n9

Hahaha! I was about to challenge you saying I'll commit to 2FS if you do and make it a New Year's Resolution. But then sanity kicked in. Maybe after the bubbly I'll be less reasonable again.

Thank you everyone for sharing your advice and suggestions. I appreciate you taking the time very much. My thoughts, for what it's worth, are: I think I'd be quite happy if the majority of my locos/stock showed the kind of wobble shared in @woodenhead's videos of Alston. I'd probably still have a go at improving the running, but mostly because I like to fiddle with things and have a stab at fixing them if it's within my somewhat green skillset. But I could definitely live with it as a happy medium between model and reality, especially as it wouldn't constrain what I can run in the way that 2FS might. My concern would be if 4-wheeled stock behaved the same, because from my experience, bogied stock tends to (but not always) fare a lot better on those bumps. So this would definitely be a reason to get some Finetrax track and test. What I don't think I can live with is the sort of swing demonstrated by my 03 on the slip in my earlier video - the amplitude of that swing I think is getting on for 5mm, and as has been pointed out, when 1mm in N is a huge distance, I think the result just looks comical. That slip is the straw that broke the camel's back, because up until that point I'd accepted, or resigned myself to, shimming every single Peco crossing. (In addition to removing "toy" plastic, and getting rid of the Unifrog in their Unifrogs.) While I have replaced or rebuilt portions of rail in some of Peco's frogs (and been astounded at how forgiving wheels have been with my results!) completely building track from scratch I think is something I might take on a bit further down the line, but thank you! To conclude, I see these choices: - Somehow fix the slip (I have some pointers already), and resign myself to everything Peco. - Bin the slip (annoyingly I have two because space trumped realism), redesign my layout, and resign myself to Peco. - Go with Finetrax if tests are favourable, redesign my layout, and probably be much happier. - Go with 2FS, deal with its consequences both positive and negative, redesign my layout, and probably be much happier. If I'd already built a few layouts, I think 2FS would win. With that not being the case, I think the answer is likely one of the first 3 with 2FS being the fallback. @Izzy's video remains a very powerful argument though! Much to ponder. In case I don't get the opportunity later, Happy New Year!

That video is just frog porn. The performance is perfect. Well done indeed! Btw, couldn't help but hear The Twighlight Zone theme reading your reply. I'll compose some of my thoughts in a bit. Thank you!

Thank you. To my eyes, and given one spec comprises a photo (Peco) and the other a diagram (Finetrax), the Peco Code 55 Slip looks to have a larger "leap of faith" (as someone else put it) as well as, dare I say, a much crasser design when compared to the Finetrax Code 40 slip. Great timing @woodenhead! Because I believe this is.... my 200th post!!! Time for that initiation! To answer your post though, the test is certainly Step 2. Before splashing out a couple of hundred smackers on a slip, a turnout, some flex, joiners, shipping, customs duties and import fees, I thought I'd first try to get the views of people who may have actually tried Finetrax Code 40, because if they say there is little to no improvement in running, I probably don't need to do the test. Don't worry, I already think it looks nothing special. I also think that while it may perform something of a minor miracle in accommodating a lack of wheel standards and trends spanning half a century or more (which is certainly to Peco's credit,) the performance of that track with today's stock leaves an awful lot to be desired.

Indeed, thank you. I have been playing with shims, but while that can help cure vertical bounce, from what I've gathered in previous replies, it's tinkering with the flangeways that would curtail the horizontal slaloming in the video. Plasticard again might help there, but its all work that has be performed on every single crossing, and that's in addition to other mods I already make to Peco's turnouts. It's all work that's adding up. I've plans to extend my layout for instance, so this would be repeating ad infinitum. If going Finetrax Code 40 means I no longer have to worry about the oversized gaps and flangeways, then that's a big argument in it's favour.

I don't know if this is the right place to post this, but in this recent post in the general modelling forum, it was suggested I try to get the views of those in 2FS. Perhaps some of you have experienced these things too? I've been quite disappointed with Peco's Code 55 - I think it was @Izzy (sorry if it wasn't you!) who warned me a while back that I might never be happy with it, and I think they were right, because after 18 months of work on my layout, I'm now considering starting over and replacing all of my Peco Code 55 track with Finetrax Code 40. Consequently, I have a ton of questions about Finetrax, and will likely have a ton more as I proceed. So I guess the three most pressing questions I have right now are: 1. Are you guys OK with me posting these/those questions here or is there somewhere more appropriate? 2. My main disappointment with Peco Code 55 is the bouncing and swinging I get from locos and stock when they traverse frogs. All Peco Code 55 points and crossings suffer from this, but their double slips seem particularly bad. Here's a video I posted showing my 03 alone and then pulling some 4-wheelers across a double slip purposely taken off my layout and placed on a flat surface: My better half says she thinks it's cute how my 03 bounces and swings its nose to and fro around half a centimetre as it crosses the slip. I'm reminded of watching something out of the Paris Dakar. So, if I take the plunge with Finetrax Code 40, how much better is this bouncing and wobbling going to be, if at all? 3. All of my locos and stock are RTR and have been bought new in the last 18 months, and I won't be running anything older. (At a guess I think that means tooling no older than around 2010ish?) It's currently all from Farish, Dapol, Peco, Revolution; mostly era 5 diesels, the odd steamer, and pulling a mix of passenger and freight stock. How likely am I to need to change wheelsets? Thank you!

That's the one that says the diameter is 0.8mm. Just mesured the wires again on both my locos, one is definitely 0.5mm and the other seems closer to 0.6mm. So other than a preference to go smaller in tight spaces rather than larger, I'd happily go with that one from Amazon. That said, the freebies from DM-Toys, which is where I'd go otherwise, can be quite compelling, especially with a bluk order of stuff... Thanks. Definitely agree on multistrand for locos. Solid core can be nice until you bend it one too many times. Although for locos, I do wonder if PVC coated are better than silicone in the sense that PVC coated wires might keep their shape better when conformed in tight spaces. Then again, I can also see the softness of silicone being a plus just because it can compress slightly. Fine gains either way I'd imagine, and probably splitting hairs.

Thanks, I'm sure that's a good option but that probably means customs and import duties for me. Hence Germany.

Great catch! Thank you. Looks like I'll be ordering proper decoder wire from Germany

This is turning out to be trickier than I thought. Looking at my local Amazon, I'm seeing suppliers of AWG30 where the diameter of the wire is larger than the wire in the pic. For example, this supplier says its AWG30 wire has an "outside diameter" of 0.8mm, whereas the loco in the pic has 0.5mm diameter wire: Complicating the picture, where I live there are a handful of places I can order online, but availability isn't great. Amazon is my best bet. Failing that, I'll order from Germany where they know how to conduct business. I'm not jumping at old computer cables and the like because I'd like to keep the colours the same.

The wire thing was a ruse. I'm getting my crayons out and gluing coloured bits of string in their place. That way, it will almost certainly get sold as "Fine when last run".

The wiring job was pretty bad to begin with, and there are splits in the insulation. I think it's also easier to do the bulk of such work with longer wires trimmed to length at the end, than trying to wrestle wires that already only just reach. This certainly wasn't a reason that was on the tip of my tongue.

Actually we all know it, just haven't told you.

Pretty sure only you can edit your posts, but I've removed the link from where I quoted you in my own post.

Surprised at the size of that range, but if any of those work then that's perfect, thank you. I may need to source some from places where they wouldn't know what decoder wire is, so that's why I wanted to know the size.

I want to replace all wires in the loco. That includes wires going to the decoder PCB shown, plus, well, every wire in the pic really. What is the gauge please? AWG30? AWG28? AWG24? Or let me know the metric equivalent - I'm not too sure how that's specified. Thanks

I want to replace the wires inside a couple of my N locos and I'm not sure what gauge to buy. I've googled some charts, but I'm not sure if the diameters mentioned include the insulation or not. For example, I want to replace all of these wires: The diameter (of the insulation) seems to be 0.5mm, although I do have some decoder wire I bought from Youchoos with a diameter of 0.4mm, but I don't know if that's suitable for all wiring inside a loco or just those wires that go directly to the decoder. If I can get away with smaller diameter wires, all the better. Bonus points if you can tell me what it is in AWG. Thanks!

That 08 certainly does look smooth. I have some Dapol 6-wheel tankers that are also quite smooth. Yet my 0-6-0 is one of the worst sufferers, as are my 6-wheeled tenders. I don't really know why some are smoother than others.

Not really a like-for-like comparison though. We earlier talked about how bogied stock tends to (but not always*) do a reasonable job at masking the effects of the big holes. Faster speeds also do a little of that. I have some Farish bogie bolsters that are really quite smooth for instance. I suspect though, that if you run 4 wheel stock and smaller locos on that layout, you'd see it, and more so the closer you get to shunting speeds. Anything with a tender would probably show it up too. That's my experience at least, from the range of diesels and steamers and stock that I have, from Farish, Dapol, Revolution, and Peco, on Code 55 points, diamonds, and slips. *Dapol's B Set coaches are prime wobblers. Looks like a great layout though!

Thank you very very much! I wasn't expecting this level of detailed research. Extremely kind of you to take the time out to do so, as well as look at your 03 on a slip. So on the face of it, from your photos and from previous videos, it does rather look like the performance of my slip is not too dissimilar. I'm going to think long and hard, because I really don't like this at all. I already know that with Peco getting trains to run how I want them to run requires modifying every single point, crossing, and slip. And not just for frog drop - I'm already modifying all Unifrogs to get rid of the Unifrog. And that's on top of its general looks, plastic check rails, and the surplus toy plastic it comes moulded with for the Peco point motors. I'm wondering if Finetrax - even if wheel changes are needed - is going to be more work than this. Or indeed how much smoother the running might be, so I am taking the first steps to get some track to experiment with. Funnily enough, I had my cheap Chinese vernier caliper out this morning and had just reached the conclusion that it wasn't accurate/consistent enough to take the sorts of measurements you have. I'd also been puzzled this morning by said Chinese caliper measuring my 7.65mm rated DCC Concepts B2B gauge as being either 7.5mm or 7.6mm. Then I in a post somewhere I read that its true size is 7.55mm despite being marketed as 7.65mm... So as you can see, I definitely I need a more accurate caliper. Might I ask what caliper you used?

Moderators! Please give this man a badge, or something!

I'm still not clear. Could you repeat those tests a scale 15MPH faster? Just kidding! What a star. Thank you very very much! And you even put a 22 in there. One of my favourite locos. I'm not going to say more about the wobble or swaying, but know that this is great Christmas Present! Thank you again!

Thanks Andrue, but it's the slip with the 04 that I really want to know about, because if you watch the video I posted a bit further up, in addition to the typical frog bounce, my 03 also swings laterally about 0.5cm as it crosses the slip at a reasonable speed. So if it turns out that the behaviour on my slip is atypical, I may yet attempt to find a way to fix it. Re the kink, I've found asymmetrical joins help, in addition to having something firm underneath to fix to. Code 55 with its embedded rail helps with the former, not sure if code 80 shares that similarity. But yes, there's definitely variety in what different stock can handle. The slow crawl and angle makes it difficult discern lateral movement, but thanks anyway. Does look smooth with its SA though!

Probably sad, but I could watch videos like this for hours 😁 After watching them, the most pressing question I have is: In the second video, is that the sound of a food blender or a Cobalt IP firing? 😁 The second most pressing question I have is: If you run the 03 04 on its own, does it also slalom like mine did in my earlier video? Just trying to work out if my slip is more duff than it should be.

This is excellent. Great point emphasizing use case. If I only operated bogied diesels, I think I’d be quite okay with the performance of the track because those locos do a great job of avoiding the derailments I’ve seen with my steamers, as well as hiding The Frog Bounce. Also good to hear I’m not the only one that might be upset if running the smaller stuff or with shunting in mind. Your reply also highlights that there’s no substitute for hands-on experience and knowledge. I think I’d have needed to know a lot more about the track and it’s performance before I made the choice I did, and I don’t think I could have gained that knowledge unless I got started somewhere. I think it’s also true that most of you guys that have been doing this for a while, end up with a very clear picture of exactly what you want from your next layout. And you can choose track accordingly. I’m nowhere near that. I chose Peco on the reputation I perceived and its availability where I live. But it’s only now that I begin to really see what it is and isn’t good at, and what the pros and cons might be for each type of layout. Merry Christmas!