Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by hayfield

  1. Looking at the two tables, which seem concise and simple to read, this could be copied by any gauge/scale so that there are no ambiguities over standards I am not saying use 00SF, just have a clear set of standards for chosen standard. Perhaps if the manufacturers stated what set of 00 gauge standards they used might move things forward
  2. Fulton Quite right a project funded by the EMGS but using Peco's knowledge and skills. My point being is that it proves it can be done in RTR, forget the gauge its a prototypical looking turnout which could be replicated in other gauges
  3. Perhaps if you stopped both misquoting people and twisting what they say we would not be forced to reply, and simply just ignore you.
  4. Here we go again miss quoting me, please stop doing so Nowhere have I said there is not a market for anything other than with code 100. Unlike yourself like many others I have proved finescale 00 gauge works and can be built to a standard equal to EM gauge if not P4. Some modellers do want something better where not only do they want something with finer tolerances, but built to finescale designs with the correct chairs being used, however they still want to use RTR stock without modification. For many 00SF has been the solution and with British Finescale providing the 00 gauge modeller 2 products in very easy to assemble kits the future looks bright Peco have made a try at the bullhead market, Personally the bent end timber is totally non prototypical, the check rail gap has been reduced at the expense of a larger wing rail gap, The geometry of the timbering is wrong for the majority of uses, interesting to see the EM gauge track they make for the EMGS differs in these areas.
  5. Kevin I seem to remember quite a few quotes stating this over the past few months or longer. And as for buying new RTR stock there are as many collectors as modellers out there if not more, then you have the toy train marked, all of a sudden the number of enthusiasts who want a better looking and performing track looks quite small
  6. Pacific Great points made here but you are Moving on from just BRMSB standards In my view the the same with a turnout as a loco !! For instance what makes an A3 look good in 4mm scale but to 00 gauge, is that its accurate visually in all things except in the wheel gauge What makes a turnout look as good is for it to accurately represent a turnout, is exactly what makes the A3 looks like its prototype visually, but the same as the model with a reduced gauge But the visual looks also like the loco wheels have to take the gauge specification into consideration. A simple task is to obtain a plan designed on prototypical practice but to a standard 00 gauge. Visually you will have a better looking turnout Looking at Peco's own bullhead template which I have printed out, clearly shows the check rails being finer than the 1.25mm check gauge, but the wing rail gap being quite a lot over the 1.25mm wing rail gap (which to me looks wrong!!
  7. As far as I am concerned, it has been correctly written. Pecos main business is set track and code 100 according to all of the posts I have read on this forum. Fact not assumption Those wanting a true 4mm scale 00 gauge track are in a small minority, but thankfully its growing. But the issue we are talking about (BRMSB) will never be solved until we take all things into consideration, wheels and track !!!
  8. Martin The main problem I can see is that the average 4mm scale modeller or collector who buys RTR stock is ever hungry for more detailed models. There is nothing wrong with this I think this is something we all strive for, but too little thought has been put into wheels and their gauging. Some buy models which are destined never to run, so they don't care, others just blame the track if their are issues. To complicate matters further there is a small and growing band who want better looking track to compliment the stock they have bought Those of us who understand track building realise the importance that both track and wheels need to adhere to the same standard. The problems with wheelsets nonconforming can derive from the design process and or manufacturing issues. The blame game at the moment is on the gauge and or its standards, which is wrong. Its seems to be a lack of a consistent standards used either in design or manufacture Perhaps if the manufacturers of locos and stock actually published the wheel standards they used, it would be a start to addressing the problem.
  9. Pete We all acknowledge that the hobby is a very broad church and at both extremes we are poles apart, I have numerous friends within the hobby ranging from at one end 1 A friend who uses set track radius 1,2 & 3 with tail chasing stock with no regard to region or era, and no scenery. He just loves playing trains 2 At the other extreme a friend who models to P4 standards and uses all types of new technology to scratch build items Both love the area of the hobby they are involved it. For some building their own track is the right route, others are reliant on buying existing RTR items. Whatever part of the hobby you enjoy you expect items you buy to be of an acceptable standard, yet we are constantly hearing of inconstancy in both design and quality control where wheels and mechanism's are concerned. Admittedly those who use coarser 00 gauge standards may tend to suffer less, however those wanting something both better looking and performing suffer the most. The more you pay for an item, you rightly expect it to be far more accurate and reliable. Its in everybody's benefit that that models comply with an acceptable quality in looks, performance and reliability. Build your own in this context is a red herring !!
  10. But you are not forced to join the society !!!, you join it usually to use their standards, unless you are a member of the EMGS who have limited stocks of P4 items Or like me am a member of the L&B, but its not my main interest in modelling
  11. Pete I agree with most of what you have written, but most modellers should have a back to back gauge, as many have said incorrect BtB are more common than reported. How many times have we heard the front bogie derails, when the issue is its back to back measurement
  12. Martin Now that would be a can of worms !! Haven't we already got too many differing standards
  13. Richard I am glad someone has a sense of clarity on this subject, as far as Martin is concerned no one has done more to promote a wide range of scales and gauges in our hobby. But in my simple interpretation of the question its not the differing track standards that is the problem, but the lack of manufacturers settling on a common wheel standard, the problem being is the genie is well and truly out of the bottle, if a common standard is agreed we will have a massive legacy of mostly non conforming stock As you say those who have little or no interest in better looking and performing track are served very well by the existing trade products There is a growing group of modellers requiring better looking and performing trackwork, traditionally these modelers were mainly forced to move either to EM or P4/S4 gauges, however there is an ever growing band of modellers wanting to remain in 00 gauge but still want trackwork to look and perform as well as the stock they now own. Peco have come out with their own version of what they believe is a workable solution, so far they have a great reputation of getting things right British Finescale has gone one step further with a very easy to build range of finescale turnouts and crossings based on prototypical geometry, Sadly there seems no one able to stand up and reassess BRMRSB 00 gauge standards
  14. Geoff Just slightly round the top of the tip of the switch rail very slightly, the cone shape of the wheels will do the rest
  15. John Very impressive, hand built track looks so much better than RTR.
  16. Here we go again, despite me asking you several times yet again you have deliberately miss quoted me to further your own twisted theories No where did I blame the DOGA, I just stated that the gauges were built to DOGA standards. Don't try to disown this gauge as recently you clearly promoted both both DOGA track gauges in another thread I cannot comment for the time before Peter Llewelyn, Peter as far as I recall never listed then as any standard other than 00 gauge, the gauge was mentioned but not the standard. At that time finances dictated any spare funds were needed elsewhere, the funds were not available for both new roller gauges and common crossings. Rather than blame the DOGA my own view which I have repeated many times was one of economics in being able to use the same common crossings for both EM & 00 gauge Your statement So please stop blaming DOGA is clearly untrue What I said was at a guess it was economics in that the same common crossings could be used in 2 gauges (EM & 00). Nothing here in this statement lay's any blame on the DOGA Please stop twisting everything to suite your own theories, and for the umpteenth time please stop misquoting me Phil clearly chose the BRMSB standard for his 00 gauge standard, so perhaps he had the same thought process that Martin suggested
  17. Martin As you know I have been helping Phil out for several years now at shows local to me, What I have said about the 00 gauge kits and parts he has taken on board and actioned well over a year ago All his 4mm roller gauges have been updated with gaps which allow the rail to rotate in the slot, also the 00 gauge roller gauges now have 1.25 flange way spacings and one end milled flat to be used over the vee. 00 Gauge common crossings now have 1,25 mm flangeways The previous owner (Peter) was left with what he inherited when buying the business, I had several conversations with him, but the financial situation was such that he felt things had to stay as they were. I never really got to know Brian that well so cannot comment why the roller gauges were made to DOGA fine standards, at a guess it was economics in that the same common crossings could be used in 2 gauges (EM & 00) I guess these older gauges will be left behind when Phil moves house, but like me he's a bit of a squirrel and likes to think they may come in useful (ballast in a wagon ?) at sometime in the future. I think the title of this topic is quite right to answer the question, the trouble is there is there any body/organisation who can talk to the trade on modellers behalf ?
  18. I doubt if the present owner of C&L or the previous one would have any idea what you are going on about. Unlike yourself I am very friendly with both and it is quite common now that Mr Reid has a chat with me about new developments he brings in at C&L. The previous owner as I reported financially could not do anything about the roller gauges, which were promoted a 00 gauge not DOGA fine. Phil not only produced new 00 gauge roller gauges to BRMSB standards, likewise a new range of common crossings again to BRMSB standards. Please don't complain to Phil as he has nothing to do with this and has taken steps to readdress the issue.
  19. Have you actually tried an 00SF turnout ? you might be pleasantly surprised with the performance and the aesthetics Secondly the late Gordon of Eastwood Town fame had a large mainline layout and a good proportion of the stock was RTR (including some H0 American locos), faultless running was achieved. As for back to back measurements of wheels are concerned, which ever gauge you use wheelsets must conform to the track standards. Stop blaming 00SF for the problems caused by the manufacturing companies. The biggest issue is not track gauge or specification, but the inability of the trade to have one wheel standard.
  20. I bought a digital solder station and never looked back when the hand held unit developed a fault I went back to my Antex and could not believe who long it took to warm up This is the one I bought https://www.circuitspecialists.eu/csi-premier75w-digital-temperature-controlled-solder-station-with-75w-soldering-iron not too expensive but does everything I ask I bought a set of 10 different tips, well wort it, I bought a spare handle, now one has a small tip the other a larger one
  21. My own take on this subject is that Peco know exactly what they are doing, until recently they have kept away from niche markets and are quite happy to allow companies like SMP & C&L to serve these markets. Simply they have build up a very successful well loved brand aimed at the mass market I see two exceptions, firstly the way they have worked with the EMGS, very clever in that whilst its only available from the EMGS, its clearly a Peco product Secondly they are fiercely protective of their position in the UK track market, when a competitor popped their head over the parapet all of a sudden there is a true 4mm scale flexi track and a range of turnouts and crossings I assume Peco will be keeping tabs on these two ranges (OK one is via the EMGS) and where there is demand they will be happy to supply I doubt in the short term Peco will consider finer flangeways, if anything this could cause more issues than its worth. This domain will be left to the niche players with the opportunities available with 3D printing
  22. Pete Fair comment, for my own use I have done this, I had an ali strip milled to 1.25 so I have plenty if material especially as I have several SMP gauges Secondly a kind member on here milled me a block gauge, perhaps I should have asked him to mill a strip a couple of foot long. I have several small boxes full of gauges. In 00 I have code 100, code 75, and code 75 and 82 in 00SF. I may even have 00/H0 universal (coarse scale) Thankfully Phil at C&L has taken the bull by the horns as far as the gauges are concerned but at the moment he has higher priorities on his plate As far as EM & P4 gauges they are well served, its the biggest market (00 gauge) that lags behind
  23. Ravenser Thank you for your post, but sadly it amplifies exactly what I have written at how badly (in my opinion) 00 gauge modellers are served when it comes to gauges Firstly in the main track building is the same which ever gauge or scale you use and again in my opinion the same products should be available to all. Perhaps the exception is the 3 point gauge, in 00 BF/ DOGAI/BRMSB (universal) scale gauge widening is inbuilt and I see the DOGA 3 point does not gauge widen, but when track building is still very useful. The way I have been taught and it seems to be the norm in all scales is that the most important dimension in track building is the check rail, in most gauges this is set by using a check rail gauge, I had both examples from (early) Exactoscale and 00SF. C&L now sell these check rail gauges in 00 gauge I have also found the easiest method of accurately fitting wing rails is to use a wing rail gauge, most of mine were obtained from old SMP kits. When building obtuse crossings they are a must!!! As for roller gauges, most (again in my opinion) are not fit for purpose without modification. Having both wing and check rail groves are both not required and get in the way. C&L now sell theirs with a flat on one side milled off so they can fit over common crossings, I also file flats on the inside so these gauges can be used over switch, check and wing rails. C&L changed their common crossings to be fully compatible with the standards that require 1.25 mm flangeways (BRMSB), but also with the roller gauges so that the rail heads can rotate within the gauge and a flat on one outside so it can be used against common crossings. At the same time common crossings with a 1.25mm flangeways were added to the range I would like to indorse Peco's track gauge IL 116, I have 4 two of which are taped together making an A frame, it sometimes serves as a third hand, the nibs can be cut off if you don't want wing and check rails, also by cutting off one of the outer nibs you have a check rail gauge. Finally the D D Wheelwrights block gauge and wing rail alignment aid is a super aid for sitting wing rails and also setting the stock rails against the wing rails, its a great pity these are not available in 00 gauge As for why C&L marketed 00 roller gauges with 1 mm flangeways, I believe was simply to reduce the number of common crossing variants, I accept perhaps they also worked with the likes of Gibson finescale wheels, who knows !!. I first had a chat with Peter about these gauges, but owing to the number he inherited and the businesses finances his hands were tied. When Phil (current owner) was made aware when finances were available new common crossings and gauges were ordered. He has 00 check rail gauges now in stock and is chatting about wing rail gauges from his gauge making supplier Thanks again for your input and promotion of 00 track gauges
  • Create New...