PECO announces its entry into the TT gauge market

[JohnR]

 

 

8 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

I guess if you squint hard; must admit I find it odd to take the trouble to get the track gauge right, and then use very approximate rolling stock on it.

 

8 minutes ago, Allegheny1600 said:

There probably is but like the prototype, it’s much larger than it’s British counterpart, sorry.

Perfect if you’re happy with just a repaint though.

 

I was thinking more along the lines of using the chassis, which I understand is the same  (changes were obviously made to fit the loading gauge). 

 

Though of course, this point may apply

 

6 minutes ago, HSB said:

Not many people appear to have picked up on the fact that the PECO track is being made to quite fine standards which will probably mean any existing Continental models will have to be re-wheeled.

 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

 

And once the Modelrail VoR tank becomes reality you’ll be able to combine both 😉

 

 

 

Thanks Paul - good point, even if my personal connections are with the Welshpool and Llanfair (which offers the chance to run H0e Liliput Coaches and a ZB U-Class in heritage mode).

 

1 hour ago, PaulRhB said:

Going back to the wagon Peco announced as the “first of a number of vehicles we’ve got in development” that coupling does look huge and more intrusive than a tension lock due to its solidity! I know it’s a standard european one but it’s one thing I’d want to see a smaller replacement for, even the 009 loop would be preferable for me. 

 

It looks to me like the photos show NEM coupler pockets, making the switch an easy job? (Edit: @Moxy has noted this while I was typing my post)  I can see the logic of using the European TT 1:120 standard as this is UK outline TT 1:120.

 

Re-reading the early pages of this thread, I can understand there being mixed feelings amongst established 3mm Scale modellers, and some might read a post like my earlier one (previous page) and wonder why I’ve not considered 3mm Scale already (fair point).  I think for me the European tie-in with TT 1:120 and r-t-r possibilities are exciting.

 

I think there is a fair bit of “marketing speak” in the way Peco have worded their launch announcement - and to be fair it has got my attention - but when that dies down I hope this development will also be prove to be good news for existing and potential 3mm Scale modellers in the longer-run too. 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke
Clarification

[Vanguard 5374]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

The 3D print market is already jumping on this bandwagon:

 

https://www.shapeways.com/product/EY897TGXH/peco-tt-1-120-lner-j70-scratchaid?fbclid=IwAR1tVfFfn9Pq6dEnCtrro02dS46omMrLS6-ayKM_AF7zLpAn3HJY1WCg0So

I’ve ordered myself one to test the water (Peco haven’t yet announced a loco) and there are suitable chassis out there that hide skirts easily. It’ll fit nicely with a 7 plank unlike a 66.

 

Support for the scale is beneficial to new modellers and Peco, Gaugemaster etc. We already have scratch aids from Worsley Works on the market, perhaps more and more people getting on board will do the scale good? I’m toying with looking at what is available on the continental market and looking at bodies that could work with existing chassis. I’m surprised there is no kit for the NS 500/600/700 and given it’s similar to locos we have here I think we will see one shortly if the scale does get further support.

Edited June 8, 2022 by Vanguard 5374

[Hobby]

22 minutes ago, HSB said:

Not many people appear to have picked up on the fact that the PECO track is being made to quite fine standards which will probably mean any existing Continental models will have to be re-wheeled.

 

I'd be amazed if it wasn't compatible with the current RTR stock from Tillig, Arnold, Piko, etc., what would be the point otherwise! Perhaps if you are using BTTB or Zeuke, though even their standards weren't too bad. For steamroller wheels in TT you really need to go back to Rokal, their stuff was crude!!

 

5 minutes ago, Vanguard 5374 said:

(Peco haven’t yet announced a loco) 

 

And I doubt they will, they've said often enough that they don't like to do RTR locos, look at the recent 009 stuff, they've helped with research but the locos have been purely Kato and Heljan products. I do suspect they will have been discussing it with a mainstream manufacturer, if it was one with a British connection then Arnold as part of Hornby and a TT manufacturer already would be an obvious choice, but Tillig are the market leaders so who knows.

[Moxy]

14 minutes ago, Vanguard 5374 said:

I’ve ordered myself one to test the water (Peco haven’t yet announced a loco) and there are suitable chassis out there that hide skirts easily. It’ll fit nicely with a 7 plank unlike a 66.

 

 

Which chassis were you thinking of for the J70?  Might get one myself.

15 minutes ago, Vanguard 5374 said:

 

 

[PaulRhB]

39 minutes ago, Moxy said:

 

If it has an NEM pocket (which it probably will), then changing the couplings will be a doddle. Peco even do 009 couplings to fit NEM pockets.

yes I fully expect it will, just looks odd to put a huge lump on each end when going for no compromise scale look on the track 😉
 

 

33 minutes ago, HSB said:

Not many people appear to have picked up on the fact that the PECO track is being made to quite fine standards which will probably mean any existing Continental models will have to be re-wheeled.

Not with recent models as Blair notes below. Most recent TT and HOm has flanges identical to N gauge so no issues with code 55. 

1 minute ago, Hobby said:

 

I'd be amazed if it wasn't compatible with the current RTR stock from Tillig, Arnold, Piko, etc., what would be the point otherwise! Perhaps if you are using BTTB or Zeuke, though even their standards weren't too bad. For steamroller wheels in TT you really need to go back to Rokal, their stuff was crude!!

 

[Pmorgancym]

44 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

True, but if there is also going to be at least one "main line" engine (which is just as necessary early on if enough people are to adopt a new scale), the 08 can support that irrespective of its regional origins or whether it is a steam or diesel prototype. A Pannier or Jinty would only "go with" a much more specific choice of bigger engine. 

 

One reason for OO modellers to downscale might be to enable them to fit more than a BLT or shunting plank into their "pint pot", and only producing small branch-line/trip working/shunting locos could easily become off-putting for some.

 

John

If only there'd been a British standard 0-6-0  :)

[Vanguard 5374]

13 minutes ago, Moxy said:

 

Which chassis were you thinking of for the J70?  Might get one myself.

https://www.modellbahnunion.com/Narrow-gauge/Universal-drive-bogie-with-motor-Next18-interface-12V-H0m.htm?shop=modellbahn-union-en&a=article&ProdNr=Rietze-70823&p=835

 

Going to order one of these, as soon as it arrives I’ll measure it up and adapt the body mesh to suit this chassis so it’s a direct fit. Didn’t realise the J70 is available for everyone to buy so will amend that.

 

Planning on doing some basic wagons to supplement the Peco offering, and will probably end up using OOn3 9mm wheels as they seem to look like a good work around for British modellers.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

50 minutes ago, PaulRhB said:

 

Not with recent models as Blair notes below. Most recent TT and HOm has flanges identical to N gauge so no issues with code 55. 

 

 

55 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

I'd be amazed if it wasn't compatible with the current RTR stock from Tillig, Arnold, Piko, etc., what would be the point otherwise! Perhaps if you are using BTTB or Zeuke, though even their standards weren't too bad. For steamroller wheels in TT you really need to go back to Rokal, their stuff was crude!!

 

 

Agreed - it gives the new Peco offering a product distinction with existing European Track ranges too: I think Tillig Track is about Code 80, while H0m track is usually either Code 75 or Code 70 (others will know this for certain).

 

In this respect it looks like Peco have taken their N-Scale Code 55 track technology and upscaled it for TT 1:120 rather than use existing H0m rail with new sleepers (the point geometry seems to be a little bit different too).

[Tim Dubya]

Now that is a very useful find @Vanguard 5374

 

 

I can see that in some of Mr Doherty's TT 1:120 kits and other's 3D prints.   I suppose in theory you could use that in a coach and have a 3D printed "dummy"* loco in front or simply in a D or EMU. 

 

http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/

*maybe from a 3D print with TT scale wheels, without a mechanism, to make life easier until something better comes along 🤷‍♂️

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Tim Dubya
sech tpecs

[Moxy]

1 hour ago, Vanguard 5374 said:

 

Going to order one of these, as soon as it arrives I’ll measure it up and adapt the body mesh to suit this chassis so it’s a direct fit. Didn’t realise the J70 is available for everyone to buy so will amend that.

 

Planning on doing some basic wagons to supplement the Peco offering, and will probably end up using OOn3 9mm wheels as they seem to look like a good work around for British modellers.

 

Thanks for the link to the chassis.  The J70 is not publicly available, it wouldn't let me buy one. 

 

I take it you are the designer of the J70?  I would certainly be interested in one if or when they do become available on Shapeways, plus any wagons that go beyond a 7 plank open.

[BernardTPM]

2 hours ago, HSB said:

Not many people appear to have picked up on the fact that the PECO track is being made to quite fine standards which will probably mean any existing Continental models will have to be re-wheeled.

Just as with the N finer N track, there are no moulded fittings on the inner surface of the rail, the rail being held firmly in place with the invisible, embedded bottom foot, allowing for flanges 1mm (and a bit) deep. Most recent models should have no problem with that.

Edited June 8, 2022 by BernardTPM

[Vanguard 5374]

46 minutes ago, Moxy said:

 

Thanks for the link to the chassis.  The J70 is not publicly available, it wouldn't let me buy one. 

 

I take it you are the designer of the J70?  I would certainly be interested in one if or when they do become available on Shapeways, plus any wagons that go beyond a 7 plank open.

Yes I did the J70 as I wanted my own yet didn’t want to pay £100+ for a RTR one, it’s a decent enough model for my needs so should work for TT. 
 

 

OO version above, will be printed in the best Shapeways quality given the size difference.

 

I don’t want to commit to anything yet, but obviously if a GWR Pannier came as the first release I’d be looking to produce suitable stock for it, likewise a LMS Jinty would push me to LMS stock. Don’t have a set plan on what I want to model in TT so I guess I’ll do a oval of sorts for now to try the scale out and see how it develops for me. Glad to have Peco supporting the scale and look forward to getting involved too.

[whart57]

I don't want to pour cold water here, but how is this J70 remotely "ready-to-run"? More pertinently how is this approach any different to the range of small diesels available through the 3mm Society, as written about in the June Railway Modeller? If you are talking about marrying 3D printed bodies to suitable chassis then that is what 3mm scale modellers have been doing for at least 10 years. And 3mm Society members already have a decent number of Parkside and Cambrian wagon kits available to them to hang onto the back of the locos.

 

I have spent a bit of time over the last few days perusing what is available RTR in TT, and it is of the order of what is available in Z gauge. I haven't really got my head around what TT is for. I know what 3mm scale is for. Either it's keeping the train sets of youth going - and lets not knock that - or its modellers tinkering at various levels of skill to produce something "different". However I look at the Arnold and Piko stuff, all of which is also available in HO and N, and wonder where the TT stuff fits. PECO must have an idea, but I don't see it.

[PaulRhB]

13 minutes ago, whart57 said:

but how is this J70 remotely "ready-to-run"?

It didn’t claim to be, 😉 he said 

 

34 minutes ago, Vanguard 5374 said:

yet didn’t want to pay £100+ for a RTR one,

 

13 minutes ago, whart57 said:

 

I have spent a bit of time over the last few days perusing what is available RTR in TT, and it is of the order of what is available in Z gauge.

Are you talking Uk only? There’s lots from Tillig in Europe and a smaller range from several others. 
 

13 minutes ago, whart57 said:

or its modellers tinkering at various levels of skill to produce something "different". However I look at the Arnold and Piko stuff, all of which is also available in HO and N, and wonder where the TT stuff fits.

And some just like different but others find N too small, quite a few like 009 because it’s just a bit bigger than N, and OO a bit restrictive with the space they have. I like the size as it’s close to my HOm models and they do make fitting things in just a bit easier. A 6ft long layout vs 8ft long can make a lot of difference in modern houses especially. In my spare room it’s 9x7 and I could fit in a 6ft shelf without blocking the doorway like my OO layout does. I solve that by removing the end board on the OO but it does mean it’s not just ready to play with. 
I can usually still tell OO and N models apart in photos but if you compare HO/OO and TT it’s virtually impossible to tell except by couplings. 

Edited June 8, 2022 by PaulRhB

[Hobby]

It fits between H0 and N and is an excellent compromise, as many if us have said already. You can get a lot more in a small space than H0 or have plenty of room for scenery. It's plus over N is that it allows lots of detail without the fiddlyness. As for what's available  it's a lot more than Z, you have missed out the biggest supplier of RTR, Tillig, and there are several other manufacturers as well.

 

Like others I have modelled in 1:120 scale and am aware of its benefits, not everyone wants a scratchbuilding/kit building scale like 3mm so the possibility of Btitish rtr in 1:120 is certainly interesting.

 

Let's wait and see rather than just knocking it.

[Tim Dubya]

15 minutes ago, whart57 said:

However I look at the Arnold and Piko stuff, all of which is also available in HO and N, and wonder where the TT stuff fits. PECO must have an idea, but I don't see it.

 

For me, it fits nicely in a 1 bedroom flat. 

 

Seriously though, for me a 1:120 will enable me to build my layout without having to compromise the track layout and platforms.  I have the boards (6ft x 18" scenic), in OO this means I get a two maybe three coach train into Pleye Wood's platforms (they don't exist yet, so don't try looking for 'em).   Dropping down 1.5mm per foot prototype will give me the extra room I need to stretch out stuff and give the feeling of more space for the station and yard, a hopefully more prototypical desolate look.  I'll probably stick to 3 coach trains without them looking rammed in and daft.
I know I could achieve more of that by going N, but it's too small for me personally and again a compromise of scale/gauge.

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Tim Dubya
Alka-Seltzer

[Compound2632]

16 hours ago, whart57 said:

Three track gauges and three wheel standards, no wonder it seems no-one agrees.

 

To which, it seems, the intention is to add to that list, two scales - with a much more significant discrepancy than exists between N and 2 mm finescale, or even between 00 and H0!

[ERIC ALLTORQUE]

Will have to see how it goes down with Santa,hes a big HO fan it seems

[Tim Dubya]

3 minutes ago, ERIC ALLTORQUE said:

Will have to see how it goes down with Santa,hes a big HO fan it seems

 

 

 

Edit:  read that wrong, need new bins

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Tim Dubya

[Hobby]

22 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

To which, it seems, the intention is to add to that list, two scales - with a much more significant discrepancy than exists between N and 2 mm finescale, or even between 00 and H0!

 

Surely the intention is to standardise on the original TT scale rather than encourage two scales. At least that's how I've read Peco's video which makes it clear they are looking st 1:120 and not 1:100. What 3mm modellers decide to do is up to them. 

[maico]

Roco new item locos in TT seem to sell out, it's only a small part of their turnover though.

https://www.roco.cc/en/productsearch/0-0-0-0-0-0-0-002-0/products.html

[U36B]

17 minutes ago, whart57 said:

PECO must have an idea, but I don't see it.

May be the idea is not just British but  Continental too?

Think about the Dutch Railways - NS had Class 11, Class 76 (for a short time but still...) and 77s.

Many steam locos were build in the UK and might be adapted to/from British Locos. And there were of course the WD 2-8-0 and 2-10-0s....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trains_in_the_Netherlands#Steam_locomotives

 

With the right partner, British TT could give Dutch TT a boost......

Oh, Piko is a major manufacturer in  NS N-scale  Models, and they are in TT too -hmmmmm

 

 

And then there are/were Class20 /37/ and 58 in France/Spain and lately rail adventure HSTs and Class 86/87 in Bulgaria and Hungary .....

I am not in TT scale but i would be tempted by a Class 08 and some clay wagons plus Polybulks and Ferryvans.....

[Vanguard 5374]

1 hour ago, whart57 said:

I don't want to pour cold water here, but how is this J70 remotely "ready-to-run"?

I don’t believe it has ever been stated or put as a ready to run item? I merely want to have a quick to build loco for my own purposes first, in a scale I wish to pursue?

[whart57]

49 minutes ago, Tim Dubya said:

 

For me, it fits nicely in a 1 bedroom flat. 

 

Seriously though, for me a 1:120 will enable me to build my layout without having to compromise the track layout and platforms.  I have the boards (6ft x 18" scenic), in OO this means I get a two maybe three coach train into Pleye Wood's platforms (they don't exist yet, so don't try looking for 'em).   Dropping down 1.5mm per foot prototype will give me the extra room I need to stretch out stuff and give the feeling of more space for the station and yard, a hopefully more prototypical desolate look.  I'll probably stick to 3 coach trains without them looking rammed in and daft.
I know I could achieve more of that by going N, but it's too small for me personally and again a compromise of scale/gauge.

 

 

Well yes, but that's the reason people went to 3mm scale. Now I get it that you don't have RTR in 3mm scale but nor do you in 1/10" scale either. Well not British outline RTR anyway.