Tri-ang Railways.

[RJS1977]

Even Setrack R1 curves though aren't as tight as Series 1/2/3 curves so a little loss of sideplay shouldn't matter too much if they're not going to be run on older track.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Even Setrack R1 curves though aren't as tight as Series 1/2/3 curves so a little loss of sideplay shouldn't matter too much if they're not going to be run on older track.

Through experience I can say it can affect R 3 and 4 radii which is what my layout is. Initially I wondered why the locos ran well on the straight and through points but stopped or judderd on the curves. A gentle push gave it all away, the wheel flanges were tight against the rails. Since then all wheels have been turned slightly and no more trouble encountered.

 

Garry

[locomad]

Pulling the wheels out a little will work, but, if using set track curves it can cause resistance on the curves due to less play. That is why I turned a very small amount off the backs. This includes the original solid wheels and they run fine though modern Peco points. Peco changed their universal range to a finer standard around the 90's I think as even Hornby were making their finer wheels by then. The good thing is all old Hornby Dublo wheels run very well without any modification, that is both 2 and 3-rail.

Plenty of videos on You Tube about my Tri-ang locos running on modern track.

Garry

Something I noticed years ago that even using peco track and curves of say 30" radius just how much these increased rolling resistance, and your right about metal Hornby-dublo wheels these seem to enjoy fine on all track.

 

I cannot remember the manufacturer but there was sold years ago another flexible track similar to peco but a lot cheaper, I found that it was slightly out of guage a bit more distance between the rails, but when used on the curves this reduced the rolling resistance, triang stock ran very well on this.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Something I noticed years ago that even using peco track and curves of say 30" radius just how much these increased rolling resistance, and your right about metal Hornby-dublo wheels these seem to enjoy fine on all track.

 

I cannot remember the manufacturer but there was sold years ago another flexible track similar to peco but a lot cheaper, I found that it was slightly out of guage a bit more distance between the rails, but when used on the curves this reduced the rolling resistance, triang stock ran very well on this.

I know of Wrenn (fibre based and very difficult to bend after cutting the webs), Gem and Peco flexible track.  There was one advertised called Welkut for both 00 and TT but I never saw any so no idea what it was like.

 

Garry

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I think Welkut had a fibre base too, though the frog was plastic.

 

There was also Graham Farish's plastic-sleepered track, Formway (or was it Formoway)?? Comprehensive range with single and double slips, and a three-way point.

 

K's marketed track called Firmway - might've used copper-clad sleepers with live frogs.

Edited January 14, 2018 by Peter Kazmierczak

[Golden Fleece 30]

I think Welkut had a fibre base too, though the frog was plastic.

 

There was also Graham Farish's plastic-sleepered track, Formway (or was it Formoway)?? Comprehensive range with single and double slips, and a three-way point.

 

K's marketed track called Firmway - might've used copper-clad sleepers with live frogs.

I forgot about Farish's Formoway.  To me their points were not as good as Peco although the range at the time was for greater.  The basic fault was no locking spring for the tiebars which meant a separate switch or motor had to be added to allow its use. The Frogs looked coarse and the live version did nothing for me.

 

Garry

[locomad]

I know of Wrenn (fibre based and very difficult to bend after cutting the webs), Gem and Peco flexible track.  There was one advertised called Welkut for both 00 and TT but I never saw any so no idea what it was like.

 

Garry

Much later than them, I think it might have been Lima or another European make, it was flexible track with steel rail, purchased about 1991 from well known Liverpool retailer, about 1/2 cost of peco. I've some laid down but replaced the track with peco 100 nickel-silver rail.

 

It was very slightly wider than peco, slightly flatter is sleepers not as thick, the plastic sleepers tend to be a bit more brittle with age.

 

I purchased the track which was steel as I though it would assist triang locos on a curved incline as they still had the magnets in the chassis to help with grip

[RJS1977]

Possibly GT - we had some (albeit nickel silver), again about half the price of Peco, but our Triang stock ran on the sleepers rather than the track.

 

Most of it was replaced when we rebuilt my father's layout to fit its new location 20 years ago. (Having come up with a plan which re-used as much of the previous track plan as possible, albeit "not necessarily in the right order", we wound up lifting half the track anyway!)

[kernowtim]

Could be lima, they made steel flexible track, I bought some from a local shop for 50p a (metre?)length

[Il Grifone]

The great advantage, as far as I'm concerned, of Formoway is that it is actually 00 and not H0, though the sleepers are a bit too close together. The pointwork could do with a bit of rebuilding. The plastic crossings are awful and the metal version is rather coarse.

 

Over the weekend I acquired some second hand Peco curved points (I run my U.S. stock on it, for which it's close sleeper spacing is ideal). There has been some discussion elsewhere concerning  running problems with these though mainly with Hornby's version. I did find that the wheels that came with the Tri-ang brick wagon* I also bought that they were a trifle unhappy and apart from the bump in the crossing gap (not a lot one can do abut that) that the wheel flange was just hitting the crossing nose despite their back to back being spot on at 14.5mm (at least according to my digital caliper - it made the gauge 16.5 so must be OK). Two were worse than the third, but these were marked "patent pending" and the thirds had a patent number so presumably are the older coarser version, not that the later one is particularly fine scale with a check gauge of 13.9mm. However a touch with a file on the crossing noses sorted things. Now all I need is the space for a layout....

 

* I couldn't resist yet another one when it came with proper wheels (Gibson I think) and Ratio bogies, brass bearings and was already fitted with W/M buffers all for £2. All the graft of removing the bogie rivets and carving away the moulded ribbing to fit the new bogies had already been done. I just had to assemble the bogies fitting the bearing and wheels and cement the Ratio bolsters in place. One of the bogie pivot pins was missing, but I fitted 3 M.A. screws instead. It now runs beautifully and I just have to fit couplings, add a bit of weight and fit  brake cross members and vacuum pipes. In due course I'll do something about the overscale lettering....

[Robin Brasher]

The track problem resolved itself when Tri-amg Hornby introduced System 6 track which was compatible with Peco and Hornby Dublo 2-rail track.

 

The last model that Tri-ang Hornby made before Dunbee-Combex-Marx bought Rovex and Tri-ang Hornby became Hornby Railways was R51S GWR 0-6-0 Pannier Tank Locomotive. This had a gloss green finish.

 

This model was made in 1973 in a Hornby Railways box. I bought it from Petts Wood Toys in Kent for £3.68 in 1973.

[Golden Fleece 30]

I have just bought a January 1958 Railway Modeller (unread properly as yet) for the TT content but it has the introduction of the series 3 track.  What surprised me was the missing square "locking tab" that used to be on each end, the ones that looked like the licorice Imps.  Was this a first issue series 3 that did not clip well by the half sleeper method and soon superseded by the tabbed ones?

 

Garry

[luckymucklebackit]

That Rocket Launcher would look great on wee Kim's layout

[locomad]

Could be lima, they made steel flexible track, I bought some from a local shop for 50p a (metre?)length

At the time never really bothered who made it, but looking back could quite possibly be Lima, it was sold as "bargain" flexible track and a good 5% cheaper than peco.

 

I'am also a fan of Hornby-dublo 2 rail track the sleeper spacing is more to British spacing, looks better too, it's very cheap as no one seems to want it, after 60 odd years the plastic goes very brittle, I've also come across some steel rail track too

[Il Grifone]

AFAIK the only Dublo steel track came in the starter set. It has 45° curves so easy to recognise. the track is quite delicate but the base is polystyrene so easy to repair (as long as yet can find the broken bits!)

 

there was a generic unbranded cheap flexible track available some years ago. IIRC it was about £1 a yard.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Here is an advert from September 1957 regarding the unloading Hopper sets.  Standard track is used and from what I remember in those days there always seemed to be more Transcontinental stock than British outline.

 

Does anyone remember the Kirdon controller as advertised in the October 1957 Railway Modeller.  It had a button to press to help start a stationary loco, sounds a good idea as opposed to turning the knob further then turning it back slightly.

 

Garry

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Just wondering why Tri-ang didn't introduce the same locos in TT and OO?

 

Sometimes they did, eg the Brush Type 2 and Jinty, but why no 00 Castle, Merchant Navy or BRCW DMU?

[Golden Fleece 30]

Just wondering why Tri-ang didn't introduce the same locos in TT and OO?

 

Sometimes they did, eg the Brush Type 2 and Jinty, but why no 00 Castle, Merchant Navy or BRCW DMU?

The did do the Merchant Navy as a Battle of Britain Winston Churchill.  In later years Hornby made a similar 3 car DMU ( I am not familiar with classes). They possibly left the Castle out as Hornby Dublo had just brought their model Bristol Castle out the year before the TT one.  These were already being converted to 2-rail by shops and sold albeit at a higher price than if Tri-ang made one.

 

The brush type 2 was slightly different with the 00 having the roof mounted headcode box.

 

Garry

Edited January 19, 2018 by Golden Fleece 30

[Il Grifone]

Here is an advert from September 1957 regarding the unloading Hopper sets.  Standard track is used and from what I remember in those days there always seemed to be more Transcontinental stock than British outline.

Does anyone remember the Kirdon controller as advertised in the October 1957 Railway Modeller.  It had a button to press to help start a stationary loco, sounds a good idea as opposed to turning the knob further then turning it back slightly.

 

Garry

 

Hi Garry,

 

I have both! The Tri-ang one is the alleged BR hopper (a flight of fancy), but the packaging allows for the TC hopper (got one of those too - another flight of fancy AFAIK). When it was introduced (1957 IIRC), the only track was Standard and the matching ramps were designed for this. The inclines really need the extra support of the moulded base anyway and ideally also the sidewalls, but that raises the price considerably.

 

 

I've never tried the Kirdon boost button - the controllers suffer from acetate disease and are jammed. (Bought just to have them - squirrel instinct & cheap!). My H&M Powermaster also has one. Its effect is rather hindered by cutting off the current before and after pushing it (the feature that allows it to reverse Trix Twin locomotives). It doesn't work all that well anyway. A stall due to loss of contact etc. still stays stalled and mechanical arthritis really should be cured at source rather than rely on a quick burst of full voltage.

 

David

Edited January 20, 2018 by Il Grifone

[Legend]

What people forget is that Tri-ang gave you the whole system. Stock, track, inclines, sidewalks,Stations,turntables, a working catenary system so that you could control two locos on the one line. Even through use of Minic a motorway system to supplement it. Model Land etc . This was all back in the sixties . Undoubtably more toy like than today’s masterpieces , but I do wonder which ones we had more fun with.

 

And , of course, superb catalogues . While we have more choice detail etc , with virtually all main classes modelled, I do think maybe the 60s were the halcyon years of British Model Trains .

Edited January 20, 2018 by Legend

[RJS1977]

The did do the Merchant Navy as a Battle of Britain Winston Churchill.  

 

Merchant Navy and BoB are two different classes of loco (Merchant Navies are larger/heavier).

[Golden Fleece 30]

Merchant Navy and BoB are two different classes of loco (Merchant Navies are larger/heavier).

I know that but in the 50's and 60's no one bothered about the extra length. Don't forget the Princess and Britannia in 00 had the same chassis. The Princess was a good inch or so short.

 

Garry

[Golden Fleece 30]

Hi Garry,

 

I have both! The Tri-ang one is the alleged BR hopper (a flight of fancy), but the packaging allows for the TC hopper (got one of those too - another flight of fancy AFAIK). When it was introduced (1957 IIRC), the only track was Standard and the matching ramps were designed for this. The inclines really need the extra support of the moulded base anyway and ideally also the sidewalls, but that raises the price considerably.

 

 

I've never tried the Kirdon boost button - the controllers suffer from acetate disease and are jammed. (Bought just to have them - squirrel instinct & cheap!). My H&M Powermaster also has one. Its effect is rather hindered by cutting off the current before and after pushing it (the feature that allows it to reverse Trix Twin locomotives). It doesn't work all that well anyway. A stall due to loss of contact etc. still stays stalled and mechanical arthritis really should be cured at source rather than rely on a quick burst of full voltage.

 

David

Hi David,  My very first train "set", and I use the word set loosely, was a Dublo Silver King and 0-6-2 with a few yard lengths of Wrenn track and some curves, no tender or coaches but a couple of goods wagons.  I was about 3 or 4 at the time and my parents did not know anything different so they "added" to it by buying a proper new set, a Tri-ang Transcontinental twin unit with two coaches.  How do you compare that?  I had two different systems and one was American, that's parents for you.  I preferred the standard track to the series 3 and as you say the inclines and sidewalls fitted nicely being specific for the track.  Muck nicer that the pink ones for Super 4 and those awful black ones for System 6.  I only had the BR operating hopper as somehow I must have convinced my parents on the differences and never got another Transcontinental item again including TT.  In the same issue is the advert for the American Bo-Bo.

 

Garry

[sagaguy]

What people forget is that Tri-ang gave you the whole system. Stock, track, inclines, sidewalks,Stations,turntables, a working catenary system so that you could control two locos on the one line. Even through use of Minic a motorway system to supplement it. Model Land etc . This was all back in the sixties . Undoubtably more toy like than today’s masterpieces , but I do wonder which ones we had more fun with.

 

And , of course, superb catalogues . While we have more choice detail etc , with virtually all main classes modelled, I do think maybe the 60s were the halcyon years of British Model Trains .

Triang also supplied a set containing a Minic motorway,a 3f & a level crossing where the car could crash into the train(or vice versa).Try doing that with todays highly detailed models.

[Golden Fleece 30]

Triang also supplied a set containing a Minic motorway,a 3f & a level crossing where the car could crash into the train(or vice versa).Try doing that with todays highly detailed models.

No doubt all the valve gear would fall off for a start, then with spares not available since Chinese production, the loco goes to the model loco equivelent of Barry Island.

 

Garry