Peco code 75 vs. build it yourself bullhead - cost?

[The Bigbee Line]

The question is to go for Peco code 75 or handmade Bullhead.  I might have missed a post, but why not consider C & L for the flex track.  They sell 25 yards for £121.  Whilst almost twice the H****ns price, it is the real McCoy.  You can then use Peco points if you want the quick fix.

 

Just my thought....

[RBAGE]

Thanks David. The thing that really worries me is the loco conversions. For the rest of the rolling stock it's (I am assuming) really just a case of popping out the OO wheels and inserting the P4 ones. But the loco conversions seem a lot  more complicated, and I think I'd end up with a load of bent bits of valve gear and coupling rods as I do it wrong. So I won't be going down the p4 route. I might live to regret that decision, but then the reverse might be true as well.

Hello Richard,

Urgent advice.

When I started making my own track, some time ago, I was convinced to change to EM. I spent a great deal of time and a lot of money buying chassis kits for RTR locos which never ran as well as the original; model. So, if you're happy with 00, stick with it. 

My humble opinion is that it is the sleeper size and spacing and the rail height and profile which has the biggest impact on the appearance, especially when viewed t low angle.

SMP flexitrack looks fantastic when ballasted and weathered and I have posted images on RMWeb that have been mistaken for EM.

 

More urgent advice.

For making your own points (turnouts), make sure you get the right track gauges. I bought what I thought were track gauges I could use for the normal RTR stock. However, they gave 1mm flangeway clearances. That means your stock back to back wheel dimension must be 14.5mm minimum. Some RTR stock is less than 14.5mm so you'll get binding at the crossing vee. The 00 gauge society do roller gauges for 2 standards ( fine and universal - I think. Titles may be wrong). But, if you want to run all stock from all manufacturers, unmodified, then you need to get the gauges which give you a flangeway clearance of 1.1 or 1.2mm. It'll save a lot of heartache.

 

Bob

[richardswain]

Richard

 

Go and buy some rail and copperclad strip along with a roller gauge and have a go. I have suggested the copperclad method as its cheaper to build than chaired turnouts, the construction is far simpler and a lot easier to adjust. A while ago I put together a set of parts for an A5 copperclad turnout ( I built the vee and made the wing and switch rails) and offered it at the cost price of the parts + postage, Martin Wynn was also happy for me to include a plan (at no charge) made from Templot. No takers.  Happy to do the same if you want a go, you just need a roller gauge.

 

John

Thanks John, that's a very generous offer, which I may well take you up on! I will try having a go first myself. Thanks too for the advice about copperclad. I have been making some progress with Templot. My method so far is to draw my "rough sketch" in Anyrail, and then importing a doctored version of that into Templot, to drawthe proper track templates I need, and to make it "look" right. Still working at the track plan, though. So I am now planning on building a simple turnout as you suggest here. After all, if that doesn't work out I probably won't be able to build the variety of turnouts I need. But I'm expecting it will work out after a few attempts. That seems to be the thrust of the comments here. I'm much encouraged. Thanks to you all!

[Jeff Smith]

Richard, I personally cannot see the point of building BH track by soldering directly onto copperclad sleepers. This I'm sure is ok for FB rail which does sit almost directly on the sleepers or a thin baseplate but one of the pleasing visual aspects of chaired BH track is the space and light under the rail between the sleepers. Also the chairs themselves; it's much easier to build them in than try sticking half-chairs on after.

 

My advice would be to forget soldering and going straight to plastic chairs glued onto plywood sleepers. I prefer plywood rather than plastic as the appearance is better and a chair can easily be adjusted by removing with a razor blade and re-gluing. Mine is 25 years old and although now stored is as strongly bonded as when new.

 

Construction could not be simpler. Stick the sleepers onto the template with thin strips of double sided tape under the rails. Cut a length of rail and file the end into a flat point, thread on the correct number and type of chairs, lay over the sleepers and slide to the correct locations over the sleepers. With slight pressure on top of the rail flood Butonol around the base of each chair with a loaded paint brush, hold down for a few minutes and a strong bond is formed as the solvent seeps under the chair. Plywood sleepers look really good when stained, you could do this before or after construction.

[ikcdab]

I had exactly the same dilemma. Peco just didn't do it for me. I bought SMP oo flexi track and built turnouts from rail soldered to copper clad sleepers. It was pretty straightforward and having bought the parts and not the kits, price wise was much the same. And it looks 100 times better!

[hayfield]

Jeff

 

I think you missed the whole point of building a copperclad turnout. Soldered constructed turnouts are very easy to adjust instantly, also the construction of the common crossing is also very much easier and definitely so much easier to adjust. The idea is to familiarise yourself in the building methods needed to make a turnout. Makes no odds whether its flatbottom or bullhead, but the latter is so much easier to file and needs far less work where the switch rails touch the stock rails.

 

Agreed a fully chaired turnout looks far better, but as most advise building a wagon before a loco after seeing lots of others attempt to build trackwork its far easier to not only build but also adjust or replace rails. Copperclad turnouts are far more cost effective for storage yards, so nothing lost, having said that I have seen plenty of stunning layouts with chair-less copperclad turnouts 

[richardswain]

Hello Richard,

Urgent advice.

When I started making my own track, some time ago, I was convinced to change to EM. I spent a great deal of time and a lot of money buying chassis kits for RTR locos which never ran as well as the original; model. So, if you're happy with 00, stick with it. 

My humble opinion is that it is the sleeper size and spacing and the rail height and profile which has the biggest impact on the appearance, especially when viewed t low angle.

SMP flexitrack looks fantastic when ballasted and weathered and I have posted images on RMWeb that have been mistaken for EM.

 

More urgent advice.

For making your own points (turnouts), make sure you get the right track gauges. I bought what I thought were track gauges I could use for the normal RTR stock. However, they gave 1mm flangeway clearances. That means your stock back to back wheel dimension must be 14.5mm minimum. Some RTR stock is less than 14.5mm so you'll get binding at the crossing vee. The 00 gauge society do roller gauges for 2 standards ( fine and universal - I think. Titles may be wrong). But, if you want to run all stock from all manufacturers, unmodified, then you need to get the gauges which give you a flangeway clearance of 1.1 or 1.2mm. It'll save a lot of heartache.

 

Bob

That's extremely useful - thanks!

[RBAGE]

Richard, I personally cannot see the point of building BH track by soldering directly onto copperclad sleepers. This I'm sure is ok for FB rail which does sit almost directly on the sleepers or a thin baseplate but one of the pleasing visual aspects of chaired BH track is the space and light under the rail between the sleepers. Also the chairs themselves; it's much easier to build them in than try sticking half-chairs on after.

 

My advice would be to forget soldering and going straight to plastic chairs glued onto plywood sleepers. I prefer plywood rather than plastic as the appearance is better and a chair can easily be adjusted by removing with a razor blade and re-gluing. Mine is 25 years old and although now stored is as strongly bonded as when new.

 

Construction could not be simpler. Stick the sleepers onto the template with thin strips of double sided tape under the rails. Cut a length of rail and file the end into a flat point, thread on the correct number and type of chairs, lay over the sleepers and slide to the correct locations over the sleepers. With slight pressure on top of the rail flood Butonol around the base of each chair with a loaded paint brush, hold down for a few minutes and a strong bond is formed as the solvent seeps under the chair. Plywood sleepers look really good when stained, you could do this before or after construction.

Jeff,

 

You're absolutely right. There's nothing looks quite like wood as err wood.

 

I've built a layout with ply sleepers stained with Newton and Windsor inks and they were by far to most convincing I've done to date.

 

Bonding plastic chairs to ply sleepers is very straight forward. In fact, I've actually bonded them by accident and had trouble removing them.

 

However, what I actually did was to paint pvc polypipe adhesive onto the chair area as base for the chair bonding process.

 

I recall that someone had since conducted a comparison between polypipe preparation and straight butanone bonding and it made no difference at all to bond strength.

 

So Richard, don't take any notice of anything I've just written.

 

Anyway, I think plastic timbering for turnouts with plastic chairs gives a smashing result once everything is weathered. Unweathered it looks like, well, plastic.

 

If you're going to use ply timbering for turnouts you then have to make your own straight track with ply sleepers for it to look consistent and I'm afraid that's just a bit too" hair shirt" for me.

 

So, my recommendation is C and L thin timbering and chairs for the turnouts and SMP for the straight track (cos it's cheaper than C and L).

 

Buy the Activity Media DVD on track making by Norman Solomon. He's the top man at track and point manufacture and a DVD that I've watched over and over again. 

 

Bob 

[Clive Mortimore]

I done both build my own track and just open the box and lay (Peco).

 

Both layouts used the same baseboards.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/62823-pig-lane-or-should-it-be-i-am-sorry/

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/66487-southbridge-my-first-depot/

 

This evening I was sorting out the track for my new layout, I believe some of the points came from Pig Lane, via Hanging Hill.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/97489-ranelagh-bridge-looking-from-the-other-side/?p=1876980

 

Peco may not look the best but I find I can get a layout up and running quite quickly and then concentrate on the bits I like doing, building stock, structures and the scenery.

 

Which ever route you take enjoy it.

[Jeff Smith]

Jeff

 

I think you missed the whole point of building a copperclad turnout. Soldered constructed turnouts are very easy to adjust instantly, also the construction of the common crossing is also very much easier and definitely so much easier to adjust. The idea is to familiarise yourself in the building methods needed to make a turnout. Makes no odds whether its flatbottom or bullhead, but the latter is so much easier to file and needs far less work where the switch rails touch the stock rails.

 

Agreed a fully chaired turnout looks far better, but as most advise building a wagon before a loco after seeing lots of others attempt to build trackwork its far easier to not only build but also adjust or replace rails. Copperclad turnouts are far more cost effective for storage yards, so nothing lost, having said that I have seen plenty of stunning layouts with chair-less copperclad turnouts

 

John, I don't think I did miss the point. The OP wants to build BH track, I merely stated my opinion on why he should consider glued/chaired track from an appearance point of view as well as explaining how easy it is to construct. Adjustment may well be easier with solder but if you have proper gauges you should not need much if any adjustment. Honestly I fail to understand why you think soldering is easier and therefore should be attempted first, especially for BH track.

[martin_wynne]

More urgent advice.

For making your own points (turnouts), make sure you get the right track gauges. I bought what I thought were track gauges I could use for the normal RTR stock. However, they gave 1mm flangeway clearances. That means your stock back to back wheel dimension must be 14.5mm minimum. Some RTR stock is less than 14.5mm so you'll get binding at the crossing vee

 

Hi Bob,

 

Those were probably the standard 00 roller gauges from C&L. Although C&L don't tell you this, they are intended for the DOGA-Fine standard, and as you say they are not suitable for unmodified RTR models.

 

But you can use 1.0mm flangeways with RTR models if you use a track gauge of 16.2mm instead of 16.5mm. This is called the 00-SF standard and C&L also do gauges for that, although you have to specifically order them, see: http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=346_375_376.

 

You will find lots of discussion about 00-SF on RMweb and it also has its own web site at http://00-sf.org.uk

 

The advantage of the narrower 1.0mm flangeways (apart from looking better) is that you can then also use kit wheels such as Markits and the wheels included in 00 wagon kits such as Parkside. These are usually actually EM profile wheels, narrower than RTR wheels, and run bumpy on 1.2mm flangeways because they drop in the gaps. On 1.0mm flangeways they run smoothly.

 

On the other hand, if you intend never to use kit wheels, and run only RTR models, the 1.2mm gaps work fine and give you a bit more leeway on back-to-back settings. Note that C&L do not supply gauges for this, even though it is the most common 00 standard. Gauges for this are available from Markits, Marcway, DOGA, etc., but not from C&L.

 

The same applies to the back-to-back gauge from C&L. It is intended for the DOGA-Fine standard and not unmodified RTR models. Again, C&L do not tell you this.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

John, I don't think I did miss the point. The OP wants to build BH track, I merely stated my opinion on why he should consider glued/chaired track from an appearance point of view as well as explaining how easy it is to construct. Adjustment may well be easier with solder but if you have proper gauges you should not need much if any adjustment. Honestly I fail to understand why you think soldering is easier and therefore should be attempted first, especially for BH track.

Jeff

 

I am not referring to a person who has experience in track building but someone who is new. I and many others will agree to differ with you as to which is the simplest form of track building. I certainly find building in copperclad much easier. For instance I have found those new to the discipline really struggle to build common crossings as a separate unit prior to fitting, where as being able to solder each piece in turn to the turnout is a far easier process.

 

Yes using gauges there should be no need in theory for any adjustment, yet even the most practised builder errs every now and then, adjusting a copperclad turnout takes seconds. For a beginner there is a learning curve in what is needed and I am sorry to say many find it quite hard, especially those who have not got an engineering background.

 

I do agree with you that chaired track does look very good, especially where the additional special chairs are used rather than chopping up standard ones to fit

[Jeff Smith]

John - we may have to agree to differ but I do admit to using pre-soldered Vs in the ones I built - however this option is also open to anyone using either type of construction but care would have to be taken not to un-solder the V during soldered construction.

 

I am a little puzzled about the notion that soldering is easier than sticking - many people have a real problem with soldering and especially neat soldering with minimal solder usage; unless a very large blob of solder is being used to represent a chair.....not a pretty solution.

 

My opinion would still be that plastic-chaired construction is no harder than plastic kit construction and that adjustment with a razor blade is just as easy as with a soldering iron.

[trisonic]

We must agree to disagree too. Go in Hot and Fast with the iron - as little solder as works. I precut a length of solder and place it in position -  doesn’t work for everybody though.

Glue is messy to me - I always get it everywhere, usually on my finger tips, I hate that.

 

Best, Pete.

[hayfield]

John - we may have to agree to differ but I do admit to using pre-soldered Vs in the ones I built - however this option is also open to anyone using either type of construction but care would have to be taken not to un-solder the V during soldered construction.

 

I am a little puzzled about the notion that soldering is easier than sticking - many people have a real problem with soldering and especially neat soldering with minimal solder usage; unless a very large blob of solder is being used to represent a chair.....not a pretty solution.

 

My opinion would still be that plastic-chaired construction is no harder than plastic kit construction and that adjustment with a razor blade is just as easy as with a soldering iron.

 

Jeff

 

If you are putting together a pre-made kit with ready made common crossings (not Vee's) I agree, but I do see skills/abilities of varying competence. But each to their own and I do prefer chaired track on the viewing area 

[Jeff Smith]

John - C&L calls them Vees or Crossing Vees. However they are rather expensive at £12 each so I can see the advantage and savings of making your own. When I built my trackwork (25+ years ago) there were no kits as such, I bought the uncut point timbers, rail, chairs and crossing vees from the Scalefour stores. They didn't seem expensive at that time!

[hayfield]

Jeff

 

Common crossings from C&L are £18  http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=346_370_371_372

 

Vees are £12 but still need the wing/crossing rails making and fitting, in my opinion just as difficult as making the Vee

[Jeff Smith]

John - ok, got it.

[RBAGE]

Jeff

 

I am not referring to a person who has experience in track building but someone who is new. I and many others will agree to differ with you as to which is the simplest form of track building. I certainly find building in copperclad much easier. For instance I have found those new to the discipline really struggle to build common crossings as a separate unit prior to fitting, where as being able to solder each piece in turn to the turnout is a far easier process.

 

Yes using gauges there should be no need in theory for any adjustment, yet even the most practised builder errs every now and then, adjusting a copperclad turnout takes seconds. For a beginner there is a learning curve in what is needed and I am sorry to say many find it quite hard, especially those who have not got an engineering background.

 

I do agree with you that chaired track does look very good, especially where the additional special chairs are used rather than chopping up standard ones to fit

Hello John,

 

I have to agree that copper clad is easier. I have built a number of layouts with chaired pointwork and I think the end result is far superior. However, for my next project I was considering using copper clad because it is easier to build, easier to adjust and actually quicker.

 

Unfortunately, a few accidental purchases of chairs on Ebay has more or less sealed the direction of "Newton Hall Junction". I'll have to use the copper clad timbering I bought, somewhere else.  

 

Bob

[RBAGE]

I have in the past used a combination of plastic chairs and timbering and soldered copper clad timbering.

 

I put the copper clad at critical locations, like the point of the vee, so that you can take advantage of the ease of adjustment. This way you can fit lost wax cast chair sparingly because they are quite expensive. Also, the copper clad timbering in this location is a goo anchor for electrical connection.

 

With regard to the ease of adjustment for of plastic chaired points. That's correct in the areas where you have good access but the most critical areas are actually the least accessible. Not an issue with soldered assembly. 

 

I might use this hybrid construction on my new project to use up the copper clad I've bought. Also use it on the slide chair area so you don't end up with your lap full of slide chairs when you take the assembly off the work area for fitting to the layout.

 

Bob

[gismorail]

hi John

I know exactly how you feel with regards to the appearance of the track and to be honest I personally feel that it can set the whole tone to a layout. Does'nt matter how good you scenic work and buildings look if the track looks like a 'train set' it can spoil the whole illusion that you are trying to create.

From my own experience I have built C&L points and used their ready made track in 7mm and have found it very rewarding and cost wise in this scale it's not too bad alongside Peco ready made track. I have also built the C&L track in 4mm without much success to be honest and as the layout that I'm hoping to build is large in size I feel that it's not the way forward as far as time is concerned.

Have you considered using the Peco code 75 track and reducing the number of sleepers per length I have seen this done on a couple of layouts to it does make a massive difference to the overall effect, the trick with this method is the ballasting and if it's done carefully it can transform the look of Peco track.

At the end of the day it's what your happy with and how much time, money and skills that you have to put into your layout.

[hayfield]

Hello John,

 

I have to agree that copper clad is easier. I have built a number of layouts with chaired pointwork and I think the end result is far superior. However, for my next project I was considering using copper clad because it is easier to build, easier to adjust and actually quicker.

 

Unfortunately, a few accidental purchases of chairs on Ebay has more or less sealed the direction of "Newton Hall Junction". I'll have to use the copper clad timbering I bought, somewhere else.  

 

Bob

 

 

I have in the past used a combination of plastic chairs and timbering and soldered copper clad timbering.

 

I put the copper clad at critical locations, like the point of the vee, so that you can take advantage of the ease of adjustment. This way you can fit lost wax cast chair sparingly because they are quite expensive. Also, the copper clad timbering in this location is a goo anchor for electrical connection.

 

With regard to the ease of adjustment for of plastic chaired points. That's correct in the areas where you have good access but the most critical areas are actually the least accessible. Not an issue with soldered assembly. 

 

I might use this hybrid construction on my new project to use up the copper clad I've bought. Also use it on the slide chair area so you don't end up with your lap full of slide chairs when you take the assembly off the work area for fitting to the layout.

 

Bob

 

 

hi John

I know exactly how you feel with regards to the appearance of the track and to be honest I personally feel that it can set the whole tone to a layout. Does'nt matter how good you scenic work and buildings look if the track looks like a 'train set' it can spoil the whole illusion that you are trying to create.

From my own experience I have built C&L points and used their ready made track in 7mm and have found it very rewarding and cost wise in this scale it's not too bad alongside Peco ready made track. I have also built the C&L track in 4mm without much success to be honest and as the layout that I'm hoping to build is large in size I feel that it's not the way forward as far as time is concerned.

Have you considered using the Peco code 75 track and reducing the number of sleepers per length I have seen this done on a couple of layouts to it does make a massive difference to the overall effect, the trick with this method is the ballasting and if it's done carefully it can transform the look of Peco track.

At the end of the day it's what your happy with and how much time, money and skills that you have to put into your layout.

 

Bob

 

There is a very simple answer, build your turnouts the composite way. In some ways its a little more involved than standard copperclad construction, but also in some areas its quicker. I have built one by lifting the rails on the copperclad timbers by using 2 mm x 0.5 mm metal strip. I used Exactoscale  plastic sleepers and C&L 1.6 mm copperclad timbers. I then ground back the metal strips to the rail sides so I could fit the chairs flush with the rails, no need for expensive metal chairs

 

 

One difference I make would be to use 0.5 mm copperclad strip to lift the rails rather than the metal strip. The sleepers were salvaged from something I built and then dismantled, look a bit tatty but after a coat of paint it looks fine

 

 

A closer view of the crossing, I was more interested in just soldering up the common crossing, but an extra sleeper at the heal end would cover more of the check rail. This clearly gives you the best of both worlds

 

Gismorail

 

I have no problems making turnouts and crossings, would never use Peco track as it is both H0 scale, uses flatbottom rail and has some nondescript form of rail fastening. My current favourite is the Exactoscale fast track bases for plain track, in fact where ever possible I use Exactoscale chairs as they are a bit crisper than the C&L ones (both available from C&L) and the timbers are in my opinion superior to the older C&L timbers

[mightbe]

Jeff

 

Common crossings from C&L are £18  http://www.finescale.org.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=346_370_371_372

 

Vees are £12 but still need the wing/crossing rails making and fitting, in my opinion just as difficult as making the Vee

 

I must beg to differ--making the Vee is absolutely no trouble at all. Getting the other rails in position and the whole thing soldered into a unit correctly is far more difficult for me. I imagine if I had a handy-dandy jig like the EMGS and Scalefour society do it would be a breeze.

[hayfield]

I must beg to differ--making the Vee is absolutely no trouble at all. Getting the other rails in position and the whole thing soldered into a unit correctly is far more difficult for me. I imagine if I had a handy-dandy jig like the EMGS and Scalefour society do it would be a breeze.

 

Might be

 

Those jigs do help a bit but they do restrict you to a size, the trick is either

 

(A) to make a jig which holds the Vee in place whilst you solder the wing/crossing rail in place. That is why using the copperclad construction is simpler.,

 

or (B) use copperclad sleepers (preferably with spacers which hold the rail at the same height above the timbers as chairs do) to solder up the common crossing.

 

The later solution is perfectly acceptable, don't forget to fill in the isolation gaps in the copperclad !!

[Donw]

We must agree to disagree too. Go in Hot and Fast with the iron - as little solder as works. I precut a length of solder and place it in position -  doesn’t work for everybody though.

Glue is messy to me - I always get it everywhere, usually on my finger tips, I hate that.

 

Best, Pete.

 

Pete for C+L track parts I use a solvent not a glue so if it gets somewhere it just evaporates.

 

Don