Kaydee metal wheels, 0.088" vs 0.110" treads

[Talbotjohn]

Hi. I notice that Kaydee metal HO wheels come with standard 0.110" or "semi-scale" 0.088" tread patterns. I note that some of the more serious (fastidious?) US modellers use the narrower tread (and visually improved?) wheels rather what I assume is the wider standard NMRA RP-25 profile tread width.

 

I was wondering if there would be any disadvantage running stock with the narrower tread wheels on Peco Code 75 or maybe code 83 US pattern flexible tracks and turnouts? I believe the RP-25 profile combines a smaller tread depth with a wider tread width compared with typical UK profiles for OO or EM.

 

Is there a simple rule of thumb whether hoppers and boxcars have plain or fluted backs to their 33" wheels please?

[Talbotjohn]

Sorry meant to say "smaller flange depth and wider tread width" when describing RP-25 profile wheels.

[alastairq]

I think the narrower wheel treads look better on stock when viewing end-on.

 

Of course, being a titewad I'd be inclined to save money and only replace the endmost wheelsets? 

 

I have one or two pieces of stock utilising the narrower [proto-87, is it called?] wheel treads, and they seem to rattle through Peco code 75 turnouts ok?

 

Of course, there's nothing to prevent folk from adopting narrower check rail gaps, or even, a slightly narrower gauge [to achieve same effect]?

[Talbotjohn]

Thanks for the reassurance. What you say is good to know.

 

I once tried fitting regauged Alan Gibson P4 spoked lowmac wheels to a HO Lilliput Baden State Railways bogie coach. It looked a lot better than standard but it wouldn't run through Peco code 75 turnouts. I fitted the Alan Gibson equivalent OO spoked wheels (deeper flange, wider tread) and it was fine.

 

I note the 0.088" tread Kaydee wheels are marginally cheaper, so as I will be replacing plastic wheels on a rake of hoppers I have just bought, it is a chance to try them out.

[Regularity]

For reference, “code 110” wheels are almost as wide as 1:48, which are usually 0.115” wide, and code 88 close to S, which is 0.087” wide but to a finer tread profile. Code 110 wheels are grossly over scale, but the flanged wheel, like the track on which is runs, is rarely modelled as accurately as what goes above it. Would anyone run a O gauge boxcar on H0 track as happily as they use wheels almost that big?

[F-UnitMad]

2 minutes ago, Regularity said:

Would anyone run a O gauge boxcar on H0 track as happily as they use wheels almost that big?

Well I do run O Scale on HO code 100 rail, but at least the gauge is 32mm (or thereabouts )

I don't think code 88 wheels are the same as Proto-87 by some way, since Proto-87 wheels are dead scale.

 

Oh and just my personal little bugbear, it's K-A-D-E-E.!!!!!! There is no 'Y' in it!!

[autocoach]

What is this company named Kaydee?  The correct spelling is Kadee... https://www.kadee.com/ . Or is PECO PIKO in the UK?

 

Note that the Code 88 wheels are becoming more common with prototype modelers in North America (includes Canada and Mexico.) Kadee is just joining other NA producers and importers offering the semi scale option.  

 

Another point if you care to model the prototype. Rib backed wheels were cast iron not steel and were obsolete by the 1950's but not banned until 1970. 

[Regularity]

3 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

Well I do run O Scale on HO code 100 rail, but at least the gauge is 32mm (or thereabouts )

I don't think code 88 wheels are the same as Proto-87 by some way, since Proto-87 wheels are dead scale

There is a difference between rail and track, as well you know.

Although not all codes are as much the same as might appear: Walthers code 83 has a wider head (great for S) than ME, for example.

 

Proto-87 wheels are to a “code” of 55, I.e. 0.055” wide, but with a scale contour. Sadly, code 88 wheels have a fatter tread than code 87 (Proto:64) and their use on S gauge track without adjusting the back-to-back causes problems- enough for several people to claim that “scale wheels don’t work”. Well, if scale wheels were being used on scale track, it might…

[Barclay]

On 16/12/2021 at 17:33, F-UnitMad said:

Well I do run O Scale on HO code 100 rail, but at least the gauge is 32mm (or thereabouts )

I don't think code 88 wheels are the same as Proto-87 by some way, since Proto-87 wheels are dead scale.

 

Oh and just my personal little bugbear, it's K-A-D-E-E.!!!!!! There is no 'Y' in it!!

Quite right - Kadee, but a lot of people pronounce it with a 'Y'. What is the correct pronunciation? I never know what to say !

[Talbotjohn]

Many thanks to those who have added to this thread, particularly Autocoach for the information about ribbed vs plain back wheels.

I checked my NMRA Standards, Wheels, Sheet No S-4, revision July 1986, to find the recommended tread width for HO wheels is 0.108", hence Kadee code 110 wheel sets. (The NMRA do not seem to specify what are acceptable dimensional tolerances but they must exist to enable economic mass production). Gaugemaster (a UK supplier) offer an comparison between the Kadee code 110 and code 88 wheels suggesting the code 88 version is a "semiscale" wheel and is the narrowest tread wheel that will run reliably through the typical RTR turnouts offered by Peco, etc. In return the code 88 tread wheel offers an appearance advantage when fitted to open framed vehicles like hoppers and tank cars. 

In the end the hoppers I purchased came fitted with metal wheels so there was no need to purchase Kadee replacement wheelsets at this time. For my US modelling I am adopting the "McClelland Good Enough principle" as outlined by Tony Koester in his book "The Allegheny Midland - Lessons Learned". My US modelling is intended to be a bit of light relief from British outline modelling to 4mm scale P4 standards.

[F-UnitMad]

13 hours ago, Barclay said:

Quite right - Kadee, but a lot of people pronounce it with a 'Y'. What is the correct pronunciation? I never know what to say !

I think the correct pronunciation is with a 'y' - 'kay-dee', since it was the two initials of the names of the brothers - Keith & Dale Edwards - who designed & patented the coupler. But it was spelt without a y in the name; Kadee.

 

7 hours ago, Talbotjohn said:

My US modelling is intended to be a bit of light relief from British outline modelling to 4mm scale P4 standards.

Good for you, mate. That is exactly how I started in US outline, albeit I never did UK P4, just super-detailing 4mm OO diesels. But once I discovered how much better US diesels ran than then-UK ones, and found a particular Railroad I liked, that was the slippery slope.

[Regularity]

11 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

found a particular Railroad I liked, that was the slippery slope

Sliding down that was Soo easy…

[F-UnitMad]

8 minutes ago, Regularity said:

Sliding down that was Soo easy…

 

   

[Allegheny1600]

13 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

I think the correct pronunciation is with a 'y' - 'kay-dee', since it was the two initials of the names of the brothers - Keith & Dale Edwards - who designed & patented the coupler. But it was spelt without a y in the name; Kadee.

 

Good for you, mate. That is exactly how I started in US outline, albeit I never did UK P4, just super-detailing 4mm OO diesels. But once I discovered how much better US diesels ran than then-UK ones, and found a particular Railroad I liked, that was the slippery slope.

I thought it was simply the phonetic way of saying “KD”!?

 

Anyway, I’ve very little experience of running code 88 wheels except for some European wagons that came so fitted. These were long wheelbase two axle models and they were rather susceptible to derailment on regular Peco code 75. US stock fitted with trucks (bogies!) shouldn’t have such problems, especially if running on the much better code 83 imho.

[Andy Reichert]

Proto:87 wheels are 0.063" wide, with a flange depth/width of 0.013" - I.e. True scale  - not to RP 25 profile.

 

NMRA HO wheels are 0.110" wide with a flange depth/width of  0.028"- modern examples to RP 25 profile. I.e code 110.

 

NMRA HO-Fine wheels are 0.088" wide with a flange depth/width of  0.025"- modern  commercial examples are frequently just code 110  profile with the outer face turned  down to 0.088 width. I.e. code 88

 

Minor problems running code 88 wheels on NMRA HO track is due to the NMRA HO frog (crossing) flange way (FW) being specified up to 0.050" wide. (as is much "00" track). So that the gap just before the frog vee  (2  x FW ) is wider than the wheel width and in some conditions code 88 wheels can bump down slightly into the gap. Problems vary from unnoticed, to irritating and more rarely unreliable running and unexplained derailments.

 

Andy