PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO

[martin_wynne]

a force of around 100,000,000,000 newtons is hard to resist.

 

Well yes, that's about 10 million tons. Send for more Weetabix.

 

I think maybe you pressed the wrong button there -- rail stressing machines go up to around 50 tons.

 

Here's some stuff from BRT4, there are pages and pages of this stuff about CWR maintenance:

 

 

The figure given there is 0.9 tons per degF lift. So if working at say 50degF (10degC) rail temperature, and wanting to stress for 80degF equilibrium, you would need 30degF lift. 30 x 0.9 = 27 tons tension needed.

 

Likewise if the rail temperature reaches 110degF (30degF above 80degF) on a hot day, the expansive force in the rail to be resisted by the fixings and ballast will be 27 tons. A lot, but not irresistible.

 

This stuff must be having them in stitches in the Peco boardroom.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[newbryford]

I still have some of the Trix MK1s. Very nice they are too, but they look a bit silly alongside the other equipment. Maybe I could stick them on a siding at the back of the layout for a bit of forced perspective

 

Apologies for the OT and not discussing Peco track in the slightest but:

 

ISTR that the Trix stuff is at a weird 3.8mm/foot.............

Somewhere in my "collection" are some Trix Coachbuilder kits and similar loco Footplateman "kits" in the same vein as the Tri-ang CKD range.

 

Cheers,

Mick

[AndyID]

Apologies for the OT and not discussing Peco track in the slightest but:

 

ISTR that the Trix stuff is at a weird 3.8mm/foot.............

Somewhere in my "collection" are some Trix Coachbuilder kits and similar loco Footplateman "kits" in the same vein as the Tri-ang CKD range.

 

Cheers,

Mick

 

I don't think it's possible to go OT here

 

That's a good question. I always assumed they were H0 scale but they could be quite a bit larger than that. I just measured one and the length along the sides (excluding buffers, corridor connections etc) is 241 mm. Not sure what it should be for 4mm/ft

[AndyID]

Well yes, that's about 10 million tons. Send for more Weetabix.

 

I think maybe you pressed the wrong button there -- rail stressing machines go up to around 50 tons.

 

Here's some stuff from BRT4, there are pages and pages of this stuff about CWR maintenance:

 

cwr_stress.jpg

 

The figure given there is 0.9 tons per degF lift. So if working at say 50degF (10degC) rail temperature, and wanting to stress for 80degF equilibrium, you would need 30degF lift. 30 x 0.9 = 27 tons tension needed.

 

Likewise if the rail temperature reaches 110degF (30degF above 80degF) on a hot day, the expansive force in the rail to be resisted by the fixings and ballast will be 27 tons. A lot, but not irresistible.

 

This stuff must be having them in stitches in the Peco boardroom.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

Well, if you put it like that, my number does seem a tad high

 

I found my error. I forgot to factor in the coefficient of expansion - Doh!  Around 400,000 newtons seems a bit more realistic.

 

Andy

[Derekstuart]

That sounds like a challenge to me.

I don't think it's possible to go OT here

 

 

BTW what do people think of the current special offer for Yorkshire Tea? Do you think that the "hard water" version is any different? I am not sure myself. I live in a hard water area and find that normal Yorkshire Tea- grown in plantations just outside Whitby-  tastes damned fine.

 

 

Apologies for the o/t but Andy's comment was red rag to a bull.

[Londontram]

Can you have some consideration for those that are interested in the OT and its development and take your idle musings somewhere else please

Edited October 23, 2016 by Londontram

[Colin_McLeod]

Londontram we are just "talking among ourselves" while waiting for the new Peco track to appear. Why not join us with a cup of Derek's Yorkshire tea, unless of course you prefer Lyons green label.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Colin_McLeod

[chris p bacon]

Can you have some consideration for those that are interested in the OT and its development and take your ideal musings somewhere else please

Whats new since the one picture was released?

[Londontram]

True you win.......... just one sugar please

[coachmann]

My goodness , all this excitement.....

My goodness, all this excrement.....        Small fonts & dyslexia....It's hard to keep track.

Edited October 23, 2016 by coachmann

[The Stationmaster]

That sounds like a challenge to me.

 

BTW what do people think of the current special offer for Yorkshire Tea? Do you think that the "hard water" version is any different? I am not sure myself. I live in a hard water area and find that normal Yorkshire Tea- grown in plantations just outside Whitby-  tastes damned fine.

 

 

Apologies for the o/t but Andy's comment was red rag to a bull.

 

Yorkshire Gold is the best of their brands and is reputedly adjusted for hard water but they don't mark it on the packets as such - however it definitely works very well on hard water.  I believe it is probably a blend of imported tea as I doubt camomile fares all that well in the Whitby area.  the tea comes from Taylors of Harrogate who are actually based in Starbeck - which used to have an engine shed (railway connection re-established)

 

However Tregothnan tea as served by GWR (note - another railway connection) is quite a decent brew and it is really, truly, grown in Cornwall - which is of course next door to Devon so we're almost getting back to Peco although I hardly dare mention that concern is based in Beer (which might of course lead this thread in yet another off-piste direction).

[gismorail]

But Larry you've gone Large 

[coachmann]

But Larry you've gone Large 

O' my goodness. 

[Ian Hargrave]

Yorkshire Gold is the best of their brands and is reputedly adjusted for hard water but they don't mark it on the packets as such - however it definitely works very well on hard water.  I believe it is probably a blend of imported tea as I doubt camomile fares all that well in the Whitby area.  the tea comes from Taylors of Harrogate who are actually based in Starbeck - which used to have an engine shed (railway connection re-established)

 

However Tregothnan tea as served by GWR (note - another railway connection) is quite a decent brew and it is really, truly, grown in Cornwall - which is of course next door to Devon so we're almost getting back to Peco although I hardly dare mention that concern is based in Beer (which might of course lead this thread in yet another off-piste direction).

 Having just confused WR and LMR Bue Pullmans,failing ignominiously to identify Snow Hill when I knew it only too well,I fear I am perhaps ill qualified to pronounce a critical assessment of Taylor's tea.Notwithstanding,here goes. On a stay in The Lakes a fortnight ago,the Yorkshire Gold we took with us from home tasted numbingly of dishwater.....mind you so did their Cafe Imperial when I tried to brew a half decent cup of coffee.

On returning home to Froth City....noted more for another beverage than tea.....we find that the bogstandard Yorkshire tea tastes in fact much better than the Gold variety.Obviously down to the South Staffs.water.

 

Footnote on coffee.When in Windermere try the coffee in the Lakeland cafe (upstairs) which comes from a small place in Kendal. Excellent view of station anf of NorthernRail's 153/156 combo on the branchline

 

 

Er...what topic was this?

[dhjgreen]

Can you have some consideration for those that are interested in the OT and its development and take your idle musings somewhere else please

I took that as meaning you were only interested in the Off Topic posts (OT)!! Rather than OP.

Edited October 23, 2016 by dhjgreen

[gismorail]

I took that as meaning you were only interested in the Off Topic posts (OT)!! Rather than OP.

     I did too

[Vistisen]

     I did too

 

I saw the original topic a few pages ago, but it wandered off and was never seen again "I'm going out now, I may be gone some time..."

[Colin_McLeod]

So you will be "making tracks" then!

Edited October 23, 2016 by Colin_McLeod

[Mike Storey]

Yorkshire Gold is the best of their brands and is reputedly adjusted for hard water but they don't mark it on the packets as such - however it definitely works very well on hard water.  I believe it is probably a blend of imported tea as I doubt camomile fares all that well in the Whitby area.  the tea comes from Taylors of Harrogate who are actually based in Starbeck - which used to have an engine shed (railway connection re-established)

 

However Tregothnan tea as served by GWR (note - another railway connection) is quite a decent brew and it is really, truly, grown in Cornwall - which is of course next door to Devon so we're almost getting back to Peco although I hardly dare mention that concern is based in Beer (which might of course lead this thread in yet another off-piste direction).

 

Yes, but which one scales down best for 4mm/ft ballast???

 

Will this be in the box with the new BH track?

[martin_wynne]

While some of these posts are amusing, I don't see that this topic has moved very far off-topic (well, apart from Derek's cup of tea).

 

Looking at Peco's announcements it is clear that they are emphasizing the "bullhead" feature of the new track, rather than the changes to the sleeper sizes and spacing. Which is entirely understandable of course -- they won't want to be suggesting that there is anything wrong with their existing track.

 

But that being so it seems reasonable that modellers familiar only with their existing track would want to discuss the characteristics of bullhead and flat-bottom rails, and the relevant prototype considerations. Peco are clearly intending the new track for the more discerning modellers who do regard track as part of the visual model, and want to get it prototypically correct in the same way as their other models.

 

Modellers who are interested only in when it will be available and how much it will cost can easily skip the discussions, and they can probably get those answers by making a phone call to their local model shop.

 

Martin.

[Mike Storey]

Hi Mike,

 

The reason is that RTR H0 doesn't work. Only the British were sensible enough to see that.

 

If you have an exact-scale track gauge, you must also have an exact-scale wheel profile. Otherwise you can't fit the wheels inside scale-width splashers, behind scale-width valve gear, inside scale-width bogie sideframes and axleboxes.

 

If you want to use overscale RTR wheels, you need to reduce the track gauge in order to fit them inside a scale-width model. 00 gauge made perfect sense for that reason, and continues to make perfect sense for the same reason.

 

All H0 models are over scale width in the running gear. This would have been especially noticeable on British-outline steam locomotives with splashers and running plates.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

Thanks Martin. That is the first time I have seen that explanation comprehensively, as I had not understood that HO steam locos still have out of scale running gear. Hmmm. I did like Fleischmann's attempt to make us stick to scale. So everything would be fine if we all stuck to diesels and electrics, as the Almighty truly intended? .......I am already half way down the street with coat (no hat today as it is a little windy).

[Pint of Adnams]

Modellers who are interested only in when it will be available and how much it will cost can easily skip the discussions, and they can probably get those answers by making a phone call to their local model shop.

As  posted previously, November's RM stated supplies are expected to reach retailers during November but pricing is still to be confirmed.

[Jeff Smith]

As  posted previously, November's RM stated supplies are expected to reach retailers during November but pricing is still to be confirmed.

Ok, so you are a high street retailer stocking both old code 75 and new B/H 75, do you display them side by side to emphasize the difference (improvement?), or do you keep them well away from each other? Perhaps in separate display cabinets - steam on the B/H, D/E on the F/B?

[Pacific231G]

Hi Mike,

 

The reason is that RTR H0 doesn't work. Only the British were sensible enough to see that.

 

If you have an exact-scale track gauge, you must also have an exact-scale wheel profile. Otherwise you can't fit the wheels inside scale-width splashers, behind scale-width valve gear, inside scale-width bogie sideframes and axleboxes.

 

If you want to use overscale RTR wheels, you need to reduce the track gauge in order to fit them inside a scale-width model. 00 gauge made perfect sense for that reason, and continues to make perfect sense for the same reason.

 

All H0 models are over scale width in the running gear. This would have been especially noticeable on British-outline steam locomotives with splashers and running plates.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Hi Martin

While that's true up to a point, the "Greenly" compromise that became OO took it to a level of absurdity in order to accomodate tyres wide enough to enable OO "models"to take 12 inch radius curves rather as O gauge layouts were often built with 24 inch curves.  

I think the general  preference for 4mm/ft scale during the 1920s and 30s had more to do with the perceived "fiddleyness" of working in an even smaller scale (at a time when gauge 0 was considered small) A number of people were already using 4mm'ft scale but with 18mm or even 19mm gauge track (the gauge adopted for 4mm/ft in America) .The BRMSB standard of 4mm/ft with 18mm gauge was also  a compromise but an arguably sensible one that allows for overscale tyres but is not so visually obvious.Had it appeared much earlier I wonder whether anyone would now be using 4mm/ft scale models with 3.5mm/ft track

 

I don't know what scale Trix or Rivarossi used for their British outline H0 rolling stock but at one time Rivarossi used a scale of 1:80 for their "H0" models of European prototypes (though not for N. American prototype models) and there was an unsuccessful attempt from Germany in the 1950s to define the scale for H0 as 1:80.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Pacific231G

[bertiedog]

I think that many UK modellers have never realised how badly scaled HO models were, and still are, Marklin in particular had no published scale ratio for many years, Rivarrosi used their own scale , as did Trix, with a separate scale for the UK.

 

The Euro models looked fantastic against UK makers, but two effects were forgotten, UK locos are very plain anyway in the real thing, and we never noticed how out of scale the offerings where from say, Trix, or any other HO makers.

 

British models are restricted by the body work and splashers to only suiting true scale models as in HOpur and P4, but this type of exact scale are useless for the mass market, where locos have to go around corners.

 

The Euro makers got away with it because of the lack of splashers etc, and the lack of customers who noticed all the dimensions had altered. Most HO makers cared nothing about specific scale dimensions, they covered it up with lashings of fine details, but when it comes down to it most HO is more toy than scale in nature. There is a big move to exact H0 scale in H0pur, but many RTR locos in H0 cannot be converted to true scale. The dimensions of the bodies have been too altered already. The chassis of all HO locos are thinner than scale, they have to be to allow side movement of the wheels

 

In any scale you can make a fine scale loco, but it will not function as a model around curves. Even the super accurate HO Brass American outline locos are altered to shift cylinders apart, widen structures, alter bodywork etc., to get them to run on curves.

 

The British do not like the idea of altering the appearance of the models body, it has to be accurate and the only answer was to reduce the gauge, as it was the lesser of two evils, out of scale bodies or an odd track.

 

By choosing the odd track it leaves the loco accurate enough to be converted to scale, something you cannot do in practice with HO models, they have been "got at" too much already.

 

So don't knock 00 too much, it has left the UK with a working semi scale system, the equivalent of Euro HO, but with the chance to convert to dead scale most RTR stock, not a bad situation in fact.........

 

The problem left was the track, and Peco, Legacy etc., are curing the appearance issues of 00 RTR track. a long overdue change, but not Peco's fault, it was others who brought about 00, and Peco had to be earning a living catering for the majority across the world. Streamline did just that, but still was not 00 fine scale till code 75 was made, which still had the wrong sleepering, left alone, to make it backwards compatible.

 

Peco seems to get the blame for all track woes, when in fact, they have offered the very best they could manufacture, given the mires and mess of the UK 00 users standards.

 

They are also a British maker and deserve all the support that customers can give, as would you give to any British supplier of quality goods with a proven and deserved record..

 

Stephen