Peco Bullhead Points: in the flesh

[Chamby]

...Has anybody had any problems with shorting anywhere yet? I have tried several locos (Bachmann / Heljan / Hornby) and all have been fine and will crawl smoothly through the points at very slow speed. However the leading drivers on my Hornby K1 look to come very close to causing a short. I was pushing the wheels over with my finger as far as they would go in this pic however and in practice I couldn't get them to actually short.

... It was interesting to get an insight into some of the reasons for the higher cost of these points. Peco flat bottom points are insert moulded [the rail is put in the mould and the sleepers formed round them] whereas the bullhead points have to be hand assembled into the moulded base.

The hand-assembled nature of these points may mean that there will be more variability between points than the flat bottom ones. BUT nobody has reported any shorting yet, despite observations about the potential for it, so hopefully this won’t be a significant issue.

 

I have had one problem with a frog rail shorting out, but that was my fault as I had soldered it to a copper clad sleeper at the baseboard join and it had raised the rail very slightly compared to the insulfrog. Not had this problem with FB points before, but the problem was solved with a little careful filing.

 

If bending the points, We will have to be mindful that the frog geometry isn’t changed. Given the tight tolerances re: insulation gaps, Peco will probably regard any shorting experienced with bended points as being outside of the design parameters and therefore outside of their guarantee too.

 

Phil

[Chamby]

Unless your rails are laid right next to the sea, such as at Dawlish. When I was working, any rail laid along the Dawlish Sea Wall stretch was expected to last about half that of other locations.

ah yes, it does shorten the rail lifespan somewhat when the trackbed is washed away and the track itself is left swinging in mid-air...

[coachmann]

When i first mentioned their flexibility, it was only meant in the context of normal bending to fit on a mainline curve, not to make it into a curved point in the fashion of a Peco product. I have always curved Peco point to fit a location. Bending too far will inevitable upset the geometry and the fit of the switch blades so one should take care. Before purchasing any, I assumed the bullhead points would be rigid and planned to position the straight part of one point at the end of a curved section of running line. However, experiments now show I can place the point on the actual curve.....which is not sharp.

Edited November 16, 2017 by coachmann

[Bernard Lamb]

I have tried various loomotives through one of these points.

The FIA trains 10000 is quite happy running on the original wheels which are known to be rather sensitive,

The only problem I have found is with an Hornby Q6. This, at a very slow speed, catches a wheel on some part of the crossing when travelling on the straight branch in the trailing direction.

It is not the leading wheel set and appears to catch on one side only but I have not yet tracked down the exact problem. 

Everything else runs just fine.

Regarding the comments about track gauge. The rail is quite loose in the chairs and can move from side to side and the angle to the vertical also has some movement. Any variation can be adjusted as you connect a point to a length of track. In the real world the visible difference would seem to be of no consequence.

Bernard

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...It occurs to me that the gap between the blades and the stock rail is a tad wide, so I might end up replacing the tie bars on mine and closing the gap a little.

 Catching up with this thread, what I hope to do in this respect is what I have done on the code 100 and code 75 FB points for some years without any ill effect. In short make a small hole in the tiebar adjacent the curved switch rail location, and move the locating 'peg' of the curved switch rail to the new hole, about 1.5mm closer to the stock rail. If this works we might ask Peco to provide a 'closer hole' on the tiebar for those inclined to fiddle? (FYI On the large rad. FB points soldering up the loose heel is possible with this arrangement, no fatigue failure by bending the old style pressings - yet!)

 

Not had the chance to inspect and work on my new acquisitions yet, rather deprived of layout playtime at present: very grateful to those who have taken the lead in showing what is possible.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

 

It is not the leading wheel set and appears to catch on one side only but I have not yet tracked down the exact problem. 

Everything else runs just fine.

 

 

Everything else runs just fine suggests a back to back issue wiith one of the Q6 wheelsets?

[Brian Kirby]

Regarding the thorny subject of sleeper/crossing timber colour, when brand-spanking new and freshly creosoted, my impression was that the wood was very very dark brown, almost black. BR used to have a large sleeper and creosoting depot at Lowestoft, no doubt the timber was imported through the docks there, perhaps from Scandinavia? If the fish didn't stink the town out, the creosote did. Obviously, as the sleepers age and dry out over the years, they lighten down through brown, and then mud shades, until the old and by now rotten ones would appear grey (a bit like my hair, but i've never used creosote). I think PECO are right to colour their sleepers in fairly new condition, although these days with weathered loco and coach options available, maybe pre-weathered track will be the next progression?

       Now of course anyone modelling Britain's railways from the 1950s to the present day, will probably want a mixture of bullhead and flat-bottom track, but if you're removing Peco Code 75 f/bs that are well stuck down, the plastic webbing can easily break. If you end up with a broken one, do not despair, just keep all the metal rails and point blades. Using PECO individulay pandrol clips and new 4mm scale sleeper strip, you can rebuild them into new points, although you'll have to add new metal check rails in two places, and a new tie-bar if changing gauge. Here's an old previously broken L/H curved point rebuilt to 18.83mm gauge (notice I haven't said P4 or S4, cos I use slightly coarser frog clearances, to save a lot of wheel-changing). I'll be getting a lot of incoming flack now, where's my tin hat?

                               Cheers, Brian.

 

[gr.king]

Re: the above. Why shouldn't you be free to use any combination of basic track gauge and flangeway dimensions that happens to suit your purposes or your preferences? You're not trying to re-define the standard for S4 or P4 after all.

 

On the matter of curving the new Peco points to a more adventurous degree than has so far been described or illustrated on here, presumably the thing to do first is to carefully study the structure of the point and its reaction to small amounts of bending, and then judiciously cut a few of the webs linking the timbers to encourage only the "right" parts of the rail structure to slide through the chairs. If the tie bar has to be sacrificed, there's always the option of soldering-in something new, with the necessary flexible links to the switch rails and a means of connection to the point actuating mechanism.

[Izzy]

 I may be wrong, but I think if you get too adventurous with curving the track base you may find some of the rail sections will end up either too short or too long. This might be seen most clearly with the blades and where they finish, but will also affect the stock rails.

 

Izzy

[Guest Midland Mole]

We got ours in today, and the general consensus around the shop was "wow, excellent work Peco!".

I'm very impressed with them, and despite moving to OO9 I picked up one of each. I'll work out what to use them for later.

Alex

[tomparryharry]

For me, making a curved point isn't the thing. In fact, I'm going the other way. Other posters have noted a nominal 48" radius on the large turnout (thanks, folks). However, I'm looking to increase the radius on my particular location, out to around the 96" (8 foot) mark. As this is within a single track situation, I don't forsee any particular problems, although as usual, views on this are fully appreciated.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian.

 

Sorry folks-forgot! In this particular situation, I'd require for the nominally curved stock rails to be reduced from the 12 degrees (as per Peco) reduced to about 4-6 degrees, with the normally straight stock rail side taking up the remainder. In other words, a 'wonky' Y point....

Edited November 16, 2017 by tomparryharry

[gr.king]

I may be wrong, but I think if you get too adventurous with curving the track base you may find some of the rail sections will end up either too short or too long. This might be seen most clearly with the blades and where they finish, but will also affect the stock rails.

 

Izzy

Then trim them dear Liza, dear Liza, dear Liza, then trim them dear Liza, dear Liza trim them?

[LNER4479]

On the matter of curving the new Peco points to a more adventurous degree than has so far been described or illustrated on here, presumably the thing to do first is to carefully study the structure of the point and its reaction to small amounts of bending, and then judiciously cut a few of the webs linking the timbers to encourage only the "right" parts of the rail structure to slide through the chairs. If the tie bar has to be sacrificed, there's always the option of soldering-in something new, with the necessary flexible links to the switch rails and a means of connection to the point actuating mechanism.

Graeme - I have had a quick go at manipulating one of these points and I reckon you could make it a 8foot radius curved point no trouble. I've not (yet!) taken a knife to it to cut webs; I suspect, due to its inherent flex you might end up with a thre'penny bit curve, although it might be worth cutting webs near the ends as it would be difficult to keep the ends truly curved otherwise.

 

If I remember I'll bring it to Warley with me...

Edited November 16, 2017 by LNER4479

[hayfield]

Handsomely said, Phil, but it seems that any new-product thread has to endure a minority of naysayers and those who wish to pour cold water, or see quite clearly how it could have been done better. As you say, in the meantime, the rest of us look, learn and maybe invest.

 

 

Don't forget that it was those who constantly complained about 3.5 mm scale H0 track being sold to 4 mm scale modellers in 00 gauge that got you this product, plus of course the prospect of competition.

 

I do however agree with you about those who knock the product for the sake of it, but constructive comments is the way things improve,which is a benefit to all.

[RichardS]

Here's an old previously broken L/H curved point rebuilt to 18.83mm gauge (notice I haven't said P4 or S4, cos I use slightly coarser frog clearances, to save a lot of wheel-changing). I'll be getting a lot of incoming flack now, where's my tin hat?

Cheers, Brian.

 

 

Seems a grand idea to me. There's quite few people using EM wheels on P4 as the slightly larger flanges are more forgiving I understand. I think there is mileage in your practice. Who can see flanges from 3/4 feet away anyway.

Edited November 16, 2017 by RichardS

[hayfield]

Here's an old previously broken L/H curved point rebuilt to 18.83mm gauge (notice I haven't said P4 or S4, cos I use slightly coarser frog clearances, to save a lot of wheel-changing). I'll be getting a lot of incoming flack now, where's my tin hat?

Cheers, Brian.

 

 

What a great way of using parts of a broken turnout, doesn't have to be in P4 or EM but could be recycled into an 00 gauge turnout, certainly answers the question what do I so with my old code 75 turnouts

Edited November 16, 2017 by hayfield

[BG John]

What a great way of using parts of a broken turnout, doesn't have to be in P4 or EM but could be recycled into an 00 gauge turnout, certainly answers the question what do I so with my old code 75 turnouts

Peco kind of encourage it for converting code 100 OO points to O-16.5. But only kind of, as the instructions that come with the sleepering play very safe, and are rather half hearted. Of course I have plans for total and drastic conversion of a 3-way point!

[tomparryharry]

Here's an old previously broken L/H curved point rebuilt to 18.83mm gauge (notice I haven't said P4 or S4, cos I use slightly coarser frog clearances, to save a lot of wheel-changing). I'll be getting a lot of incoming flack now, where's my tin hat?

Cheers, Brian.

 

 

Seems a grand idea to me. There's quite few people using EM wheels on P4 as the slightly larger flanges are more forgiving I understand. I think there is mileage in your practice. Who can see flanges from 3/4 feet away anyway?

A pedantic modeller, with a microscope, I'd say!

 

Ian.

[Brian Kirby]

Judging by the warm reception these new bullhead points have had, Messrs Peco will be no doubt be planning additions to the range. We mustn't expect a complete range all at once, development and production costs have to be covered, maybe two or three types (L&R) will appear every so often? So what type would be the absolute top priority and would sell well? I think a long diamond crossing next, so people can construct double junctions and more complicated arrangements. Would a single slip be the next most useful and popular item, albeit more costly?

    Off the top of my head, I seem to remember that a lot of BR Modernization era diesels, were designed to negotiate a minimum curve of four and a half chains, in old money. One chain in distance was 22yards, so 4.5 chains equals 99 yards, which equals 297 feet. If you divide 297 by 76 (4mm scale), it comes our near enough to 4ft radius track. The previous Peco flat-bottom large radius points were nominally 5ft radius, the medium radius were 3ft, the small were 2ft. So in other words, if modelling finescale, the large radius at 5ft should be a starting point, leading to even larger radii types. However, I acknowledge that we have to compromize to fit a given space, and an element of condensing is tolerable, making a bullhead near 3ft useful. As for a bullhead 2ft radius, I can't see that selling well, and wouldn't look too good, being strictly only of use in industrial environments, with very small locos. 

          For the record, Peco Streamline curved points were 6ft outside/2.5ft inside, 2.5ft is the absolute minimum i'd build large loco kits to run on, even this requires serious surgery on locos like Britannias, other people often build to run on 3ft minimum radius. As Larry mentioned a day or two ago, the Peco double-slips are quite tight, equivalent to somewhere between 2.5ft and 3ft, any new bullhead design might require a longer unit to relieve it to a larger radius. I hope my maths are right, perhaps someone can double check the figures?!

                                                                                       Cheers, Brian.

[Mallard60022]

Judging by the warm reception these new bullhead points have had, Messrs Peco will be no doubt be planning additions to the range. We mustn't expect a complete range all at once, development and production costs have to be covered, maybe two or three types (L&R) will appear every so often? So what type would be the absolute top priority and would sell well? I think a long diamond crossing next, so people can construct double junctions and more complicated arrangements. Would a single slip be the next most useful and popular item, albeit more costly?

    Off the top of my head, I seem to remember that a lot of BR Modernization era diesels, were designed to negotiate a minimum curve of four and a half chains, in old money. One chain in distance was 22yards, so 4.5 chains equals 99 yards, which equals 297 feet. If you divide 297 by 76 (4mm scale), it comes our near enough to 4ft radius track. The previous Peco flat-bottom large radius points were nominally 5ft radius, the medium radius were 3ft, the small were 2ft. So in other words, if modelling finescale, the large radius at 5ft should be a starting point, leading to even larger radii types. However, I acknowledge that we have to compromize to fit a given space, and an element of condensing is tolerable, making a bullhead near 3ft useful. As for a bullhead 2ft radius, I can't see that selling well, and wouldn't look too good, being strictly only of use in industrial environments, with very small locos. 

          For the record, Peco Streamline curved points were 6ft outside/2.5ft inside, 2.5ft is the absolute minimum i'd build large loco kits to run on, even this requires serious surgery on locos like Britannias, other people often build to run on 3ft minimum radius. As Larry mentioned a day or two ago, the Peco double-slips are quite tight, equivalent to somewhere between 2.5ft and 3ft, any new bullhead design might require a longer unit to relieve it to a larger radius. I hope my maths are right, perhaps someone can double check the figures?!

                                                                                       Cheers, Brian.

Yup about the Peco Double Slips. A couple of my LWB 4 wheel Vans (LNER style) do not like them at all but that's no loss as I have passed them on to a new home where BR ER is the era.

I think a Single Slip should be next as almost every small goods yard had one (or more if it was a busy place)..

Phil

[Pete the Elaner]

Judging by the warm reception these new bullhead points have had,

Warm on where? This forum?

Those posting on this thread are only a small fraction of the potential market, but a high proportion of those who actually appreciate the product.

As far as Peco are concerned, the real world is sales figures. Talk is cheap, sales is business.

A retailer will have a better idea than most about how well these are selling.

[New Haven Neil]

Warm on where? This forum?

Those posting on this thread are only a small fraction of the potential market, but a high proportion of those who actually appreciate the product.

As far as Peco are concerned, the real world is sales figures. Talk is cheap, sales is business.

A retailer will have a better idea than most about how well these are selling.

 

Yup - sold the lot.  More incoming.

[Mallard60022]

Warm on where? This forum?

Those posting on this thread are only a small fraction of the potential market, but a high proportion of those who actually appreciate the product.

As far as Peco are concerned, the real world is sales figures. Talk is cheap, sales is business.

A retailer will have a better idea than most about how well these are selling.

Like Neal says! I think you will also find that a load of Retailers have sold out alreadyj, so that demonstrates good sales does it not?

Phil 

[New Haven Neil]

Like Neal says! I think you will also find that a load of Retailers have sold out alreadyj, so that demonstrates good sales does it not?

Phil 

 

Not just the points - the track all went this week too. On Monday.  More also incoming.

[bertiedog]

Another bonus to these fine points is they are quieter than the equivalent flat bottom versions, with hinged blades, as stock runs through.

 

It does need a touch more care on fixing down to ensure the pressure of any fastening, pins or screws does not distort the top from being level.

 

The bending of the point seems OK, but carefully check the gauge at the max amount of bend. This flexibility allows much finer visual and mechanical performance, with smoother curve transitions.

 

Laying more track and points over the weekend on Middlechurch Marsh layout, some flat bottom track to remove first.

 

Stephen.