BRealistic Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 You've reminded me of my first train-spotting outings, Pete.. also with an elder brother, along with his equally older mates! Mom made him take me, so you can imagine how welcome I felt!!! That was to New Street Station (in the mid Fifties)... where most of the 'interesting' trackwork was hidden in tunnels! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Yorkshire Pud Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Evening all First off, many thanks to martin_wynne, BRealistic, and Andy Y, for putting me in the picture about the sleeper spacings ......... I hadn't realised the compromises surrounding the use of Peco code 75 track, and so I guess ultimately, its down to personal preference and what "looks right" to the individual modeller. I confess that when I first read Andy Y's post regarding the spacing of the sleepers, I took it as 7.5mm "gap", not "centres". As it turns out my 10mm sleeper "centres" is seemingly just as valid ......... as it, along with the rest of the track, is somewhat of a compromise anyway. I can now see that my first effort is a bit wider than Andy's, and also the track photo posted by BRealistic ......... both of which are perfectly "good looking" to the eye IMHO, although I must say I still like the slightly wider look. Therefore, I've decided to compromise just a tad, and space the sleepers on my layout at 9mm "centres" which just about hits the lower dimension that martin_wynne talked about in his post. Thanks to all who tried to help and explain this to a newbie !! ........ only hope my first effort turns out half as good as what I've seen on here. Cheers !! Simon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Now I'm preparing an HO model with code 70 rail on sleepers with 24" centres! I do like the look of US rail - contrary to popular belief in the UK their mainlines look much the same as the UK, well-maintained (over vast distances) concrete sleepered, double-track. The hard part is modelling the lightweight shortline with 39' lengths (staggered) and wavy....and getting it to work! Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Todd Posted December 27, 2013 Share Posted December 27, 2013 Another method for Peco turnouts................Go to page 17, onwards. http://www.dccconcepts.com/PDF_Downloads/cobalt_instructions.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted January 28, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 28, 2014 Just found this thread and it is just what I need to know at the moment. One thing I would add is that I had considered using either a Templot print out or a C & L template to use as a spacing guide. P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Todd Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Click Link.................Sleeper spacing tool Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poulmarvezen Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Hello? Is anybody still reading this thread? Sleeper spacing .... Fantastic idea this, many thanks. My twopenneth is that you can't play with anything (sleeper width, sleeper length) except the spacing. I tried 10mm c/c, thought it was fantastic for a couple of days, then started to have doubts. I saw 8.5mm c/c was muted, but liked the whole concept of spacing them out so went for 9mm. I liked that. Then, being a mathematician, decided to divide 16.5 (00) by 18.83 (P4). Answer, 0.8762etc. Multiply that by the "true" c/c of 10mm, (24 sleepers per 60'0" track panel), and you get 8.762mm c/c. This appeals to my OCD, and mediates the 8.5mm and 9.00mm camps. OK, I've settled for 8.76mm. My OCD is not as bad as it could be. This is easier to set out than you think. Using 5mm squared graph paper draw a line (A - B) 20cm long and mark off 1cm intervals. Draw a line (B- C) 17.52cm (= 2 x 8.76) long from one end of the 20cm line at an angle of about 30 or 40 degreees. Join the ends of these two lines, (A-C) Then draw a series of lines parallel with AC intersecting all the 1cm intervals on AB, but also intersecting BC. These intersections are now at 8.76mm centres. All this is best done on a drawing board with a T-square and an adjustable square. Now rotate the adjustable square through 90 degrees, and draw a series of lines through the intersections on line BC, this gives your sleeper spacing. I then plonked my de-webbed Peco 75 onto this diagram and slid the sleepers into position. Incidentally I found using my Xuron track cutters to shift the webs much faster and easier than a craft knife, with no chance of springing a sleeper off, also the blade scores the underside of the rail and makes sliding the sleepers about a bit jerky, with the Xuron you don't get this problem. Now ready to do a bit of Copydexing, (waiting for Amazon France to deliver it) hoping I can glue all the undersides of the sleepers and get it down before it dries. Need to mark out the cork first in felt tip using the graph paper thingy. I've laid out a great long sweep of track with a a piece of 9mm x 50mm ply on edge (temporarily screwed in place with blocks of wood) to butt the sleepers against. Really proud of that!. En continue! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maisie1 Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Hello? Is anybody still reading this thread? Sleeper spacing .... Fantastic idea this, many thanks. My twopenneth is that you can't play with anything (sleeper width, sleeper length) except the spacing. I tried 10mm c/c, thought it was fantastic for a couple of days, then started to have doubts. I saw 8.5mm c/c was muted, but liked the whole concept of spacing them out so went for 9mm. I liked that. Then, being a mathematician, decided to divide 16.5 (00) by 18.83 (P4). Answer, 0.8762etc. Multiply that by the "true" c/c of 10mm, (24 sleepers per 60'0" track panel), and you get 8.762mm c/c. This appeals to my OCD, and mediates the 8.5mm and 9.00mm camps. OK, I've settled for 8.76mm. My OCD is not as bad as it could be. This is easier to set out than you think. Using 5mm squared graph paper draw a line (A - B) 20cm long and mark off 1cm intervals. Draw a line (B- C) 17.52cm (= 2 x 8.76) long from one end of the 20cm line at an angle of about 30 or 40 degreees. Join the ends of these two lines, (A-C) Then draw a series of lines parallel with AC intersecting all the 1cm intervals on AB, but also intersecting BC. These intersections are now at 8.76mm centres. All this is best done on a drawing board with a T-square and an adjustable square. Now rotate the adjustable square through 90 degrees, and draw a series of lines through the intersections on line BC, this gives your sleeper spacing. I then plonked my de-webbed Peco 75 onto this diagram and slid the sleepers into position. Incidentally I found using my Xuron track cutters to shift the webs much faster and easier than a craft knife, with no chance of springing a sleeper off, also the blade scores the underside of the rail and makes sliding the sleepers about a bit jerky, with the Xuron you don't get this problem. Now ready to do a bit of Copydexing, (waiting for Amazon France to deliver it) hoping I can glue all the undersides of the sleepers and get it down before it dries. Need to mark out the cork first in felt tip using the graph paper thingy. I've laid out a great long sweep of track with a a piece of 9mm x 50mm ply on edge (temporarily screwed in place with blocks of wood) to butt the sleepers against. Really proud of that!. En continue! Any chance of some pictures / diagrams to go with this Poul?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Andy, I've just found this thread and it looks very interesting. In post number 1 of this thread you provided a link for a tool which might help with the whole job of sleeper separation and spacing. Unfortunately, the link no longer works (unless it's me). Also, the link in post number 106 for the spacer doesn't seem to work. Can you help with an up to date link or other, more classical, types of contact details? I'm itching to have a go. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted July 19, 2015 Author Share Posted July 19, 2015 Pete's obviously changed the website around since that time but it can be found here - http://www.phd-design-etchings.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&path=25_70&product_id=130 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG John Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 I'm currently butchering Peco code 100 OO track to produce O gauge track that will be hidden under cobblestones, and O-16.5 that will be ballasted over the sleepers. An advantage of using Peco track is that you can buy it secondhand, and it's tough enough to mostly still be in one piece. I've got one turnout that I'm intending to convert to copper clad, so I can have fairly accurately spaced 7mm narrow gauge sleepers on the moving parts where I can't bury them in ballast, so discovering this topic has given me a bit more confidence! One thing I've noticed when "researching" the narrow gauge track is that it never seems clear whether sleeper spacing is between centres, or the actual gap between sleepers. The word spacing seems to be used without explaining what's meant, so it's easy to get caught out. My understanding of the English language makes me think it's the gap between sleepers, but coming from a family of engineers makes me think it must be between centres! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold martin_wynne Posted July 19, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 19, 2015 My understanding of the English language makes me think it's the gap between sleepers, but coming from a family of engineers makes me think it must be between centres! Hi John, The spacing is always quoted centre-to-centre. The gap between them would vary according to the width of the timber -- plain wooden sleepers are 10" wide, most wooden crossing timbers are 12" wide, a few are 14" wide. regards, Martin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozthedog Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 This is a piece of test track with Peco Code 75 medium radius point modified for servo actuation (spring and associated housing removed). The sleepers at the toe have been replaced and re-spaced to match the attached track which has also had the sleepers re-spaced to a gap of 6.3mm between them. I have two reservations; a) 6.3mm may be too big a gap giving a narrow gauge look and the wider spacing of the track sleepers draws attention to the closeness of the point sleepers. In reality they would be close but not that close. I am thinking of trying again with 5.5mm sleeper spacing and would be grateful for any comments you might have on the appearance at the moment. Here's a close-up. Thanks Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Hello Keith, I think that your work has made a dramatic and positive effect on the track appearance. The one thing you can't get away from is the width of the sleepers. I think it's this that may, as you suggest, contribute to the narrow gauge appearance. The appearance of the point timbering spacings is apparent but not as obvious as I would have expected. Is the 6.3 mm spacing used to give the correct distance for sleeper centres? If that is the case then this would result in too big a gap. I think your plan to try with a 5.5 mm gap will go a long way to disguising the sleeper width issue. I am looking forward to seeing the results (with unmodified point included) because I am on the cusp of making a decision to use modified Peco track with unmodified pointwrok or revert to previous practise of SMP track and hand built points. The former would be considerably quicker. Thanks, Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tase Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Keith, that looks better than straight out of the box but in my opinion what lets it down is the actual width of the sleeper itself - it's just too narrow. Re-spacing only exacerbates this I'm afraid. This isn't a criticism of your work but just my observation. The ballast looks good - is it Woodlands Scenics? Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozthedog Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Bob I have just made a pair of 5.5mm spacers so as soon as I have some track ready I shall upload a pic. Here is a Peco long point before and after modification. I think it significantly improves them. Tase - The ballast is Woodland Scenics Fine Gray. Regards Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Budgie Posted July 23, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 23, 2015 One thing I would do is remove the odd-shaped timber from the other end. Timbers are straight, not bent in the middle (like a one-stringed fiddle!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Whilst I have done some tests upgrading the look of the code 75, my main work has been with the Code83 ... I haven't read this thread all the way through but I have gone much further than what I've seen in these last few posts ... I will take some photos and post them tomorrow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Whilst I have done some tests upgrading the look of the code 75, my main work has been with the Code83 ... I haven't read this thread all the way through but I have gone much further than what I've seen in these last few posts ... I will take some photos and post them tomorrow. Can't wait. Any advice before I take the plunge will be gratefully received. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozthedog Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 5.5mm spacing seems to do the job. I think the odd shaped timber at the other end is meant to represent two sleepers that meet in the middle. Maybe it needs a nick in the middle to separate them. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEAMYAKIMA Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 OK ... as I said yesterday, I have not read all the posts on this and so if I am repeating what others have done please forgive me. I am using code 83 HO as HO track so there are no sleeper spacing issues for me .... I just wanted to improve the look of the turnouts .... Here are 4 photos that show what I've done Straightening the toy-like joint sleeper arrangement... Filing away the excess plastic around the crossing I will fill the holes used to mount the switch machine ...... the other side are cut off ... Here is a great improvement .... filing back the hinges/pivots .... BUT BEWARE ... there is a high chance of destroying the point ... certainly they are now very flimsy at this point (no pun intended) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Great work lads. Keith, 5.5 mm certainly looks like the way to go and I think once it's ballasted the effect of the narrow sleepers will be less apparent. The issue with the timbering as the tracks diverge isn't as straight forward as separating the 2 attached timbers. If you do that then one or both will be too short. I would be tempted to cut the timber on the through track to the correct length and remove the one from the diverging track completely and then start to interlace sleepers until the 2 lines a completely separated (as TEAMYAKIMA has done). TEAMYAKIMA, I like what you've done with your points/turnouts (depending on where you live). Removing the switch blade hinge looks a bit scary. I think I would just try to disguise it by painting. I like the longer timbers at the switch end. I think I'll give that a go. I wonder if the continuous timbering goes too far beyond the crossing before you've started to interlace the sleepers. I think I would have started interlacing 1 or maybe 2 timbers earlier. However, the overall appearance is a huge improvement. Thanks to both. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozthedog Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 "Straightening the toy-like joint sleeper arrangement..." - a great improvement. This is how Templot would do it: I am just off to the shed to see what I can do! Cheers Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBAGE Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 "Straightening the toy-like joint sleeper arrangement..." - a great improvement. This is how Templot would do it: I am just off to the shed to see what I can do! Cheers Keith Love it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozthedog Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Back from the shed a little damp from the rain crossing the lawn! Here's the final product. Not too far away from the Templot drawing (previous post). That's as far as I am going to go with it. Now on to lay the track for Wallingford. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.