Hornby announce TT:120

[Jeff Smith]

39 minutes ago, Pacific231G said:

The common wheel standard is NEM 310 but, for 12mm gauge, that does allow for a flange depth of between 0.5mm and 1mm so they don't have to be quite so good at slicing 1:120 pizzas as  these appear to be. For 9mm gauge the range is 0.5-0.9 so it's really where manufacturers decide to be within that range. At the finer end of its range the NEM wheel profile is very close to NMRA RP25.

ADD

I've just looked at the Modmüller site and they say that their RP25 TT wheelsets are happy with Tillig track so I'd be surprised if they're not equally happy with Peco and Hornby track. for some reason they quote a flange depth of 0.64mm for RP25 but don't give that dimension for the standard, Rokal and Zeuke wheelsets.  Their "standard" TT wheelset does though appear to have about the same flange depth as Tillig and Hornby - a lot closer to 1mm than 0.5mm!  I'm guessing that the Rokal and Zeuke compatible wheels are outside the NEM specs. 

The finer the flange the more you need some kind of compensation.  OO, EM and N get away without because of the relatively large flanges and some axle slop which generally prevent the wheels from riding up over the rails.

[frobisher]

1 minute ago, luke_stevens said:

These are the Dapol ones with the standard fitting.

 

Though obviously these aren't tension locks but much nicer knuckle couplings ;)

[luke_stevens]

1 minute ago, frobisher said:

 

Though obviously these aren't tension locks but much nicer knuckle couplings ;)

 

I may have misunderstood. You mean the Triang TT3 mini-tension locks?

 

Luke

[frobisher]

2 minutes ago, luke_stevens said:

I may have misunderstood. You mean the Triang TT3 mini-tension locks?

 

Hroth was wondering if tension lock couplings would be available in NEM 355 compatible form (to replace the Tillig style ones), and I merely said they no one does them at the moment, but it should be feasible (and would might be a better coupling that the NEM 356 "Rapido" coupling.

 

I'm not sure you'd want wide Triang style couplings though (especially with the close coupling mechs in play) but a scaled down version of the narrow 00 NEM versions used these days.  The Dapol couplings are just so much nice to my mind.

[Pacific231G]

2 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

The finer the flange the more you need some kind of compensation.  OO, EM and N get away without because of the relatively large flanges and some axle slop which generally prevent the wheels from riding up over the rails.

That's true, tolerances don't scale, but RP25 has always seemed reasonably robust. For TT the NMRA recommended wheel profile is code 79 which has a flange depth of 0.51mm  and a tyre width of 2mm. 

According to their website, Müeller's RP25 wheels have  flange depth of 0.64 mm which is the flange depth (0.635mm)  for RP25 code 110 wheels, That's the type commonly used for H0 and if it's not too fine for that it certainly shouldn't be for the smaller scale.

Tillig do make eight-spoked wheels for H0m but they're 8.5 mm  tread diameter so a bit large for UIC/BR standard 920mm 3ft diameter wagon wheels in 1:120 scale (though didn't spoked wagon wheels tend to be a bit larger) These appear to be the same wheels that I have on my Tillig H0m wagons and, for some reason, they look far more pizza cutterish in photos than when I simply look at them. Those wheels are 2.25mm wide including the flange.

 

I do though also have a bag of Nine Lines 8 mm  diameter six-spoked wheels for 00n3. not far off for diameter though, being narrow gauge, possibly a bit heavy in the rims (as are the Tillig spoked wheels and the Nine-Lines wheel width and flanges look to be about the same as those).  The price label is in French francs so I must have picked them up at Expometrique a good few years ago and I think some of the French H0m kit makers may have used them. Nine Lines is sadly gone but 00n3 sources may still be a good place to look .

Edited November 29, 2022 by Pacific231G
addition of spoked wheels.

[boxbrownie]

On 28/11/2022 at 18:27, definate maybe said:

Those pictures appear to show a coalfish or similar wagon which I don’t think have been discussed in any of their phase 1 to 4 announcements so far. Makes me wonder what else is well down the development line

 

take care/ stay safe

 

mark

One thing I noticed was what appeared to be ventilated disc on some wheels (only on the inside though) where as the wagon has the older shoe brakes.  Design clever?

[teletougos]

1 hour ago, Pacific231G said:

That's true, tolerances don't scale, but RP25 has always seemed reasonably robust. For TT the NMRA recommended wheel profile is code 79 which has a flange depth of 0.51mm  and a tyre width of 2mm. 

According to their website, Müeller's RP25 wheels have  flange depth of 0.64 mm which is the flange depth (0.635mm)  for RP25 code 110 wheels, That's the type commonly used for H0 and if it's not too fine for that it certainly shouldn't be for the smaller scale.

Tillig do make eight-spoked wheels for H0m but they're 8.5 mm  tread diameter so a bit large for UIC/BR standard 920mm 3ft diameter wagon wheels in 1:120 scale (though didn't spoked wagon wheels tend to be a bit larger) 

3mm Society did do 8.2mm spoked wheels (8-spoke) but I don't know if they do any more, as it was getting harder and harder to source them. 

 

Whether spoked wheels tended to be larger, I don't know.  

 

I got a bag of Steam Era 7.6mm spoked wheels which were .088" - what the Yanks call 'code 88'. Bit fat but well made. Flanges are okay. Assume they were done for Aussie 3'6" prototype. 

 

[boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, frobisher said:

 

  The Dapol couplings are just so much nice to my mind.

I wonder if they will work as well as the Hornby supplied couplings as regards the close coupling mechanism?

[Dava]

4 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

That's true, tolerances don't scale, but RP25 has always seemed reasonably robust. For TT the NMRA recommended wheel profile is code 79 which has a flange depth of 0.51mm  and a tyre width of 2mm. 

According to their website, Müeller's RP25 wheels have  flange depth of 0.64 mm which is the flange depth (0.635mm)  for RP25 code 110 wheels, That's the type commonly used for H0 and if it's not too fine for that it certainly shouldn't be for the smaller scale.

Tillig do make eight-spoked wheels for H0m but they're 8.5 mm  tread diameter so a bit large for UIC/BR standard 920mm 3ft diameter wagon wheels in 1:120 scale (though didn't spoked wagon wheels tend to be a bit larger) These appear to be the same wheels that I have on my Tillig H0m wagons and, for some reason, they look far more pizza cutterish in photos than when I simply look at them. Those wheels are 2.25mm wide including the flange.

 

I do though also have a bag of Nine Lines 8 mm  diameter six-spoked wheels for 00n3. not far off for diameter though, being narrow gauge, possibly a bit heavy in the rims (as are the Tillig spoked wheels and the Nine-Lines wheel width and flanges look to be about the same as those).  The price label is in French francs so I must have picked them up at Expometrique a good few years ago and I think some of the French H0m kit makers may have used them. Nine Lines is sadly gone but 00n3 sources may still be a good place to look .

Dundas Models do Markits 8 & 9 mm 00n3 disc wheels with the same profile, I use them for 014, pushed out on the axles.

https://dundasmodels.co.uk/webstore/index.php/hikashop-menu-for-module-108/category/542-dundas-models-00n3-wheels-bearings

 

Dava

[Les1952]

 

I think I've posted this already, but this was the first attempt at putting a Dapol Easi-shunt coupler into a TT:120 coupler box.  I've since taken this droopy one out and substituted a different random one, which sits level.  I think this particular coupler had been squeezed in an early overtight Farish NEM pocket. It has gone into the box with one of the Farish locos I'm selling off as a result of abandoning UK N (though I'm in Continental N until at least the end of 2024 and OO until at least the end of 2025 assuming those two layouts don't pick up any more show bookings).

 

My first piece of rolling stock only arrived this morning and I've been busy packing up Bregenbach im Schwarzwald for the long trip to Paisley show this weekend.  I set off on Thursday morning and don't get back to Newark until the afternoon of a week today - 3 nights at the hotel in Paisley and an overnight stop in County Durham in each direction.  Once I'm home I intend to set up a temporary track with the Peco points and streamline that arrived last week and do some curvature tests with this loco and the coach to see if it is practicable for me to use Easi-shunts throughout.

 

If I find out anything significant as a result of the tests I'll report back, though probably not for 10 days or so.   In the mean time if you are in the tropic of the River Clyde this weekend Paisley show sounds like it is going to be good.  Drop in and say hello.

 

Les

[britishcolumbian]

3 minutes ago, Les1952 said:

 

I think I've posted this already, but this was the first attempt at putting a Dapol Easi-shunt coupler into a TT:120 coupler box.  I've since taken this droopy one out and substituted a different random one, which sits level.  I think this particular coupler had been squeezed in an early overtight Farish NEM pocket. It has gone into the box with one of the Farish locos I'm selling off as a result of abandoning UK N (though I'm in Continental N until at least the end of 2024 and OO until at least the end of 2025 assuming those two layouts don't pick up any more show bookings).

 

My first piece of rolling stock only arrived this morning and I've been busy packing up Bregenbach im Schwarzwald for the long trip to Paisley show this weekend.  I set off on Thursday morning and don't get back to Newark until the afternoon of a week today - 3 nights at the hotel in Paisley and an overnight stop in County Durham in each direction.  Once I'm home I intend to set up a temporary track with the Peco points and streamline that arrived last week and do some curvature tests with this loco and the coach to see if it is practicable for me to use Easi-shunts throughout.

 

If I find out anything significant as a result of the tests I'll report back, though probably not for 10 days or so.   In the mean time if you are in the tropic of the River Clyde this weekend Paisley show sounds like it is going to be good.  Drop in and say hello.

 

Les

 

The Piko V90 is quite nice, I *almost* feel bad about discarding the body to use the chassis to power my class 22.

[BRTrainz]

11 hours ago, boxbrownie said:

I wonder if they will work as well as the Hornby supplied couplings as regards the close coupling mechanism?

From experience using NEM HO Kadee's in close coupling mechs, no.

Close coupling mechanisms need coupling rigidity to work right that Kadee-style couplings don't have.

Best to stick with the Hornby supplied Tillig-style one or look at Roco's (which as best as I can tell is the same as Fleischmann's N gauge Profi one) if you want close coupling.

[britishcolumbian]

5 minutes ago, BRTrainz said:

Roco's (which as best as I can tell is the same as Fleischmann's N gauge Profi one)

It is.

[BRTrainz]

10 minutes ago, britishcolumbian said:

It is.

Interesting pricing then, as the Roco ones seem to be almost twice as much as the Fleichmann ones.

Edit: Never mind, the Roco ones seem to be sold in pairs and the Fleichmann ones singly.

Edited November 30, 2022 by BRTrainz
Correction

[boxbrownie]

56 minutes ago, BRTrainz said:

From experience using NEM HO Kadee's in close coupling mechs, no.

Close coupling mechanisms need coupling rigidity to work right that Kadee-style couplings don't have.

Best to stick with the Hornby supplied Tillig-style one or look at Roco's (which as best as I can tell is the same as Fleischmann's N gauge Profi one) if you want close coupling.

What I have done with Kadees and close coupling mechanisms is make the coupling rigid laterally with a smidge of cyano.

[frobisher]

1 hour ago, BRTrainz said:

From experience using NEM HO Kadee's in close coupling mechs, no.

 

Except the Dapol ones don't have the extra swivel joint the NEM H0 Kadees do which is what causes those issues.  Quite a different beast.

[PeterStiles]

26 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

What I have done with Kadees and close coupling mechanisms

 

Erm, I'm pretty sure that this defeats the point of having Kaydees in the first place. If you're going to not-uncouple somethings then don't fit kaydees and fit something fixed (and therfore much much cheaper) instead.

 

unless of course you have a billion spare kaydees lying around doing nothing.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, frobisher said:

 

Except the Dapol ones don't have the extra swivel joint the NEM H0 Kadees do which is what causes those issues.  Quite a different beast.

Bachmann do a NEM fit Eezi-Mate (Kadee clone) for HO that also lacks the secondary pivot.

 

They are more forgiving when used in Close Coupling Units, but don't cure the issues completely. As mentioned above, similar results can be obtained by locking up the pivot on NEM Kadees with a tiny drop of superglue!

 

Only couplers that lock together rigidly fully optimise the performance of CCUs (the rather grandiose "Kinetic coupler" now seems to be preferred by manufacturers' publicity departments.)

 

The continental-standard ones that will come with Hornby's TT:120 models do that and, if I were getting any, I'd not bother spending more to worsen performance.

 

John

Edited November 30, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[peak experience]

18 hours ago, Jeff Smith said:

......and here we start a whole new discussion.......couplings and coup!ing choice are probably more contentious than scale/gauge ratio......

there is a fledgling thread on TT couplings in the dedicated TT section on the forum. 

Edited November 30, 2022 by peak experience

[Mike Harvey]

Although it is an ugly beast in N, the Fleischmann Profi coupler is made for the TT:120 NEM pocket. They are a rigid coupler held together with a pivoting latch on the top. A 1mm diameter neodymium magnet in the top provides for a home brew magnetic uncoupler using under track magnets to repel the latch upwards and to one side. Fully compatible with kinematic coupler arms by being rigid. No unplanned uncoupling, and a pre-uncouple facility too even using the magnet. Mechanical uncoupling is possible using a between rails ramp, which is what Fleischmann use on one of their large exhibition layouts featuring an automated hump-shunt yard.

 

Might be too short for general TT use.

 

https://www.fleischmann.de/fen/products/accessories/others/389545-profi-plug-in-couplings-9545-bulk-pack.html

 

 

[Hroth]

20 minutes ago, peak experience said:

there is a fledgling thread on TT couplings in the dedicated TT section on the forum. 

 

I quite agree, but there's nothing happening with Hornby at present so people are becoming bored.  It'll all change when the first "Scotsman" trainsets get delivered.

 

The Devil makes work, etc....

 

[Pacific231G]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

Bachmann do a NEM fit Eezi-Mate (Kadee clone) for HO that also lacks the secondary pivot.

 

They are more forgiving when used in Close Coupling Units, but don't cure the issues completely. As mentioned above, similar results can be obtained by locking up the pivot on NEM Kadees with a tiny drop of superglue!

 

Only couplers that lock together rigidly fully optimise the performance of CCUs (the rather grandiose "Kinetic coupler" now seems to be preferred by manufacturers' publicity departments.)

 

The continental-standard ones that will come with Hornby's TT:120 models do that and, if I were getting any, I'd not bother spending more to worsen performance.

 

John

The Eezi-mate does though require a kinematic mount. Quite a lot of my older Jouef and Acho stock is retro fitted with fixed NEM boxes (mostly from the French YDModels*) and with those you can't use Eezi-mates because they just pull the vehicle off the track. The same thing applies  to fixed coupling bars. I assume that also applies to the standard TT coupler but I have no experience of it.

It would be nice if Kadee did produce a version of their coupler for NEM boxes on CCUs - which are now the norm- but I guess the market smply isn't large enough. The fact that Kadee produce their NEM 362 coupler in four lengths says a lot about how far manufacturers fail to follow the NEM. 

I've not though had any more problems using Kadees with kinematic mounted boxes than with fixed ones though I get pretty good close coupling with both. My H0 layout is fairly small though. 

 

*Yves Desse started his company as an eBay shop selling specially designed resin moulded NEM boxes that one could glue to the underside of Jouef, and Acho wagons to replace the 'orrible hinged loop couplers. They are now etched but still work well and don't suffer from the 'droop' that aflicts so many CCU mounted boxes and is the bane of my shunting life.

Edited November 30, 2022 by Pacific231G

[boxbrownie]

3 hours ago, PeterStiles said:

 

Erm, I'm pretty sure that this defeats the point of having Kaydees in the first place. If you're going to not-uncouple somethings then don't fit kaydees and fit something fixed (and therfore much much cheaper) instead.

 

unless of course you have a billion spare kaydees lying around doing nothing.

No, Kadees have two pivoting pins, one for the horn and one in the mount so the whole coupling can swivel, you just stop the main swivel action for close coupling.

[irishmail]

For those of us in the TT:120 club,  Hornby have got the second part of the Train Termial blog up in the members area.  Some nice images of the 08 and samples of the HST & Mk3 coach.

Good news re Ladders, they will be removed on the production models for the relevant versions, so Hornby do listen to feedback from' customers'.

Edited November 30, 2022 by irishmail
Add additional info

[Hroth]

Thanks for the heads up about the Train Terminal blog, I've just had a look.

 

I was interested to read

Quote

We have chosen a range of liveries for the initial release, including perhaps the shunter’s most iconic guise of BR Blue.

where I would beg to differ!  A BR Green guise would have been more "iconic" and have fitted in with their steam releases, particularly the A4.  The blue livery is acceptable, but perhaps one of the post-private liveries could have been put back instead?

 

The production sample of "Blink Bonny" looks terrific, I'm glad they didn't immediately rush out a "Flying Scotsman", though that will come...

 

Edited November 30, 2022 by Hroth
spelin, again...