Jump to content
 

Why should I not choose 00-SF

dasatcopthorne

By dasatcopthorne,
in Handbuilt Track & Templot

Recommended Posts

davknigh

davknigh

Posted
Posted

It depends. If you are coming back into the hobby after a lapsed period and have little stock then perhaps this is the time to think of EM or P4. After all you are going to go to the trouble of building your own track so there is no more difficulty in building EM or P4, just different gauges to be used in the construction. If you have a whole lot of stock and just want better track the 00-SF would make more sense. FWIW I fell into the first category and went to P4 and have no regrets.

 

Cheers,

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites
dasatcopthorne

dasatcopthorne

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It depends. If you are coming back into the hobby after a lapsed period and have little stock then perhaps this is the time to think of EM or P4. After all you are going to go to the trouble of building your own track so there is no more difficulty in building EM or P4, just different gauges to be used in the construction. If you have a whole lot of stock and just want better track the 00-SF would make more sense. FWIW I fell into the first category and went to P4 and have no regrets.

 

Cheers,

 

David

Sorry David.

 

I've added some qualifying information to my original post.

 

You may try again with your reasoning.

 

Dave

TiC

Link to post
Share on other sites
dasatcopthorne

dasatcopthorne

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Because you wish to cleave to the Holy Writ of DOGA and not consort with heretics!

 

Sorry.

 

I love heretics

 

Dave

If the Bachmann that you have been buying is badged 'Graham Farish' and the Hornby is the Arnold Brighton Belle you might find that there is too much gap between the rails. :jester:

 

Mega fail!!

 

Dave

Hang on , hang on, I've thought of a reason not to go 00-SF. ,,,,....... Damm no, that doesn't count

 

It's a real no-brainer isn't it.

 

Make up yer mind!  :)

 

Dave

Finally a secret society in railway modelling, so secret no one ever met anyone , it's like the illuminati of 00

 

Oi!

 

00sf, please.

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
Edwardian

Edwardian

Posted
Posted

I would hesitate to enter the partisan battlefield of gauge war, but as a returnee, I have had to think about this issue.

 

For what it's worth, my thought process has been thus, thus far:

 

  • A more accurate gauge is a good thing, though EM appears to be more forgiving, however, neither it nor, even, P4 are true scale, so the choice is not whether to compromise or not, but really the degree of compromise you can live with.  If I wanted to hand-build everything, I would probably prefer S Gauge.
  • We are, hopefully, past the days when the EM Society would show you a plank with hand-built EM track next to proprietary OO track with its chunky HO-spaced sleepers in order to present a false imperative for change. The real comparison is between finescale track in the various gauges and whether that comparison showed EM or P4 to be so much more realistic in overall appearance.  If you cannot live with OO SF, then fair enough, but
  • Track gauge isn't everything ("pop", as MRJ readers explode at the mere suggestion).  Compromise is everywhere.  I have seen layouts with EM or P4 that, nevertheless are compromised or lack any greater, or even, equivalent realism to OO layouts overall.  This comes about because EM and P4 track does not necessarily go with superior scenery or structures, or even with superior stock; after hours re-wheeling or replacing the chassis of an RTR loco, you can be left with stock that is obviously still the same used by box shakers.  Further, an EM or P4 layout is just as likely to involve tighter than prototype  curves and severely compressed lengths; why get precious about your track gauge when your platforms are still 3 feet too short?
  • So, I reason, its a balance.  A layout may or may not look realistic with or without a more accurate gauge.  An important factor, but only one such that must be balanced.  
  • The decisive issue for me?  Turnouts may have to be hand-built.  If I want 2-bolt chair track (correct for the Great Western), I cannot even use the flexi-track.  So why not go for EM, at least?  In my case, it is a question of stock. The layout of a lifetime will need a lot of stock, as it's a mainline.  It sounds ambitious, but, actually, I am probably near to three-quarters of the way there in terms of the stock I have amassed over the last couple of decades.  There will be something in the region of 70 locos, 150 coaches and 400 wagons. I could not have built up such a large collection in EM and I really don't want to re-gauge that lot!  If I wanted 2 or 3 small Ricean layouts, that would be a different matter, so I suspect that each modeller must balance the pros and cons himself and apply them to his unique situation. 

Good luck, whatever you decide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
dasatcopthorne

dasatcopthorne

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would hesitate to enter the partisan battlefield of gauge war, but as a returnee, I have had to think about this issue.

 

For what it's worth, my thought process has been thus, thus far:

 

  • A more accurate gauge is a good thing, though EM appears to be more forgiving, however, neither it nor, even, P4 are true scale, so the choice is not whether to compromise or not, but really the degree of compromise you can live with. If I wanted to hand-build everything, I would probably prefer S Gauge.
  • We are, hopefully, past the days when the EM Society would show you a plank with hand-built EM track next to proprietary OO track with its chunky HO-spaced sleepers in order to present a false imperative for change. The real comparison is between finescale track in the various gauges and whether that comparison showed EM or P4 to be so much more realistic in overall appearance. If you cannot live with OO SF, then fair enough, but
  • Track gauge isn't everything ("pop", as MRJ readers explode at the mere suggestion). Compromise is everywhere. I have seen layouts with EM or P4 that, nevertheless are compromised or lack any greater, or even, equivalent realism to OO layouts overall. This comes about because EM and P4 track does not necessarily go with superior scenery or structures, or even with superior stock; after hours re-wheeling or replacing the chassis of an RTR loco, you can be left with stock that is obviously still the same used by box shakers. Further, an EM or P4 layout is just as likely to involve tighter than prototype curves and severely compressed lengths; why get precious about your track gauge when your platforms are still 3 feet too short?
  • So, I reason, its a balance. A layout may or may not look realistic with or without a more accurate gauge. An important factor, but only one such that must be balanced.
  • The decisive issue for me? Turnouts may have to be hand-built. If I want 2-bolt chair track (correct for the Great Western), I cannot even use the flexi-track. So why not go for EM, at least? In my case, it is a question of stock. The layout of a lifetime will need a lot of stock, as it's a mainline. It sounds ambitious, but, actually, I am probably near to three-quarters of the way there in terms of the stock I have amassed over the last couple of decades. There will be something in the region of 70 locos, 150 coaches and 400 wagons. I could not have built up such a large collection in EM and I really don't want to re-gauge that lot! If I wanted 2 or 3 small Ricean layouts, that would be a different matter, so I suspect that each modeller must balance the pros and cons himself and apply them to his unique situation.
Good luck, whatever you decide.

Oh dear, Edwardian.

 

You fall at the first hurdle, having not read the title of this thread.

 

Please return to the start, re-read my question and post #1.

 

Do not join the DOGA but do collect 200 4mm scale wooden sleepers just for your effort.

 

Dave :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
The Stationmaster

The Stationmaster

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

The only thing which makes me wary is my ability (or lack of) to build reliable pointwork to deliver the gauge narrowing and finer clearance through the crossing.  If I could conquer that and become a fairly old dog able to learn some new tricks then I'd go for it like a shot - one look at Gordon S's Eastwood Town is more than enough to convince me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Edwardian

Edwardian

Posted
Posted

Nice try Mr Dave, but, of course, I addressed the OP by, admittedly at great length, demonstrating that I could not, in fact, come up with a decisive reason not to use OOSF!  Of course, this depends on me being correct in my belief that most RTR wheelsets will run on OOSF, as opposed to FS, so not seeing it as an obstacle in the way EM or P4 would be. 

 

Put another way, if you only want to be exposed to reasons not to choose OOSF, stop wasting our time and take out a subscription to MRJ! 

 

If I did 'emoticons', which I don't, because I'm not 12, I'd insert one here so you could be sure I make my comments in a spirit of good-natured humour!

 

[sighs for the modern world].

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ian_H

Ian_H

Posted
Posted

I really don't see what your all getting at, my perfectly good (but old) Triang Super 4 track is perfectly okay for playing trains. I get it out of the box, put it together on the dining room table, some times on the floor, and watch the trains go round until it time for tea!

 

Do I need to change to oosf, well since I don't have any points on my trainset then probably not :no:

Link to post
Share on other sites
dasatcopthorne

dasatcopthorne

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I really don't see what your all getting at, my perfectly good (but old) Triang Super 4 track is perfectly okay for playing trains. I get it out of the box, put it together on the dining room table, some times on the floor, and watch the trains go round until it time for tea!

 

Do I need to change to oosf, well since I don't have any points on my trainset then probably not :no:

Ian, Ian!

 

You really need to build yourselfa circle of track in 00sf.

 

Then we will be able to add another name to the list of users.

 

And

 

When you need your first point, you won't have to fiddle with closing up the gauge somewhere within the point.!

 

But, naughty, naughty. This is not about why I shouldn't use 00sf. Is it now? :-)))) (can't find my emoticons)

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
martin_wynne

martin_wynne

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

You should not use 16.2mm track gauge on curves below about 30" / 750mm radius.

 

Such curves will need some gauge-widening, which is easily achieved by using 16.5mm flexi-track for them.

 

If the entire layout uses such curves, it would be better to use 00-BF or DOGA-Intermediate for the pointwork, rather than 00-SF. With the disadvantage that you won't be able to run kit wheels reliably, but 00-SF isn't really intended for such layouts.

 

It is important to remember that 00-SF is a derivative of EM, it is just a lucky accident that most modern RTR models run well on it.

 

More about 00-SF here: http://00-sf.org.uk

 

Martin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...