RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 The point that Martin has tried to make repeatedly (perhaps too often now) Certainly too often. That's because I keep failing to get the point across. What I care about is that 00 track looks properly engineered to carry the weight and size of traffic running over it. You can't do that by messing about with scale ratios based on a model of something else. The only way is to design some suitable full-size track to the same gauge as the rolling stock, and then build a model of it. The result for 4ft-1.5in track is sleepers 8ft long. For the same weight of traffic, to maintain a similar load pressure on the base formation you need roughly the same area of timber. 4ft-8.5in track typically has 8ft-6in sleepers at 24 sleepers per 60ft panel. So for the same area of timber, 4ft-1.5in track with 8ft sleepers needs 24 x 8.5 / 8 = 25.5 sleepers per 60ft panel. Obviously you can't have half a sleeper, so that gets rounded up to 26 sleepers per 60ft. At 4mm/ft scale, that scales to 32mm long sleepers at 9.3mm centres. And bingo, that is exactly what Peco have produced. So well done them, and good news for everyone who wants their 4ft-1.5in track for 00 models to look like it was laid by permanent way engineers. Martin. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 (edited) The vast majority of us, for various reasons, retain the nominally 14.5 mm back to back dimension and run the models on track that has the rails set 16.5 mm apart. Some don't, but that doesn't make them superior modellers - they Er really? Edited October 2, 2017 by coachmann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bertiedog Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 (edited) It's all in the minds eye,...... the track is real...... the gauge is right, ..................and it's 00 and 16.5mm..... go on..................keep saying this to yourself repeatedly in a darkened room, relaxed on a couch and indulge in self hypnosis, or a good strong stiff drink, ...or both.....then the whole issue will fade away,.... yes it will,........ convince yourself.........go on......you know it all makes sense eventually, as the bottle empties. Stephen Edited October 2, 2017 by bertiedog Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dungrange Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Er really? Well, I've seen a number of 00 layouts that in my opinion are modelled to a higher standard than some EM and P4 layouts. Just because someone chooses to model in EM or P4 does not automatically make them superior modellers - it just means that they have a more accurate track gauge. I will however agree that your average EM / P4 modeller is generally a more skilled modeller than your average 00 modeller. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Vistisen Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 Not at all Martin and it was also partly Pauls post (about the 20 thousand lol) ? - but we understand that some people have different interest some people are more interested in track , some in stock, some in scenery & some just opening the box and playing with it. - I think if the new track appeals to the shake the box market the hobby will have moved on a bit , even if its not what some of us would call faithful track I remember the old 'improving peco points' thread from way back its still a long way from a prototypical point but its an acceptable compromise if you are short of time or skills, and gets results quickly. I wasn't aware that i had a duty to 'move the hobby on a bit'. I suddenly feel the pressure. I think that all website should add an extra terms and conditions checkbox that ensures we all agree to advance the state of the hobby. Possible it should only be activated if you buy Peco track, Hornby railroad, and automatically checked if there is the text 'P4' in the order form. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Smith Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 All I can say is roll on availability of the points so that the discussion can move on..... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Clive Mortimore Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 2, 2017 Certainly too often. That's because I keep failing to get the point across. What I care about is that 00 track looks properly engineered to carry the weight and size of traffic running over it. You can't do that by messing about with scale ratios based on a model of something else. The only way is to design some suitable full-size track to the same gauge as the rolling stock, and then build a model of it. The result for 4ft-1.5in track is sleepers 8ft long. For the same weight of traffic, to maintain a similar load pressure on the base formation you need roughly the same area of timber. 4ft-8.5in track typically has 8ft-6in sleepers at 24 sleepers per 60ft panel. So for the same area of timber, 4ft-1.5in track with 8ft sleepers needs 24 x 8.5 / 8 = 25.5 sleepers per 60ft panel. Obviously you can't have half a sleeper, so that gets rounded up to 26 sleepers per 60ft. At 4mm/ft scale, that scales to 32mm long sleepers at 9.3mm centres. And bingo, that is exactly what Peco have produced. So well done them, and good news for everyone who wants their 4ft-1.5in track for 00 models to look like it was laid by permanent way engineers. Martin. I am glad about that because my 1/76th scale model of a 76 ton locomotive weighs 1/76 less, a real ton, so needs properly engineered track. No it don't is it just a plastic model. Model, noun, a three-dimensional representation of a person or thing or of a proposed structure, typically on a smaller scale than the original. Oxford English Dictionary. I can recall our battery commander using models to represent our gun positions and the enemy tanks. "The light coloured stones are us and the dark ones the enemy". Peco have made some better represented track, great see all the smiling 00 modellers We don't need a constant reminder that it is 4 ft 1 1/2 ins, it is a representation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 We don't need a constant reminder that it is 4 ft 1 1/2 ins, it is a representation. You believe it is a representation of something else. I believe it is 4ft-1.5in gauge. Why is your opinion more valid than mine? Where have I ever written "We don't need a constant reminder that it is a representation"? Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dungrange Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Certainly too often. That's because I keep failing to get the point across. What I care about is that 00 track looks properly engineered to carry the weight and size of traffic running over it. You can't do that by messing about with scale ratios based on a model of something else. The only way is to design some suitable full-size track to the same gauge as the rolling stock, and then build a model of it. The result for 4ft-1.5in track is sleepers 8ft long. For the same weight of traffic, to maintain a similar load pressure on the base formation you need roughly the same area of timber. 4ft-8.5in track typically has 8ft-6in sleepers at 24 sleepers per 60ft panel. So for the same area of timber, 4ft-1.5in track with 8ft sleepers needs 24 x 8.5 / 8 = 25.5 sleepers per 60ft panel. Obviously you can't have half a sleeper, so that gets rounded up to 26 sleepers per 60ft. At 4mm/ft scale, that scales to 32mm long sleepers at 9.3mm centres. And bingo, that is exactly what Peco have produced. So well done them, and good news for everyone who wants their 4ft-1.5in track for 00 models to look like it was laid by permanent way engineers. Martin. Thanks Martin - you learn something new every day. I'd assumed that Peco's choice of 26 sleepers per 60' panel length was simply based on an assumption of the most likely radius that the track will be laid to. If I'm not mistaken, the number of sleepers on the prototype is increased from 24 sleepers per panel on straight and nearly straight track to 26 sleepers per panel when laid to a radius of less than 20 chains(?). As most model railways employ much tighter curves, I just assumed that Peco had adopted 26 sleepers per 60' so that it would be correct when creating curves typical on a model railway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Roy Langridge Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 You believe it is a representation of something else. I believe it is 4ft-1.5in gauge. Why is your opinion more valid than mine? Where have I ever written "We don't need a constant reminder that it is a representation"? Martin. It is not that our opinions are more valid, we are generally happy to call it 00 and not keep trying to tell you it is 4’8.5”. You, however, seem to want to quote your 4’1.5” ad infinitum. Roy 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold NHY 581 Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 (edited) You believe it is a representation of something else. I believe it is 4ft-1.5in gauge. Why is your opinion more valid than mine? Where have I ever written "We don't need a constant reminder that it is a representation"? Martin. It is not that our opinions are more valid, we are generally happy to call it 00 and not keep trying to tell you it is 4’8.5”. You, however, seem to want to quote your 4’1.5” ad infinitum. Roy Ad nauseam. Look, us plebs get it. OO gauge is narrower that what 4mm scale track should be. However, ramming this at us at every available opportunity is now tiresome and needless. We know that it's not a scale 4ft 8.5 but posting the exact measurment seven times over six pages is excessive. The width of the rails is not the important thing here. It is the overall improvement offered by the better sleeper spacing amongst other things. The width between the rails is actually not one of them and was one thing which was beyond doubt when the track/points were first announced. It's like repeatedly pointing out a Bachmann loco has an electric motor in the boiler...... Come on now.. Rob. Edited October 2, 2017 by nhy581 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 If I'm not mistaken, the number of sleepers on the prototype is increased from 24 sleepers per panel on straight and nearly straight track to 26 sleepers per panel when laid to a radius of less than 20 chains(?). As most model railways employ much tighter curves, I just assumed that Peco had adopted 26 sleepers per 60' so that it would be correct when creating curves typical on a model railway. Hi David, Yes, and also for straight track on soft ground, and in tunnels. But we keep being told that 00 model track is meant to represent something else. So that when 00 track is laid to 3 chains radius, it actually represents 60 chains radius. And the sleeper spacing should represent what would be appropriate for that. When we get into such prototype details in this topic about track we are told that it's not relevant and not wanted here. That approach would go down really well in a topic about model locomotives, wouldn't it? regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
31B Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Gaugemaster, Peters Spares and Osbournby Models all have prices listed now too. In the interests of moving the conversation on, I'd like to know what people think Peco will focus on next (assuming they don't decide to add a pair of xl points to the range... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dungrange Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 In the interests of moving the conversation on, I'd like to know what people think Peco will focus on next (assuming they don't decide to add a pair of xl points to the range... My guess would be medium radius points, since Martin has already highlighted that they can't make a longer turnout and stick with their 12 degree geometry. Of course they may also go for their large Y point as a logical next step. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 In the interests of moving the conversation on, I'd like to know what people think Peco will focus on next (assuming they don't decide to add a pair of xl points to the range... My guess is curved versions of these large radius turnouts. They can probably use some of the existing tooling and components, minimising the additional investment needed. Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold NHY 581 Posted October 2, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2017 A three way point would be useful. However small/medium radius points would open the narket right up. Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tender Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 In the interests of moving the conversation on, I'd like to know what people think Peco will focus on next (assuming they don't decide to add a pair of xl points to the range... Some more standard code 75 track would be nice, all my usual suppliers are 'out of stock', maybe it's Peco's way of increasing demand for bullhead rail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBRJ Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 If, as someone keeps pointing out, this is a model of "4'1" " gauge track, it is as out of proportion for a 4mm sale model railway as the current HO Streamline is. Which is actually the point that he tries to get across subtly, or not so subtly maybe My point, is that from a sideways on view, which is what you have from a high level mounted railway, is that this is a major step forward, a really major one - and for the one small, personal reason I am very happy the Peco have done this for us all IF I want to make my track to the correct gauge (and sometimes I do indeed want to do exactly that) then I will do so, using the same methods many people have used for a long time.... But that is not what a step-change in Peco Track is all about, it is about making things better than they were 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmanchester Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 I wish the turnouts would arrive.....very soon.......then instead of all the bickering we can see some pics of layouts using it and reports of how nice the track is to use. Rob ( Em gauge using C&L stuff - takes me 6 months to build two turnouts ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBRJ Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 (edited) I wish the turnouts would arrive.....very soon.......then instead of all the bickering we can see some pics of layouts using it and reports of how nice the track is to use. Rob ( Em gauge using C&L stuff - takes me 6 months to build two turnouts ) Don't for a second think that the arrival of the goods will halt the "chat" - it will just make it that little bit more intense Edited October 3, 2017 by LBRJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Colin_McLeod Posted October 3, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 3, 2017 4ft 1.5 inches https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0z2Bc-C79w Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 A three way point would be useful. However small/medium radius points would open the narket right up. Rob Agreed - when I saw the EPs for the bullhead points I thought nice, but no good for a bullhead laid shunting plank, which is what I'd go for as a toe-dipping exercise, and would nicely compliment a fleet of Hattons "Barclays" and Hornby "Pecketts"! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 The only way we can encourage Peco to expand the range is to find a way to fit in a long radius point & buy the bullhead variety of this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeithHC Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I am waiting for the points like everyone else. However not for standard gauge I am thinking of the Padarn Railway even then it will be slightly over gauge.......... I will get my hat and coat. However in reality yes I want the bullhead system and will live with the slight error in my eyes it will look great and I will apply Rule No. 1 Its my railway so I can do what I want...... Keith 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Solly Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Templot - a track design program from the UK http://www.templot.com/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts