[Graham Plowman]

Pedro,

QUOTE (pedromorgan @ 8 Mar 2007, 22:56) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>the switch blades with a hinge in the middle are my main one. i just hate it. points arnt like that.

Not wishing to defend Peco, but such turnouts with hinged blades are prototypical although they are quite rare these days. They are known as 'loose heel switches'. We pulled a few sets out of Sheffield Park back in the winter 76/77 remodelling.

QUOTE Tillig seem to be taking up the challenge fairly well and i look forward to seeing how the situation developes. I think there will always be a trainset market for Peco track. but i think the serious mnodellers will switch more and more to Tillig. Tillig track is also HO but it look far better under a OO loco than Peco does.

It's a funny world we live in! On the one hand, we have people complain that they don't like Peco track because of its shortcomings, scale issues etc etc and then those same people are quite happy to use Tillig track, which doesn't look anything like British track, has different sleepers, spacings, chairs and geometry and is HO scale. Yet they run their OO scale models on it!
Perhaps all Peco need to do is make an accurate turnout in HO scale ?
Serious modellers will not go for Tillig. They will go for SMP/C&L.

Graham Plowman

 

[Graham Plowman]

QUOTE (Doug @ 9 Mar 2007, 21:27) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>What is a serious modeller?

Someone that is happy to put up with an out of scale OO loco with boilers designed to house 1940's chunky electric motors or chassis made of solid metal with suspension detail moulded onto the sides. Fixed ponies and flangeless wheels...

I think that modelling is all about compromise. Compressing reality into the limited space we have involves quite a bit of compromise. We can't get too obsessed with one aspect of the hobby, when we have glaring inaccuracies in other areas.

"Someone that..." - I think you mean 'Someone who...".

My reply was in the context of track. In that context I meant 'serious modeller' to mean someone who is not happy to accept current RTR track and is prepared to make an effort to obtain better track.
Yes, I agree, modelling is about compromise. Some people will compromise to different degrees on some things and not others. Those who are 'really serious' tend not to compromise much at all and go for P4.
The point I was making was that anyone who is 'serious' about British track would go for SMP/C&L and not Tillig because the latter doesn't look anything like British track. No doubt I will get a barrage of replies from those who disagree because they use Tillig!

Unfortunately, you chose to widen the discussion by bringing in a whole collection of elements which were not the topic of conversation. People tend to have a problem when others appear to use a term (such as 'serious') without qualifying themselves and it usually results in those people getting upset when they find they become 'left out' in the definition. I apologise for my lack of qualifying my statements. Hopefully by bringing the context back onto track ONLY, that clears up any misunderstanding.

Graham Plowman

 

[Graham Plowman]

QUOTE (Doug @ 10 Mar 2007, 20:59) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Thanks for correcting my English Graham...

You say, Tillig doesn't look anything like British track. What does British track look like?

I never said Tillig looked British. I and others model with it because of it's superior running qualities that the pesky little electric locos appreciate over the likes of Peco.

Doug,

Probably the best way to find out what British track looks like is to get hold of one of the PWI manuals on the subject, for example 'British Railways Track'.

In summery, the differences are:

1/ Chairs - totally different
2/ Geometry - different
3/ Check rails - different
4/ Sleeper spacing - different
5/ Sleeper sizes - different
6/ Sleeper arrangements - different

Compare them with a real UK turnout at your local railway station and you'll see what I mean.

It is an interesting concept that you "and others model with it because of it's superior running qualities that the pesky little electric locos appreciate over the likes of Peco". The issue of sleepers and spacings in 00 does not appear in that statement which makes me wonder whether all the talk on this subject really is concerned about sleepering or whether all people want is just reliable running through a better designed turnout - in other words, people don't care what it looks like, so long as it is reliable.

Personally, I use Peco code 75. Not perfect either, but when carefully laid and correctly wired in combination with correctly B2B's wheels, I have had complete reliability: http://www.brma.asn.au/ShowPage.aspx?P=417...46358752C202027

Graham Plowman

 

[Graham Plowman]

QUOTE (Nathan @ 9 Mar 2007, 22:32) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>OK, hold up a minute guys!

Rail-Rider has a good point with starting out with a Hornby set - I will end up with code 100 track. Still, this doesn't mean that I'll necessarily have to extend this set in terms of track as it's just an oval.

I'm not quite getting the hang of why Code 75 is better in some people's opinion.
I understand what electrofrog points are at this stage, but what sort of extra wiring are we talking of here?

1/ Code 75 looks a lot better
2/ Things run a lot better on it - most RTR stock these days runs better on code 75 than 100
3/ Its constructed to allow proper live frog wiring

Extra wiring see: http://mrol.gppsoftware.com/livefrogwiring.asp

These are simple modifications for which code 75 has been purposely made to enable.

Graham Plowman

 

[Graham Plowman]

QUOTE (Oakydoke @ 13 Mar 2007, 19:02) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Apart from Tillig Elite, Peco Streamline code 75 and 100 do not look British either!

What Tillig gives you is something reliable, less clunky looking, with decent switch rails on the points.
Even at code 83, it looks finer than Peco code 75.
In fact code 83 is pretty close to scale size for modern mainlines anyway.

As far as chairs go, modern track doesn't have them!!!

The rail fixings on Tillig will more than do for Pandrol clips. This is 4mm/ft after all and not everybody is so fussy about unseen detail at normal viewing distances. For many it's a case of "If it looks right, it is right".

The only problem with Tillig is the H0 sleeper spacing that also afflicts Peco Streamline.
On balance, like for like Tillig looks far better. I wouldn't be paying all the extra money if I didn't think so.

C&L/SMP 00 track doesn't fit the bill as modern era track, unless it's in old sidings or a remote branch line.
It certainly doesn't look like anything near my local main lines.

You could say, for the vast majority sticking with 00 16.5mm track, it's Hobson's choice!

I think Oakydoke's comments above are pretty representative of the debate regarding 00 track.

I haven't had any problems with Peco code 75, but evidently, others have had problems with Peco and hence Tillig gets a preference.

Several comments above draw my attention:

- The rail fixings on Tillig will more than do for Pandrol clips
- This is 4mm/ft after all and not everybody is so fussy about unseen detail at normal viewing distances
- For many it's a case of "If it looks right, it is right".
- for the vast majority sticking with 00 16.5mm track, it's Hobson's choice!

Not wishing to criticise anyone, but my observations of all of these statements is that they are fairly representative of the hobby. Many people are evidently throwing down track in blissful ignorance of technical details, geometry, what it represents or whether it has any form of accuracy. Clearly, it doesn't matter to them and they are quite happy to run 00 models on continental outline track modelled in HO scale, despite the fact that it looks less British than the products they are moving from.

It makes me wonder what all the debate about 00 track (ref sleepers and spacing) is when quite clearly, a lot of people really don't care what their track looks like so long as it is reliable!

Could it be that the answer is for Peco to make an accurate model of British track in H0 scale ?

I really can't see the point in any 'better 00 track' all the time people are building layouts on 4x8 boards - you simply can't build anything accurate in 00 in that space with curve rad 1 and 2. 'better 00 track' will simply look very strange with such tight radii and probably, Tillig does too!

Graham Plowman