Why Would I Choose 00-SF ?

[gordon s]

Hi Gordon,

 

I'm puzzled why DOGA would have a vested interest to denigrate it? If as they claim their reason for being is to represent 00 modellers, and some 00 modellers are using 4-SF, they would on the face of it be eager to embrace it as part of their family.

 

Unless of course their reason for being is not that?

 

It would be interesting to know their membership figures, what services they offer to members, if they have an online forum, how often they stage Expo-style exhibitions such as those put on by the other scale societies, etc.? They do seem to keep a very low profile in the hobby, and here on RMweb.

 

Martin.

 

That's the contradiction, Martin.  The aims of DOGA as published by Brian would suggest they welcome all modellers in 00.  Rather than rubbish 00-SF at every opportunity it would make far more sense for someone to actually build some 00-SF turnouts, conduct some detailed tests under controlled conditions and then report back for us all to read what the plusses and minuses are in making that choice.

 

Surely that would do far more for 00 modellers and would certainly change my view of their attitudes so far.

 

Ravenser continually misses the point that 00-SF modellers are happy to live alongside DOGA Fine and Intermediate modellers and admire their work.  We share a love of 00 and I see no harm whatsoever in a policy of encouraging modellers to work in a common scale, however that may be achieved under the 00 umbrella.

 

Freedom of choice is one thing we all enjoy and change should be welcomed if it is well founded.  There is a huge opportunity for DOGA to take a lead here and show they are a progressive organisation, not one that appears locked in the past.

[AndyID]

There is a huge opportunity for DOGA to take a lead here and show they are a progressive organisation, not one that appears locked in the past.

 

Hi Gordon,

 

That's exactly the point. I do not know if Ravenser really represents the DOGA or not, but if he does, the DOGA has a simple question to answer:

 

Does the DOGA want to embrace the community, or does the DOGA want to enforce "standards" upon the community?

 

Seems simple enough.

 

Andy

[martin_wynne]

I suspect we are in violent agreement here

 

Oh no we are not. The manufacture and sale of Marmite is in clear contravention of the Geneva Convention.

[Semi Fast]

Oh no we are not. The manufacture and sale of Marmite is in clear contravention of the Geneva Convention.

 

I thought that the manufacture and sale of Marmite was allowed - it's the consumption of Marmite that threatens world peace.

 

Andrew

Consumer of Marmite in industrial quantities

[davefrk]

I like Marmite - on toast, on an apple sandwich, on a cheese sandwich, on a boiled egg sandwich but not, definitely not on a beef sandwich. Call me contrary if you like....

 

 

Dave Franks

Sticking with EM and 16.65 B2B on Gibson wheels.

[Edwardian]

It's generally non-fatal if they don't breath on you afterwards.  Accidentally kissing them, that's the real killer.  Survivors say they can never quite lose the after-taste.  Dreadful. 

[RichardS]

I take your point Andy, but really Mr Ravenser appears so determined not to change his mind or accept (even consider) the information he is given that I think you're flogging a dead horse. As interesting as the psychology might be life is too short for such disputes. You cannot argue with a concrete block

 

4-SF makes sense to me and I'm no technical expert but I can understand when it applies and when it doesn't which is what the gentleman seems to have trouble with.

 

The DOGA seems to be an enigmatic association. It seems to have no ambition other than to perpetuate the past. My vision of tweed-jacketed pipe-smoking men thumbing through 1950s and 60s copies of Railway Modeller may be wrong of course. Having seen it's stand at exhibitions it is generally rather dull. Even the EMGS is more exciting (no offence meant to anybody of course but I find EMGS a little dated too. In fact in my experience it is the Scalefour Society which is the most dynamic and friendly.)

 

I don't think 4-SF has a place in DOGA - simply it's not OO which surely has to be 16.5mm gauge.

 

My view is that 4-SF is really a discrete standard and should be viewed as such by all rather than trying to convince others that they should 'accommodate' it into a wider portfolio.

 

And I have decided that my first hand-built track will be to 4-SF. Once I get to grips with Templot of course. ;-)

 

I still haven't finished my spreadsheet - note to self to do so.

 

Regards

Richard

[RichardS]

For the record I am was a Marmite baby.  Food of the Gods. The factory is near Burton and the smell around it must be what heaven is like.

Did you know you can use it to make a drink a bit like Bovril. Quite savoury. 

Edited October 20, 2015 by RichardS

[Edwardian]

My poor wife had to adopt a gluten free diet.  The one, considerable, silver lining was her giving up Marmite!

 

Each to his own, however.  What a great metaphor for finescale standards; enjoy yours by all means, but don't shove it down my throat!

[Semi Fast]

There will never be an answer to where a variation like 4-sf sits - but does it really matter?

 

To those who don't/won't use it, it isn't "00" because of the nominal gauge.

 

Those who do use it will see it as 00 because they will be using 00 stock without modification.

 

Compared to the number of users of RTR track work, the numbers of modellers involved are few.

[The Stationmaster]

I thought that the manufacture and sale of Marmite was allowed - it's the consumption of Marmite that threatens world peace.

 

Andrew

Consumer of Marmite in industrial quantities

That of course is exactly the point - you like Marmite, I don't (can't abide the smell).  But if you wish to consume it I am not going to condemn you or argue with you that not consuming Marmite is better than consuming it.  Same with this thread - it is about reasons for choosing 00/4-SF and not about reasons for not choosing it.  So carry on choosing and informing please - not disinforming.

[Pacific231G]

My poor wife had to adopt a gluten free diet.  The one, considerable, silver lining was her giving up Marmite!

 

Each to his own, however.  What a great metaphor for finescale standards; enjoy yours by all means, but don't shove it down my throat!

So presumably Marmite lovers would want the sale of Vegemite to be banned in this country? (I prefer Vegemite to Marmite)

 

This does remind me of the Welsh tale (I've heard versions from several other cultures but my family is Welsh) of a devout man who was castaway on a desert island for twenty years and not only survived but thrived. When he was finally rescued he was complimented on the neat fields of crops, his meticulously documented study of the local fauna and flora  and the comfortable house he'd built for himself. The only thing they couldn't understand was why he'd built two chapels. "That's easy" he explained "This is the chapel I go to every Sunday and that's the one I WOULDN'T BE SEEN DEAD IN !" 

Edited October 20, 2015 by Pacific231G

[hayfield]

Just seen this in there website ,

If he is the man from DOGA ,then he doesn't seem to have their values

image.jpg

 

Brian

 

 

How about sending this to Ravenser via a PM, you could always send the link to this thread to the DOGA for comment 

[Guest bri.s]

Just had a quick look on the DOGA website for a email but couldn't see one ,I do think if he's part of DOGA and a senior member ,that it looks quite bad on them ,but you do get rouge fanatics that can't change or accept anything else with the times ,the fact as he's having to hide behind a false name shows he knows what he's doing

 

The constant attacks on a scale he neither models In or has at least tested he must have an ulterior motive

Any decent person who had doubts about it would ,first build something ,test it and then tell us their findings ,so

To summarise his opinion is flawed and not worthy of this thread or any other on this subject

 

So I ask ravenerser ,go on build one ,you know your dying to ,then come back comment and tell us how you got on

 

Like others have said if it works for them what's the harm ,my friends do alsorts of different scales do I say they're wrong ,no I just enjoy the modelling they do

 

Brian

[martin_wynne]

1 Now if DOGA intermediate standards are so good, why do the DOGA have a fine standard as well ?

2 Looking at DOGA fine standards, please why chose/design a standard that clearly does not work for many RTR wheelsets without drastic alteration?

 

What is interesting there is that DOGA Fine (EM minus 1.7, with 1mm flangeways) has exactly the same so-called "eroded" clearances as EM and 4-SF.

 

C&L have been selling DOGA-Fine turnout kits for years, with no warnings from DOGA about their "eroded" clearances or unsuitability for RTR wheels.

 

Martin.

[gordon s]

How about sending this to Ravenser via a PM, you could always send the link to this thread to the DOGA for comment 

 

Don't worry he has a get out clause as it specifically says a 'track gauge of 16.5mm'.....Of course that means only 75% of each my turnouts will qualify.  

Edited October 20, 2015 by gordon s

[BoD]

Marmite?

 

Just hasn't been the same since they narrowed the jar slightly.

[RichardS]

There was I saying this was a technical thread and the debate to marmite.

 

Last year I recall there being a special issue of matured marmite or something just wondering if anybody tried this and what it was like.

[davefrk]

There was I saying this was a technical thread and the debate to marmite.

 

Last year I recall there being a special issue of matured marmite or something just wondering if anybody tried this and what it was like.

 

Too strong for me, maybe I'm just a woose.

 

Dave.

[Derekstuart]

The tolerances for Marmite are based on the perceived taste of it- ie that you remember from the 1970's.

 

You've posted yourself that Marmite jars are two steps thicker than they used to be, and small jars one step, and given the figures which show how dramatically Marmite dislike has been reduced.

 

That reduction in Marmite dislike is what I'm talking about.

 

For the record I've never objected to the non-consumption of Marmite - I've said that it's a personally questionable solution to an alleged "problem" which doesn't exist. Denigrating Marmite makes not a scrap of difference to the taste merits of this product (I dare not call it a food stuff since certain people are sketchy in their opinion of it and there is dispute amongst its consumers as to which is the best variety- ie extra strong).

 

No dietry changes will be averted by replacing Marmite with Vegemite either.

 

The whole basis for the promotion of anti-Marmite concept (and the endless aggressive posting on here) has been the claim that existing Marmite isn't the best food stuff imaginable and that the "problem" is "solved" by not eating it.

 

In other words th whole anti-Marmite campaign rests on a  sustained critical attack on Marmite ingredients (and, frankly, on those consuming them)  . It's unsurprising if that results in criticism from Those actually eating it.

 

Nobody would take seriously a claim that consumers eating peanut butter were not entitled to an opinion on the merits of vegemite, mayonnaise, salad cream , or that Bovril drinkers were not entitled to disagree with Mr Stephen Siddle's own burger relish.

 

(I completely ignore any suggestion that I am chief financial officer and treasurer for the Double Oh Great mArmite association.

[Ravenser]

Ravenser, don't you think that is being a bit silly? After all, what possible motive or gain would anyone have for doing that?

 

Given a modeller with an hour to spare, is he more likely to:

 

a. assemble a wagon kit, or

 

b. mount a campaign of sustained critical attack on 16.5mm gauge standards and those working to them?

 

The presence of a keyboard does have a strange effect on some folk, but let's keep an element of common sense in these discussions.

 

Martin.

 

I've just got back from work. In the 22 hours since I last posted in this thread, there have been an amazing 40 posts, all from a limited number of supporters of the OO-SF concept

 

Most of those posts have been hostile speculation /criticism about myself or about DOGA. Nearly all the rest have been about Marmite.

 

I think you are the only person who has actually posted comments about anything substantive (which I'll reply to separately)

 

A week or ten days ago I posted nothing in the thread for 5 days, prompting all sorts of postings to the effect "where is Ravenser? Why does Ravenser not comment???" When I eventually made a brief posting noting that I had been away at a show , that kicked off a 24 hour feeding frenzy almost entirely comprised of OO-SF supporters speculating about me

 

There are certainly keyboard warriors posting in this thread, in support of OO-SF.

 

Indeed I'm starting to think that one reason for the remarkable absence of completed layouts to OO-SF standards is that the main advocates and supporters of it spend all their time on here, posting frenziedly in support of the concept day after day, week after week 

[Derekstuart]

Mr Siddle

 

I think the reference to Marmite was something we refer to as "sense of humour". You should try it, it's well worth it.

 

I think the reason that people have given up posting substantive information is because some people (not mentioning any names, but in short- you) won't let them discuss it in peace. I have not seen one person denigrating 00- and why should anyone want to? There are some damned good layouts built to 00.

 

You have built a nice layout and I for one would like to learn more about it (after all, isn't that the point of a forum? To show and to learn). Learn what you think makes a good 00 layout if you will. Why don't you concentrate more on YOUR layout's positives? I think it looks impressive regardless of whether I share the same gauge as you.

 

I don't use 00SF/4SF (although I have toyed with the idea) but I respect these chaps that have done excellent work in that gauge. Why can people not appreciate other people's work even if it differs from their own?

 

But either way I will NOT tolerate disrespect to Marmite from EITHER side of this argument.

Derek

[Ravenser]

What is interesting there is that DOGA Fine (EM minus 1.7, with 1mm flangeways) has exactly the same so-called "eroded" clearances as EM and 4-SF.

 

C&L have been selling DOGA-Fine turnout kits for years, with no warnings from DOGA about their "eroded" clearances or unsuitability for RTR wheels.

 

Martin.

 

Martin :

 

Working clearances are only eroded if you run wheels with fatter flanges than the 1979 EM wheel profile through a 1.0mm flangeway.

 

You seem to be advocating doing exactly that - in fact you seem to be suggesting that Gibson and Ultrascale wheels are too fine for EM track, and that EM modellers should use Romford wheels instead if they want their stock to fit EM track properly.  Hence my comment about this being an 18.2mm gauge equivalent of Martin Goodall's notorious "EM-P4"

 

 

For EM and 4-SF tracks the optimum wheel profile is the BRMSB 2.5mm wide wheel typified by Romford/Markits products. Other wheels run just fine on both gauges of course, but if you wanted the best match of wheel profile to track dimensions, that would be the wheel to use. Set at 16.5mm back-to-back for EM and 14.5mm back-to-back for 4-SF. 

 

 

 The wheel standard and the track standard are two sides of the same coin

 

The DOGA OO-Fine track standard is for use with the OO-Fine wheel standard. I don't ever remember any suggestion from anyone in DOGA that people should use wheels coarser than the corresponding wheel standard on such track. If you did that, you wouldn't be working to the standard . Your wheels wouldn't match your track

 

You appear to be saying that in your view the EMGS wheel standard is mismatched with the EMGS track standard?

 

You yourself explained quite clearly, with detailed figures, how quickly those thicker flanges reduce the available clearances

 

I was thinking there of the effects of the flange thickness. With RTR wheels the flange thickness is 0.8mm and back-to-back 14.4mm. That leaves only 0.2mm running clearance on 16.2mm gauge. Which is fine for straight track and gentle curves, in fact providing very steady running. But it is at the bottom end of the range for sharper curves. That's why it is important to allow some gauge-widening on such curves, or use 16.5mm flexi track for sharp curves.

 

Romford/Markits wheels have thinner 0.7mm flanges, and when set at 14.5mm back-to-back the running clearance on 16.2mm gauge is 0.3mm -- a 50% increase over RTR wheels and a bit more freedom to use sharper curves at normal 16.2mm gauge. The thinner flanges also allow an increased angle of attack in the 1.0mm flangeway, where this might be needed for vehicles having a long fixed wheelbase.

 

Finer kit wheels such as Ultrascale with 0.6mm flanges at 14.6mm back-to-back allow even more running clearance on 16.2mm gauge at 0.4mm. This is double that of RTR wheels and rather more than strictly needed, so running when being propelled is not as steady as it might be. Also their narrower 2.3mm width is approaching the limit for full support through crossings if prototypical blunt-nose crossings are fully modelled.

 

 

So the available clearance for the flange through a 1.0mm flangeway is 0.4mm if using Gibsons/Ultrascales , but erodes to 0.3mm with Romfords, and is down to 0.2mm with RP25/110

 

These figures are, obviously, the same for EM, DOGA OO-Fine, and OO-SF/4-SF

 

You yourself note that the consequence of this is an increase in the minimum necessary radius - this will apply to all three standards

 

You have quoted a figure of 2'6" minimum radius in EM - this must be taken as the minimum when working to EMGS standards (ie with Gibsons). The minimum radius for using Romfords is therefore higher, and the minimum  radius if using RP25/110 higher again

 

For comparison, and as a cross check, Iain Rice's 2002 book Designs for Urban Layouts quotes a series of minimum radii for EM:

 

Light Railways etc                   -   2'6" min radius

Secondary routes                   -   3'0" min radius

Main line practice                   -   4'0" min radius

 

I take the "main line" figure to cover 8-coupled locos.

 

The implication of this is that the minimum radius required by a Hornby 8F /Bachmann ROD running with its original wheels on these standards - eg  if an EM modeller pulled out the wheels for 18.2mm gauge - would be significantly over 4'0" , perhaps up around 5'0"

 

(Which is quite a restriction and will come as a heck of a shock to a lot of folk working in OO)

 

 

And in general you do seem to be arguing consistently, across various gauges, for working clearances to be stripped down to much lower levels than are normally specified, whether in EM, OO, or OO-SF/4-SF. I think you are reducing them far too far

 

 

Unfortunately on a forum such as this, that's not the case. If misleading statements are left unchallenged, some poor soul coming along in a few weeks or months time and trying to make sense of it all, is going to be left very confused.

 

 

I agree , which is why it seems a good idea to ask for clarification as to whether you are actually saying what your posts seem to imply you are suggesting

Edited October 20, 2015 by Ravenser

[RichardS]

Mr Ravenser, I have no idea who you are, whether you hold office in any organisation, or whatever. I have no issues with anything you do or say. I have no axe to grind about OO-SF, DOGA, 4-SF in fact I don't have a model railway at present although I am building two for other people (one is 3.5mm HO and HOm; the other 4mm OO all on Peco - not my choice- theirs) But I can tell you the reason that you are the subject of so much intrigue, speculation and maybe even a little ridicule from some quarters.

 

It is simply because you will not let it go. If you just accepted that some people want to model in OO-SF/4-SF and wished them well and showed interest in the results they achieve and celebrated their successes with them and commiserated with any failures all would be easy. But you don't. All you ever seem to do is criticise what other people want to do and tell them/infer/suggest they are wrong to try it. Nobody understands why you do this.

 

By all means question their reasoning, discuss the technical aspects, offer constructive criticism but your general tone seems rather one of destructive negativity seemingly based on your own preferences.

 

If people are wrong they'll soon find out. Some people only learn by making mistakes. And at the end of the day what's it to you if they go off down the wrong road? Let them.

 

And btw I don't know anybody else on this thread either. Me? I now ignore your posts on this subject as they are largely irrelevant to me. But as Martin mentioned earlier the correction of errors, misunderstandings and the suggestion of alternatives to 'facts' by he and other informed correspondents is needed as it could confuse others coming to this forum, thread and topic. Which nobody, I assume, wants.

 

You'll note that I have used the words 'seem' seems' 'seemingly' etc. I suspect that at the end of the day you don't want to discourage railway modelling, I would like to believe that you are in favour of technical progress and take the view that just because something is different doesn't mean it is bad. I think it's because people don't understand where you are coming from that causes the interest.

 

Like you I would like to see more layouts in OO-SF/4-SF but they take time. (I would like to see more - non-Peco tracked layouts generally whether they be, DOGA, EM, P4, or whatever)  When I build my own layout in earnest which should be in the new year I propose to try the OO-SF/4SF concept/standard. I will test it first of course. But the concept and what it seems to offer meet my present needs.  

 

Please don't take offence at what I have written, I mean no ill to you or anybody else. But you did ask why people write about you. 

 

Regards

Richard Slipper

Norwich

[mightbe]

The example of the 8F assumes that there is no sideplay. I don't have an 8F or a WD, but I can tell you that other models from Bachmann and Hornby have built-in sideplay, especially to the middle axle(s)--probably more than is necessary for me, although I assume it caters to the set-track crowd quite well. For the record, in my book just about any radius less that 36" is quite firmly the territory of industrial and light railways, though in some goods yards that might be acceptable.

 

Regardless, these models work on 16.2 mm common crossings with 1.0 flangeways and a 15.2 mm check gauge. In fact, they work beautifully. I can also tell you that Atlas, Athearn, Bachmann USA, Broadway Limited, and InterMountain quite like those crossings as well. My guess is that the B8 has a radius around 66". I forget what Templot said. 

 

I've heard that it's poor practice to build turnouts in track that needs gauge widening, though some have and it does mean that one check gap will be larger than the other.

 

Even though my execution was less than perfect, the turnouts meet the 00-SF criteria: 16.2 track gauge (min), 15.2 check gauge (max), and 1.0 mm flangeways. All the same, my 00-SF is gauge-widened throughout, due to my use of  C&L flextrack, but that still meets the 00-SF criteria, as the track gauge is still 16.2 mm.

 

You're also forgetting that gauge-widening occurs, though the effect is basically nil (in 00-SF, DOGA-Fine, EM, and 18.0 mm) until you get down to 36" or less, when it can be quite substantial. Let's not forget that the prototype was even more generous with gauge widening than Scalefour! 

 

EDIT: I should add that the InterMountain wheels are code 88, which wouldn't work on your belovèd DOGA-Intermediate (and wouldn't work on DOGA-Fine unless I adjusted the B2B, like I would also have to do for every other piece of stock I own).

 

*also edited to correct information regarding min/max dimensions. D'oh!

 

Quentin

Edited October 20, 2015 by mightbe