cromptonnut Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 Any idea of price? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartleymartin Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 It would be considerably more than 80mm spacing for the set-track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ossygobbin Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 It would be considerably more than 80mm spacing for the set-track. why ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted April 20, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 20, 2017 why ? Bogie rolling stock overhang on the larger radii. Too close and you'll get side swiping. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcD Posted April 20, 2017 Share Posted April 20, 2017 Any idea of price? The chap on the stand said that they would be comparable to the current points. So some where between £40-£50 depending on where you get them from. marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartleymartin Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 I did some mathematical calculations based on the known set-track dimensions and I think I came up with a spacing of about 112mm or something like that, but I can't remember exactly what it was, nor can I find any of my working out for it. It doesn't matter to me. Chances are that I will be cutting rails and making some modifications to these points when they finally arrive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMR CHRIS Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 A question was asked about our diesel locos on small curves, on another forum down under, so I tested a couple of locos on the couple of bits of Peco set track I got form a friend, there's plenty of overhang I'd consider the track is great for short locos locos and stock but larger items are just pushing the limits And track spacing would need to be as wide as as your intended stock With small 0-4-0's and 4 wheel stock the track spacing wouldn't need to be very wide but as soon as you introduce a bogie vehicle you will have to space nice and wide to suit. I didn't take measurements as the question was only could the locos negotiate the curve. Some photos below showing the overhang the gap between loco Buffers on the curve Also the result of a short 4 wheel wagon coupled to a medium length loco NSW 49 classafter entering the curve, about the size of a BR 25 class last photo is of a long NSW 45 class similar length to a BR 37 class Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted April 30, 2017 Share Posted April 30, 2017 (edited) The track spacing question ...... I use coarse scale track and points that have a very similar radius to the Peco No.2 Setrack, about an inch tighter, and curves that go inside them, so effectively a No.1 radius, and the spacing is 92mm, which is what applies across my layout (+2mm in places, by accident, not design!) This spacing is good for coaches up to at least 40cm length, yielding fairly generous clearance between trains on the curves, even with coarse scale, which has a lot more "float" in everything than finescale. I'm confident that it would also be OK for 42cm coaches, but don't have any, so can't check. It's also good for the end-throw on the bunker-end of a Stanier 2-6-4T, which is the most "poking out" loco that I have, and looks for all the world as if it is going to hit things, which it doesn't. What might infringe clearances are the noses of long diesel locos, things like Peaks and Class 40, depending upon exactly where the centre of rotation of the bogies is. So, my guess is that Peco could provide a 90mm spacing, but haven't they made the points as 22.5 degrees arc? If so, the spacing resulting from two turnouts forming a crossover will be much greater than 90mm (hartleymartin's 112mm sounds of the right order, although I vaguely recall getting to 120mm when I tried to work it out) which could cause a fair few headaches, and much sawing. The turnouts that I use are 18 degrees of arc, and it is a pair of these forming a crossover that yields the 92mm. I was amazed when Peco opted for a 22.5 degree geometry for their 0 gauge set-track, for this very reason; I'd expected them to use an 18 degree geometry, with 20 curves to a circle, rather than 16. Bit of a ramble .... sorry! Kevin Edited April 30, 2017 by Nearholmer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andi4x4 Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 My guess is that they have used the geometry they are already using for their SM32 set track components - perhaps, partly due to the SM32 being very coarse ( I used it in the past, along with Maldon track for my coarse/vintage 0 gauge) and maybe wanting to try to capture the "not so coarse" coarse scale sector such as the later offerings from the likes of Basset Lowke (Corgi), Ace and Darstaed, and possibly, maybe, also aiming it towards the 10mm/ft 3ft narrow gauge market. Currently, it is common for the 15mm/ft and 16mm/ft narrow gauge sectors to use SM45 or G45 track to represent 3ft gauge, which is far too coarse really, but, they have little other option besides hand built. 22.5deg does make it a little awkward to incorporate them into a design which also uses standard finescale points, though, without modification. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poggy1165 Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 If it's not a silly question, what is a 'unifrog'? A frog with a degree? I honestly think these things will sell quicker than PECO can make them; they are just what a lot of people have been waiting for. I think I may find room for one or two myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcD Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 If it's not a silly question, what is a 'unifrog'? A frog with a degree? I honestly think these things will sell quicker than PECO can make them; they are just what a lot of people have been waiting for. I think I may find room for one or two myself. The chap at PECO said that the frog could be either live or dead. I think that set track in N and OO are dead frog. Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simond Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 "Unifrog", the railway modellers' equivalent of Schroedinger's cat... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcD Posted May 1, 2017 Share Posted May 1, 2017 but does it actually exist? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simond Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Well, just remember that the eponymous cat was a hypothetical construct, designed to demonstrate the futility of a particular line of reasoning. "Gentlemen, please place your bets." 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 (edited) I did a bit of photocopying, cutting and sellotaping, using the illustration of the point in the Peco advert, and the track centre resulting from a pair used as a crossover comes out at a whopping 160mm (+/- a bit, allowing for scaling and sellotaping errors). That is enough to permit an island platform between the two roads! Maybe I've made a serious mistake somewhere. Unifrog seems to be an isolated metal frog, which is dead, but is supplied with a wire soldered to it, so that it can be made live. This arrangement necessitates a short length of insulation in each switchrail, and there has been some grumbling about that short length being needlessly long in some of the recent H0/00 offerings. Andi4x4 ...... the geometry doesn't seem to be quite the same as the small SM32 point, near, but not the same, so I guess they re-drew it all, because of the change of rail from Cade 200 to Code 124 (or is it 143?). I'm expecting that it won't accept much, if any, coarse-scale stuff without a modicum of violence being applied to the checkrails to allow for 27.5mm, rather than 29mm b-t-b, but we shall see ..... Kevin Edited May 2, 2017 by Nearholmer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Dava Posted May 7, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 7, 2017 Here it is, on the PECO stand at the Derby exhibition this weekend. Apparently now in production and expected to be on sale by the end of the month. No word on price from any of the retailers yet. Ideal for shunting layouts with small locos.Of which I have a collection which is likely to increase. Expect a flurry of 'planks' with Ruston 48DS shunters... Dava 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simond Posted May 7, 2017 Share Posted May 7, 2017 It looks like it's going to need modification if the purchaser wants any pretence of normal double track spacings. Kind-of defeats the objective of set track? Best Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
81A Oldoak Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 Here it is, on the PECO stand at the Derby exhibition this weekend. Apparently now in production and expected to be on sale by the end of the month. No word on price from any of the retailers yet. Ideal for shunting layouts with small locos.Of which I have a collection which is likely to increase. Expect a flurry of 'planks' with Ruston 48DS shunters... Peco SR point.jpg Dava NB the recommended loco in the advertisement, which was just announced as the Model Rail O Gauge 2016 Loco of the Year. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Dava Posted May 8, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 8, 2017 Chris, You have made your 'point' on product placement earlier in this thread! Obviously no-one else makes a RTR 0-4-0ST ideal for the advert. Dava Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMR CHRIS Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 (edited) It looks like it's going to need modification if the purchaser wants any pretence of normal double track spacings. Kind-of defeats the objective of set track? Best Simon Yes but nothing that can't be achieved to get the result required, even by a novice with a set of zuron rail cutters What I'm liking the look of is the Tie bar, if they can upgrade the streamline range to that it would be good. Looks like a winner for those wanting to make the most of there latest impulse buy RTR locos. Turn that shelf where they sit into a shunting plank. Edited May 8, 2017 by SMR CHRIS 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted May 9, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 9, 2017 (edited) It looks like it's going to need modification if the purchaser wants any pretence of normal double track spacings. Kind-of defeats the objective of set track? Best Simon Setrack for a pseudo mainline or a more spaced out industrial setting though? Its geometry has to match the existing curve so that's what you get. Like said above snipping a bit of the curve out is hardly beyond anyone as long as you cut both points in the same place it will match as a crossover or just lay the curve on top and snip at the same place I don't think this was ever intended as a pure starter range to follow the N and OO ranges. Edited May 9, 2017 by PaulRhB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Will a Xuron cutter chop this rail OK? I'm used to Code 200, which I have to saw, and I don't want to snap the jaws of my cutter, 'cos I already did that with the previous pair, by accidentally attempting to cut steel wire, which I thought was NS! K Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyBrook Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Will a Xuron cutter chop this rail OK? I'm used to Code 200, which I have to saw, and I don't want to snap the jaws of my cutter, 'cos I already did that with the previous pair, by accidentally attempting to cut steel wire, which I thought was NS! K I got the impression when I saw these on the Peco stand at Glasgow that both the straight and curved sections had rail joiners about 5 sleepers from the end so hopefully these are merely add on pieces to make the turnout match the standard set track pieces, fingers crossed. Wish Peco were a bit more giveish with info at times. Sandy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Aha ..... if they've done that, mega-sensible ....... see my earlier posting, where I suggested that was what was needed ...... hopefully, it will give c18 degrees of arc, instead of 22.5, which will work very nicely. K Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simond Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Kevin, I'd completely agree with you, it would have been an easy exercise for Peco to supply the point, with a short length of curved track to make up to match the settrack geometry. Looking at the photo, it does not seem that they have done so. However, I suspect that if they had done so, they would have also needed to supply an unusual length of straight, to match the ends of the straight branches. And an alternative curve, to provide the kick-back for a parallel siding, and so on. A look in an old TriAng catalog from Series 3 days may be instructive! best Simon 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