Hornby announce TT:120

[Hroth]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

According to the video it seems it isn't compatible with PECO unless you use an adapter that nobody makes yet.

 

As I've (mis?)understood from other posts about the Peco track, the flexitrack "looks" code 55 from the outside and "is" code 80 on the inside due to the way the track base is moulded. I think thats why Peco sels packs of extra sleepers, so the moulded base can be cut back to join the ends more neatly. 

 

I look forward to being confirmed/corrected by anyone who has Peco track.  As Hornby is unashamedly code 80, then if the Peco track is code 80 in disguise, there shouldn't be any problems. If its true code 55 then some sort of adapting will be needed.

 

[Hroth]

4 hours ago, Peter Kazmierczak said:

Ding goes the doorbell and there stands Brian, our postie, clutching an A4 padded envelope. So my Hornby TT pack has arrived! Membership expires 10/10/2023 so is it free until then? Nice little pin badge. Haven't looked at the catalogue yet though. 

 

I went out this morning, to go to a Christmas Fair* and so missed the Postperson**.

 

Just got back to find a padded envelope on the mat.

 

HURRAH!!!

 

I'm now official with badge'n'lanyard'n'card'n'catalogue'n'all!!!

 

I wonder if the catalogue is the corrected reprint...

 

* So this is Christmas....  (Only another 33 Shopping Days to go!)

** I get an alternating Postman and Postwoman and I can't remember who it should be today!

 

[Legend]

18 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

I went out this morning, to go to a Christmas Fair* and so missed the Postperson**.

 

Just got back to find a padded envelope on the mat.

 

HURRAH!!!

 

I'm now official with badge'n'lanyard'n'card'n'catalogue'n'all!!!

 

I wonder if the catalogue is the corrected reprint...

 

* So this is Christmas....  (Only another 33 Shopping Days to go!)

** I get an alternating Postman and Postwoman and I can't remember who it should be today!

 

Yup me too!  There must be a fresh batch gone out . I really wanted it for the catalogue . I know it’s on line but I collect Hornby literature . Don’t think I’ll be wearing my lanyard , but the card will be good to get into the super exclusive TT lounge when Hornby visits Glasgow 

 

Just come back from Falkirk exhibition , I must admit going round a few layouts thinking. I wonder if I could do this in TT:120 ?  Thinking BR Blue with HSTs 37, 47, 08  .  I wonder if there’s a Deltic before phase 9? 

Edited November 19, 2022 by Legend

[MarkSG]

15 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 

As I've (mis?)understood from other posts about the Peco track, the flexitrack "looks" code 55 from the outside and "is" code 80 on the inside due to the way the track base is moulded. I think thats why Peco sels packs of extra sleepers, so the moulded base can be cut back to join the ends more neatly. 

 

I look forward to being confirmed/corrected by anyone who has Peco track.  As Hornby is unashamedly code 80, then if the Peco track is code 80 in disguise, there shouldn't be any problems. If its true code 55 then some sort of adapting will be needed.

 

 

Your understanding of the Peco track is broadly correct, yes. It appears to be code 55, but the actual metal part goes below the visible level of the sleeper. You can see how that works on the product image of the single sleeper - the bit underneath the rail is deeper than the sleeper itself. That's obviously unprototypical - in real life, the rail rests on top of a flat sleeper - but on the model you can't see under the rail so it gives the impression of a shallower (ie, code 55) rail.

 

However, that doesn't mean you can just connect Peco's pseudo-55 track to Hornby's code 80 track with a normal joiner. If you look closely at the end of the rail on Peco's track, you can see that it isn't a genuine flat bottom rail profile. There's actually a kind of double lip at the bottom, the lower part being hidden by  the sleeper and moulded chairs, so that it merely appears to be flat bottom above the sleeper level.

 

 

What that means in practice is that Hornby's code 80 joiners probably won't connect to Peco's track, while Peco's code 55 joiners may not connect to Hornby track. And the profile is different anyway, as Hornby's track will be 80/1000 inch above the sleeper while Peco's will be 55/1000 inch. So you're probably going to need to fudge some kind of connector to join the two. I say "probably" because I can't find any images of Hornby's track that show as much detail as Peco's, and it's possible that you might be able to connect the two if the code 55 joiners will link to the code 80 track (which may be the case, as Peco's code 55 and code 80 N gauge track both use the same joiners). But we won't really know until someone tries it.

[D9020 Nimbus]

I think Peco do a conversion track for N gauge code 80 – code 55. But since they aren't doing code 80 TT (yet, at any rate) they've no particular reason to do one for that gauge. Tillig do of course make an extensive range of code 80 TT track—they were after all a track manufacturer before purchasing Berliner-Bahnen.

[Steamport Southport]

2 hours ago, BachelorBoy said:

I doubt you'll be the main target market for Hornby TT120.

 

 

Aren't I? Why are they sending me emails about it then? Sent before I had joined up to the "free" club.

 

Why have I already got plans for a layout that is probably going to cost north of £1000?

 

Already spent about £60 on a few buildings, hence why I'm asking about the track.

 

I would suggest I am very much in the target market.

 

 

 

Jason

[Tim Dubya]

Re: Track Compatibility...

 

 

😜

[irishmail]

1 hour ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

I think Peco do a conversion track for N gauge code 80 – code 55. But since they aren't doing code 80 TT (yet, at any rate) they've no particular reason to do one for that gauge. Tillig do of course make an extensive range of code 80 TT track—they were after all a track manufacturer before purchasing Berliner-Bahnen.

When I used to dabble in 'N' I experimented with both code 80 & 55 track, the rail joiners are the standard N gauge ones suitable for both code 55 & 80, the only thing you would need to do was to shim up the code 55 to make a smooth transition to the code 80, so as far as I can understand it, the Peco code 55 should be able to join up with the code 80 from Hornby.

[F-UnitMad]

1 hour ago, D9020 Nimbus said:

I  think Peco do a conversion track for N gauge code 80 – code 55.

Do they? Because when I did N years ago Peco's Code 80 & 55 joined together just fine, the fishplate connects the lower web of the 55 rail to the 80 as normal. No 'conversion' track was needed.

The doubt might be if the same can be done with Hornby 80 to Peco 55 - sleeper height is the key there.

 

Edit, posted at the same time as Irishmail, above. But I don't recall having to shim sleepers.

Edited November 19, 2022 by F-UnitMad

[Les1952]

3 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

As I've (mis?)understood from other posts about the Peco track, the flexitrack "looks" code 55 from the outside and "is" code 80 on the inside due to the way the track base is moulded. I think thats why Peco sels packs of extra sleepers, so the moulded base can be cut back to join the ends more neatly. 

 

I look forward to being confirmed/corrected by anyone who has Peco track.  As Hornby is unashamedly code 80, then if the Peco track is code 80 in disguise, there shouldn't be any problems. If its true code 55 then some sort of adapting will be needed.

 

 

I have some on order but if it works the same way as the N gauge track it will connect directly to Code 80 track, though you may have to use Hornby's fishplates if these are a small amount wider.

 

It involves cutting away the webbing of the Code 55 where the fishplate has to go - you have to do that anyway to connect two pieces of Code 55. You will also need to pack under the sleepers of the Peco for a couple of lengths.  Never an issue in N where Hawthorn Dene and Croft Spa both used Code 55 on the visible sections and Code80 Setrack roind the ends.

 

Les

 

Edited November 19, 2022 by Les1952
put 80 twice where I meant 55...

[seeseerider]

2 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Aren't I?

 

…

 

Jason

Absolutely Jason. TT can and does appeal to many different modelers. I, for one, am an experienced Gauge 1 German, US 3 rail O scale, British o gauge 2 rail fine scale guy. And - I can’t wait for the new TT products from Hornby. Im building my new TT layout with Tillig track right now - but I have lots of Hornby’s products preordered and can’t wait for them and I therefore consider myself in their market. 

[Hobby]

3 hours ago, irishmail said:

When I used to dabble in 'N' I experimented with both code 80 & 55 track, the rail joiners are the standard N gauge ones suitable for both code 55 & 80, the only thing you would need to do was to shim up the code 55 to make a smooth transition to the code 80, so as far as I can understand it, the Peco code 55 should be able to join up with the code 80 from Hornby.

 

Which is what the converter rail will do, the rest of us will use some card! The only possible issue is who's rail joiner to use. I've used Peco code 80, Roco code 83 and Tillig code 83, all three have a slightly different foot so I found using the rail joiners for the widest foot worked on all three.

 

Though why people can't just be patient and wait for the Hornby track rather than indulge in endless useless speculation is beyond me, though most of this thread is full of such rubbish.

[luke_stevens]

2 hours ago, Hobby said:

<snip>

 though most of this thread is full of such rubbish.

<snip>

 

That's a pretty good description of RMweb, if not the whole Internet 😀

 

Luke

[Les1952]

2 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

Which is what the converter rail will do, the rest of us will use some card! The only possible issue is who's rail joiner to use. I've used Peco code 80, Roco code 83 and Tillig code 83, all three have a slightly different foot so I found using the rail joiners for the widest foot worked on all three.

 

Though why people can't just be patient and wait for the Hornby track rather than indulge in endless useless speculation is beyond me, though most of this thread is full of such rubbish.

 

Peco's website says that the n-gauge rail joiner (SL910 or SL911 insulating) is the one to use on their TT track.  Assuming that the Hornby rails are similar in width at the bottom that means it should also be possible to use the Peco power feed rail joiners (PL-82) to supply Hornby as well as Peco track.  That in itself saves an awful lot of soldering to railsides or the underside of rail joiners.

 

I can't wait to get my Peco and Hornby track orders to have a play.  Only a couple of months to find out.

 

Meanwhile I've tracked down a Plux16 decoder to go in my Piko diesel.

 

Les

[luke_stevens]

There isn't any Hornby TT120 track in circulation yet to check but Hornby did say it was compatible with Tillig (rail height and track geometry) so here are two pictures I took complaining the Tillig TT track with the Peco TT track.

 

1) Tillig to the left, Peco to the right.

The rail height seems about the same but the visual height is different. Oddly I haven't tried to couple them up (and can't now that the Peco is used on my TT120 diorama, covered in the Peco track forum) I can't tell from the picture but I believe that the rail head of the Peco track is finer than the Tillig which could cause problems with joining the web of the rail.

 

2) Peco Left, Tillig right.

The rail tops look about the same height above the surface. Hopefully sufficient that a swipe of the file will sort any discrepancy out.

 

Luke

[BachelorBoy]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

Though why people can't just be patient and wait for the Hornby track rather than indulge in endless useless speculation is beyond me

Because it's fun!

 

[BachelorBoy]

8 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

 

I would suggest I am very much in the target market.

 

I did say "main" target market :-)

 

Anyway, can we leave it there, please? (Although feel free to have the last word.)

 

I don't want to start a feud. 

[Hobby]

8 hours ago, luke_stevens said:

T2) Peco Left, Tillig right.

The rail tops look about the same height above the surface. Hopefully sufficient that a swipe of the file will sort any discrepancy out.

 

Luke

 

A shim of thin card will bring them level, the Tillig is code 83 so a slight file of the edge of the rail, if you want to, will make for smooth transition, I'm assuming that's what this "transition track" will do, only for more money! I've been using code 80 and 83 rail together for decades without any issues, though.

[Les1952]

9 hours ago, luke_stevens said:

There isn't any Hornby TT120 track in circulation yet to check but Hornby did say it was compatible with Tillig (rail height and track geometry) so here are two pictures I took complaining the Tillig TT track with the Peco TT track.

 

1) Tillig to the left, Peco to the right.

The rail height seems about the same but the visual height is different. Oddly I haven't tried to couple them up (and can't now that the Peco is used on my TT120 diorama, covered in the Peco track forum) I can't tell from the picture but I believe that the rail head of the Peco track is finer than the Tillig which could cause problems with joining the web of the rail.

 

2) Peco Left, Tillig right.

The rail tops look about the same height above the surface. Hopefully sufficient that a swipe of the file will sort any discrepancy out.

 

Luke

 

What matters for joining the rails is the height of the rail itself and the width and shape of the rail at the bottom.   By the scientific (?) method of taking a ruler to the pics the Tillig rail is a little wider, so Tillig rail joiners will most likely fit both.  I suspect it will be possible to force Peco joiners on, but that is for confirmation in January.  However Lima and Minitrix tracks are wider at the bottom than Peco making it harder to use Peco joiners, but that issue can easily be resolved with a file.  The Peco track will need a card shim under it to support the level change at the bottom, but in N gauge we've been doing that for years......

 

In other words nothing that can't be sorted.  The Train Set Market won't bother (especially if Hornby introduce flexi) and more advanced modellers will find it comparatively easy.

 

Les

 

Edited November 20, 2022 by Les1952

[Hobby]

34 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

the Tillig rail is a little wider, so Tillig rail joiners will most likely fit both.  I suspect it will be possible to force Peco joiners on,

 

If they are using the same rail as the H0e and m which is probable then that's exactly what you can do, the Peco insulated joiners are a little easier as they have some "give" in them.

[boxbrownie]

On 19/11/2022 at 11:11, richierich said:

Interesting the gear is exposed. Similar to what some N gauge models are like. A great way for fluff and other debris to get into the gear train. 

Are you thinking Sam’s layout? 😁

[richierich]

2 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

Are you thinking Sam’s layout? 😁

Whose Sam?

[BachelorBoy]

4 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

Are you thinking Sam’s layout? 😁

 

 

ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!

MENTION OF "SAM" OF "SAM'S TRAINS" ON THE THREAD.

EXPECT SUBJECT DIVERSIONS.

 

[boxbrownie]

20 hours ago, MarkSG said:

 

Your understanding of the Peco track is broadly correct, yes. It appears to be code 55, but the actual metal part goes below the visible level of the sleeper. You can see how that works on the product image of the single sleeper - the bit underneath the rail is deeper than the sleeper itself. That's obviously unprototypical - in real life, the rail rests on top of a flat sleeper - but on the model you can't see under the rail so it gives the impression of a shallower (ie, code 55) rail.

 

However, that doesn't mean you can just connect Peco's pseudo-55 track to Hornby's code 80 track with a normal joiner. If you look closely at the end of the rail on Peco's track, you can see that it isn't a genuine flat bottom rail profile. There's actually a kind of double lip at the bottom, the lower part being hidden by  the sleeper and moulded chairs, so that it merely appears to be flat bottom above the sleeper level.

 

 

What that means in practice is that Hornby's code 80 joiners probably won't connect to Peco's track, while Peco's code 55 joiners may not connect to Hornby track. And the profile is different anyway, as Hornby's track will be 80/1000 inch above the sleeper while Peco's will be 55/1000 inch. So you're probably going to need to fudge some kind of connector to join the two. I say "probably" because I can't find any images of Hornby's track that show as much detail as Peco's, and it's possible that you might be able to connect the two if the code 55 joiners will link to the code 80 track (which may be the case, as Peco's code 55 and code 80 N gauge track both use the same joiners). But we won't really know until someone tries it.

Exactly, PECO have done the same as their N gauge track, it improves the look of the visible rail immeasurably and gives greater strength, what’s not to like? The PECO track is modellers track the Hornby track is Train Set track.

[boxbrownie]

1 minute ago, BachelorBoy said:

 

 

ALERT! ALERT! ALERT!

MENTION OF "SAM" OF "SAM'S TRAINS" ON THE THREAD.

EXPECT SUBJECT DIVERSIONS.

 

Guilty as charged M’lud, now about that fluff……