Peco Bullhead Points: in the flesh

[PMP]

22 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Not where I was 30 years ago they weren't. In the club I was in, modellers were hand-building track in 00, EM and P4:

 

 

A system of bullhead trackwork and easy-assemble kits would have been grabbed with both hands. Truly there are two different hobbies on RMweb.

 

Martin.

Well they weren't grabbed with both hands, we know that. K&L was available, and it wasn't bought by the bucketload. SMP was available and it wasn't bought by the bucketload. My experience in retail terms was in one of the busiest and high profile finescale shops of the time, MRM at Kings Cross. We kept all the ranges in stock. The club I was in had modellers in OO/EM/P4/N. The number of them in the finer scale gauges handbuilding track was and always has been by far in the minority, and will remain so. If this pent up demand was so large why hasn't the other range of OO RTL finescale trackwork even surfaced an EP?

 

There aren't two different hobbies on RMweb, that's a spectacularly daft thing to say. There must be more because some people won't paint their trains a different colour.

 

Perhaps what you need to realise is that you don't understand what the importance of track is to modellers across the hobby in all scales, and we know that the importance is not particularly high, never has been, and won't be.

 

The other element of course is this entire thread is about a ready to lay, commercial product that the buyers understand exactly what it is. There's a reason why the track section of RMweb isn't as popular as the layouts thread, or the products section or the little Bytham thread. It's because track is not as important in the hobby as you think it is, or should be.

Edited September 20, 2022 by PMP
spellin

[PaulRhB]

10 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

Truly there are two different hobbies on RMweb.

Why split it up? It’s all one hobby but with huge variety of levels and aims. I model across the spectrum from Lego to brass kits on hand built track for different subjects and don’t consider it two or more separate hobbies. Currently I’m focussing on the rtr end because I’m enjoying operation based layouts in OO, HO, 009 and Nm9 but I built an O gauge layout thirty years ago with all handbuilt track and Underhill and Oakville kits which was definitely at the finescale end. Who knows in ten years time I may be back to handbuilt as I’m slowly hand building stock in 7/8ths. 
Being a modeller isn’t just about ultimate finescale standards, operation and fun are just as valid as goals.  Just because you choose focus on one end of the scale of fidelity modelling and subject doesn’t mean that all do 😉

 

 

[martin_wynne]

46 minutes ago, PMP said:

It's because track is not as important in the hobby as you think it is, or should be.

 

That's why I suggested there are two different hobbies here.

 

1. everyone else.

 

2. me.

 

Martin.

[Jeff Smith]

The club I was in, in the mid-eighties, was hand building OO track using punched Brook Smith ply sleepers and brass rivets......then sticking on K&L chairs cut in half.......

[gr.king]

Steam waned a very long time ago, but models of steam locos are still very popular, so why not continue to offer and develop/increase the OO bullhead track range too?

[Gilbert]

I suspect as with most other things they do Peco know their market - we can buy it or not as we wish.....I've already used it on two layouts and will do another....

Chris H

[Jeff Smith]

Not sure what radius a Peco small point is but SMP supplies a very simple to build 36" BH kit......

[James Harrison]

Curved points, a 'Y' and a three-way point would be welcome, there is, after all, only a fairly limited number of things a common or garden LH or RH point can do.  Small radius points would be welcome but to my mind a three-way point is preferable. 

[SHerr]

7 minutes ago, James Harrison said:

Curved points, a 'Y' and a three-way point would be welcome, there is, after all, only a fairly limited number of things a common or garden LH or RH point can do.  Small radius points would be welcome but to my mind a three-way point is preferable. 

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there. Those 3 are the most logical next steps, I’d suggest those using the current range would see those as the gaps. I’ve curved one of the long radii slightly but really they are quite fine for those that can’t build track and the curved and Y are really needed. As a follow on a decent trap point would be good (not the same as the code 75 effort). 3 way with uni frog would be a game changer as well.

[Tim Dubya]

4 minutes ago, SHerr said:

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there. Those 3 are the most logical next steps, I’d suggest those using the current range would see those as the gaps. I’ve curved one of the long radii slightly but really they are quite fine for those that can’t build track and the curved and Y are really needed. As a follow on a decent trap point would be good (not the same as the code 75 effort). 3 way with uni frog would be a game changer as well.

 

Better add a catch point too 👍

[Paul Cram]

4 hours ago, PMP said:

Well they weren't grabbed with both hands, we know that. K&L was available, and it wasn't bought by the bucketload.

 

Your wrong there. Len had the machine running 24/7 and couldn't keep up with the demand.

Edited September 20, 2022 by Paul Cram

[PMP]

40 minutes ago, Paul Cram said:

Your wrong there. Len had the machine running 24/7 and couldn't keep up with the demand.

I know he did, he used to come into the shop, and there were occasions when it was unobtainable for various reasons. It was however a ‘cottage industry’ format, (still is), and the lack of OO gauge K&L/C&L  layouts compared to either copper clad or Peco, underlines that. If you’re suggesting it sold in significant volumes for OO builders, where are the resulting layouts either now or then?

[Ben Alder]

I've used K&L/C&L 00 track since the eighties along with, at the start ,SMP pointwork, then Peco Code 75 with added chairs, and latterly a gradual replacement programme of bullhead points. The siding in the foreground is a salvage job from another layout, K&L, while the rest is newer C&L bought from them some ten years ago.A lot of modellers never bother with social media, even today,and it may be  a case of assuming because it it isn't on  line it hasn't happened......

[PMP]

9 hours ago, Ben Alder said:

I've used K&L/C&L 00 track since the eighties along with, at the start ,SMP pointwork, then Peco Code 75 with added chairs, and latterly a gradual replacement programme of bullhead points. The siding in the foreground is a salvage job from another layout, K&L, while the rest is newer C&L bought from them some ten years ago.A lot of modellers never bother with social media, even today,and it may be  a case of assuming because it it isn't on  line it hasn't happened......

Richard, yours was one of the few that came to mind as I wrote the comments above, as well as James Hilton’s.

I too on Shelfie2 (above), have mixed OO CD75 streamline and bullhead, but as far as the track market goes we are in the minority. There’s obviously a market for the Peco range, they wouldn’t have expanded it if there weren’t. A big factor that many are missing is these products match the ‘space’ the market has, there’s unlikely to be an increase in available modelling space for most of us, hence the popularity, size and geometry worldwide of the typical ready to lay trackwork across all scales. This UK specific market is of course small compared to the HO market typical OO track comes from. Retailers see plenty of customers who want the latest DCC super train with all the details and widgets for no more than twenty quid, but those same detail fanatics aren’t en masse asking about better track. They’re quite happy with their existing track products.

 

Edit: I’d forgotten I’d done the track mix thing with Shelfie1, https://albionyard.com/2013/06/16/superquick-track/ At the time I used C&L as the Peco products weren’t available. A further thought is that if I get asked about the physical track at shows it’s normally is the layout (S1&S2), EM or P4?  

I used to get the same with Albion Yard which was entirely streamline CD75.

I find that odd, but it does perhaps show/emphasise that ‘track’ isn’t a key player. I get much more questions on the scenery and lighting and stock before the track questions come up.

Edited September 21, 2022 by PMP
Add pics and para

[martin_wynne]

1 hour ago, PMP said:

I find that odd, but it does perhaps show/emphasise that ‘track’ isn’t a key player.

 

You have rather lost me.

 

This entire topic is about Peco's response to the demand for better 00 track. There have been numerous topics over the years pleading for such a track. And many topics showing attempts to improve the flat-bottom track by changing the timber spacings and other modifications.

 

But now you say that hardly anyone is interested in track? The success of this range demonstrates otherwise.

 

I suggested that Peco, having discovered that modellers of railways are in fact interested in modelling their defining feature properly, might now turn their attention to doing something similar for modellers of UK flat-bottom track.

 

I don't know why you find my posts about track so objectionable, but life is funny at times. 🙂

 

Martin.

[PaulRhB]

32 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

I suggested that Peco, having discovered that modellers of railways are in fact interested in modelling their defining feature properly, might now turn their attention to doing something similar for modellers of UK flat-bottom track.

 

To be fair Martin you rather muddied the waters with the comments about bullhead being on the wane 😉.
Yes most will agree a flat bottom range to complement this is a good idea but doing it now would slow down the bullhead range too. The Peco range isn’t perfect but works with the compromises essential for mass manufacture. They tried to do the Unifrog on their N set track but couldn’t get it reliable enough at the assembly stage so there are assembly considerations we don’t see with handbuilt track.
Changing geometry probably means a whole new set up for the machines and that takes time to swap over configurations, costing money, and can increase the likelyhood of errors in the machines brain.

The range has been a success and we are seeing the first major step since code 75  came out so a little patience and I strongly suspect we will see a ‘modern’ flat bottom option after bullhead is a fairly complete range. 

Edited September 21, 2022 by PaulRhB

[newbryford]

17 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

Not sure what radius a Peco small point is but SMP supplies a very simple to build 36" BH kit......

 

But that involves actually making something.........

 

I would suggest that track building is conceived as more difficult than kit building (and yes, I know some kits can be "problematic").

 

Making your own track is quite rewarding - but it's been awhile since I made any (2002-ish!)

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by newbryford

[The Stationmaster]

I live at the end of a 5 mile long branch line.    And of course lots of people like to model branch lines even the simplified stubs most of them have long since become.  Or branch has the following track - bullhead rail on timber sleepers, bullhead rail on concrete sleepers, bullhead rail on longitudinal timbers on the viaducts, some very recently laid flat bottom rail on timber sleepers, and some slightly less recently laid flat bottom cwr rail on steel sleepers.  

 

Some of the track, including the bullhead on concrete sleepers, is well past its 60th birthday and in places is undergoing spot replacement of sleepers but the rail is not being changed.  Full relaying has only taken place where absolutely essential.  This is typical of many branchlines and some secondary toputes although I would agree that most main line routes are now mainly flat bottom cwr rail on, usually, concrete sleepers but some stretches on steel sleepers.    

Edited September 21, 2022 by The Stationmaster

[newbryford]

Horrocksford Junction in Clitheroe.

Mix of FB and BH on a (reasonable) main line.

All the plain track has been replaced in recent years with FB, but the bullhead pointwork hasn't.... (the siding on the right is into Castle Cement - all bullhead from there. Apart from some newly laid track within the works) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by newbryford

[Tim Dubya]

1 hour ago, newbryford said:

I would suggest that track building is conceived as more difficult than kit building (and yes, I know some kits can be "problematic").

 

Making your own track is quite rewarding - but it's been awhile since I made any (2002-ish!)

 

I find building track a hell of a lot easier (and more successful)  that brass coach construction to be sure.

 

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Tim Dubya
)

[E100]

For me curved points would be welcome, alongside a y point and larger and smaller radius points.

 

That being said I think it's more important that the existing core range is kept in good supply.

[RThompson]

On 20/09/2022 at 18:49, gr.king said:

Steam waned a very long time ago, but models of steam locos are still very popular, so why not continue to offer and develop/increase the OO bullhead track range too?

 

And of course bullhead track is still in use today on Network rail and even being reused on recycled plastic sleepers so is still relevent now.

[PMP]

On 26/11/2017 at 23:56, martin_wynne said:

 

Sorry to correct you like this, but it is important on web sites such as this that misinformation is not propagated further.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Yes Martin I do find some of your posts objectionable particularly with the hypocrisy you show here. Above is a quote from this thread in 2017 from yourself!

 

In a post above you make the statement below, after deliberately selectively taking a sentence of mine and quoting it out of context.

 

On 21/09/2022 at 10:14, martin_wynne said:

But now you say that hardly anyone is interested in track? The success of this range demonstrates otherwise.

 

 

Yet what I said was, in the same post you quoted from

On 21/09/2022 at 08:37, PMP said:

I too on Shelfie2 (above), have mixed OO CD75 streamline and bullhead, but as far as the track market goes we are in the minority. There’s obviously a market for the Peco range, they wouldn’t have expanded it if there weren’t. A big factor that many are missing is these products match the ‘space’ the market has, there’s unlikely to be an increase in available modelling space for most of us, hence the popularity, size and geometry worldwide of the typical ready to lay trackwork across all scales. This UK specific market is of course small compared to the HO market typical OO track comes from. Retailers see plenty of customers who want the latest DCC super train with all the details and widgets for no more than twenty quid, but those same detail fanatics aren’t en masse asking about better track. They’re quite happy with their existing track products.

And you distort into a lie, that I've said there's hardly any market for it. I'm more than happy to call anyone out when they choose to deliberately falsify or skew things I've said. Only you can tell us why you are deliberately misquoting and misleading the readers of this thread.

 

And I feel we deserve an answer from you on why you're doing this, because as you so rightly said in 2017, it's so important on web sites such as this that misinformation is not propagated further.

 

Edited September 25, 2022 by PMP

[martin_wynne]

Hi PMP,

 

(If you are making it personal it would be nice to know your name instead of being anonymous.)

 

In return I find some of your posts objectionable, although I wouldn't have said so if you hadn't decided to make it personal.

 

For example you wrote:

 

Quote

thirty years ago

we were still thinking Lima and early Bachmann was the height of fidelity, there was no market demand for this track, people buying track were still firmly wedded to the Streamline ranges CD100, and to a much lesser extent CD75.

 

Well you might have been doing that, but I wasn't, and none of my friends in the local club were doing so. They were all building their track (mostly in copper-clad), and when it came to buying track it was SMP Scaleway. The club built a large 00 layout that way. I imagine many RMwebbers were doing exactly the same, so please don't blithely assume you are speaking for everyone.

 

For example, see the long and popular topic "Eastwood Town" here on RMweb from the late Gordon Stolliday. Built exactly that way in 00.

 

If Peco had been producing the present bullhead range at that time, which they could easily have done, it would have been eagerly adopted. But no-one in the club wanted to make their 00 trains look daft by running them on H0 track.

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Edited September 25, 2022 by martin_wynne

[Jeff Smith]

It would be a shame if this thread got locked - if you must bicker use PMs.......