Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi,

Having now bought 95% of the rolling stock I need for my next layout, I'm starting to think about track. My thoughts went straight to Peco, but is there anything better in 00??

I'm thinking finer rail, more gap above the sleeper, finer detail, longer turn out's, blackened rail etc. I did a bit with H0e and bought some tilling track, that was very nice. I was hoping to get the same quality in 00.

Thanks.

Rob.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,499 Posts
Hi Rob
The only track that I can think of is the stuff you have to make yourself! I think it is called SMP and you buy the sleepers and rail separately and build it yourself. I am not sure on anything else I'm afraid as I have always been happy enough with peco to be honest.

Kind regards

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
Tillig is a respected H0 track I believe, Link is here

Marcway will make custom 00 track for you see here for marcway website -or look in the back of mags -

C and L finescale sell well respected flexitrack but only turnout kits not ready assembled I believe - see here

Then there is SMP scaleway which I believe is now part of Marcway? which makes flexitrack - see here

I am afraid I am on Peco 75 so can't speak from personal experience but I am sure if you use the search box on this site you will find some discussion of the relative merits

Cheers

TimP
 

·
In depth idiot
Joined
·
7,685 Posts
This has become a frustration in OO. Choices at the moment are plain track from SMP and C&L, (which immediately illustrate the improvement that is possible) and handbuilt from components. All points have to be built from kits or basic components, or bought in from specialist track builders such as Marcway. Clearly it would be possible to have RTR points to a matching standard, but the UK's RTR track making specialist isn't interested. This is a great shame, as in addition to economy the ease of use, robustness and longevity of Peco's points is superior to soldered track work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
The track debate is one which flares up from time to time so it is not worth going through all the old arguments - but perhaps I could make a couple of points:
  • Peco track features sleeper dimensions and spacings to around 1:87 scale, which is consistent with the track gauge
  • SMP and C&L track looks finer because it represents bullhead rail, which is lighter than modern flatbottomed (FB) rail. Peco Code 75 FB track is a pretty good representation of the real thing, if you accept the scale to which it is made. There is no gap between the sleeper and the rail on modern FB track
  • Bullhead track is still in use on Network Rail but it is now very uncommon on running lines, and any layout set in the last twenty years would need to have a convincing back story for it to use such rail exclusively
Chris Thomas
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
OK, having now talked to some people and followed it up on the net with picks (I've also found a thread here on track comparison) I'm going to buy Tillig HO track.

Peco just doesn't even come close. I don't care about the extra cost, it's all about the model, not the money.

Rob.
 

·
Dogsbody
Joined
·
1,387 Posts
Given that OO track is the wrong guage, I think we are getting a bit to pedantic about which brand looks best. In another thread on this forum someone commented that most of us seem not to look below platform level. Maybe, maybe not but if we want real accuracy better either make our own track to the correct size and modify some of the excellent models that are available, or get the manufacturers to start making British outline stuff in HO.

On balance I think I'll go for British HO and continue to enjoy using Peco while I wait, and wait and wait.....
 

·
Chief mouser
Joined
·
11,775 Posts
QUOTE (BobB @ 4 Mar 2009, 14:13) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>On balance I think I'll go for British HO and continue to enjoy using Peco while I wait, and wait and wait.....

Sounds familiar, probably explains the Lima 33s (5), 4F(2) and numerous mark 1 and 2s plus the Fleischmann Warships, Bulleid coaches etc etc etc........

Regards
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
9,845 Posts
The rail fastenings on Peco track are not to my taste for the mid 50s so I will trying some C & L or SMP. In photos of the real thing, you can always make out the fastenings so that's the look I hope to achieve. I do know the gauge is wrong but so long as the view is not head on, it isn't as much of an issue.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
228 Posts
QUOTE (Chris T @ 4 Mar 2009, 10:39) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>[...]
  • Bullhead track is still in use on Network Rail but it is now very uncommon on running lines, and any layout set in the last twenty years would need to have a convincing back story for it to use such rail exclusively
Chris Thomas
Good point Chris. Actually, that said, the rise of steel and concrete sleepers can't be ignored forever. In fact, NR is now experimenting with recycled plastic sleepers -- if that cottons on, perhaps Peco et al could make their sleepers from the same sources for added realism


QUOTE (BobB @ 4 Mar 2009, 14:13) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Given that OO track is the wrong guage, I think we are getting a bit to pedantic about which brand looks best. [...]
I agree. I've enjoyed 00 all my life so far, and I'll continue to do so. I love to get a loco out its box and place it on the track. But even as a kid, before I knew the gauge was nearly 3mm out of whack, I stood in front of Mallard at the NRM, then looked head on at my Hornby model at home and scratched my head. Years later I read about EM and P4 and thought 'Ah-ha!' Now I'm really looking forward to getting into P4, not to count rivets, but because I'm dead keen about getting into miniature engineering and pushing the scale tolerances as far as I can. If that means I'm a bit odd or mad, great!


I completely agree that RTR track needs to keep pace with today's excellent locos and stock. It's only my view, but life is short and I couldn't contemplate hand building 00 trackwork. Of course, P4 means re-gauging or scratch/kit building are unavoidable, and that might not be your thing. It also makes tolerances a lot finer and curve radii bigger -- perhaps EM could be a good compromise here. But, if I was concerned about items as detailed as rail chairs, sleeper spacings and rail carrying heights, I just couldn't ignore the 16mm gauge.

Cheers,

Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
perhaps it is a good time for a company like C&L to produce generic B/H rail turnouts?

Already there is flex track in the finescale gauges...perhaps there is a groundswell of need , to satisfy those potential customers who don't feel able/confident at making their own turnouts?

Currently these folk make do with the likes of Peco, etc...yet have found obvious the deficient gauge.

Certainly for EM and P4, there are simple 'kits' for converting rolling stock.....

so perhaps we need a helping hand with turnouts.....the current peco brigade won't blanche at the prospect of having their track layouts dictated to them by fixed geometry.

who knows..already the major manufacturers offer a choice of operating systems for locos.......

perhaps next they may feel, [if there is a market to expand,] comfortable with offering alternate finescale gauges ? [US O scale makers offer hi-rail or finescale]

often simply a matter of alternate wheelsets..they already offer detailing options, dependant on whether the loco is a runner or a mantleshelf queen?

And if a mantleshelf collector is ok with dummy couplers, etc...why not a more finescale wheel gauge as well?

Makers have shown how modern manufacturing technology allows so much variation on a theme....perhaps it's time 4mm scale modellers pressed hornbachetc for that next step????

the option of EM/P4, straight from the box????
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top