New range of simple to assemble 00/EM gauge pointwork kits - EM B7 Prototype - First Look

[KeithHC]

9 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

I have to say having now made 3 of them , albeit prototypes, not having a set, was unproblematic..!  These turnouts, assembled as per the instructions, are aimed at those who might never have contemplated making their own turnouts; be it EM or OO.  This has opened up the making of more prototypical turnouts to a huge potential audience and is decades overdue.  Were we really, with all the innovations in RTR rolling stock,  DCC etc, going to plod on forever more with, save for the EMGS B6's, two main choices - Peco or scratch build?  As has been indicated, you can modify if you want or need to.  But Wayne's products are going to make a huge difference and his turnout range, and the EMGS B6s, are all I need for my intended layout(s).  I remember going to see the first Lord of the Rings movie and, at the end, the lights came on and a well spoken man was berating the movie and almost shouting, "so much was missing, it was made too simple, all these people will now think they understand Tolkien".  Maybe, I thought (amongst other things), but surely that was the point (no pun intended)...!  I have no desire at my age to have to undertake a 10,000 hour apprenticeship on turnouts, an hour or two will suffice..!  Well done Wayne. 

Well said Patrick. I agree with all you have said so far I think also these will allow ham fisted modellers like me to build better layouts. Especially as Wayne has said he will be selling items like the crossing separately. Being able to buy an A,B or C crossing and building a turnout designed on Templot is something I can now consider. If only we could give gongs for innovation in our hobby then the first two should go to Wayne and Martin. I can see in the future this will give a kick to Peco to look again at its ranges. One wonders if there is a time limit on the agreement with the EMGS and could we see Peco bring the EM range in house and open the possibilities of making EM more mainstream. 
 

So Wayne will this be an Easter present to the hobby.

 

Keith

[NFWEM57]

1 hour ago, Siberian Snooper said:

Without wishing to get embroiled in arguments about whether, or not to have a set in the turnout stock rail, would it be an idea to add a footnote to the instructions mentioning it for the uninitiated, who may in future wish to add the set.

 

 

Good point, put perhaps an explanation of what it is as well..!  But I think the vast majority will not add one.  Critically, I am imagine space to put a food note on the (already bulk printed) instructions is limited so perhaps a link to the BF website where a more detailed explanation could be provided along with tips on how to adapt the kits to make curved points.  Or a link to a relevant RMWeb topic...!  The least confusion in the instructions with the kit the better.

Edited March 29, 2021 by NFWEM57
clarity

[hayfield]

I have just answered a PM about what is a "SET" and curving turnouts. By habit I put a "SET" on the inside rail and it works, on the other hand Wayne has stated he made a design which does not need it. Both methods work.  Building the turnout as designed for me and NFWEM57 has proved easy and simple if you READ and follow the instructions. The turnouts are very easy to build

 

But a word of warning for novice builders wanting to adapt the straight turnout to a curved one. It may not be as quite as simple to curve a turnout as some may think. I am not saying its impossible, far from it, but I can think of a couple of issues like, will the timber fret want to spring back to being a straight one? Certainly a set will be needed in the inside of the curved stock rail, what will the effect be in the tiebar position, having a correct plan to follow, plus a couple of other things. As I said nothing too hard or impossible, in fact I think those with a bit of experience its straight forward, and may well lend itself well to this process. Simply its not a tip out of the box and fall together curving it, as it is with building the standard design

 

 

[KeithHC]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

I have just answered a PM about what is a "SET" and curving turnouts. By habit I put a "SET" on the inside rail and it works, on the other hand Wayne has stated he made a design which does not need it. Both methods work.  Building the turnout as designed for me and NFWEM57 has proved easy and simple if you READ and follow the instructions. The turnouts are very easy to build

 

But a word of warning for novice builders wanting to adapt the straight turnout to a curved one. It may not be as quite as simple to curve a turnout as some may think. I am not saying its impossible, far from it, but I can think of a couple of issues like, will the timber fret want to spring back to being a straight one? Certainly a set will be needed in the inside of the curved stock rail, what will the effect be in the tiebar position, having a correct plan to follow, plus a couple of other things. As I said nothing too hard or impossible, in fact I think those with a bit of experience its straight forward, and may well lend itself well to this process. Simply its not a tip out of the box and fall together curving it, as it is with building the standard design

 

 

I presume John that it will come down to someone having a go and reporting back. My thoughts are using parts that will be available from Wayne the crossing along with C&L and exactoscale on ply or plastic sleepers. Mind you this will be sometime away still got to learn Templot etc. However it all depends on being able to build the first kit.

 

Keith

[hayfield]

Just now, KeithHC said:

I presume John that it will come down to someone having a go and reporting back. My thoughts are using parts that will be available from Wayne the crossing along with C&L and exactoscale on ply or plastic sleepers. Mind you this will be sometime away still got to learn Templot etc. However it all depends on being able to build the first kit.

 

Keith

Keith

 

Depending how deeply you wish to delve into Templot, in its basic form its very user friendly and easy to use. the cast crossing is very user friendly with the kits, and could be of use for scratch building, the switch blades are very nice

[NFWEM57]

Should we now consider renaming this topic area - Scratch & Kit Built Track and Templot?..  Just a thought!

 

Patrick

[KeithHC]

6 minutes ago, NFWEM57 said:

Should we now consider renaming this topic area - Scratch & Kit Built Track and Templot?..  Just a thought!

 

Patrick

Sorry let’s stick to this new great product. And well done to both you and John for giving us all an insight into what I consider will be a revolution in 4mm scale track work.

 

Keith

[RBAGE]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

Keith

 

Depending how deeply you wish to delve into Templot, in its basic form its very user friendly and easy to use. the cast crossing is very user friendly with the kits, and could be of use for scratch building, the switch blades are very nice

With regard to Templot, you either get it or you don't. Unfortunately, my head isn't wired to understand any type of CAD programme. To be honest, I'm not sure what it's wired for.

With these points/turnouts, it looks as if I can continue to rely on the tried and tested method of a long piece of bendy wood, panelpins and a pencil.

[NFWEM57]

1 hour ago, KeithHC said:

Sorry let’s stick to this new great product. And well done to both you and John for giving us all an insight into what I consider will be a revolution in 4mm scale track work.

 

Keith

Hi,  I was referring to the topic group, not this topic / thread.  No matter, I'll get back in my box   

Edited March 29, 2021 by NFWEM57

[hayfield]

7 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

Hi,  I was referring to the topic group, not this topic / thread.  No matter, I'll get back in my box   

Better keeping it the same, and if needed start a companion thread

Edited March 29, 2021 by hayfield

[hayfield]

4 hours ago, RBAGE said:

With regard to Templot, you either get it or you don't. Unfortunately, my head isn't wired to understand any type of CAD programme. To be honest, I'm not sure what it's wired for.

With these points/turnouts, it looks as if I can continue to rely on the tried and tested method of a long piece of bendy wood, panelpins and a pencil.

 

Firstly if you use a long bendy bit of wood it might do the same job as a plan ? Providing you keep the crossing straight and pay attention to the "set" you should be fine. Failure to do both is likely to result in a poor performing turnout. which with a super bit of engineering by Wane would be a shame

 

I am certain if you ask nicely there are plenty of helpful modellers here who would send you a PDF, I too do not understand CAD programs so there is at least two of us with similar issues.

[RBAGE]

11 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Firstly if you use a long bendy bit of wood it might do the same job as a plan ? Providing you keep the crossing straight and pay attention to the "set" you should be fine. Failure to do both is likely to result in a poor performing turnout. which with a super bit of engineering by Wane would be a shame

 

I am certain if you ask nicely there are plenty of helpful modellers here who would send you a PDF, I too do not understand CAD programs so there is at least two of us with similar issues.

A bendy bit of wood doesn't seem to adversely effect what Norman Solomon does and I haven't had any problems with that part of the track building process. It's the sort of fundamental planning tools that I understand.

Once I've developed the flow of the trackwork, I would then use C&L templates and cut them to match the alignment. Norman Solomon relies solely on his own work.

So, it sounds to me that this product lends itself to the stick and panel pin technique but whereas the C&L template would prompt you on the requirements from prototypical geometry, this product doesn't. However, if as Wayne says, good running is achievable without a set that might suite the "average" modeller.

The average modellers have long been satisfied by fixed geometry turnouts. Modellers who already strive for smooth, flowing trackwork are probably sold. If this encourages some of those "average" modellers to improve the "look" of their trackwork, it will have been an even bigger success than I already expect.

Keep up the good work Wayne and when will the 00 gauge points and crossings be available?  

 

Yes, it is possible to improve the appearance of even 00 gauge track.   

[NFWEM57]

2 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

I can accept that you wish to keep the topic with this product, however other modellers who also want an easy to build turnout kit do actually want to adapt them, and as I said in my post I had just replied to a PM about how to build one into a curved turnout

 

Now as the instructions refer to using a plan and even if Wayne produced a curved plan it may be the wrong radii, if we ban Templot how to those wishing to curve a kit find an appropriate plan ?

Hmm, confused..!   My suggestion was to change the forum title to quote Scratch & Kit Built Track and Templot unquote so that we accommodate both scratch and kit build track as well as Templot.  So, I am confused as to how you might have interpreted this as banning templot. Or have I missed something?  Off topic I know, but your response crept under the lid of my closed box..!

Edited March 29, 2021 by NFWEM57

[gordon s]

As a builder of my own track and user of Templot, my personal view is those two should be together and kit built track should have their own section.

 

Are there any other kit produced pointwork suppliers other than the excellent product from Wayne? I know you could buy turnout kits from SMP a while back, but they were very basic and miles away from Wayne’s product in the various gauges, so he may have the field to himself, but in numerous gauges.

 

My hunch is that guys who buy Wayne’s product will be looking for a better looking product than Peco and will use them as is.

 

As someone who solders their own track, the attraction for me is moving to chaired track without the hang ups of choosing the right type of chair and having to glue them in the right place. The chance to buy a finished turnout base and just sliding the rail into place is something that really appeals to me and it may well be the next stage will be to try and modify Wayne’s turnouts into the free flowing track style that Templot makes so easy. I suspect I would be an exception to the general user as I’m a Templot user and possibly retired track builder.....

 

Personally, I think it would be a mistake to add kits into the Templot/scratch built track section as I have seen so many disagreements on track standards and the smallest prototype detail, it would totally distract from the very easy assembly of Wayne’s product and actually put possible customers off. Take the question of ‘set’ in pointwork. I would always include that in my own track, but if Wayne can produce a kit that doesn’t require it and it proves 100% reliable, then why confuse others or complicate a simple process?

 

I would keep it away from the detail of scratch track building and allow the designer the freedom to make something that works and focus on just how easy it is build a kit and get a huge gain in appearance on anything currently available.

 

Just my tuppence......

Edited March 29, 2021 by gordon s

[hayfield]

2 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

Hmm, confused..!   My suggestion was to change the forum title to quote Scratch & Kit Built Track and Templot unquote so that we accommodate both scratch and kit build track as well as Templot.  So, I am confused as to how you might have interpreted this as banning templot. Or have I missed something?  Off topic I know, but your response crept under the lid of my closed box..!

 

Patrick

 

Sorry I got the wrong end of the stick. But I think keep the title the same, perhaps a sister thread would be better. The thing is the turnouts are superb for those who lack modelling track skills, and it may be confusing to some, and others may have some form of hang up if anyone dares to err from the straight and narrow

[hayfield]

2 hours ago, gordon s said:

As a builder of my own track and user of Templot, my personal view is those two should be together and kit built track should have their own section.

 

Are there any other kit produced pointwork suppliers other than the excellent product from Wayne? I know you could buy turnout kits from SMP a while back, but they were very basic and miles away from Wayne’s product in the various gauges, so he may have the field to himself, but in numerous gauges.

 

My hunch is that guys who buy Wayne’s product will be looking for a better looking product than Peco and will use them as is.

 

As someone who solders their own track, the attraction for me is moving to chaired track without the hang ups of choosing the right type of chair and having to glue them in the right place. The chance to buy a finished turnout base and just sliding the rail into place is something that really appeals to me and it may well be the next stage will be to try and modify Wayne’s turnouts into the free flowing track style that Templot makes so easy. I suspect I would be an exception to the general user as I’m a Templot user and possibly retired track builder.....

 

Personally, I think it would be a mistake to add kits into the Templot/scratch built track section as I have seen so many disagreements on track standards and the smallest prototype detail, it would totally distract from the very easy assembly of Wayne’s product and actually put possible customers off. Take the question of ‘set’ in pointwork. I would always include that in my own track, but if Wayne can produce a kit that doesn’t require it and it proves 100% reliable, then why confuse others or complicate a simple process?

 

I would keep it away from the detail of scratch track building and allow the designer the freedom to make something that works and focus on just how easy it is build a kit and get a huge gain in appearance on anything currently available.

 

Just my tuppence......

 

Gordon

 

You will love them, and have the knowledge to know what to do in adapting the kit

 

First off though I would build one as its is, the build sequence slightly differs from what you are used to. It would also give you the appreciation of how adaptable it could be.

 

Redesign your loco shed (again) with 1-7's, you will have it up and running in a fortnight!!   

[AndyID]

I have to admit I sort of skimmed through a lot of the lasts posts (our power went out) but please excuse me while a make a serious point (no pun etc., etc.)

 

The "set" is not a cosmetic feature. Whether you are are modelling turnouts at 1:1 or 1:76.2 the set actually allows the switch rail to properly interface with the stock rail. It''s not rocket science. It's mechanical engineering that was created at least 150 years ago.

 

You may choose to ignore that inconvenient detail as I did in the past and "get away with it" but you might want to consider the benefits of doing it per prototype practice.

[NFWEM57]

On 29/03/2021 at 21:21, hayfield said:

 

Patrick

 

Sorry I got the wrong end of the stick. But I think keep the title the same, perhaps a sister thread would be better. The thing is the turnouts are superb for those who lack modelling track skills, and it may be confusing to some, and others may have some form of hang up if anyone dares to err from the straight and narrow

Thank you, apologies not needed, just clarification..!  I am a humble spectator / contributor (newbie) in a world of very experienced modellers.  In my day job I am very much an expert listened to by some very senior people.  However, I am very much at the bottom of the food chain in this environment and appreciate you all giving my contributions the time of day.  Great respect.  With Wayne's new product we will likely get many more visitors and I think more inclusive language, behavior and understanding might be required, even in a separate thread.  But if it is a separate thread, how do we then pull the newcomers into the finer art? Because with our experience, knowledge (in my case very limited, for this topic), we can either share it or hide it.  I have another hobby in which people fall into two camps, never reveal anything, pass on everything.  I am in the latter camp and have watched as people I have mentored have blossomed.   The ultimate competition for my other hobby is very hard to win and does require the 10,000 hours of experience / apprenticeship; or quite a bit of luck in 40 separate competitions over 2 weeks.  So, how are we, collectively, going to meet this challenge...?  And despite Wayne's great product, how do we help C&L, and similar, survive?

 

Patrick

Edited March 31, 2021 by NFWEM57
clarity

[roythebus1]

We can help C&L etc survive by learning from Wayne's products, Martin's Templot, and having to experience of those, use Martin's planning to make the more awkward bits of track that wouldn't be worth mass-producing. As Hayfield has said, the crossings and switch rails are ready-made and are an excellent start to hand-built other bits. 

 

Personally I find it tedious building crossings and trying to get them accurate, having built track since 1966 I still haven't got the hang of doing them easily!

[hayfield]

11 hours ago, NFWEM57 said:

Thank you, apologies not needed, just clarification..!  I am a humble spectator / contributor (newbie) in a world of very experienced modellers.  In my day job I am very much an expert listened to by some very senior people.  However, I am very much at the bottom of the food chain in this environment and appreciate you all giving my contributions the time of day.  Great respect.  With Wayne's new product we will likely get many more visitors and I think more inclusive language, behavior and understanding might be required, even in a separate thread.  But if it is a separate thread, how do we then pull the newcomers into the finer art? Because with our experience, knowledge (in my case very limited, for this topic), we can either share it or hide it.  I have another hobby in which people fall into two camps, never reveal anything, pass on everything.  I am in the latter camp and have watched as people I have mentored have blossomed.   The ultimate competition for my other hobby is very hard to win and does require the 10,000 hours of experience / apprenticeship; or quite a bit of luck in 40 separate competitions over 2 weeks.  So, how are we, collectively, going to meet this challenge...?  And despite Wayne's great product, how do we help C&L, and similar, survive?

 

Patrick

 

8 hours ago, roythebus1 said:

We can help C&L etc survive by learning from Wayne's products, Martin's Templot, and having to experience of those, use Martin's planning to make the more awkward bits of track that wouldn't be worth mass-producing. As Hayfield has said, the crossings and switch rails are ready-made and are an excellent start to hand-built other bits. 

 

Personally I find it tedious building crossings and trying to get them accurate, having built track since 1966 I still haven't got the hang of doing them easily!

 

Soon after leaving school I worked for a Company called Dixons Photographic (now owns the likes of Currys) Then a super company led by an outstanding Chairman, it would never open a shop in a town unless there was an existing photographic shop there. Competition increases business, needless to say the company grew exceptionally well

 

Wayne's product is attracting those who for what ever reason would not buy a kit, it will open peoples eyes to a far better product. Most will stop there, a few will want something a bit more personal/different. Initially it will be adapting a kit to curve it, next making a simple facing or trailing crossing.

 

However a trailing or facing crossing may require using a few bits from either the C&L or Exactoscale range to bridge the gap. A few longer timbers, a few chairs and a bit of rail (or Wayne may sell these as an add on)

 

Then perhaps others will want something which is not available and cannot be adapted from an existing kit, the mystery of track building has been blown away and dip their toe in building

 

In short those wanting better looking track will grow in number, and there will be a crossover of customers between the two formats. In short the market will grow benefitting both and perhaps more companies

[KeithHC]

42 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

 

Soon after leaving school I worked for a Company called Dixons Photographic (now owns the likes of Currys) Then a super company led by an outstanding Chairman, it would never open a shop in a town unless there was an existing photographic shop there. Competition increases business, needless to say the company grew exceptionally well

 

Wayne's product is attracting those who for what ever reason would not buy a kit, it will open peoples eyes to a far better product. Most will stop there, a few will want something a bit more personal/different. Initially it will be adapting a kit to curve it, next making a simple facing or trailing crossing.

 

However a trailing or facing crossing may require using a few bits from either the C&L or Exactoscale range to bridge the gap. A few longer timbers, a few chairs and a bit of rail (or Wayne may sell these as an add on)

 

Then perhaps others will want something which is not available and cannot be adapted from an existing kit, the mystery of track building has been blown away and dip their toe in building

 

In short those wanting better looking track will grow in number, and there will be a crossover of customers between the two formats. In short the market will grow benefitting both and perhaps more companies

Well said John your thoughts follow very much my way of wanting these kits. As to a cross over I would expect Wayne may have that already on his radar. If you look at his n gauge range he already has a crossover. As a ham fisted modeller these kits are the way in to better looking track work for me. I have a c&l point kit that I have had for several years but have been frightened to have a go but starting with Wayne’s product will hopefully give me the confidence so it may end up in a fiddle yard but I will have built it(probably c**ked it up).  Have you completed the test build yet and have you any further thoughts suggestions.

 

Keith

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, KeithHC said:

Well said John your thoughts follow very much my way of wanting these kits. As to a cross over I would expect Wayne may have that already on his radar. If you look at his n gauge range he already has a crossover. As a ham fisted modeller these kits are the way in to better looking track work for me. I have a c&l point kit that I have had for several years but have been frightened to have a go but starting with Wayne’s product will hopefully give me the confidence so it may end up in a fiddle yard but I will have built it(probably c**ked it up).  Have you completed the test build yet and have you any further thoughts suggestions.

 

Keith

 

 

Keith

 

As you said its a good start in track building and may well be a step towards building a C&L kit, a word of warning with old C&L kits, if its an older 00 gauge kit it has 1mm flangeways and should be built to either 00SF as per what Wayne is doing or DOGA fine standards, which will involve in changing the back to back of all stock. Secondly the older style of roller gauges have the wrong check rail settings for 00 gauge

 

New C&L 00 gauge kits can be ordered with both 1.25 mm common crossings and the correct roller gauges, both for 1.25mm flangeways and more importantly allowing the head of the rail to rotate

 

The turnout is nearly finished but family, allotment and other project has got in the way. All I can say is that its perfect for the novice as well as the time poor scale modeller, certainly it will be welcomed by the EM gauge fraternity, and will make a few companies wince at the quality

[KeithHC]

Thanks John for the advice just to complicate further it’s an EM turnout... Still looks like I am having an interesting weekend with an 00 point kit from Wayne.

 

Keith

[martin_wynne]

On 28/03/2021 at 18:46, AndyID said:

I've made quite a lot of turnouts. The first attempt was around 60 years ago but I could never get the switch to work to my satisfaction. That was until Martin educated me about the set. Prior to that I had no idea there even was such a thing 

 

I have just found this clever animation. It illustrates perfectly what happens without a set in the diverging stock rail.

 

The switch blades have to be excessively long and thin, and there is barely a flangeway clearance behind the open blade at the narrowest part. It is showing pivoted switch blades, but the problem is even worse with flexible switch blades:

 

(Sorry, I have no idea who owns the copyright on this, or where it came from.)

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[NFWEM57]

1 hour ago, martin_wynne said:

 

I have just found this clever animation. It illustrates perfectly what happens without a set in the diverging stock rail.

 

The switch blades have to be excessively long and thin, and there is barely a flangeway clearance behind the open blade at the narrowest part. It is showing pivoted switch blades, but the problem is even worse with flexible switch blades:

 

(Sorry, I have no idea who owns the copyright on this, or where it came from.)

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

Trawling through RMWeb I noticed this picture of a 'set' making tool on an upload by Hayfield on his workbench thread; 28 Mar 21  Apparently it can be used twice before it is a write off..!

 

I am surprised nobody has made a steel one, or am I missing something?  Have 2 small pieces of 0.2mm stainless steel on the way to experiment.  I assume it will still be possible to slide the joggle through Wayne's new product (inserting at the toe end).

 

However, given that Wayne's product works as is I will probably only use it on scratch build.

 

Patrick

Edited April 3, 2021 by NFWEM57