11B Posted April 7, 2018 Share Posted April 7, 2018 Daft question time....And I think the answer may also be on here.... Is there any difference in the sleeper length between the BH track, FB code 100 and FB code 75? Thanks Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold simon b Posted April 7, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 7, 2018 (edited) Daft question time....And I think the answer may also be on here.... Is there any difference in the sleeper length between the BH track, FB code 100 and FB code 75? Thanks Ian Code 75 and 100 FB track use's identical sized sleepers, Bullhead track sleepers are about 2.5mm wider. Also another happy user of the points here, no shorting with Hornby 31's and Heljan 23's. Edited April 7, 2018 by simon b Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anders63 Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 I did found out an problem if you use German 5 axles steam locomotive. It short circuits when pass over the turnout. It depends middle of the locomotives wheel move in sideways more than other wheels. I give up with the Peco Bullhead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold simon b Posted April 9, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 9, 2018 I did found out an problem if you use German 5 axles steam locomotive. It short circuits when pass over the turnout. It depends middle of the locomotives wheel move in sideways more than other wheels. I give up with the Peco Bullhead. So you found one particular loco that has a problem with these points, but yet was never designed to run on them? 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 I did found out an problem if you use German 5 axles steam locomotive. It short circuits when pass over the turnout. It depends middle of the locomotives wheel move in sideways more than other wheels. I give up with the Peco Bullhead. I never thought of trying to run them on this track. A selection of various makes and classes seems to run OK. No sign of any problem going from a crawl to flat out. The crew in the Jumbo are complaining at what I am doing to them though. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 Seems he left shortly afterwards.....:-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 Andrexit? Perhaps the idea that the Peco Bullhead points are an attempt at some sort of finescale, and are not therefore universal at the same time, does not translate satisfactorily. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chamby Posted April 10, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 10, 2018 Andrexit?Perhaps the idea that the Peco Bullhead points are an attempt at some sort of finescale, and are not therefore universal at the same time, does not translate satisfactorily. I think some folk may be having difficulty in grasping the concept of a mainstream supplier producing such a specialised finescale product, that is not meant to be a ubiquitous system. Setrack, it most definitely is not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 So the track won't accommodate my Tri-ang "Jinty" with steamroller wheels then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Andrexit? Perhaps the idea that the Peco Bullhead points are an attempt at some sort of finescale, and are not therefore universal at the same time, does not translate satisfactorily. I think the blame lies elsewhere in the fact that the standards for 00 gauge it times gone by have not kept up with the finer quality modern production methods are able to produce. The standards being used were in place when the wheels were much coarser. Added to now manufactures can build better (finer scale) models they cannot agree on a set of common set of finer standards to match the quality of their products Having seen the products in the flesh I was slightly disappointed. If you are building a crossover then the look is stunning with the equalised timbering, but for a single turnout or some formations the equalization looks wrong. I have also heard some negative feedback on the robustness of the product 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 (edited) I think some folk may be having difficulty in grasping the concept of a mainstream supplier producing such a specialised finescale product, that is not meant to be a ubiquitous system. Setrack, it most definitely is not. I think GR King was more correct when he said an attempt at finescale, as they are build to a standard which was formulated when wheels were coarser. The uni-frog problem is nothing to do with finer standards, its an attempt to merge 2 differing situations (live v dead frogs) into one offering It is also a form of ste track, where all the components (differing turnouts and crossings) interlock with each other. Edited April 11, 2018 by hayfield Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Gilbert Posted April 11, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 11, 2018 So the track won't accommodate my Tri-ang "Jinty" with steamroller wheels then? It will - as long as you don't expect it to move... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium St Enodoc Posted April 11, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 11, 2018 So the track won't accommodate my Tri-ang "Jinty" with steamroller wheels then? My clockwork 0-6-0ST runs pretty well on scale track (on its flanges) but doesn't like points. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 My clockwork 0-6-0ST runs pretty well on scale track (on its flanges) but doesn't like points. Any shorts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 My clockwork 0-6-0ST runs pretty well on scale track (on its flanges) but doesn't like points. Or spring related problems? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium St Enodoc Posted April 11, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 11, 2018 Any shorts? No, the wheels only touch the plastic bits - plenty of clearance to the rails. Or spring related problems? Not as long as you don't over-wind it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Any shorts? Why are you asking about his trollies...? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Just being thorough. After all, this track is getting the blame for all sorts of ills. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junctionmad Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 personally I think Unifrog is a great idea, I mean are people seriously still laying Insulfrog or not switching the frog these days , in any sort of serious layout ?? dave 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted April 11, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 11, 2018 I have also heard some negative feedback on the robustness of the product Fine appearance and robustness are uncomfortable bedfellows. It's difficult to do one and include the other.(Same applies to locos/coaches etc. Fit the fine details and they break/fall off with rough handling.) Similar lack of robustness claims were made against Code 75 compared to Code 100 when it came out. That soon disappeared when folks accepted the fact that finer meant more careful handling. I learnt that after laying two pieces of Code 75 on what was possibly one of the first exhibition layouts to use it in the early 1990s (and still going today....) By it's very nature, the cross section of bullhead means that there is less "meat" for any moulded rail fixing to hold onto. And not only that, BH is more easier to bend than FB. It simply requires different (i.e. more careful) handling. Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted April 12, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 12, 2018 There's a 3-page article starting a series on using the new Peco bullhead track to build a small layout, on page 383 of the May 2018 edition of the Railway Modeller. Part 1 is about laying it. Part 2 next month will be about the electrics. Digital edition just arrived. I had better not post any screenshots for copyright reasons. Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 Fine appearance and robustness are uncomfortable bedfellows. It's difficult to do one and include the other.(Same applies to locos/coaches etc. Fit the fine details and they break/fall off with rough handling.) Similar lack of robustness claims were made against Code 75 compared to Code 100 when it came out. That soon disappeared when folks accepted the fact that finer meant more careful handling. I learnt that after laying two pieces of Code 75 on what was possibly one of the first exhibition layouts to use it in the early 1990s (and still going today....) By it's very nature, the cross section of bullhead means that there is less "meat" for any moulded rail fixing to hold onto. And not only that, BH is more easier to bend than FB. It simply requires different (i.e. more careful) handling. Cheers, Mick Mick I never found the code 75 flatbottom to be anything but robust. And far stronger than SMP, which in my younger years found distorted easy when track pins were used and as you say the rail came out of the chairs far easier than Peco code 75 Fast forward to Exactoscale's Fast track bases & the P4 companies products, the designer of the system took on board the shortcomings of the previous system he designed and introduced track bases made with sleepers & timbers 1.6 mm thick, this solved the issues of the previous system of unstable track bases or you could say a system which was easier to lay. For what ever reason Peco have decided to move to a track system with a thinner base, some will find this not as easy to use. As for your comments on robustness, I hear what you say, but there is a world of difference with a hand rail being knocked off and rails coming out of chairs. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted April 12, 2018 Share Posted April 12, 2018 There's a 3-page article starting a series on using the new Peco bullhead track to build a small layout, on page 383 of the May 2018 edition of the Railway Modeller. Part 1 is about laying it. Part 2 next month will be about the electrics. Digital edition just arrived. I had better not post any screenshots for copyright reasons. Martin. The mind boggles. Just how long an article is needed to tell you how to connect two wires between the controller and the track? Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted April 12, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 12, 2018 The mind boggles. Just how long an article is needed to tell you how to connect two wires between the controller and the track? Bernard Two wires? That must be the new fangled DCC-thingy that folks are talking about....... Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Gilbert Posted April 12, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 12, 2018 Two wires? That must be the new fangled DCC-thingy that folks are talking about....... Mick It'll never catch on....trust me... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now