C&L Finescale

[flubrush]

Bearing in mind ths was all 30+ years ago it would appear that most people have managed ithout having instrucrions in the packs since.

 

All the individual chair systems I can think of incorporate the rail inclination.  Our original whitemetal S scale chairs of 40+ years ago had the appropriate inclination and our present plastic ones - also designed by Len Newman who designed the C&L and Exactoscale products - hold the rail at the proper inclination.   I've also just checked some Cliff Barker G1 products and they have the rail inclination.

 

It's not too difficult to adjust a gauge which has a deep parallel slot.  Gradually take the edge off the non-gauge side of the rail slots with a needle file ( with a safe back) until the gauge fits easily on the rails when held in the chairs.   You would probably require a lathe to do the same job on a Rolagauge.

 

Jim.

[martin_wynne]

The only thing you need to put in the pack is a link to a website with all the information, Or even better a link to a page with links to a range of sites covering various levels knowledge,

 

I didn't mention that because I just know that you would then get complaints from customers without computers, or with very slow internet connections, wanting you to send them a printout of several web pages.

 

The object of the exercise is to do absolutely nothing which will generate support requests. Otherwise they will take up all your time, leaving you no time for actually making the stuff for the people who do know what they are doing.

 

Martin.

[martin_wynne]

It's not too difficult to adjust a gauge which has a deep parallel slot.  Gradually take the edge off the non-gauge side of the rail slots with a needle file ( with a safe back) until the gauge fits easily on the rails when held in the chairs.   You would probably require a lathe to do the same job on a Rolagauge.

 

Hi Jim,

 

The easiest solution with a roller gauge is to wind some soft copper wire (fuse wire) into the slots until they are only deep enough to engage the rail head. The normal tolerance in the slot will allow the rail head to tilt at 1:20 angle, the head is (or should be) radiused on the corners:

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

Why is it a total red herring?  A red herring is something that is irrelevant to the discussion.  As the current discussion is about C&L products and cant in chairs, it seems entirely relevant.  It's also much too easy, and dare I say a little arrogant, to brush something off as "common knowledge"; it clearly isn't because I didn't know it and nor did quite a few other people who have also had this problem.  I produce a range of quite advanced kits (nothing to do with modelling), and I include with each kit a comprehensive set of instructions;  while I know that most people who buy the kits won't need them, I am aware that some will - they've paid good money for the kit and it seems only right to cater for them so they don't make of mess of it.

 

DT

 

 

Your complaint is about gauge narrowing, it also seems most interacting with this thread are aware that the chairs have the cant, which seems to me confirming its common knowledge. Instructions are/were  available. The issue you have is the interaction between the gauges you have used and the chairs. In Exactoscale defence they supplied a set of compatible gauges for their product, with C&L I have a set of each 00 and EM track gauges which work without the gauge narrowing, I do not have a set of C&L's P4 gauges so cannot check them out

 

You stated you supply kits and include instructions, so do C&L and Exactoscale !!. The advice of both company's is to start off and buy a kit with full instructions, after that if prefered buy the components separately you can build with confidence. Now as you built the turnouts on ply timbering once you were aware of the issue its an easy fix providing you used the recommended solvent (Butanone), which is once the solvent is completely set (24 hours) carefully break the bond and re-set the rail

 

My problem was in using a gauge not designed for the system, as it happens old scalefour society 3 point gauges worked fine. Still I will pass your suggestion on to Phil, might even generate a few extra sales for him

[martin_wynne]

Why is it a total red herring?  A red herring is something that is irrelevant to the discussion.  As the current discussion is about C&L products and cant in chairs, it seems entirely relevant.  It's also much too easy, and dare I say a little arrogant, to brush something off as "common knowledge"; it clearly isn't because I didn't know it and nor did quite a few other people who have also had this problem.  I produce a range of quite advanced kits (nothing to do with modelling), and I include with each kit a comprehensive set of instructions;  while I know that most people who buy the kits won't need them, I am aware that some will - they've paid good money for the kit and it seems only right to cater for them so they don't make of mess of it.

 

The point there is that you are supplying kits. The Exactoscale kits do include a full set of printed instructions, and the correct pattern gauges. When you buy a pack of chairs you are in effect buying "spare parts" for the kits. If I recall correctly, the spare chairs were not originally available separately, it was necessary to buy a full kit to get them.

 

I agree that all this should have been explained on the C&L ordering web site.

 

Martin.

Edited August 23, 2018 by martin_wynne

[Lecorbusier]

 

 

My problem was in using a gauge not designed for the system, as it happens old scalefour society 3 point gauges worked fine. Still I will pass your suggestion on to Phil, might even generate a few extra sales for him

I have a set of relatively recent Scalefour 3 point gauges and it was these which caused the gauge narrowing issues - fine for rivet and copperclad construction though.

 

I was a newcomer to track construction when I came across the issue. I was scouring both RM web and Scaleforum for threads and advice whilst having a bash. I tried copperclad first with success but was unhappy with the detail. I decided to give functional chairs a bash following the reading of a fair few threads. Half way through my first attempts a particular thread I was following alerted me to the issue with gauges which clamped the track vertical and fortunately I had only been experimenting up to that point.

 

Moving forward it might be an idea to flag the issue up in bold in some form or another. Not interested in pointing fingers, but flagging the problem would seem to be a neighbourly thing to do.

[Paul Cram]

Paul & Martin

 

Thanks for the input but from memory the original system was designed & marketed by K&L and thin plastic timbers were available and I was introduced to the system as free standing, not as something designed solely for ply and rivet construction

 

Exactoscale turnout and crossing kits come with extensive instructions

 

The original K&L chair packs came with instructions, at some point the instructions were only packed with the turnout and crossing kits

 

Peter Llewellyn rewrote these instructions soon after taking over C&L from Brian Lewis, but before adding Exactoscale into the fold.

 

At one time the Original Exactoscale website had the turnout instructions and plans available as downloads

 

Several C&L and Exactoscale downloads are available on the currant C&L site, with the exception of the kit instructions

 

The fact that the chairs have a cant built in is a total red herring and long been common knowlage

 

Track gauges has always been an achilles heal with C&L and other companies for that matter. For long periods C&L sold roller gauges with check rails set for GOGA fine standards, early)2nd generation) versions had quite thin groves, newer steel versions have deeper groves which providing meet the standards set by Mr Newman allowing the rail head to rotate are fine. Exactoscale P4 track gauge sets designed for head rotation and also have a gauge widened set ( sadly without instructions of how much to widen and when)

 

At the end of the day irrespective of both scale gauge or method used should check that what has been built has remained in gauge. I would also check that gauges are to the required standard, as most of my gauges differ slightly from each other despite being within the specified tolerance range

The original K&L chairs were with pips and had thick sleepers. This was the wishes of the East London Area group who persuaded Len that there would be a market for plastic chairs. I was a member of that group at the time. I still have some of the original chairs and sleepers. The thin sleepers were at the request of Alan Gibson as was the removal of the pips from the chair base to enable track to guaghes other than P4.

Edited August 23, 2018 by Paul Cram

[PenrithBeacon]

I haven’t built much in the way of track, but the advice by C&L was to make the plain track first and then the points. Seems good enough!

[hayfield]

The original K&L chairs were with pips and had thick sleepers. This was the wishes of the East London Area group who persuaded Len that there would be a markey for plastic chairs. I was a member of that group at the time. I still have some of the original chairs and sleepers. The thin sleepers were at the request of Alan Gibson as was the removal of the pips from the chair base to enable track to guaghes other than P4.

 

 

Thanks for the info, the initial parts I bought were K&L (not Alan Gibson) via Puffers of Kenton and on to 00 gauge thin timbers, no doubt benefitted from Slaters input

 

I have seen old C&L and Slaters sprues (photo of 3mm association sprue) where there were 10 chairs and one slide chair on the end of the sprue. One idea Phil has mentioned is that when a tool needs replacing having a selection of chairs on a standard sprue, rather than having a cost of making a tool for single set of special chairs.

[Joseph_Pestell]

There are alternatives via 3D printing. I'm currently developing Templot to export files suitable for 3D printing of chaired track bases, and there is no reason in principle not to print simply a fret of chairs without the timbers. Which could have 2mm dia holes in the base.

 

They will all be for vertical rail, not inclined. The reason is nothing to do with gauging difficulties, but the practical difficulty of creating the required conical bends and twists in inclined rail for pointwork, for knuckle bends, set bends, vee rails, etc. I don't believe using inclined rail is practicable for pointwork in small scale models, without some sophisticated press tools.

 

Some details of progress at:  http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=2734&forum_id=6&jump_to=25327#p25361

 

 

Notice the random key positions and screw heads. There should be a corner radius around the top of the jaw, but I think I'm going to draw a line at this. I've used as much of the REA drawing as seems reasonable. I'm hoping that the 3D printer will smooth out some of the sharp angles. In 4mm scale a lot of the detail will be lost, but hopefully it should be visible in the larger scales.

 

 

Still a long way to go, so don't hold your breath.

 

See also the 3D chairs from Andy in the same Templot topic (he has some experimental versions available now).

 

edit: p.s. Torper -- inclined rail is 1:20 angle (3 degrees), not 20 degrees.

 

Martin.

 

Now that is a sensational piece of news! And deserves its own thread.

Edited August 23, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[Vistisen]

The point there is that you are supplying kits. The Exactoscale kits do include a full set of printed instructions, and the correct pattern gauges. When you buy a pack of chairs you are in effect buying "spare parts" for the kits. If I recall correctly, the spare chairs were not originally available separately, it was necessary to buy a full kit to get them.

 

I agree that all this should have been explained on the C&L ordering web site.

 

Martin.

 

I'm a complete amateur in this track building business, having only built three points myself, I have not considered whether the chairs I am using cause canting of  the rail. (I have enough trouble getting bullhead rail up the right way and making sure that the 'blocks' in the chairs are on the outside of the rails. But I have assumed that using track gauges on the top of the rails which is where (until corrected) I think the wheels touch the track would ensure that the gauge is correct there. A quick bit of red wine powered maths tells me that the gauge of a pair of rail with a cant of 3 degrees about the mid point and a rail height of less than 2mm makes a of about .1 mm and to be honest my soldering skills leave a LOT larger margin of error than that, and still, at least some of my stock will run through my points.

Edited August 23, 2018 by Vistisen

[martin_wynne]

Now that is a sensational piece of news! And deserves its own thread.

 

All in good time, there is still a long way to go. Don't hold your breath.

 

It does have its own topic, see: http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=3307&forum_id=1

 

I posted here simply to point out in reply to a question that the chairs will be for vertical rail. Or at least, any I have anything to do with will be. The Templot code will eventually be open-source, so if anyone wants to modify it for inclined rail, over to them.

 

Martin.

[purplepiepete]

I have some but not used them yet, they do look very good with the detail far more visible in 7mm scale than 4 mm scale, and if they work as well as they look I will have no complaints

 

A word of warning (no instructions supplied), do get some instructions, Some chairs do come with keys cast to the chairs, others have separate keys requiring a slightly different build process than the plastic type sold by C&L and Exactoscale. Expensive but you get what you pay for, the packs they are sold in have altered. bulk packs are good value but only available in check rail chairs.

 

The owner is very helpful and have given me good instructions

 

John, many thanks for the update. Any idea if Butanone / MEK could be used on these ? I guess they are not ABS and I have no experience of the plastic used in 3D printing.

[hayfield]

I'm a complete amateur in this track building business, having only built three points myself, I have not considered whether the chairs I am using cause canting of  the rail. (I have enough trouble getting bullhead rail up the right way and making sure that the 'blocks' in the chairs are on the outside of the rails. But I have assumed that using track gauges on the top of the rails which is where (until corrected) I think the wheels touch the track would ensure that the gauge is correct there. A quick bit of red wine powered maths tells me that the gauge of a pair of rail with a cant of 3 degrees about the mid point and a rail height of less than 2mm makes a of about .1 mm and to be honest my soldering skills leave a LOT larger margin of error than that, and still, at least some of my stock will run through my points.

 

Vistisen

 

With 00 the built in tolerances will mop up any slight tolleriances, it is quite possible that it would be un-noticeable in running charistics with EM gauge as well. P4 may be a bit different

 

My own take on this is all about the quality of the gauges, rail and the fact that most folk have digital measuring equipment

 

Firstly all standards state an acceptable +/-. Newer more accurate machinery is now available and the rail head width varies

 

Using my (cheap) digital calliper I find gauges do differ a tad, both in gauge and rail head width, and as we are reminded in several threads gauge widening is not as critical as gauge narrowing. The depth of the rail head slot also varies from gauge to gauge and this also could prevent the rail from rotating correctly

 

I must admit after buying some very nice 3 point gauges from The Alan Gibson Workshop (which are not cheap) they give a nice tight fit to the rail head (which is what you want for copperclad and ply and rivet construction) in hindsight its not what you want for plastic chair construction. There is nothing wrong with either the gauges or chairs, just that with this type of construction its just the build method of this product requires something a bit different

 

Again be careful with what rail you use, using other makes of rail could split the chair bases, which could lead to people blaming the chair when its the rail thats at fault, and if the head is slightly different could impede the head rotation within the gauge.

 

I have my own view on gauges and believe we as modellers are let down from the suppliers, why when in both P4 and EM gauges where you need both check and wing rail gauges so we have roller gauges with check and wing gauges built in (which mag give the wrong gauge)!!. Why are both check and wing rail gauges not available in 00 gauge? I could go on

[hayfield]

John, many thanks for the update. Any idea if Butanone / MEK could be used on these ? I guess they are not ABS and I have no experience of the plastic used in 3D printing.

 

 

I have been told to use superglue, perhaps one of the better quality versions, also told to soak the chairs in white spirit for 30 mins to dissolve unwanted residue from the printing process

 

Must find the time to build an example

[martin_wynne]

Why are both check and wing rail gauges not available in 00 gauge?

 

Hi John,

 

The 00-SF 15.2mm check gauges* are showing as back in stock at C&L: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=346_375_376&product_id=8776

 

These are labelled for 00-SF but they are also correct for 00-BF and all 00 gauges except DOGA-Fine.

 

Wing rail gauges (crossing flangeway gauges) are readily available from car shops as spark-plug feeler gauges. For 00-SF (and EM) use 1.0mm or 40thou. For 00-BF use 1.3mm or 50thou.

 

*p.s. I think Phil said he had changed the supplier for these? If so I don't know how they compare with the previous high-precision gauges originally sourced by Brian Tulley.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Edited August 24, 2018 by martin_wynne

[purplepiepete]

I have been told to use superglue, perhaps one of the better quality versions, also told to soak the chairs in white spirit for 30 mins to dissolve unwanted residue from the printing process

 

Must find the time to build an example

 

Look forward to a review John as this appears to be the way ahead for future development.

 

Not keen on the superglue idea though - no room for mistakes !

[hayfield]

Hi John,

 

The 00-SF 15.2mm check gauges* are showing as back in stock at C&L: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=346_375_376&product_id=8776

 

These are labelled for 00-SF but they are also correct for 00-BF and all 00 gauges except DOGA-Fine.

 

Wing rail gauges (crossing flangeway gauges) are readily available from car shops as spark-plug feeler gauges. For 00-SF (and EM) use 1.0mm or 40thou. For 00-BF use 1.3mm or 50thou.

 

*p.s. I think Phil said he had changed the supplier for these? If so I don't know how they compare with the previous high-precision gauges originally sourced by Brian Tulley.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

 

Martin

 

I use the 00SF check rail gauges for 00 as previously advised by yourself, but their availability has been erratic and not commonly known, I had some ali strip milled to 1.25 mm by a friend, so I am fine for these but it does not seem 1,25 mm strip is available. Flat bar is far easier than feeler gauges, sorry but I am lazy or just prefer using the equipment designed for the job

 

I find DCC concepts gauges excellent quality and do code 82 flatbottom as well as code 75 bullhead gauges

 

Not seen any of the new gauges yet

[Jol Wilkinson]

You can never have too many gauges!

 

 

The brass rectangular block is a "Mint Gauge", which is used to test assembled track and highlights any tight spots. The black triangular gauge is the DD version (P4 only) available through the S4 Society. It has a different approach to the rail "locating pegs". The outer one of each pair is tapered so that the rail will incline if required.

 

 

The other three point gauges have a parallel peg, which holds the rail vertically. However, this could be amended by filing the inner face of the outer part at an angle or cutting it down so it only holds the rail head.

 

 

.

[Siberian Snooper]

The DD mint gauges are also available in EM, from the EM Gauge Society.

[hayfield]

Jol

 

How very true that you cannot have enough gauges, certainly can equal your number of P4 gauges, then I have 00, EM and 7mm scale ones

 

One of the better gauges is the DD Wheelwrights block with crossing alignment aid, I have both P4 and EM sets, these aid the building of common crossings

[PenrithBeacon]

The DD mint gauges are also available in EM, from the EM Gauge Society.

I thought they were out of stock and unavailable from the manufacturer. I have been on a waiting list for over 12 months now.

[Ravenser]

Hi John,

 

The 00-SF 15.2mm check gauges* are showing as back in stock at C&L: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=346_375_376&product_id=8776

 

These are labelled for 00-SF but they are also correct for 00-BF and all 00 gauges except DOGA-Fine.

 

Wing rail gauges (crossing flangeway gauges) are readily available from car shops as spark-plug feeler gauges. For 00-SF (and EM) use 1.0mm or 40thou. For 00-BF use 1.3mm or 50thou.

 

*p.s. I think Phil said he had changed the supplier for these? If so I don't know how they compare with the previous high-precision gauges originally sourced by Brian Tulley.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

 

 

Emphasis added by me.

 

This is incorrect, since those gauges are designed to produce a track gauge of 16.2mm not the OO track gauge of 16.5mm. They are therefore  not suitable for "OO-BF" (Martin's private term for OO BRMSB standard,) nor for DOGA OO Intermediate.

 

C+L state the gauges in question produce 1.0mm flangeways - this is incorrect for both OO BRMSB (nominal 1.25mm flangeway, ) and DOGA OO Intermediate (tolerance range 1.15mm - 1.25mm flangeway)

 

While Martin has long actively promoted his "OO-SF" concept , trying to get modellers to work in OO-SF by misleading them that they are actually working toa different OO standard is a bit much.

[martin_wynne]

This is incorrect, since those gauges are designed to produce a track gauge of 16.2mm not the OO track gauge of 16.5mm.

 

Hi Ravenser,

 

I was referring to Check Gauges, not track gauges. The 00-SF check gauges are for 15.2mm check rails, not running rails, and are suitable for all modern 00 except DOGA-Fine, on both 16.2mm and 16.5mm track gauge.

 

I was replying to John's complaint that traditionally check gauges have been available for EM and P4, but not for 00. The fact that you misunderstand the difference between check gauge and track gauge illustrates his point perfectly.

 

 

While Martin has long actively promoted his "00-SF" concept , trying to get modellers to work in 00-SF by misleading them that they are actually working to a different 00 standard is a bit much.

 

00-SF is not mine, it's been around since the 1970s. And I'm not actively promoting anything. I do my best to provide helpful information for track-builders -- why is it that every time I do so you pop up to denounce it, often as now completely misunderstanding what I've said?

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

Emphasis added by me.

 

This is incorrect, since those gauges are designed to produce a track gauge of 16.2mm not the OO track gauge of 16.5mm. They are therefore  not suitable for "OO-BF" (Martin's private term for OO BRMSB standard,) nor for DOGA OO Intermediate.

 

C+L state the gauges in question produce 1.0mm flangeways - this is incorrect for both OO BRMSB (nominal 1.25mm flangeway, ) and DOGA OO Intermediate (tolerance range 1.15mm - 1.25mm flangeway)

 

While Martin has long actively promoted his "OO-SF" concept , trying to get modellers to work in OO-SF by misleading them that they are actually working toa different OO standard is a bit much.

 

 

We have been through this before and if you actually read both posts with an open mind and an understanding of the subject you would realise the check rail measurement from the vee in both standards is the same.

 

With regard to the C&L statement, The way you have interpreted it is incorrect, the check rail gauge ignores the stock rail and takes the measurement from the Vee to the stock rail. Therefore has no ability to affect the positioning of the stock rail.

 

The 00SF check rail gauge is designed to fit into the 1mm gap between the Vee and wing rail (described by C&L as flangeway) it will also fit the 1.25 mm gap required by the GOGA intermediate specifications for the wing rail gap, I believe the DOGA intermediate check rail measurement is 15.2 mm which the gauge complies with, as the 00SF specifications uses the same measurement. As Martin has said we are talking about a check rail not running rail gauge

Edited August 24, 2018 by hayfield