[Lancashire Fusilier]

Tillig is indeed in my opinion one of the better off the shelf HO track systems. I nearly went that way myself before heading down the C&L route and hand made points etc. I purchased a couple of pieces and was well impressed with the detail on the chairs and the pre-weathered rail. Now I couldn't handle the yellowish look of nickle silver and stick to the C&L steel track.

One easy to do improvement to RTR HO track to make it look a little better for the UK 4mm modeller is to space the sleepers out a bit more. While this doesn't correct the actual sleeper under size issue, simply separating the sleeper spacing a little to scale sleeper spacing does make a vast visual improvement, particulalry once ballasted, and is easy to do to any of the RTR HO track suppliers.

 

[Lancashire Fusilier]

QUOTE (slot.jockey @ 5 Feb 2009, 22:45) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Have you thought about using C&L flexitrack with Tillig points

I did actually and discounted it purely on the sleeper spacing discrepancy originally ie pointwork with silly sleepers and track that was "right".

For my own layout that I have commenced I need the coarseness of the RTR track and point work as any number of modelling friends may well want to run their own items and there are a number of currently available RTR items that the flanges are too coarse and hit the finely moulded chairs on the C&L. For example Dapol's milk tank stock all hit the C&L chairs, not enough to de-rail but enough...

Having said all that, do I build to coarse 16.5mm standards so as to not re-wheel stock and adjust back to backs or do I say stuff it, if you run on my layout this is what you need to do?

I want to be able to take an item of motive power or two over to a friend in the BRMA on at least a monthly basis so will have to decide soon so I can finalise the track plan. There is something appealing about going Tillig all around though and making some minor cosmetic changes and spending time on ensuring the basllasting and other trackside features are well executed such that the track is not the focus.

 

[Lancashire Fusilier]

QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 9 Feb 2009, 21:19) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Finer scale back to backs will run fine on peco points.... in fact 14.75 gives a better run through them.

If you use 1mm flangeways at the frog and 1.1 at the wing rails, it'll take most RTR too.... but do you really want to compromise things that much? Finescale is a good habit worth cultivating. Anyway - their stock will run better on their own layouts too if they make the back to backs consistently 14.5 or greater

Ok, so for clarity for others reading this then, you are saying that hand made pointwork with the 1mm and 1.1mm flangeways respectively will take most RTR stock and then for the items which are a little coarse then swap out wheel sets for Gibsons or Romfords or Markits et al? Assuming using 75 BH rail from C&L for the pointwork and the C&L flex track too.

 

[Lancashire Fusilier]

I am quite sure the recent varieties of RTR will be fine. It was just that I had experienced as mentioned to you that the Dapol range of Milk Tanks seemed to have flanges that hit the chairs of C&L 16.5mm track and that was what struck me that if I really needed to re-wheel I may as well stick with EM and be done with it. Mind you still not a total no-no - massive indecision really!