PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO

[Joseph_Pestell]

But the problem here is surely not about the rail. What will be glaringly obvious is a mismatch in the sleepering. So the new track is really not much use until there is compatible pointwork (whether from Peco or elsewhere).

[Pacific231G]

But the problem here is surely not about the rail. What will be glaringly obvious is a mismatch in the sleepering. So the new track is really not much use until there is compatible pointwork (whether from Peco or elsewhere).

That seems to make sense Joseph but it was equally true in the opposite direction when Peco introduced Streamline effectively to H0 scale at a time when all "serious" OO pointwork including their own Pecoway points used the much wider BRMSB sleeper spacing. 

[Vistisen]

But the problem here is surely not about the rail. What will be glaringly obvious is a mismatch in the sleepering. So the new track is really not much use until there is compatible pointwork (whether from Peco or elsewhere).

The sleepers are one glaring fault, but for me, the joints in the blades are just as big a problem. That is why I have used Tillig track on my railway. What I really want is tillig points with 'OO' gauge sleepers.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Vistiaen

[Vistisen]

That seems to make sense Joseph but it was equally true in the opposite direction when Peco introduced Streamline effectively to H0 scale at a time when all "serious" OO pointwork including their own Pecoway points used the much wider BRMSB sleeper spacing. 

 

But the problem here is surely not about the rail. What will be glaringly obvious is a mismatch in the sleepering. So the new track is really not much use until there is compatible pointwork (whether from Peco or elsewhere).

'or elsewhere' Please tell me you are proceding :-)

[AndyID]

When does cold water become hot?

 

 

 

That's an easy one.

 

It's always hot. It's only heat that prevents it turning into ice 

[martin_wynne]

It's always hot. It's only heat that prevents it turning into ice 

 

No, it's always cold. Otherwise it would turn into steam.

[Derekstuart]

Am I the only sane one here?

No, it's always cold. Otherwise it would turn into steam.

[AndyID]

Am I the only sane one here?

 

Like the concept of heat and cold, sanity is a purely relative concept. In fact, insanity is largely inherited from relatives, most frequently from one's children.

[Derekstuart]

Actually I would like to withdraw my comment and not elaborate further.

I know there are several people on this forum who have had mental health issues- one of whom I know has seen my comment.

 

Of course my comment was not meant in any way to make light of mental health, but with hindsight it could be open to interpretation, thus I apologise if anyone has been offended by the post.

 

Sorry for the o/t

[DropTheTap]

And Peco have a range of Setrack, directly aimed for them..........

 

Agreed. And most trainsets are manufactured by Hornby and Bachmann, who normally supply track with them.

 

No evidence, but I question whether PECO's main customers are trainset users rather than layout builders. Although many years ago, it wasn't until my circle of trainset friends and I decided to start building layouts that we learned of somewhat more superior track in PECO. It seemed very logical that, as Hornby supplied the trainset, aftermarket track components were sought from the same source.

 

Again, no evidence, just a personal perspective.

 

I for one am very much looking forward to this track: I was going to cut and re- space code 75 F/B for my next project but I think I'll put off trackwork until the new releases. We've been asking for accurate sleeper spacing for years, now we (almost!) have it and I'm very grateful. I wonder if they'll produce bullhead on concrete sleepers eventually?

Edited March 25, 2016 by DropTheTap

[hayfield]

A Code 75 OO bullhead ready-to-lay track system is very much overdue.  But this isn't it.  It's a half-baked announcement of a pointless product.

 

I think it does a disservice to all of those, like me, who have yet to develop the finescale skills (and who's overcommitted time militates against this), to assume that we would not welcome such a Code 75 OO bullhead ready-to-lay track system with open arms.

 

I hope that Peco's announcement heralds the advent of just such a system, but I don't accept that Peco is offering the market anything particularly useful or essential by producing track alone, and I, for one, won't buy the track in isolation. 

 

Edwardian

 

Its nice to know that some of those who are happy to buy ready to run stock want decent ready to lay bullhead trackwork, sadly far to many box shakers do not give a dam what it looks like, that's why Peco for years have got away with selling a H0 track system as 00 gauge. Yes the gauge is the same but the scale is not !!

 

As you have said its not bullhead rail and there are no turnouts and crossings available at this moment. There are 3 ranges of ready to lay 00 gauge track available in true bullhead rail

[Derekstuart]

Of course anyone who wants BH rail with whatever sleeper spacing they want could always make it from individual C&L components. There is skill to making turnouts but making plain track requires no skill just the ability to carry on without dying of boredom.

[DropTheTap]

Edwardian

 

Its nice to know that some of those who are happy to buy ready to run stock want decent ready to lay bullhead trackwork, sadly far to many box shakers do not give a dam what it looks like, that's why Peco for years have got away with selling a H0 track system as 00 gauge. Yes the gauge is the same but the scale is not !!

 

As you have said its not bullhead rail and there are no turnouts and crossings available at this moment. There are 3 ranges of ready to lay 00 gauge track available in true bullhead rail

 

Right, but to take C&L as an example, it's significantly more expensive and not as widely available. (But yes I agree, it looks very authentic).

[Pacific231G]

Of course anyone who wants BH rail with whatever sleeper spacing they want could always make it from individual C&L components. There is skill to making turnouts but making plain track requires no skill just the ability to carry on without dying of boredom.

And then you still have to ballast it!  Actually I think respacing Peco Streamline sleepers in H0 to represent the wider spacing used on minor lines and sidings probably comes a close second even if you use a jig (and you'd be daft not to)  That's one reason why I'll be very likely to buy some of Peco's BH track whenever it appears.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Pacific231G

[Derekstuart]

David

 

I wouldn't use a jig for plain track (though I have "invented" a world class, incredibly complex jig for precision engineering common crossings (OK- some bent wire)).

All you need to produce plain track accurately is a copy of Templot (a little practice is required if you want custom track designs).

 

I might well be wrong on this- but I think the ballasting "argument" is irrelevant as you will have to ballast ALL track types.

 

 

We will just have to face facts that I am right and no one else is entitled to an opinion unless it agrees with mine.


PS: Does anyone have any opinion on whether the next PECO development should be in P4 of 4sf/00sf? And for that matter which one of the two gauges is best?

 

(edit: just to say that I am off for some lager and popcorn and see if anyone bites at that comment- I might as well have something to do for my 6 month ban I am about to get for flaming this thread. (only joking Mr York)).

Edited March 25, 2016 by Derekstuart

[AndyID]

as you will have to ballast ALL track types.

 

 

Not if you use Tri-Ang Standard Track.

[martin_wynne]

I might well be wrong on this- but I think the ballasting "argument" is irrelevant as you will have to ballast ALL track types.

 

Peco's idea of ballast:

 

 

[Derekstuart]

Does anyone have any opinion whether I should click informative/useful or funny for Martin's post?

[Budgie]

Does anyone have any opinion whether I should click informative/useful or funny for Martin's post?

Maybe you should click Friendly/Supportive.

[newbryford]

 

Does anyone have any opinion whether I should click informative/useful or funny for Martin's post?

 

 

Maybe you should click Friendly/Supportive.

 

I'd go for craftsmanship/clever because it's such a timesaver and looks so realistic............

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Pacific231G]

David

 

I wouldn't use a jig for plain track.

 

I might well be wrong on this- but I think the ballasting "argument" is irrelevant as you will have to ballast ALL track types.

 

 

You do indeed have to ballast all (well most) track types buit it was facing that chore on top of the respacing work that was a bit camel's back. I did find the jig useful mainly just to hold the individual sleepers square before laying them and I'd used a similar one years ago to handbuild some track for an American layout with a typically N. American tie spacing. They probably took no more than about ten minutes each to make.

 

I now realise though that all this was a complete waste of time and I'm grateful to Martin for drawing my attention to Peco's hyper realistic foam ballast strip. I've never actually noticed a main line ballasted with plastic foam but that's obviously my lack of observation and I must look out of the window more on my next train journey.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Pacific231G

[Derekstuart]

For these two, I know "funny" is the button to press.

 
 
 
 
I'd go for craftsmanship/clever because it's such a timesaver and looks so realistic............

Cheers,
Mick

 

You do indeed have to ballast all (well most) track types buit it was facing that chore on top of the respacing work that was a bit camel's back. I did find the jig useful mainly just to hold the individual sleepers square before laying them and I'd used a similar one years ago to handbuild some track for an American layout with a typically N. American tie spacing. They probably took no more than about ten minutes each to make.

 

I now realise though that all this was a complete waste of time and I'm grateful to Martin for drawing my attention to Peco's hyper realistic foam ballast strip. I've never actually noticed a main line ballasted with plastic foam but that's obviously my lack of observation and I must look out of the window more on my next train journey.

[Derekstuart]

Actually David,

 

I think your comment is also worth a "informative useful" as well as funny.

 

 

Like many people I use Templot with timbers taped/glued to the paper copy. Perhaps it would be better instead to glue the spacers to it- admittedly with turnouts there might be more different spacing (2ft, 2ft 6, 2ft 4, so on). From that could be glued (or soldered) vertical spars to hold checkrails too.

 

What a clever chap you are.

[edcayton]

Can I suggest that as "scale"00 track is an oxymoron then we may as well use scale HO track as it will look better when there are no trains about, and won't get looked at when there are trains to see?

 

Ed

[hayfield]

Right, but to take C&L as an example, it's significantly more expensive and not as widely available. (But yes I agree, it looks very authentic).

 

You are quite correct, but if you have to replace the track later Peco may then become more expensive. Normally available in a couple of days via the post, which for me would be the same fot Peco as I do not have a local model railway shop