Possible to replace Peco set track points with something finer looking?

[MikuMatt81]

Hi everyone,

 

   So im two years into building my first layout, and in many ways im still new to the hobby so please forgive me if I ask a "stupid" question here... 😀

 

When I started my journey I didnt know the difference between code 100 and code 75, insulfrog and electrofrog, or much of anything really.

 

Two years on and I feel ive learnt a lot, and I have taken a particular interest in modelling scenics, especially trees, foliage, flora, static grass etc, and I am really proud of what I have acehived so far.

 

Now I have packed a LOT on a small 8 x 4 layout (because its all the space I have in the world), and as a result,  track wise I am stuck within the geometry of Peco's set track, which is OK and its served me well, allowing me to focus on modelling my diorama's which is where most of the fun is for me.

 

I mostly use my layout for taking snaps, and I feel the cod 100 insulfrog points whilst OK, obviously are'nt ideal for photography, especially given how finely ive modelled many of the other scenic elements around them.

 

In an ideal world, I would like to slowly replace the main track with Peco or C&L Code 75 (OO gauge) bullhead track, but I know given the tight constraints of my layout, Im stuck within the geomtry of those 1st radius insultfrog points.

 

Now Im sure this idea I have in my head is pie in the sky, but would it be at all feasable to hand build a sort of "faux bullhead" style code 75 point using say parts from a C&L kit? obviously it wont be prototypical geometry, but it really doesnt have to be... I just want something that looks a bit finer with the correct sleeper spacing, and nothing more.

 

So is there any hope here for something better? or have I finally lost the plot? 😂

 

 

 

 

[RichardT]

It probably is possible. Why not just have a go? It’ll only cost you a small amount in materials and time, and it’ll be a useful skill to develop. Then tell the forum how you got on.

 

Good luck

 

RichardT

Edited April 25 by RichardT

[Wheatley]

You can in theory recreate the geometry of Setrack points with (for example) copperclads and Code 75 rail. However, the geometry of Setrack points is so compromised compared to even the smallest pair of points on the real thing that it begins to look silly, almost like a scaled up version of 009 Crazy-Track. 

 

It's notable that Peco hasn't announced any intention to go below Streamline medium radius with the Code 75 Bullhead, even the BH medium radius points are pushing it a bit.  Setrack points are even smaller than small radius Streamline points of course. You can do it but it looks odd. 

[MikuMatt81]

1 hour ago, RichardT said:

It probably is possible. Why not just have a go? It’ll only cost you a small amount in materials and time, and it’ll be a useful skill to develop. Then tell the forum how you got on.

 

Good luck

 

RichardT

 

Hi Richard,

 

   I would very much like to go ahead and try it out, there are two things i need to clarify in my head first.

 

1. I would obviously need a template to work from, could this be put together in something like Templot (which I obviously have no experience of yet) ? or perhaps I could simply base the build off a template of the Peco set track point? (im not sure if Peco might have one handy?).

 

2. I would need to know what parts to buy, perhaps there is a suitible kit I could butcher?

 

regards,

[MikuMatt81]

1 hour ago, Wheatley said:

You can in theory recreate the geometry of Setrack points with (for example) copperclads and Code 75 rail. However, the geometry of Setrack points is so compromised compared to even the smallest pair of points on the real thing that it begins to look silly, almost like a scaled up version of 009 Crazy-Track. 

 

It's notable that Peco hasn't announced any intention to go below Streamline medium radius with the Code 75 Bullhead, even the BH medium radius points are pushing it a bit.  Setrack points are even smaller than small radius Streamline points of course. You can do it but it looks odd. 

 

Hello there,

 

    I hear what you're saying about it potentially looking odd, I can definately understand where you coming from, but I think it would be a fun exercise to try out if nothing else. 😄

[lapford34102]

Hi,

I've made bullhead code 75 "copies" of Peco small radius point using copperclad sleepering. Downloaded the Peco template and and re-drew the sleeper spacing to match the code 75 bullhead. It is a bit more involved than that but essentially that's it.

 

One of the three I did for my parcels layout.

I appreciate what others are saying about doing this with Setrack geometry and it looking somewhat odd but until someone tries.......

Cheers

Stu

 

[MikuMatt81]

9 minutes ago, lapford34102 said:

Hi,

I've made bullhead code 75 "copies" of Peco small radius point using copperclad sleepering. Downloaded the Peco template and and re-drew the sleeper spacing to match the code 75 bullhead. It is a bit more involved than that but essentially that's it.

 

 

 

 

Hi Stu,

 

  Wow thats pretty much what I had in mind! May I ask where you downloaded the Peco template please?

 

Also what is the process with regards to isolation on these? I just need mine to function like an insulfrog (as all my locos have Stay-alives fitted), but look similar to the Peco Bullhead  Unifrog design.. im guessing its about cutting in specific places?

[RichardT]

1 hour ago, MikuMatt81 said:

? or perhaps I could simply base the build off a template of the Peco set track point? (im not sure if Peco might have one handy?).

Yes. As others have said, the geometry is compromised WRT real track geometry but that’s not the point (no pun intended!) of your proposal.  Templot is intended to draw models of real track, not toy train track (which is what Peco Setrack is, really) and would be overkill for your experiment. But later on…who knows where you’ll go? 😁

 

I did the same thing when I started in N gauge in the 1970s, using copper clad sleepers and secondhand Peco rail over a printed Peco setrack point template stuck to a block of wood. I used track pins with their heads cut off pushed into the wood to hold the rail ends over the template.  (Copying what I’d seen Mike Cook do with SMP point kits on his South Devon layout.) They didn’t look “real” (but neither does Setrack) but they worked - running was a bit rough mind you until I realised I hadn’t filed the switch rail ends & stock rail joggles properly and the common crossings were always a bit of a bodge (I was using FB rail in my ignorance - it’ll be easier with BH) but it was fun and I was *so* chuffed - “look dad, I’ve made my own points!”

 

*Then* I started learning about prototype track geometry… (but also about beer and girls, which slowed down the modelling a lot.)

 

The Peco point templates (intended for track planning purposes) are downloadable from their website - find the point you need and the template should also be there.  (We used to have to send off for printed ones by post enclosing two or three inlay strips from a length of Peco flex track!)

 

As I said, good luck! Will be interested to see the results.

 

RichardT

Edited April 25 by RichardT
Clarifying

[brossard]

I have used Peco templates for the build of my 0 gauge turnouts (I made my own because the price of Peco 0 Gauge is pretty high).  They work well and set track turnouts are probably a good starting point for building your own track.  My first efforts were the rebuilding of clapped out 00 Peco code 100 turnouts on copper clad.  Soldering rail to copper clad is also good to start with as it's straightforward.  Get yourself some roller gauges.  There are also vee and blade jigs but these aren't essential IMO.

 

John

[Dungrange]

2 hours ago, RichardT said:

The Peco point templates (intended for track planning purposes) are downloadable from their website - find the point you need and the template should also be there.  

 

Unfortunately, that only seems to be the case for the Streamline range.  There doesn't appear to be any downloadable templates for the Set Track range.

[RichardT]

25 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

  There doesn't appear to be any downloadable templates for the Set Track range.

Oh b*gger. Sorry @MikuMatt81.  They definitely did used to do printed Setrack point templates.  (EDIT Just checked and they *do* templates for 9mm gauge Setrack points but not 16.5mm. How odd.)

 

Mind you, all they consisted of were an overhead photo of a point. So just photocopy or scan a Setrack point at 100% to make a DIY template? Voila - that’ll sock it to The Man!

 

RichardT

Edited April 25 by RichardT
Adding info about 9mm templates

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

5 hours ago, MikuMatt81 said:

...I feel the code 100 insulfrog points whilst OK, obviously aren't ideal for photography...

Then again Hornby have yet to notice how even their best models have the shine taken off them when advertised standing on their own dreadful set track.

 

Here's someone who has done the very thing you propose.

https://www.newrailwaymodellers.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=57802&hilit=copperclad+set+track+points

[MikuMatt81]

20 minutes ago, RichardT said:

Oh b*gger. Sorry @MikuMatt81.  They definitely did used to do printed Setrack point templates.  (EDIT Just checked and they *do* templates for 9mm gauge Setrack points but not 16.5mm. How odd.)

 

Mind you, all they consisted of were an overhead photo of a point. So just photocopy or scan a Setrack point at 100% to make a DIY template? Voila - that’ll sock it to The Man!

 

RichardT

 

Well look, I emailed Peco and they let me have the attached image (from a brochure I belive), not exactly a template per say, but they must think it OK for the intended purpose as I told them what I wanted to do.

 

It'll be tricky printing it out to the right size though, I am told the straight section is 168mm long so thats something to go on.

 

My next question for the community is, assuming copper clad sleepers throughout, and an un-powered frog like on the original ST point, where exactly will I need to make incisions throughout the point to avoid shorting?

 

Also I assume the tie bar will the tie bar need a spring of some kind?

 

 

thanks!

 

 

[MikuMatt81]

25 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Then again Hornby have yet to notice how even their best models have the shine taken off them when advertised standing on their own dreadful set track.

 

Here's someone who has done the very thing you propose.

https://www.newrailwaymodellers.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=57802&hilit=copperclad+set+track+points

 

I too have noticed that Hornby use their Set track in all their marketing stuff, and I actually think the Peco set track looks quite a bit better than Hornbys, especially when carefully weathered down.

 

Thanks for the link, really interesting to see!

[brossard]

15 minutes ago, MikuMatt81 said:

 

Well look, I emailed Peco and they let me have the attached image (from a brochure I belive), not exactly a template per say, but they must think it OK for the intended purpose as I told them what I wanted to do.

 

It'll be tricky printing it out to the right size though, I am told the straight section is 168mm long so thats something to go on.

 

My next question for the community is, assuming copper clad sleepers throughout, and an un-powered frog like on the original ST point, where exactly will I need to make incisions throughout the point to avoid shorting?

 

Also I assume the tie bar will the tie bar need a spring of some kind?

 

 

thanks!

 

 

 

One weakness of using a copper clad tiebar is that the solder joint of the blade fatigues over time.  Norman Solomon (the guru of trackwork) used bent brass pins as hinges for tiebars.   A bit tricky because you have to drill the tiebar exactly to get the right blade spacing.  Speaking of which, Peco's blade spacing is horrendous, designed to suit all manner of wheels standards I assume.  If you build your own turnouts you can adjust the blade to something more reasonable.

 

There are pictures of Set Track points on Peco website with dimensions.

 

https://peco-uk.com/collections/100/products/turnout-2nd-radius-right-hand?variant=7435698044962

 

John

[Jeremy Cumberland]

26 minutes ago, MikuMatt81 said:

My next question for the community is, assuming copper clad sleepers throughout, and an un-powered frog like on the original ST point, where exactly will I need to make incisions throughout the point to avoid shorting?

I'd be inclined to build them with live frogs and switch the crossing polarity.

 

The problem with any sort of insulfrog arrangement is that you end up with a very small, vulnerable crossing nose. Peco insulfrogs make the crossing nose part of the plastic base moulding. Peco Unifrogs use the moulded plastic base to support the crossing nose over its entire length. You will struggle to get this level of support with hand built track, not without having a very long insulated section.

[brossard]

Agree, basically electrofrog with a cut between the closure rail and crossing for insulation.  Solder a common wire  to the crossing and wires to the stock rails that are jumped to the closure rail.  Make sure the electrical connection between closure rail and blade is reliable, something like an omega loop.

 

 

These are 0 gauge but the idea is the same as 00.  The turnout in the middle is Peco and I have modified it to mitigate the nasty blade spacing of the original.  Note the gaps between the closure rail and crossing on all three, this isolates the crossing.  Peco points have a jumper under the gap which must be broken.

 

The two crossings on the outside were built on the Peco template, which I left in place.  Timbers are wood.

 

I'm a big fan of slo mo point motors.  Mine are Tortoise but only because they are two decades old and still going.  They have two sets of contacts.  There are other options.  The club layout has SEEP with contacts but we have found these tend to go out of calibration.  There is a program to replace SEEP with Tortoise and Cobalt.

 

John

 

Edited April 25 by brossard

[MikuMatt81]

49 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

I'd be inclined to build them with live frogs and switch the crossing polarity.

 

The problem with any sort of insulfrog arrangement is that you end up with a very small, vulnerable crossing nose. Peco insulfrogs make the crossing nose part of the plastic base moulding. Peco Unifrogs use the moulded plastic base to support the crossing nose over its entire length. You will struggle to get this level of support with hand built track, not without having a very long insulated section.

 

The problem I have is that I already have very basic Gaugemaster GMC-PM2 point motors fitted, which of course  dont support polarity switching. 

 

I could of course easily buy new point motors, but everything is already such a tight fit under my highly compressed layout, (with Dapol signal motors and all sorts of everything in the way of the point motors),  id struggle to even get the old motors out and replaced.

 

If you really feel live frogs are the only way to go, very sadly id have to can the project before it gets started 😢

 

 

[Il Grifone]

Part of the problem with Peco and Hornby pointwork (apart from being H0 scale to USA  standards) is the sloppy clearances intended to accept overscale wheels. Modern (if you can call standards set in the late 30s modern - Dublo!) wheels are reasonably fine and don't require the grossly overscale tolerances provided, especially the deep flangeways. the divergence of the wing rails starts far too soon and requires a floor in the crossing for the flanges to run on when passing through.

 

I intend to tighten all mine - I laid my American layout with Streamline and the NMRA (and BRMSB) wheels tend to bump passing through.

The British layout is laid with Formoway (yes that old!), which suffers from the same problem, but luckily the track is not fixed down yet.

Get out the PCB strip and the soldering iron....

[brossard]

58 minutes ago, MikuMatt81 said:

 

The problem I have is that I already have very basic Gaugemaster GMC-PM2 point motors fitted, which of course  dont support polarity switching. 

 

I could of course easily buy new point motors, but everything is already such a tight fit under my highly compressed layout, (with Dapol signal motors and all sorts of everything in the way of the point motors),  id struggle to even get the old motors out and replaced.

 

If you really feel live frogs are the only way to go, very sadly id have to can the project before it gets started 😢

 

 

 

The GMC-PM2 is the basic SEEP.  There is a version with two sets of contacts.  There is a polarity switching relay:

 

https://www.gaugemasterretail.com/gaugemaster-gm500.html

 

but, to me, that is pretty expensive if you have a lot of motors. 

 

If you do plan to do some under board wiring, I hope for your sake that you can tip the layout on it's side.  As I said in another thread, trying to wire a layout while lying on your back is a level of Hell that Dante didn't mention in his Inferno.

 

John

[Jeremy Cumberland]

31 minutes ago, MikuMatt81 said:

 

The problem I have is that I already have very basic Gaugemaster GMC-PM2 point motors fitted, which of course  dont support polarity switching. 

 

I could of course easily buy new point motors, but everything is already such a tight fit under my highly compressed layout, (with Dapol signal motors and all sorts of everything in the way of the point motors),  id struggle to even get the old motors out and replaced.

 

If you really feel live frogs are the only way to go, very sadly id have to can the project before it gets started 😢

 

An alternative would be Electrofrog "out of the box" style wiring, where you rely on stock rail to switch blade contact to provide the electrical supply to the crossing. This presumably is something you had intended doing anyway if you wanted to replicate Insulfrog, but I can't say it is anything I would choose to do myself, and I have no idea how reliable it can be made.

 

I suppose you'd solder a pickup strip to the underside of the switch blade that has a wiping contact with the stock rail (or vice versa, soldering to the stock rail and wiping the switch) when the switch is closed. With Electrofrog out-of-the-box, the two switch blades are electricaly bonded via the frog, so you'll need to  take care that the opposite side electrical wiper breaks before the near side electrical wiper makes. You will also need to make sure that the switch blade to closure rail electrical contacts are absolutely reliable on each side. You will probably need to add insulating joints and track feeds at the diverging end of the point, but these depend on the track plan.

 

There is a potential problem with "out of the box" Electrofrog, which you don't get with Insulfrogs or live frogs with switched frog polarity, and that is that the open switch blade will be at the opposite polarity to the adjacent stock rail, which could cause a short if you have narrow open switch gaps, thick flanges or undersized wheel back to backs. This is unlikely to be a problem if you keep the same overly-wide open switch gaps as the Settrack points, but I expect you want to make them narrower.

[Dungrange]

1 hour ago, MikuMatt81 said:

If you really feel live frogs are the only way to go, very sadly id have to can the project before it gets started 😢

 

I'd certainly see it that way, as I don't see how you're going to hand make the nose of the common crossing.  With handmade track, the normal process is to file both rails so that you end up with an all metal 'frog'.  For an Insulfrog style design you either need a way to create a plastic frog (eg injection moulding) or you end up with a very small all metal frog, isolated from the diverging tracks, which would be difficult to support, but might be doable.  The high diverging angle of Set Track would make it easier to get a short frog than with more scale track.

[MikuMatt81]

27 minutes ago, brossard said:

 

The GMC-PM2 is the basic SEEP.  There is a version with two sets of contacts.  There is a polarity switching relay:

 

https://www.gaugemasterretail.com/gaugemaster-gm500.html

 

but, to me, that is pretty expensive if you have a lot of motors. 

 

If you do plan to do some under board wiring, I hope for your sake that you can tip the layout on it's side.  As I said in another thread, trying to wire a layout while lying on your back is a level of Hell that Dante didn't mention in his Inferno.

 

John

 

That GM500 unit looks interesting, so I can hook up my existing GMC-PM2 motor to the GM500, and have it manage polarity switching for me, is that correct?

 

If so id happily buy a bunch of these if meant I could use my existing PM2 motors.

[MikuMatt81]

11 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

 

I'd certainly see it that way, as I don't see how you're going to hand make the nose of the common crossing.  With handmade track, the normal process is to file both rails so that you end up with an all metal 'frog'.  For an Insulfrog style design you either need a way to create a plastic frog (eg injection moulding) or you end up with a very small all metal frog, isolated from the diverging tracks, which would be difficult to support, but might be doable.  The high diverging angle of Set Track would make it easier to get a short frog than with more scale track.

 

Ok thanks, i will have to find a way to make live frogs work in that case :)

[brossard]

6 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

 

I'd certainly see it that way, as I don't see how you're going to hand make the nose of the common crossing.  With handmade track, the normal process is to file both rails so that you end up with an all metal 'frog'.  For an Insulfrog style design you either need a way to create a plastic frog (eg injection moulding) or you end up with a very small all metal frog, isolated from the diverging tracks, which would be difficult to support, but might be doable.  The high diverging angle of Set Track would make it easier to get a short frog than with more scale track.

 

Not that I would go the insulfrog route myself, but in my mind I can see making the non metal nose from plastic strip and epoxy then filing after curing.

 

I always make the crossing on a separate jig:

 

 

After making the vee, add another cc strip so that it is well supported then saw off the vee end, replacing it with plastic.  I've never done this so just a suggestion.

 

John