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

[JohnR]

7 hours ago, MikuMatt81 said:

 

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?).

 

 

Peco have templates of all their points available for download from their website. 

 

Youi will find that the code 75 streamline points have a different geometry - so the track needs to be spaced aprt by 50mm, rather than 67mm, and even the small radius points have a larger radius that settrack points, so they will take up more space. 

 

You're probably going to end up taking up a lot of your trackwork in order to fit them in. 

[brossard]

18 minutes ago, MikuMatt81 said:

 

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.

 

As read the blurb, that is my understanding.  (I went off solenoid motors decades ago.)  However, the relay only does one turnout so that seems expensive to me.  How many motors are we talking about?  Seems to me if you got new SEEPs with the integral contacts, the cost would be a wash and you wouldn't need to find fresh real estate.

 

John

[ikcdab]

2 hours 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 😢

 

 

If you want decent running and something which looks the part, then live frog IS the only way to go. It is also far simpler.

And dont worry about the point motors - use what you have and just switch the polarity with a miniature relay that can be sited anywhere out of the way. It really is simple to do, the miniature rerlays are very cheap and its very satisfying too.

[ikcdab]

1 hour ago, MikuMatt81 said:

 

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.

why buy thise when this sort of thing is more flexible, cost effective and easier to use:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/123790409463?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=9hOxI6nZQ-6&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=oMX1GZ5VQyG&var=425275799840&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

[Wheatley]

3 hours ago, Dungrange said:

.  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,.

 

3 hours ago, brossard said:

 

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.

 

You could make up an insulfrog on a piece of sheet copperclad then cut to shape afterwards, or even by infilling between sleeper with offcuts. This is a flat crossing so far less acute angles, but the crossing noses on here are lumps of 60thou styrene superglued in then sanded and filed to shape. The bits coloured in red are all the same polarity, bare copper is the opposite polarity. Unfortunately there was no photo of the crossing noses in place but without the four foot infilled. Insulation gaps were cut with a slitting disc. The lumps of solder scattered at random are the connections for the wires underneath  which connect areas of the same polarity. 

 

 

It's hidden in a tunnel so it doesn't need to be pretty but it does need to work 100% reliably. (It can be accessed if need be !). 

Edited April 25 by Wheatley

[Jeremy Cumberland]

2 hours ago, ikcdab said:

why buy thise when this sort of thing is more flexible, cost effective and easier to use:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/123790409463?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=9hOxI6nZQ-6&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=oMX1GZ5VQyG&var=425275799840&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

That's a conventional relay. How would you use it with a solenoid point motor, CDU and pulse contact switch?

 

The GM500 contains a dual coil latching relay and I imagine it has been designed specifically to work with Gaugemaster point motors. The instructions say 9V-24V, which ought to cover pretty much all CDU configurations.

[kevinlms]

I would be very tempted to leave the current layout, basically as it is.

 

When you are ready, start a brand new layout incorporating many new features, such as better looking points. It can be built over a period of time, with the old one still being available to use as required.

To be honest, the work required to change the existing points, is a fair amount of work - but of course, that's entirely up to you.

[martin_wynne]

On 25/04/2024 at 09:21, MikuMatt81 said:

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? 😂

@MikuMatt81

 

Hi,

 

You haven't lost the plot, and all is not lost. 🙂

 

You just need to think in terms of industrial turnouts, and get into Templot.

 

Industrial turnouts are very often flat-bottom, but not always. You can find plenty of very short bullhead turnouts in old industrial sidings. The Peco Set-Track turnouts are very close to a 9ft-1:3.75 bullhead turnout, having a model radius of 18 inches in 00 gauge. Here I have overlaid one in Templot on the Peco plan which you posted:

 

 

If you get into 3D printing that would be very easy to build.

 

Templot can create all the files you need to create this on 3D printers, and the filing jigs needed to make the rail parts:

 

 

 

See about Plug Track at: https://85a.uk/templot/club/

 

 

 

Martin.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

49 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

You just need to think in terms of industrial turnouts...

Completely unintentionally, I spent most of career based on and around sites which formerly had extensive rail served industries, the evidence of which regularly 'surfaced' when new construction was underway. Top marks for temptation...

[ejstubbs]

18 hours ago, brossard said:

However, the relay only does one turnout so that seems expensive to me.

 

The GM500 can switch the polarity of two turnouts at once, so would work well e.g. for a crossover where the two point motors would be 'fired' off a single pulse from the CDU.  See the second diagram in this article on the GM website.

Edited April 26 by ejstubbs

[MikuMatt81]

16 hours ago, kevinlms said:

I would be very tempted to leave the current layout, basically as it is.

 

When you are ready, start a brand new layout incorporating many new features, such as better looking points. It can be built over a period of time, with the old one still being available to use as required.

To be honest, the work required to change the existing points, is a fair amount of work - but of course, that's entirely up to you.

 

As much as Id like to do a second layout later down the line,  Im likely never going to have any more space than where I have my current layout in right now.

 

Indeed space is at a premium for many, and I feel very lucky to have the layout I have, as not too long ago I didnt think Id have anything at all.

 

Any  track replacment work would be done slowly in piecemeal manner, section by section. I have a Dremmel set and all essential the tools, and I feel its something I could acheive.

21 hours ago, brossard said:

 

How many motors are we talking about?  Seems to me if you got new SEEPs with the integral contacts, the cost would be a wash and you wouldn't need to find fresh real estate.

 

John

 

I have about 12 turnouts in total, however only two of those are in a "nightmare to remove" position, so I could use the GM500 unit just for those two, and easily replace the others.

 

 

*******

 

Moving on, I have had so many wonderful replies to my original post, that its almost been a tad overwhelming, and I've struggled to reply to every individual who took the time to try and help.

 

I have read ALL your posts very carefully, and taken on all your advice with much consideration, so thankyou all.

 

Moving foward my plan of action is:-

 

To draw up the template over the weekend, I will share it here for you all to eyeball before I go ahead and order the parts.

 

I plan to embrace the live frog build, and should I go ahead with replacing old points,  I would use something like the G500 unit to deal with polarity switching due to my not wanting to remove any existing point motors from underneath the baseboard.

 

I think its worth building at least one point as a skill building exercise, on a testboard first, even if I never went ahead with a full replacment on the actual layout.

 

I am *very* interested in the hobby, and I refuse to let the amount of space I have available stop me learning and trying out new things!!

 

 

[Harlequin]

You are taking a commendably pragmatic approach.

 

I have two thoughts for you:

1. It is possible to build a roundy round in 8 by 4 using streamline track. That would probably mean starting again from scratch so you might not be ready to do that yet.

2. You must have some space around your 8 by 4 to move around it and reach everything. What if you used that space for a layout and some of space currently occupied by the 8 by 4 for an operating well? That would also mean starting again but with much more room devoted to the layout so it changes the equation! (To be clear, a bigger railway in the same space.)

 

Edited April 27 by Harlequin

[melmerby]

On 25/04/2024 at 17:49, Il Grifone said:

Part of the problem with Peco and Hornby pointwork (apart from being H0 scale to USA  standards)

Doesn't look much like the more prototypical code 83 stuff

[MikuMatt81]

Hi everyone,

 

     So I hand-drew a template yesterday, I used my artists light-tracer so I could draw the rail on one piece of paper, and the sleepers on another. Thus allowing me to fine tune the sleeper arrangment if needs be without having to re-draw the entire thing.

 

Please remember this isnt (obviously)  intended to be prototypical in any way, just a finer looking point with code 75 BH rail, and 6mm sleeper spacing.

 

I slightly elongated the blade rails, and I would have liked to move the tie bar further down, but it has to be used in conjunction with existing point motors and theres no way in hell im taking them out again lol! 😁

 

Now I was wondering as to the possibility if I could use the DCC concepts pre-etched sleepers instead of standard copper clad in order to avoid having to cut and fill pcb.

 

Of course I understand they are intended for real world points, but there looks like a wide range of soilder pad spacings on the pre-etched sleepers to complete the project?

 

And finally what thickness of sleepers would I need to line up height with Peco BH please?  would spacers between the rail and sleepers be feasable for a first timer like me?

 

 

thanks!

Edited April 28 by MikuMatt81

[MikuMatt81]

On 26/04/2024 at 19:50, Harlequin said:

You are taking a commendably pragmatic approach.

 

I have two thoughts for you:

1. It is possible to build a roundy round in 8 by 4 using streamline track. That would probably mean starting again from scratch so you might not be ready to do that yet.

2. You must have some space around your 8 by 4 to move around it and reach everything. What if you used that space for a layout and some of space currently occupied by the 8 by 4 for an operating well? That would also mean starting again but with much more room devoted to the layout so it changes the equation! (To be clear, a bigger railway in the same space.)

 

 

Hi Phil,

 

   Thankyou very much for your message, its good to know what is possible in the space. It'd be unlikely id tear up my existing layout anytime soon however, as ive put a serious amount of time into the scenics, and I am generally very content with what i have..

 

That said, if some extra space becomes available later down the line I will likely do a scenic type enclosed end to end layout with lighting - not sure what you call them. now.

 

I actually have some Peco Bullhead points and track in stock somewhere for when that day comes.

 

 

regards,

 

Matthew