Peco O Gauge Set Track

[two tone green]

Looks like it has finally arrived. Scroll down towards the bottom of the page.

 

http://www.tower-models.com/towermodels/ogauge/peco/track/index.htm

 

[bennyboy]

Interesting, I didn't even know that they were planning to introduce O gauge Setrack! These should be a boon for those O gauge newbies who are planning to buy the forthcoming RTR models by Dapol and Heljan.

[81A Oldoak]

40.5" radius curves. Our Hudswell Clarke 0-6-0ST is happy on 36" radius curves.

[two tone green]

For the potential O gauge modeler this has got to be a plus point towards getting going in O gauge.

 

Points and crossings next. Just hope they don't wait too long before bring them out. Possibly more news from Telford on this.

[deltic17]

400mm long straights? - they should have made them 420mm which would have equated to a 60ft length!

[deltic17]

For the potential O gauge modeler this has got to be a plus point towards getting going in O gauge.

 

Points and crossings next. Just hope they don't wait too long before bring them out. Possibly more news from Telford on this.

I still think a 3 way point in the standard range would be a popular addition - fingers crossed for Telford - we live in hope!

[two tone green]

Yes, three way and some points between the new set track radius and the current standard range.

[HSB]

This track is obviously aimed at the tin-plate market. Why would anybody else need sectional track when flexible track can be bent to whatever radius you desire (with transition curves for smoother running)? It would indeed be nice to see a bigger range of points for fine-scale though.

[hartleymartin]

The only other option for people running 3-rail or coarse scale stuff is the Atlas 3-rail stuff. I reckon that Peco are just trying to ensure that that keep a certain market share.

 

However, I think that their O-16.5 track could benefit from having points the same geometry as their set-track range. There are a lot of narrow-gauge modellers out there who would buy them.

[PatB]

Prior to the current phobia for putting curves in 0 gauge track, a smidge under 3'6" would have been considered a reasonable minimum radius for the space starved modeller with short wheelbase stock.  After all, it's the equivalent of, what?  Nearly 2' in 00, which was once considered acceptable, if not generous, for the inside tracks of a serious (as opposed to train set) roundy roundy.

 

I'd buy an oval of it if only to set it up on the floor temporarily in order to run in (small) locos and stock.

[Hesperus]

I've made a start on handlaying some curves of a similar size for just that reason. Having looked at the link I'll probably finish them as if I had £100 spare it would be in the Ixion buying kitty.

[switcher 1]

After about 20 years of asking, if not more, they are finally giving their 'customers' what they want, if they produce the small radius pointwork & 3-way.

 

Personally, I believe this has come about because of Dapol's imminent releases, & possibly why it is taking so long for them to come to market, I think there will be a boxed 0 gauge train set very soon.

Edited September 4, 2013 by fatmac

[hartleymartin]

Considering that it would be 100 pounds just for a circle of track, I'm guessing that it's going to be a rather expensive train-set. probably loco 2x wagons and a brake van of some sort.

 

I agree that Peco should produce a 3-way point. There is lots of demand for them!

 

What (nominal) radius would the "small" points have? Same as the curved set-track?

[HSB]

I would expect any 'small' radius to be 4' (i.e. double their small radius H0 points).

By the way, PatB, 3' 6" radius in 0 would be the equivalent of 2' In EM, not 00, and that has always been considered tight in EM.

Edited September 4, 2013 by HSB

[KTM]

Well, I'm pleased that Peco have brought us the first 'inexpensive' ready-made curves (that I know of) since the Lima days. Test tracks on the dining room floor will be in for Planning Permission soon! 

 

Jon

[two tone green]

Lenz, yes the DCC people, have been doing an O gauge set track range for quite a while. Their second radius curve is almost the same as the new Peco ones. There is 9mm difference in the radius.

[HSB]

How do you mean in EM and not OO? are they not the same scale now?

They are the same scale but not the same gauge! EM is the nearest equivalent in 4mm scale to 0 in 7mm. The narrow gauge of 00 gives greater clearance on tight curves.

[switcher 1]

Considering that it would be 100 pounds just for a circle of track, I'm guessing that it's going to be a rather expensive train-set. probably loco 2x wagons and a brake van of some sort.

 

I agree that Peco should produce a 3-way point. There is lots of demand for them!

 

What (nominal) radius would the "small" points have? Same as the curved set-track?

I think I read somewhere that they are to be the same radius.

 

An 0 gauge trainset for around about £400 I would imagine, not really that expensive, all things considered. 8)

[Coldgunner]

If its robust enough for impromptu layouts in the living room or out in the garden, I'll get a loop.

[PatB]

I would expect any 'small' radius to be 4' (i.e. double their small radius H0 points).

By the way, PatB, 3' 6" radius in 0 would be the equivalent of 2' In EM, not 00, and that has always been considered tight in EM.

 

OK.  tight, yes, but still doable if my memory of 1960s and 70s EM practice, as described in Railway Modeller, isn't too foggy.  Besides, as the 31.5 mm brigade will attest, there's a fair bit of slop in 0 gauge standards too.

 

I'm not advocating sub-4' radii as being ideal, or even particularly desirable, but, back in the not so far off days when people built model railways in other than straight lines, there were plenty of examples of equivalent curves on serious model railways.

[HSB]

Some vintage 0 scale layouts such as the Sherwood Section and the Greenlane & Hillside certainly did use very sharp curves but they tended to be built to Coarse scale standards.

[PatB]

Some vintage 0 scale layouts such as the Sherwood Section and the Greenlane & Hillside certainly did use very sharp curves but they tended to be built to Coarse scale standards.

 

I'm thinking in terms of other scales and gauges too.  I seem to remember reading somewhere quite recently (although possibly in a very old magazine) that the minimum radius on Buckingham (EM of course) was in the region of 2'.

[KTM]

 

I'm not advocating sub-4' radii as being ideal, or even particularly desirable, but, back in the not so far off days when people built model railways in other than straight lines, there were plenty of examples of equivalent curves on serious model railways.

 

Interesting point.

 

Tight radii was once considered an acceptable compromise when building a model railway. It became 'frowned upon' later on then more recently, it seems to have moved further towards the unnacceptable end of the scale.

 

WhenI first started in model railways, I preferred tight curves because it meant I could fit more in to the space, have a longer straight section for stations and a more operationally interesting layout.

 

It's easy to lose sight of these joyful advantages when trying to build a 'serious; model!

 

Jon

[hartleymartin]

Tight curves look bad when viewed from the outside of the curves. Tight curves were especially abhorred by people building exhibition layouts. With a little extra slack in the couplings, there is no reason that one cannot successfully operate tight curves on a home layout, especially when you consider that you are viewing the trains from the INSIDE of the curve and the tightness of the curve is far less apparent.

 

One only needs to remember to transition and elevate curves on running lines. The elevation doesn't need to be more than about 2mm in O scale. If you do it gradually, going in 0.5mm increments, the elevation of curves can be very successful and realistic.

 

if you still have trouble when running trains on the curves, consider a continuous check-rail. They were used on the prototype.

 

At the moment I am doing some experiments producing grooved rail by using code 100 rail on its side butted up to the web of another piece of rail. The resulting groove is about 1.5mm wide, so would require the gauge to be narrowed to 31.5mm for it to work best. If you want slightly wider grooves, I think that Code 125 rail used similarly would be the best bet.

Oh, and apparently Lenz do a R-T-R 3-way point!

 

 

 

If these can be obtained at a reasonable price, I see no reason why these should not be popular with O gauge modellers. They would be especially handy for shunting layouts! (Heck, I would love one for an inglenook that I want to build!

Edited September 7, 2013 by hartleymartin

[switcher 1]

At £129.50 - 11.25 degrees turnout - http://www.ekmpowershop2.com/ekmps/shops/aandhmodels/track-74-c.asp - pre ordering likely to be necessary.

I get a feeling it would be rather large, just like Peco turnouts, unfortunately.

 

 

 

Lenz O Track is designed for easy use with a set geometry.  Fleixitrack is also available.  The rail is nickel silver and the base is made from a UV resistant plastic so is able to be laid indoors and outdoors.  Rail is flat bottomed, 3.75mm high and the rail joiners have an embossed bolt pattern.  Rails are spaced at 32mm for O gauge.

Edited September 7, 2013 by fatmac