Jump to content
Users will currently see a stripped down version of the site until an advertising issue is fixed. If you are seeing any suspect adverts please go to the bottom of the page and click on Themes and select IPS Default. ×
RMweb
 

PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO


Free At Last

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

 

Sorry, Martin. In my haste to speed read through the thread this morning, I missed that one.

 

An interesting idea, but would it not look a bit odd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Sorry, Martin. In my haste to speed read through the thread this morning, I missed that one.

 

An interesting idea, but would it not look a bit odd?

 

I don't know whether their intended market would really notice. They are already using a modified flat-bottom section, rather than a true bullhead. Hardly anyone notices that in 0 gauge. A section of wider flat-bottom rail may not notice much if fully chaired and "hidden" between bullhead outer rails. They can then use their special web-less flat-bottom section for insert moulding, in fact all the existing rail parts, blades and fittings.

 

They have managed some insert moulding of bullhead rail in the crossing section of their lower-volume 0 gauge turnouts, but it's flashy. I would think they have some tricky production problems to solve for a fully bullhead turnout, if it is not to involve low-volume hand assembly and a much higher cost.

 

More interesting to me is not what Peco come up with, but what Richard Johnson at DCC Concepts is planning, as he seems to be much more concerned with fidelity to prototype than Peco are likely to be. Who knows, he may get there first. If you missed the links: http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=27283&view=findpost&p=433634and on.

 

Martin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admire roads too. The hill in the background has a disused railway tunnel running through it, and behind me was a much-photographed railway. But my camera lens chose this instead:

 

attachicon.gifamber.jpg

 

Martin.

I recall my first drive on a motorway and thinking how graceful the curves of the road and the bridges above it were. The railings on the bridges were painted in different colours which enhanced them.

 

Long live driving on the left and Imperial measurements! May we go back to buying petrol by the gallon please? We did have a try at going metric but the whole thing tailed off. After doing my best with it in my youth I've become a hopeless old reactionary.

 

Why don't we build MS1 (Medium Speed 1) instead of MS2 and run it with steam? With wisps of steam curling past the windows, longer journey times would be a jolly good thing.

 

Lest you think I veer off topic, MS1 would be built with 60' lengths of bullhead. Honeymanoosh, honeymanoosh, honeymanoosh!

 

I put those tablets down somewhere but where?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course youth wins in the end but it doesn’t half make a muck of its victory. Notice that in my last ramble I used a foot sign. I wonder what idiot decided that the international symbol for inches should be in? With no stop to indicate an abbreviation,  it stops the flow of my reading dead because I read “in” and not “inch”. As for the bright spark who started to use feet and inches for quotes and apostrophes…

 

Apostrophes! Oh, found the tablets. Gulp. Now what on earth have apostrophes got to do with track?

 

So please, Peco, nice electrofrog points with no plastic flash or mould in the common crossing, nice metal check rails and no hinged rails. At your early convenience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I don't know whether their intended market would really notice. They are already using a modified flat-bottom section, rather than a true bullhead. Hardly anyone notices that in 0 gauge. A section of wider flat-bottom rail may not notice much if fully chaired and "hidden" between bullhead outer rails. They can then use their special web-less flat-bottom section for insert moulding, in fact all the existing rail parts, blades and fittings.

 

They have managed some insert moulding of bullhead rail in the crossing section of their lower-volume 0 gauge turnouts, but it's flashy. I would think they have some tricky production problems to solve for a fully bullhead turnout, if it is not to involve low-volume hand assembly and a much higher cost.

 

More interesting to me is not what Peco come up with, but what Richard Johnson at DCC Concepts is planning, as he seems to be much more concerned with fidelity to prototype than Peco are likely to be. Who knows, he may get there first. If you missed the links: http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=27283&view=findpost&p=433634and on.

 

Martin. 

 

It does sound as though DCCConcepts are further advanced with this. But Richard J is quite cagey in all his announcements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the prototype is called a railway. It is the track which differentiates it from other modes of transport. You might think modellers of railways would regard that as the most significant part to get right?

 

Martin.

 

Careful old boy, you'll be accused of shouting if you use bold type.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We go lineside to watch trains, not gaze at the track. Same with railway modelling. The people who do look at track are usually P4 modellers who see nothing else! Beautifully detailed trackwork with every conceivable detail from point rodding to electrical trunking and everything in between. And when a train comes along it's a  cut & shut DMU with lozenge glazing or a re-wheeled RTR loco with RTR coaches passing RTR wagons. Each to his own.....  :smoke:

 

 

Coachman

 

Thanks for bringing a smile to my face, I was one of your layout groupies avidly waiting for the next instalment of your layout, how many times did you change the trackwork as it failed to convey the scene you were trying to make. The way you made the trackwork blend into the scenery was a master piece, for someone who cares little for track the craftsmanship you showed in modelling was not only wonderful but very absorbing and addictive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coachman

 

Thanks for bringing a smile to my face, I was one of your layout groupies avidly waiting for the next instalment of your layout, how many times did you change the trackwork as it failed to convey the scene you were trying to make. The way you made the trackwork blend into the scenery was a master piece, for someone who cares little for track the craftsmanship you showed in modelling was not only wonderful but very absorbing and addictive.

Thanks John..... Very kind. It's not that I care little about track. I care about track a heck of a lot. It is the rockbed of any model railway I build, but once trains have a smooth passage over every piece of track and turnout, I barely looks at it after that except for cleaning the rail heads. However, I spend as much time on each individual project after that from history to architecture to colouring to coaching stock and things not mentioned (I hate signalling!)

Edited by coachmann
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Careful old boy, you'll be accused of shouting if you use bold type.....

 

It is upper case which is regarded as shouting on the web. Bold type and the other formatting features in the posting editor are provided for the very purpose I use them -- to provide emphasis and clarity.

 

Thanks for a positive contribution to the discussion.

 

Martin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How Hornby Dublo did it.

2 rail in the 60s Sleepers 30mm x 3.25mm Spacing 8.12mm

 

3 rail in the 50s Sleepers 25.8mm x 3.16mm Spacing 12 mm

 

 

Colin

 

I think most made and sold 00 (4mm scale) track and points at the time Hornby Dublo and Triang were about. Its just everything either died out or went to H0. Except for SMP and Marcway.

 

Good to see Peco back into the 00 gauge fold and I guess points will follow, no doubt others will follow with 3d printed etc for those wanting something better and bespoke as it is today either build your own or have deep pockets

 

Now who said no one cares about track ? 16 pages and going strong And Coachman coming out as a confirmed trackie (sorry Larry)

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

It does sound as though DCC Concepts are further advanced with this. But Richard J is quite cagey in all his announcements.

 

If you have followed his previous posts on that forum, you will know that he is quite keen on 00-SF, see for example: http://www.modelrailforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=28504&view=findpost&p=332639

 

He has already introduced track gauges for 00-SF. So when it comes to flexi-track and pointwork, who knows? It would certainly set his product apart from the others.

 

But that's just me thinking out loud. smile.gif  I have no information or connection with DCC Concepts.

 

Martin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

But which current geometry?

 

Peco have said it will match the existing code 75 range, so I would expect- when they do introduce pointwork, a medium BH will be the same as a current medium code 75 etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Track maketh the layout.  Conversely, it does not matter how good the scenery and rolling stock are, bad track will let the whole thing down.

 

I am not that excited by track, if I'm honest.  Cary Grant once said something along the lines of a gentleman is the background for showing off the beautiful woman on his arm.  You notice her, not his finely cut suit.  But, the suit has to be right if it is not to be noticed!

 

Good track does the same for the things that move along it. IMHO.

 

I have seen some layouts that 'get away' with Peco HO track because they are so artfully ballasted, coloured and weathered.  It strikes me as not an easy illusion to pull off.  More usually, OO needs all the help it can get to militate against the narrowness of the gauge.  Code 75 rail and better length and placing of sleepers seems to me to be the way forward.  

 

It depends how you define good/bad track.

 

Good looking track may run badly and the opposite is also true.

 

I had one (and still do have one) of the very first Code 75 layouts on the exhibition circuit - I was quite surprised by how many asked if the gauge was EM....... And that is with medium radii points.

 

I for one, look forward to the new BH track as by the time I come around to building my next layout, I'm hoping that there'll be a decent range of pointwork.

 

Cheers,

Mick

Edited by newbryford
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I would have thought any company supplying ready to run track would ensure it worked perfectly, whether it looks right is another thing

 

I think you've slightly misunderstood my point (no pun intended)

 

No matter how good or bad the track may look from a prototypical point of view, if it isn't laid well, it won't run well.

 

As has been said before, model railways are a compromise, it's just that we all have different levels of compromise. My major ones are that I model 00 - complete with all the foibles that 16.5mm gauge brings with it. I use Peco Code 75 as it's a time thing and it works every time if laid well.

I have handbuilt track and although it looked good and ran well, I only have so much time on this world and I want to basically play trains not spend evenings threading chairs on rails and gluing them to sleepers.

 

There are other compromises, but that's what great about this hobby - each to their own.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peco have said it will match the existing code 75 range, so I would expect- when they do introduce pointwork, a medium BH will be the same as a current medium code 75 etc etc

Yes, I would agree, PECO will most likely merely duplicate the existing code 75 range of point work, most likely in uniform. The timbering and track detail will no doubt correspond as best they can with their new 00 Bullhead. Hence the geometry will be the same. I cannot see them switching , rather like their code 87 range to REA geometry for example, nor would there really be any reason to do so, in my opinion.

 

 

dave

Edited by Junctionmad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have thought any company supplying ready to run track would ensure it worked perfectly, whether it looks right is another thing

actually part of the issue with 00 is that you cant guarantee that the all models out there will run perfectly at all. You design for the middle of the bell curve !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

actually part of the issue with 00 is that you cant guarantee that the all models out there will run perfectly at all. You design for the middle of the bell curve !

 

So in reality, it's not a track problem, but a wheel problem.

 

There's always an issue in making something "backwards compatible" until the point (again, no pun intended) comes at which the manufacturers have to say no more.

Not a perfect analogy, but computers are an example. Otherwise, they'd all still have 5 1/4" floppy drives and a cassette player input............................ But if you want to use those things, you keep the old Amstrad 1612.

 

Likewise, if you want to run Wrenn and HD stuff, you use older spec track systems.

Edited by newbryford
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much talk of how great and ever so realistic future layouts will look with the new Peco bullhead track. With bullhead Medium 36" radius and small radius 24" radius points....?   :mosking:

it will look " better" , it will always be 00 track with all its compromises , even p4 isn't correct prototypically after all. I dont think anyone would claim that the new track will fix all known issues with 00, including the existence of twelve ten thumbed modellers :D :D

 

Dave

Edited by Junctionmad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...