What isn't boring is seeing pictures and information about model railways that work (thank you Gordon for a degree of sanity).   

 

And Dave (dasatcopthorne) there isn't a reason this side of the galaxy why you or anybody else should not use 16.2. If it works; brilliant. If it doesn't; tough.

 

(On the other side of the galaxy they don't use 16.2 they use 42, apparently, but that doesn't work for everybody and some of them have spent 3 trillion years arguing about whether it should be 42 or 45. Meanwhile a small group of ambulant pelargoniums have started to use 48.2 and another sub group of small green wiggly things that nobody has given a name to yet have proposed using 48.83. Of course they haven't a clue what all these numbers mean as nobody thought to invent railways on that side of the galaxy - but it keeps them occupied through the long nights of the Killerdracahodinium winter which lasts for 33 millennia...... or so it seems) 

 

Finally, should anybody wish to go DOGA'ING (the art of Double O GAuging, you understand) that's ok by me too but it's not my scene.

 

Now go and do some modelling, please. ;-)

 

Regards

 

Richard Slipper

Norwich

[Junctionmad]

The problem is blogs are probably a better " fora for the dissemination of information then discussion forums. Learning from Forums is a bit like trying to understand the rules of rugby listening to a series of passionate supporters argue about the rules, the ref , the latest game , all at the same time.

 

The best advice , is rather then get frustrated trying to particulate in the free for all , why not start a topic and ask specific questions , generally those who reply will try to stay on topic and answer your question (s) !!

 

It's worth pointing out that discussion forums don't exist to educate anyone !!! They exist to stimulate discussion. Such discussion may be educational or it may not be. Neither can anyone " cry " " stop and educate me ". Whether that happens is purely at the behest of contributors ( to be fair , most are more then willing to help)

 

Dave

Edited September 28, 2015 by Junctionmad

[Junctionmad]

I do think you are right that it would help to have a reference point where people can read up on such things- even if it is a case for yes, a case for no and a case for yes, but...

 

In fairness Martin has repeatedly posted links to the 00-SF site that explains all the basics.

[polybear]

Hence Gordon, hayfield , myself etc are modelling in 00-SF , ie track work that is a derivative of 00 , Brian ( poly bear ) is therefore modelling in 4-SF , which is a derivative , as Martin points out , a derivative of EM

 

Dave

Not me - I'm still in the 00-SF camp, just without using flexitrack

If that should upset any oversensitive 00 follower then that's unfortunate, but it sure won't keep me awake at night   

 

Brian

['CHARD]

Richard, that's fine but a bit late to the party to be honest.

 

Mike (Stationmaster) and others, myself included, are starting to get meaningful data coming through.

 

Gordon's pictures are my inspiration but the S&C on my main lines will be decorative 95% of the time so will be 16.5 throughout.

 

I've approx 500 loco wheelsets, 400 coaching stock wheelsets and 1000 freight wheelsets to consider. I don't foresee a B2B gauge coming out except following a derailment. I'm certainly not adjusting that lot.

[martin_wynne]

But today , what is the common 00 hand built track standard.

 

I just answered that - see: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/102666-why-would-i-choose-00-sf-4-sf-in-templot/page-20&do=findComment&comment=2035824

 

For over 60 years now, almost everyone handbuilding 00 track has used the 00-BF standard. Roller gauges for this have been available from Romford, Markits, SMP Scaleway, Marcway, DOGA, and others. For pointwork, templates have been available from SMP Marcway for about 50 years, and from C&L for about 25 years. Many handbuilders like to print their own templates using Templot. The DOGA Intermediate standard is essentially the same, although published more recently.

 

I'm not too clear how this information helps this topic about 4-SF? Modellers building pointwork to the 4-SF standard will not need to know about or use 00-BF. It just confuses the issue to drag in all these peripheral data. I added some 00-BF data at http://4-sf.uk for the benefit of those already handbuilding in 00-BF, modellers intending to use 4-SF can ignore it.

 

The C&L turnout kits and gauges are not for 00-BF or 4-SF, they are for the DOGA-Fine standard, as now explained on their web site.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Edited October 2, 2015 by martin_wynne
link updated