Ron Ron Ron

That's all very true Gordon, but in doing nothing other than what they've done for the last umpteen years, they run the risk that their market will slowly begin to fall away. e.g. falling numbers of new entrant modellers ageing modeller population sticking with what they have (no need to buy track products) a small but steady flow of people moving to self-build, many of who wouldn't if suitable RTL was available. people seeking alternatives (e.g. Tillig etc.) That's all without considering that unlikely scenario of a competitor coming onto the scene. Ultimately, all companies need growth, unless they are prepared to trim back and scale down their operations. .

He didn't say "proportionate to the gauge". .

Ditto the US Code 83 perhaps? It is probably true that if Peco introduced a comprehensive 00 track range, then sales of their current Code 75 and possibly Code 100 would almost collapse in the home market (UK). However, there is a possibility that the new track would stimulate increased interest and sales may benefit from that. They might even gain sales from people who would otherwise go the whole hog and build their own track. I have no doubt that if a such a move was considered to be a worthwhile exercise, a sensible company wouldn't just sit on their hands and wait for customers to come their way. So why would they make that move into 00 track ? Falling sales of exiting product lines Loss of sales, or the threat of losing sales to another company's competing products Identifying that sales are not being maximised by the current product offering The potential of increasing the market Strengthening the brand with an improved product offering Strengthening the brand with a wider, balanced range of products (partially the halo effect) It could be any, or any combination of such factors. In the meantime, if they do nothing, I rather think they will be increasingly exposed to the first 2 items on my list and run the risk of incurring a degree of damage to their brand. All hypothetical I know, but food for thought. .

Pete, when you say "...correct length (and spaced) sleepers...", to what were they "correct"? If they were to 4mm/ft scale then they would look odd on 16.5mm track; ....but then, nobody is asking for "scale" length and spaced sleepers, but rather "scaled" or adjusted sleepers and spacing to allow for the gauge discrepancy. AFAIA C&L, Exactoscale and SMP use "scaled" dimensions for their 16.5 gauge 00 products, rather than scale dimensions. The result is not that shabby IMHO. .

Bill, may I refer you to previous posts on the issue of the market. I don't regard those questions as awkward, but quite reasonable and pertinent; but I believe they've already been answered several times over. Basing present day and future decisions purely on what has gone before, would be rather blinkered and quite frankly, dumb. Of course the accumulated knowledge and understanding of the past market and hobby, is a firm foundation on which to make commercial decisions, but equally, if not more so it makes sense to look at the present and the future. To look at where the hobby is today, not yesterday and to look at where the hobby is going, could go, or should go in the future. The nature of the hobby today, is not what it was 10, 15 or 20 years ago and neither are the aspirations and desires of those who partake in it. Market conditions change, the aspirations of the consumer will have changed, market opportunities can open up, the world does not stand still. It is universally accepted that the wealth and quality of manufactured model railway products, particularly in the field of RTR models, has improved in leaps and bounds over the last 10 to 15 years. However, it is widely cited that in the area of RTL track, there has been very little or almost no progress or improvement. It appears I am not alone in thinking that time is up for the status quo that has prevailed in this area of the hobby, for so long. Without wanting to pick out Peco in particular, it is worth noting that there is a fairly widely held view that the Devon company is rather too conservative, if not dated and stuck in its ways. Then again, contrary to that view, we have seen them move into new areas and introduce new specialist (narrow gauges) and mainstream track ranges (US Code 83), so it appears they are not averse to seeking out new markets. I have noticed that the management of that company is beginning to take on a younger look. Two of the 5 directors are in their late 60's (including Charles Pritchard), however two directors (including the company secretary) are aged 36 and 44 and the remaining female director is aged 56. It might be wishful thinking, but with the older more tradition influence in the company living on limited time, so to speak, I suspect there will be more forward and enterprising thinking ahead. One lives in hope. .

Indeed it does. Set Track type track with flexitrack available as well. However, as I pointed out earlier, there are also "finer" track ranges, which are not Set Track, that also include the option of rigid sections (curves and straight sections) alongside their flexitrack, points and crossings. .

Without knowing for sure, I strongly suspect that any communication, dialog or exchange of information and ideas, is very sporadic and largely incidental. I've highlighted.... "...and that's probably how we prefer it". Who acually prefers the lack of standards or an influential body to work in the interests of the hobby? For me, the lack of an NMRA or MOROP type organisation, with sufficient influence and clout, is the single biggest problem with the railway modelling hobby in Britain. It's the lack of such representation that has held back the hobby in the UK in several respects and led to some of the problems , such as this 00 track issue, that continue to beset the hobby. Instead we have a muddle of individual specialist groups representing particular niche branches of the hobby, some of whom have put their self interest ahead of the general good on occasion, but the largest segment (by far) of the hobby remains unrepresented. That does not strike me as a healthy situation. .

I had hoped that "spoiler" type posts had been deterred from this thread by now.

This not as some people appear to think, such an outlandish or unusual request. Overseas there are finer scale track ranges available (similar to Peco's Code 75), which include some fixed radius curves and rigid straight sections, alongside flexitrack and a full range of points and crossings. All in the same range, using the same sleeper bases and rail section. i.e. the "set track" pieces are indistinguishable in appearance from the flexitrack. The Tillig Elite range is one such range that has this. Not really. It's not the same thing as "Set track", as most people in the UK understand it. I Agree. However, some matching fixed pieces of track may be of benefit. They certainly won't detract from the look, if used appropriately. While I totally agree with you on transition curves, I think it's fair to point out that an awful lot of modellers seem to omit transition curves from their layouts. I'd even go as far as saying it's all too common to see this on some exhibition layouts. It isn't necessary to use Code 100. e.g. The Tillig Elite fixed geometry items are still Code 83 and have exactly the same sleeper arrangements and appearance as the rest of the Elite range. An analogy would be if Peco decided to introduce some rigid straight lengths, or fixed radius curves in their Code 75 Streamline range. Remember these are optional extras, that modellers may, or may not choose to incorporate in their track plan. One possible use could be in hidden areas, fiddle yards, or in the case of the visible part of the layout, alongside straight platform edges. In principle, I don't think this is a bad suggestion, if it could be accommodated in a range. If it was a question of priorities though, then Flexitrack woulds obviously come first. Unfortunately, I think you have been misunderstood. There is an apparent lack of awareness that this sort of option is already available in other track ranges in overseas markets. Bernard, with due respect, I think you have completely misunderstood. sub39h is not suggesting "set track" as you understand it. This is quite different. .

Rust coloured rail is less likely than the "pre-weathered look" that some track systems use. During the course of this thread I keep referring back to the Tillig Elite range. The Nickel Silver rail that is used in this track system is chemically darkened and does not have the bright shiny appearance of the rail used in for example, all of the Peco ranges. Left on its own, some people would be happy to use this pre-weathered track as it comes "out of the box", but for those wanting to go on and paint their track, it forms a very good base from which to start from. As for track rubbers....shouldn't they be kept well away from any track? .

I think the shareholders may be restricted to the Pritchard family, as the group of Peco companies are a private family affair.

By "out of the blue", in a way that's what I meant. He created the market for his own product and grew the (tiny) market for handbuilt track as a result. .

Interesting stuff Martin. Thanks for posting those links. Do I understand correctly, that for a manufacturer who has the latest technology and tools, design to manufacturing is not only a faster process, but more cost efficient, i.e. cheaper?

Can I refer you back to post 503 on page 21. Markets don't have to exist, to a very great degree they are created. Even if a small market already exists, it can be significantly increased by changing and improving what's on offer. 30 years ago, there was no market for home computers. 10 years ago, there was only a tiny market for "smart" mobile phones. 5 years ago, there was no market for Tablet computers. 15 years ago, there was said to be no market for super detailed RTR in 00. 15 years ago, there was said to be no market for quality, smooth can motors in RTR. 10 years ago, there was said to be no market in the UK for DCC. 5 years ago, there was said to be no market for RTR EMU's in 00. 3 years ago, there was said to be no market for a modern day, super detailed, RTR Blue Pullman to be produced. The P4 track company arrived out of the blue and increased the market for kit building. At the other end of the scale, Peco decided to introduce ranges of narrow gauge track for much smaller niche markets. How much did that cost to tool up? Need I go on? There also appears to be some confusion in this discussion between having a market, or creating a market and economic viability. Although these are related and in economic terms totally inter-dependent; they are quite different aspects of the issue and shouldn't be confused. Assuming the price, build quality and availability issues are well balanced, British style 00 RTL track will sell itself and create its own market. As to whether it's a viable economic proposition is another matter and for would-be manufacturers, or commissioners to decide. . .

Sycon Ltd is listed as a "Dormant company" with £600 capital.

Read post 503 on the previous page (page 21). That's OK, build your own track (to do so should be commended and admired); but for many people the option of building their own track will not be taken up, for whatever reason, even if they want better RTL track that is more appropriate to 00 than the current Peco offerings. If a "better" alternative was available, from Peco or any other company, I'll wager you might think twice about using the current Peco ranges again for a British 00 layout? .

Thanks for all the photos, but that glazing looks atrocious. .

Pacific231G raises the usual question mark about whether there is a sufficient market for the new 00 track product, or would enough people be interested or motivated to use it instead of what's currently available. Ponder this thought. If such a new track system became available, from Peco or anyone else, the reviews would almost certainly give it a favourable reception (assuming build quality and cost were OK). How could they not give it a favourable reception when there would be the obvious comparison to be made with the current offerings. I believe it then follows that the magazine writers and contributors would also state their preference for the new product. Online forums would also reflect that view. In no time at all, it would become the accepted wisdom across the internet and printed media, that the new 00 track was a better choice than what has been available up to now. Given that environment, that impression and viewpoint would very likely begin to take root within the wider hobby. So the question is not, "is there a market for this", or " would enough people be sufficiently bothered by their track to buy it....", etc, etc. Rather the interest generated by the new product would itself create the market. Does that sound too idealistic? Well it seems to me that's how many successful new products come to market and gain traction. They create their own demand by adding value and having a degree of "desirability" about them. When the only competition happens to be the only horse in town and getting on a bit at that, I would hope (or maybe wish?) that the job would be relatively straightforward. . .

Other track systems already have the permanent connection between the stock rails and switch blade, complete with isolated frogs ready to be connected to a polarity switch (e.g. Tillig). This has to be a given with any new product. .

I can't tell from the photos of the blue one above, but in the video kindly posted by SDJR7F88, the red one looks like the body is made of cheap coloured plastic. I don't know if that's just the video, as he says it looks good in the flesh. Self coloured plastic is really a backward step if done badly. I'll reserve judgement until I've seen one myself. .

Mickey, half the time I haven't got clue what point you're trying to make, if any; but if you generally believe 4mm / 00 Gauge track is a desirable thing and think it would be a benefit to the hobby (...particularly to the biggest section of the hobby by far), why not get behind it, rather than do nothing but make what appear to be snide and sarcastic comments. I think we all accept the likelihood of it happening doesn't look too good and hasn't done for a long while; but times are changing and so are attitudes. Every year that passes, the chances of it happening are improving and the intransigence of the largest maker of RTL track in the UK market makes them look worst and more dated year by year. Those modellers who support and back the call for improved track products need to push more than ever and it won't help to just throw in the towel and accept a second best ...no, make that third rate, compromise. Maybe the modelling community shouldn't have desired and demanded better RTR models. We could have all just accepted the "no market for it round here" response and been grateful for the dated 20 & 30 year old toys that kept being rehashed? I don't understand this repeated remark? What is that supposed to mean? .

From anecdotal evidence (some in this thread too) it seems the Marcway points are much stiffer than others with flexible point blades. That example doesn't rule out the use of such blades in a RTL product, even though there is still the issue of requiring a latching function to be performed by a mechanism, point motor, stronger actuator wire or other device. Hinged blades can still be avoided. Also, from what has been said above, the Marcway points would ideally still need to be modified for DCC use. Maybe it's time they updated their product offering too? I refer back to the Tillig RTL example, where the points are now fully ready for DCC/DC frog polarity switching (product updated 2 years or so ago) and the blades are not as stiff or resistive as has been reported for the Marcway example. .

Dear oh dear !!!!!

As usual when this topic is aired, rather than making any useful contribution to this thread, or being useful to the discussion, a number of people posting are doing nothing but attempting to subvert the very notion of decent RTL 00 track. Whether consciously or not. If I may paraphrase Ravenser's views on this, posted on MRF a few months ago, whenever a thread about this topic gains momentum, the "disrupters" come out of the woodwork. If you are happy to build your own track and turnouts, or if you prefer to do so, that's fine. If you would like to encourage others to do likewise, that's fine too. However, that's for another topic. As has been repeatedly said, this topic is not about building your own, but about RTL track. May I kindly request that if you have no interest in RTL 00 track, could you please leave it to those who wish to make a positive contribution. As an aside, I do have a view that if a better looking RTL track system was miraculously made available (note: I'm not saying it will appear), then for some people, the incentive to build there own, or to go to EM or P4, may evaporate. In other words, a better looking RTL 00 track system, has the potential to damage the numbers of people getting involved with handbuilding, EM and possibly even P4. I'm sure other people have thought about this and don't like the prospect? You can sometimes read between the lines of some comments and get a "feeling" of where people "are coming from", so to speak. .

Now they are mixed in with the C&L product line, is there a whole range of C&L turnouts, crossings and slips listed on their website, with Nickel Silver Rail? C&L Exactoscale 00