Brass0four Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 The anchorite, Julian of Norwich (a chick btw) became famous for calling God, Mother, rather than, Father. Sooooooooo, if the glove fits... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sasquatch Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 20, 2014 Kal. As regards Peco rail. To my mind if the gauge is 16.5 HO the sleeper spacing should be closer otherwise it won't look right. Most of us mere mortals run RTR locos & stock straight from the box so have to settle for HO trackwork. The only thing that's wrong with code 100 is that it looks wrong in HO scale so code 75 looks much better and gives the HO trackwork a scale longer look. The best improvement is to cut off all those ugly bits around the switches which means using different motors to the Peco ones but hey. Who uses them! Code 75 on left, ]code 100 on right Yes that's Atlas Code 100 and Peco double slip. I used the code 75 slip as the code 100 version is naff! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ChrisN Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2014 Kal, Oh dear track. My comment is, and I will put it on this thread rather than Al's so no one thinks I am having a go at anyone, that I was surprised that the Cambriam, before it was the Cambrian laid flat bottom track in the 1860s. Not exclusively, and I need to check again about the coast lines and have a good look at the track. As I did not notice telegraph poles until I specifically looked for them I cannot say definately that it was not laid in PECO code 100, although to be honest, it may have been to heavy for them as everything was on a shoe string. With your permission Kal, Shaun, Why do you say the PECO code 100 slip is rubbish? I assume you mean the double slip. I will be using code 100 as I need to get things running once my layout is built and I have quite a lot of old stock and I do not want to re-wheel most things I have. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sasquatch Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 20, 2014 Most locos stall on the example I have or worse derail! It might be the older version as it has pressed nickel switch blades that look very Double-O! I'm so happy with the Code 75 one , that the decision has been made to switch. Having said that there's all those Shinohara turnouts I brought but at 70 pence each I'm sure they'll fit in in the hidden sidings! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ChrisN Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2014 Most locos stall on the example I have or worse derail! It might be the older version as it has pressed nickel switch blades that look very Double-O! I'm so happy with the Code 75 one , that the decision has been made to switch. Having said that there's all those Shinohara turnouts I brought but at 70 pence each I'm sure they'll fit in in the hidden sidings! Shaun, Thanks. Umm, that does not sound hopeful as one code 75 slip means the same as all the track at code 75. 'THINKS!' Kal, You have double slips do you not? Are they code 100 or 75? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Todd Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Click pictures,to enlarge....... Edited February 21, 2014 by David Todd 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sasquatch Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 20, 2014 Picture 4 is starting to look more like the real thing than the real thing dt! Nice work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaz Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) dt You are going to have to move your thread here, you get more comments and likes And Sasquatch is right it's looking really good, even though the picture portrays the old portal not your new one. Edited February 20, 2014 by Jaz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sasquatch Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 20, 2014 Shaun, Thanks. Umm, that does not sound hopeful as one code 75 slip means the same as all the track at code 75. 'THINKS!' Kal, You have double slips do you not? Are they code 100 or 75? Have just checked the Peco site for double slips. The SL90 looks finer than the one I have. Also noticed that there wasn't an SLE-90. No electrofrog in code 100, that must have been the reason I opted for the code75 SLE-190. Hate dead frogs!!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 Shaun, Thanks. Umm, that does not sound hopeful as one code 75 slip means the same as all the track at code 75. 'THINKS!' Kal, You have double slips do you not? Are they code 100 or 75? Hi My slips are 75 but I do have 100 long points and track, but it us not east to spot. I changed to 75 because I prefer the 3 way points , but I never removed the 100 stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 Have just checked the Peco site for double slips. The SL90 looks finer than the one I have. Also noticed that there wasn't an SLE-90. No electrofrog in code 100, that must have been the reason I opted for the code75 SLE-190. Hate dead frogs!!!!!! For me that is more important than 100, 75 sleeper spacing etc, I too say avoid insulfrog at all cost, they are so frustrating Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ChrisN Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2014 Kal and Shaun, Thanks. Dead frogs would be easier to wire I suppose. Still, I may be lumbered with it. I am not sure when Hornby changed things over to all run on code 75, and I am not going to put up a thread in the Hornby section. I suppose I ought to buy a length of code 75 and see how my stock runs on it, although are the check rail gaps too different? That is, if the stock ran on straight track would they fail to negotiate code 75 turnouts? I am sorry if this has been discussed in the talk of track but to be honest I have just skimmed the posts as there are a lot more important things in life to spill (metaphorical) blood over. Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 Anyways, for flat bottom track I believe both 75 and 100 are wrong, and code 82 would be precise, but when all said and done, so what. Dt's main track is 100 and to me that looks cool, Same goes for Sasquatch 100 to 75 So I think it is all just track fascism, use what you are happy with Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Todd Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Well,Dover Priory is using Peco 100, for my main trackwork, Peco 75 for normal turnouts, peco 75,for 3-way turnouts, peco 75 for slips, code 83 Shaun o' Hara,Scissors crossing.. dt You are going to have to move your thread here, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ChrisN Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Kal, To be honest, I do not care either. I just do not want to lay code 75 and find my 20 year old stock, which I am sure will work, does not run over it. On the other hand, even though I started life with dead frogs I do not want them to cause me issues now. Edited February 20, 2014 by ChrisN 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaz Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Speaking of emoticons...how do you give the 3 that show up on your ratings (useful, creative and dislike) as sometimes these would be useful? I heard.....it was gossip u understand....that Andy Y pulled them after complaints...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) Chris Are you DCC ? If not and if you never will then insulfrog is less of an issue Edited February 20, 2014 by Kal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold ChrisN Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 20, 2014 Kal, Thanks. I am starting out as DC, with the thought as I mentioned on ypour thread a while ago of moving to DCC, mainly so my grand children could use their computers to control it, but, hey ho, it is not a big deal. It will make wiring it a lot easier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sasquatch Posted February 20, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 20, 2014 There's nothing wrong with good old Peco code 100! It's a good reliable system for a start. There is a great range of turnouts and accessories and when painted and ballasted nicely can look really old fashioned which creates the all-of-a-piece scene. I for one certainly would never find the time to build my own track. Other things are more important to me than scale trackwork. Super elevation is one, many a good layout picture can be let down because the trains are not leaning! regards Shaun 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brass0four Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I love dead frogs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcredfer Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Only with ......... I love dead frogs. ....Garlic and Olive Oil ....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal Posted February 21, 2014 Author Share Posted February 21, 2014 And where would we be if we had no rules...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sasquatch Posted February 21, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 21, 2014 There are rules???? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Todd Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Kal. As regards Peco rail. To my mind if the gauge is 16.5 HO the sleeper spacing should be closer otherwise it won't look right. Most of us mere mortals run RTR locos & stock straight from the box so have to settle for HO trackwork. The only thing that's wrong with code 100 is that it looks wrong in HO scale so code 75 looks much better and gives the HO trackwork a scale longer look. The best improvement is to cut off all those ugly bits around the switcheswhich means using different motors to the Peco ones but hey. Who uses them! I used the code 75 slip as the code 100 version is naff! I do,............have got 49 Dcc Cobalts, all working.......... 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Todd Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Have just checked the Peco site for double slips. The SL90 looks finer than the one I have. Also noticed that there wasn't an SLE-90. No electrofrog in code 100, that must have been the reason I opted for the code75 SLE-190. Hate dead frogs!!!!!! https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=images+of+dead+frogs&rlz=1C1CHFX_enGB530GB530&oq=images+of+dead+frogs&aqs=chrome..69i57j0.10865j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now