HSB Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I am currently getting a run time error when accessing Marcway's site. I wondered if anyone knows the radius of the Marcway 4mm/00 single slip please and could post an image of one on their layout? They list 36", 48" or 54" radius. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 25, 2012 Author Share Posted July 25, 2012 Lucky to have friends like this.... Philip Hindley of this parrish very kindly removed all the wheels from one of my Bachmann 'Crab' locos and turned the flanges down to a finer profile as per current Bachmann locos. It now runs through the Peco American Code 83 point as smoothly as cutting through butter. Weard they should be so much deeper than on other Bachmann locos.... The wheels after having the flanges reduced. The effect is to make the wheelbase look longer.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 25, 2012 Author Share Posted July 25, 2012 Hi Mickey, Marcway appears to have two sites, one showing 17.5% VAT and old prices and another much more up to date. I can access both sites, but the Peco site with printable templates shows a run time error on my PC. Same with the new German Meinert 'Mein Gleis' printable point templates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold sjp23480 Posted July 25, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 25, 2012 I have been watching this thread with great interest as I cogitate my choice of track for a future project. Having built a small test layout using SMP code 75 track and SMP plastic point kits, I really liked the look of the finished product. Unfortunately my main project is much larger and requires a wider variety of point work, medium and long radius, three way as well as crossings and slips. I intended to use SMP flexi track with code 75 Peco point work - which seems a decent compromise and achievable. However, I hear mixed opinions on Peco single and double slips. I only need 4 slips so am considered building them myself using SMP kits. Would anyone have a view on the following: - mixing SMP slips (copper clad sleepers, etc) with Peco point work? - are the SMP points any more reliable than their Peco equivalents? - given I have only ever build the SMP plastic sleepered kits, are they easy to build? Many thanks for your considered opinion. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 26, 2012 Author Share Posted July 26, 2012 I considered buying a Shinohara American Code 83 large radius double slip (around £56.00), as it is a #8 and means it matches with the large radius points of the same angle. I've had second thoughts and will either put up with the toylike 2' radius Peco Code 75 slips or used a ladder of normal points. SMP soldered points are reliable enough and Marcway offers slips to match 36", 48" and 53" radius points. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayfield Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 I have been watching this thread with great interest as I cogitate my choice of track for a future project. Having built a small test layout using SMP code 75 track and SMP plastic point kits, I really liked the look of the finished product. Unfortunately my main project is much larger and requires a wider variety of point work, medium and long radius, three way as well as crossings and slips. I intended to use SMP flexi track with code 75 Peco point work - which seems a decent compromise and achievable. However, I hear mixed opinions on Peco single and double slips. I only need 4 slips so am considered building them myself using SMP kits. Would anyone have a view on the following: - mixing SMP slips (copper clad sleepers, etc) with Peco point work? - are the SMP points any more reliable than their Peco equivalents? - given I have only ever build the SMP plastic sleepered kits, are they easy to build? Many thanks for your considered opinion. Steve Providing you take your time, use gauges and get the gaps at the end of the rails at the obtuse (K) crossing the correct length. You will have no problems. One thing with hand built double slips is that you need a strong point motor to move the switch blades as you have double the blades and the length of the switch blades are shorter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold sjp23480 Posted July 26, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 26, 2012 Thanks for the insights on the SMP copper clad points. Think I might take a shot at building one and see how I get on! :-) Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 28, 2012 Author Share Posted July 28, 2012 I thought these comparisons might be of interest. Marcway list standard diamonds to match their points except for the largest radius. Marc has just made me the diamond crossing shown specially to match the 72" point to form a lovely sweeping double junction... It can be seen the Peco Code 75 produces a sharper angle for the junction than the Code 83 and Marcway tracks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jukebox Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Just out of curiosity, what's the relative lengths from tip of blade to an equidistant point on all three configurations (say, where the opposing rails are 10mm or ~1/2 inch apart from coming out of the frog on the farthest crossing) Coach? Obvious the Marcway is going to use a heck of a lot of real estate... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 28, 2012 Author Share Posted July 28, 2012 Hi Jukebox, I'm not clear where you want me to take measurments. Do you want it from toe of blade to point of frog on the points? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jukebox Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Hi Jukebox, I'm not clear where you want me to take measurments. Do you want it from toe of blade to point of frog on the points? Hi Coach Honestly, not critcally fussed - just trying to get a handle on how much more length the Marcway configuration needs in total. The two Peco options appear similar (within 50mm?) but the Marcway looks to need another 200+mm because of its more protypical angle. (I ask because I have a couple of those #8 Shinohara double slips, and they excrete all over the Peco ones for looks, but getting them to "work" is not going to be easy becasue of the length of straight track they chew up...) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 29, 2012 Author Share Posted July 29, 2012 Jukebox, I hope the following assists.... I ask because I have a couple of those #8 Shinohara double slips, I would be grateful if you could upload a photo of the Shinohara Slip, as I would like to see one of these close up. Are they electrofrog or insulfrog? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jukebox Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Here you go: Both are Code 70, and Electrofrog, but not DCC ready (part of a job lot on eBay...) On the turnout I've removed the rivets that the blades swing on and replaced them with N gauge rail joiners and a PCB tiebar - and added the jumpers (hence the gaps in the sleepers) but have yet to isolate the frog by cutting the rails. From reading some companion siteson line, I believe it's a matter of adding jumpers and cutting the frog on the slip to do the same. Curiously, the rails already pivot on joiners, not rivets, in this piece. Dimensions added for reference. Regards Jukebox Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.