Unifrog?

[Suzie]

Unifrog is an improvement on a couple of things, mainly getting rid of the need to use unsightly insulated joiners!

[bertiedog]

Unifrog is an improvement on a couple of things, mainly getting rid of the need to use unsightly insulated joiners!

But that assumes the use of DCC, where power on all tracks is required. The moment I see a Unifrog point on a P4 layout to make it less unsightly might be fun, the easier cure would be better looking insulated fishplates, rather than adding extra cuts to the points, in filled with plastic as per the existing Unifrogs.

 

Hopefully, as covered in the Bullhead postings, the new points will have just the two small breaks, not the two tiny ones and two whoppers as on the H0n3 example.

 

Stephen.

[Suzie]

But that assumes the use of DCC, where power on all tracks is required...

 

No assumptions - it applies to any layout with passing loops or crossovers.

[njee20]

That was my thought too, I'd happily get rid of IRJs!

[Poggy1165]

 I would suggest that conventional fishplates look dreadful in any scale. The Exactoscale design of metal and plastic fishplates which both join the track and provide insulation where necessary while actually resembling real fishplates seems a big upgrade to me over the Peco equivalent.

 

The unifrog thing is apparently to be supplied in the 7mm scale small radius points. I wondered what it was, and now I know I am dischuffed.

[47137]

It looks like the Unifrog is being rolled out for the HOn3 and Code 83 ranges to begin with - the USA, which is Peco's main market.

 

It seems pretty sensible to me for diamond crossings and double slips - the item is supplied ready to use without additional wiring, and the modeller can choose to electrify the nose of the crossing and the wing rails if desired.

 

https://www.trainworld.com/manufacturers/peco/peco-slu8363-code-83-unifrog-6-double-slip-switch-track/

 

 

- Richard.

[Pint of Adnams]

It looks like the Unifrog is being rolled out for the HOn3 and Code 83 ranges to begin with - the USA, which is Peco's main market.

 

It seems pretty sensible to me for diamond crossings and double slips - the item is supplied ready to use without additional wiring, and the modeller can choose to electrify the nose of the crossing and the wing rails if desired.

 

https://www.trainworld.com/manufacturers/peco/peco-slu8363-code-83-unifrog-6-double-slip-switch-track/

 

 

- Richard.

The HOn3 range is new and only has left and right hand switches, whilst it's only the double slip in the Code 83 range, with all the remaining switches still Electrofrog. The new O gauge Setrack left and right hand points are Unifrog, possibly to support the increasing availability of BRITISH RTR locos and rolling stock.

Edited May 29, 2017 by Pint of Adnams

[47137]

The HOn3 range is new and only has left and right hand switches, whilst it's only the double slip in the Code 83 range, with all the remaining switches still Electrofrog. The new O gauge Setrack left and right hand points are Unifrog, possibly to support the increasing availability of BRITISH RTR locos and rolling stock.

 

Well, this is the page I found for the code 83 diamond crossing:

https://www.modelrailwaysdirect.co.uk/track/peco-sl-u8364-6-diamond-crossing-unifrog/

 

I know the crossing is not a "switch" but surely the impression is of a roll-out to create a unified product line where one product replaces both live and dead frog versions, and starting in the largest market area? Seems like a good idea to me.

 

(For the 0 gauge 'Setrack', the branding suggests a product geared to fit the space available rather than to represent any prototype, and I'll guess they are aimed at the world-wide market, for both 1:48 and 1:43 scales. They still sound good for micro layouts and other limited spaces, British or elsewhere).

 

- Richard.

[rue_d_etropal]

Most people getting into O gauge at the moment are working in small spaces. The new r2r locos are definitely aimed at that market. In fact it is those new locos that are probably the draw. Certainly one friend is dabbling in O gauge just because of the Dapol Terrier.

As the points are new designs, it makes sense to use the latest idea , ie the Unifrog. When the moulds for existing points come up for renewal I would expect unifrog to be used. That is assuming there are no problems, but I would have expected that to show up with the first range to introduce them.

[Retro_man]

 UNIFROG
 

#6 DIAMOND CROSSING 
    

The PECO Streamline HO '83 Line' track system has been established for over 12 years as the modellers' first choice when selecting an accurate HO scale North American track system for their layouts. The opportunity has recently been taken to upgrade our #6 Diamond Crossing into the new UNIFROG format, this format effectively offering the features of both Insulfrog and Electrofrog, so giving the modeller the choice with how it's operated.

As supplied, the crossing operates as if it were an Insulfrog unit. All rails are live except for the separate frog tip and wing rails (see close-up image above), which are isolated. In this format the unit will operate quite satisfactorily, but if the modeller prefers to switch the polarity of the frog, then the pre-attached wires make it easy to link them to a changeover switch or microswitch. In either case, this crossing, as with all PECO turnouts and crossings, can be operated by either method for both analogue or digital systems, without any modifications to the track required!

      

The Electrofrog version of this crossing (SL-E8364) has already sold out, and we have just a few left of the original Insulfrogs in stock (SL-8364). The new Unifrog version replaces both of these versions. In stock now, and sold in singles.

SL-U8364  PECO Streamline HO '83 Line' #6 Diamond Crossing - Unifrog    

 

The above information recently received from Peco. It looks OK to me and avoids having to stock both insulfrog and electrofrog versions of the same unit.

 

Steve

Model Railway Imports

Canada

[Pint of Adnams]

So producing the Code 83 Diamond next was logical as it will 'share' the same frog design as the already-produced Double Slip. From a manufacturing point of view reducing the production alternatives by half makes absolute sense, creates additional production capacity, substantially reduces the number of moulds and ongoing need to refurbish them, and reduces stock holdings along the supply chain. All that allows Peco in return to invest in new products, such as the new 00 bullhead track, and retailers to hold more of them. Whether you love or hate live frogs or dead frogs, to have the option of either in one product makes absolute sense.

[Fluo66]

I like the idea of the Unifrogs. In my eyes it is a big progress and it helps to reduce the number of different points. Then it is much easier for beginners because they have not to decide which type of point they have to buy.

 

But with the change if frog design Peco should also replace the plastic check rails with metal ones in the whole Code 75/Code 100 range.

[John ks]

I can see a couple of things that could be changed to improve this xing

 

 

Note 1 :- I would liked to see the length of the unifrog increased which would increase the gap between the two frog rails

 

I sometimes have shorts on insulfrogs when the wheel bridges the gap between the 2 frog rails (more noticeable on DCC)

If this happening with the unifrog then it negates some of the advantages.

 

 

A quick fix is to paint a little clear nail polish on the metal rails of the frog(the light blue area)

This effectively increases the length of the insulfrog

 

Apart from these quibbles I wouldn't hesitate to use unifrogs

 

John

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Phil Bullock]

Can  I ask how blades are powered please?
 

On unifrog points are they electrically bonded to the stock rails or are they still relying on a pressure contact at the toe end for electrical continuity?

Kind regards

 

Phil Bullock

 

[PMP]

Phil, my understanding having actually spoken to Peco a couple of times at Warley and subsequently, is that the design will allow traditional blade contact, for dead frog operation and there'll be additional electrical connection/s to the blade for switched crossings. They hadn't decided what methodology they were going to use, from a couple of options they'd shortlisted.

[bertiedog]

I still think for "safe" operation in respect of points, (not other types), when the wheels go over the gap between the two rails approaching the frog tip, there would be a considerable risk of a short as a metal tyre crosses the rail to frog gap, with the plastic insulation between the two rails being breached.

 

The answer is built in, wire it all as normal, the frog tip to the rails, it sounds like Pecos intention, after I spoke to them, that the point will have wires bonded to each part to allow wiring it as dead frog, or unifrog, which is in effect a live frog. Even the wing rails are separate electrically and will be connected by wire underneath. These wires can be broken or connected as you wish.

 

My only remaining thoughts are the plastic gaps, they are more unsightly than before, and where in Bull head Code 75 they are doing away with the blade joint, they are adding a plastic solid insulated joint at the bend between the blades and wing rails.

But you cannot win it all, and the design seems good. Peco seem convinced that most users will use it from the packet as a dead frog point, with no switching, both outlets live at all times. but they can be wired up in several other ways. 

 

Stephen

[Phil Bullock]

Unifrog is an improvement on a couple of things, mainly getting rid of the need to use unsightly insulated joiners!

 

And maybe - just maybe - if the dead section is very short and they have blades bonded to stock rails they might also do away with the endless frog juicer vs switches powered frog arguments!

 

Phil

 

[Methuselah]

Any news yet as to when these points will be available...?

[ed 66 plant]

Any news yet as to when these points will be available...?

Hi

     I spoke to the Peco stand person at Swindon rail museum on Saturday last and he told me within 3 weeks.

S.P. yet to be determined

regards,

Ed

[Phil Rudderforth]

Apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere - its my first post and I'm still finding my way around - but having just found out the price of these, and having waited for a long time to get some, does anyone have an opinion on the pricing?  I've got 12 of them on back order from Model Railways Direct and find that they are being priced at £27.53 each, (which is almost a fiver below rrp).  A bit expensive (considering ultimately I may need around 40 of 'em!)?

 

I know thats about on a par with Marcway, but gulp. 

[njee20]

Welcome Phil, I assume by "these" you mean the bullhead turnouts, as there are a few releases with Unifrogs. You may get more of a response in the long running "bullhead track" thread.

 

Seems expensive, certainly, but not ridiculously so, it's going to be a smaller market than their 'normal' stuff, it's probably quite shrewd pricing as it's targeted more at the 'serious' modeller. Can you not use normal code 80 stuff in non-scenic areas? If you need 40 in the scenic area then yes, you've got a big bill coming!

 

As for Unifrog, I still think that's got potential, interesting to see development across the range is limited.

[Phil Rudderforth]

Welcome Phil, I assume by "these" you mean the bullhead turnouts, as there are a few releases with Unifrogs. You may get more of a response in the long running "bullhead track" thread.

 

Seems expensive, certainly, but not ridiculously so, it's going to be a smaller market than their 'normal' stuff, it's probably quite shrewd pricing as it's targeted more at the 'serious' modeller. Can you not use normal code 80 stuff in non-scenic areas? If you need 40 in the scenic area then yes, you've got a big bill coming!

 

As for Unifrog, I still think that's got potential, interesting to see development across the range is limited.

I have when you consider I was planning to use DCCConcepts digital motors as well, but perfection's never cheap I guess.  All the layout will be in full view, but its just for me, so you never know, if I buy it on the drip, I might just beat the grim reaper 

[Colin_McLeod]

There is an explanation of the unifrog in the November RM. Basically it's a dead frog made of metal. It has a wire attached for anyone who wants to make it a live frog.

 

It makes sense from a production point of view as it avoids the need to manufacture two types of turnout. Being metal it also looks better.

Edited October 12, 2017 by Colin_McLeod

[Ron Solly]

Outside of the wiring changes/simplifications, I would say that once turnout is down, rails painted, ballasted and weathered, unless one looks closely at the turnout, the small bit of black plastic won't be that noticeable.

[Dominion]

I can see a couple of things that could be changed to improve this xing

 

unifrogg.jpg

 

Note 1 :- I would liked to see the length of the unifrog increased which would increase the gap between the two frog rails

 

I sometimes have shorts on insulfrogs when the wheel bridges the gap between the 2 frog rails (more noticeable on DCC)

If this happening with the unifrog then it negates some of the advantages.

 

frog.jpg

 

A quick fix is to paint a little clear nail polish on the metal rails of the frog(the light blue area)

This effectively increases the length of the insulfrog

 

Apart from these quibbles I wouldn't hesitate to use unifrogs

 

John

 

I am just going back to John's post about the potential risk of a short created by a wheel bridging to the opposite polarity rail elements either side of the crossing. 

I do not have that issue with my electrofrog turnouts as the whole frog, crossing and wing rail sections are quite long, so a wheel passing through the crossing never gets close to an opposite polarity rail.

On the unifrog pictures I have seen, the opposite polarity rail elements seem to get very close to the correct polarity running rails and "area" traced by a passing wheel tread.

If anyone has seen a recent picture or near final prototype of the new Peco bullhead turnout do you think the current design may be immune to this issue or might it still be a risk ?

Tom