Boomers Wood
- Thread starter Steve Cook
- Start date
Neil
Western Thunderer
....Can I interest anyone in this You-Tube clip of my biggest, 6-axle Dark Side O Scale loco taking 2ft Radius points ... ...Okay I confess it'd rip any other stock off the track if it was coupled up - there IS a limit to what radius even buckeye couplers can get around - but I still love the sheer cheek of it...
That's huge, 10" in OO was what I got down to with this layout.
Captain Kernow
Western Thunderer
Well, I'm going to re-post the original photos, as I can't really get any improvements on them in terms of angle and close-up focus.
It occurred to me, when thinking about Steve's conundrum (prior to Project 'X/Y/Z'), that an alternative main line locomotive might be kinder on the curves, so I checked out the relative overhang of my Hymek and Class 22 on 'Callow Lane'. The sharpest curve on the layout is the A6 into one of the sidings, so I tried to pose both locos with the same wagon in the same place. This was the result:
First of all - the Hymek:
Then the Class 22:
Apart from proving that I have a rather hairy wagon interior and a previously un-spotted split in the Hymek's buffer, the Class 22 did indeed have less of an overhang.
Just occurred to me that with the new Dapol one coming out, Steve may have considered doing a trade-in at Honest John's Used Hydraulics Emporium (branches Nationwide).....
Anyway, the other thing I was thinking of uploading in my befuddled state yesterday, were some pics of possible replacement sprung buffers I'd obtained some time ago, for my Hymeks.
Replacement doesn't appear to be that straightforward, due to the way that the solid plastic Heljan buffers are 'embedded' into the chassis block casting, but I reckon something could be done.
The alternatives that I came up with at the time (none fitted to my own locos as yet) were examples from Bachmann (cheapo) and A1 models (a bit more expensive but nicer). Here they are, in case this is of interest, Steve.
Bachmann ones:
A1 Models example:
Both the Bachmann and A1 Models examples measure up at 7.5mm across the front face of the buffer head, which seems to match the Heljan buffer head as well.
In my view, not providing sprung buffers was only marginally acceptable when the Heljan Hymek was introduced. Now, and especially in view of subsequent Heljan releases, I would consider it a major failing, although I doubt that it would be in Heljan's economic interests to retro-fit them to the model now.
It occurred to me, when thinking about Steve's conundrum (prior to Project 'X/Y/Z'), that an alternative main line locomotive might be kinder on the curves, so I checked out the relative overhang of my Hymek and Class 22 on 'Callow Lane'. The sharpest curve on the layout is the A6 into one of the sidings, so I tried to pose both locos with the same wagon in the same place. This was the result:
First of all - the Hymek:
Then the Class 22:
Apart from proving that I have a rather hairy wagon interior and a previously un-spotted split in the Hymek's buffer, the Class 22 did indeed have less of an overhang.
Just occurred to me that with the new Dapol one coming out, Steve may have considered doing a trade-in at Honest John's Used Hydraulics Emporium (branches Nationwide).....
Anyway, the other thing I was thinking of uploading in my befuddled state yesterday, were some pics of possible replacement sprung buffers I'd obtained some time ago, for my Hymeks.
Replacement doesn't appear to be that straightforward, due to the way that the solid plastic Heljan buffers are 'embedded' into the chassis block casting, but I reckon something could be done.
The alternatives that I came up with at the time (none fitted to my own locos as yet) were examples from Bachmann (cheapo) and A1 models (a bit more expensive but nicer). Here they are, in case this is of interest, Steve.
Bachmann ones:
A1 Models example:
Both the Bachmann and A1 Models examples measure up at 7.5mm across the front face of the buffer head, which seems to match the Heljan buffer head as well.
In my view, not providing sprung buffers was only marginally acceptable when the Heljan Hymek was introduced. Now, and especially in view of subsequent Heljan releases, I would consider it a major failing, although I doubt that it would be in Heljan's economic interests to retro-fit them to the model now.
Steve Cook
Flying Squad
Hi Tim
Thank you for taking and posting the photos
They definitely show the advantage of having much finer standards in respect of controlling the position of the rolling stock on the track and thus the significantly higher chances of successful propelling. The buffer photos are excellent 
Just been having a look at my Hymek and I reckon if you could pin the buffer beam to the chassis block (as well as using the coupling hook as a brace) one could get away with not needing the buffers to perform the 'locating function'. It would be a worthwhile mod I think.
Hi Jordan
I'll PM you an address over
I've stripped the layout of all the track now and am pushing templates around checking what will fit. At the moment it looks like this
It will comfortably allow 5 wagons and a brake to be 'run around' which is the limit of the fiddle yard anyway. The run into the main siding is now completely straight which should counter all of the issues. The two points furthest away are large radius, I will have to use a medium radius at the end of the layout closest to the bottom of the picture to maintain a decent length of track for the loco release.
I still think it needs a bit of work, the hatched areas of polystyrene are likely to go, allowing the track to be a bit closer to the rear of the board - hopefully I can increase the distance between the two large points and the lift out section. So some progress, will make a descision tomorrow and go shopping for new bits on Friday
Thank you for taking and posting the photos
They definitely show the advantage of having much finer standards in respect of controlling the position of the rolling stock on the track and thus the significantly higher chances of successful propelling. The buffer photos are excellent Just been having a look at my Hymek and I reckon if you could pin the buffer beam to the chassis block (as well as using the coupling hook as a brace) one could get away with not needing the buffers to perform the 'locating function'. It would be a worthwhile mod I think.Hi Jordan
Yes please , that would be great
I'll PM you an address over I've stripped the layout of all the track now and am pushing templates around checking what will fit. At the moment it looks like this
It will comfortably allow 5 wagons and a brake to be 'run around' which is the limit of the fiddle yard anyway. The run into the main siding is now completely straight which should counter all of the issues. The two points furthest away are large radius, I will have to use a medium radius at the end of the layout closest to the bottom of the picture to maintain a decent length of track for the loco release.
I still think it needs a bit of work, the hatched areas of polystyrene are likely to go, allowing the track to be a bit closer to the rear of the board - hopefully I can increase the distance between the two large points and the lift out section. So some progress, will make a descision tomorrow and go shopping for new bits on Friday
S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
Have to be honest Steve, and apologies for not having been on here earlier, but 3 link coupligs and Peco "small" radius points are a bad combination - I learnt this as a teenager! I generally found that the medium points are OK, depending more on the diameter of the buffer heads than anything else (no problem with a Hornby 25 and their VDA etc) but you really want large radius, although given the geometry of Peco points (constant crossing angle, at least for the medium and large turnouts) and they are not an ideal solution, no matter what the question might be...
The other problem is that due to the amount of "tolerance" (slop) in 00/H0 "universal" track, the whole issue has been exacerbated. It might be worth investigating Peco code 83 track and points, but even if this worked (I believe that the code 83 is to NMRA standards) you would still need at least a medium radius.
Or you may wish to simply replace everything with EM track...
The other problem is that due to the amount of "tolerance" (slop) in 00/H0 "universal" track, the whole issue has been exacerbated. It might be worth investigating Peco code 83 track and points, but even if this worked (I believe that the code 83 is to NMRA standards) you would still need at least a medium radius.
Or you may wish to simply replace everything with EM track...
S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
Pardon my simplicity, but do you not have the wagon on the straight (main) route of the turnout, and the loco on the curved (diverging) route in those photos?
I think we should be told!
Captain Kernow
Western Thunderer
Negative, Caller, both locos propelled the wagons into the siding via the curved part of the point, I think the camera close-up is distorting the angles!
It's on the blue highlighted section as shown on these photos:
JimG
Western Thunderer
Or maybe some more of that nice S scale track he has been known to lay. He could knock up the stock over the weekend.
He could knock up the stock over the weekend. Jim.
S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
I think it is more the overhang on the loco - I can see why they were fitted with oval buffers!
Captain Kernow
Western Thunderer
Hi Graham,
Just a quick hi-jack of Steve's thread to comment!
All windows do have curtains, but the families that live here tend to draw them wide open each morning...
Will probably add gutters as you suggest, the cottages aren't fixed in place yet. Some dirtying/weathering will also be done, although not yet worked out best way to do this convincingly on Howard Scenics brick paper (any suggestions gratefully received).
Cheers.
28ten
Guv'nor
MIG powders? id stay clear of anything water basedHi Graham,
Just a quick hi-jack of Steve's thread to comment!
All windows do have curtains, but the families that live here tend to draw them wide open each morning...
Will probably add gutters as you suggest, the cottages aren't fixed in place yet. Some dirtying/weathering will also be done, although not yet worked out best way to do this convincingly on Howard Scenics brick paper (any suggestions gratefully received).
Cheers.
Steve Cook
Flying Squad
Tuck in
Especially if you carry on posting photos of Callow Lane - the trackwork is looking rather splendid chap I wish I could work that quick JimOr maybe some more of that nice S scale track he has been known to lay.
Jim.
This layout is being used to establish some parameters that I can apply to a couple of proposed S scale schemes I have been kicking around. Trouble is, they require about 750 sleepers and 1500 or so chairs (which will take time to cut the keys down - thats 15 hours work alone unless I can come up with a jig fixture) and I want to be sure the basic premise will keep me happy before I start Its good to have something to aim for though...
Steve Cook
Flying Squad
Project CAC is dead.
Meet Project NSC (not so cheap) instead Another working title, I need to come up with something of an S&D flavour at some point, but first up, new stuff
The points above are shown with one of the old short points on the left for comparison. All code 75, two long and one medium plus 6 yards of new straight track. The board surfaces have been cleaned up and the points checked that they switch frog polarity correctly. The copperclad strips remain as I'm sure I'll damage something getting them out - I'll take that risk when I kinow exactly which route the new track plan will take.
Right, best get on with it (after a brew mind!)....
[bully mode] Round Two...[/bully mode]
Meet Project NSC (not so cheap) instead
Another working title, I need to come up with something of an S&D flavour at some point, but first up, new stuffThe points above are shown with one of the old short points on the left for comparison. All code 75, two long and one medium plus 6 yards of new straight track. The board surfaces have been cleaned up and the points checked that they switch frog polarity correctly. The copperclad strips remain as I'm sure I'll damage something getting them out - I'll take that risk when I kinow exactly which route the new track plan will take.
Right, best get on with it (after a brew mind!)....
[bully mode] Round Two...[/bully mode]
Captain Kernow
Western Thunderer
'S&D with Diesels', Steve, or 'Hardcore Pure Original?'
Steve Cook
Flying Squad
Can I do both Tim, I may have had an unintended purchase in a 3F style whilst at the model shop'S&D with Diesels', Steve, or 'Hardcore Pure Original?'
Dog Star
Western Thunderer
RIP - and not one joke about David Dickinson?
Steph Dale
Western Thunderer
Can I do both Tim, I may have had an unintended purchase in a 3F style whilst at the model shop
Ooh careless...
C'mon, get on with it then.
Steph
S
Simon Dunkley
Guest
An improvement, but I would say that so far, you have shown that "00 finescale" ain't easy, whereas in EM you wouldn't have had these problems as the tolerances are tighter!
Suggests to me that 00 "Universal" works best with tension-lock couplers (may also work well with knuckle couplers, but I have no experience of these). If "Finescale" 00 (which I am begiining to think is a contradiction in terms) requires tighter tolerances and therefore handmade track, then the solutions are to narrow the flangeways, increase the B2B and probably re-wheel nearly every loco in sight, or to narrow the flangeways by reducing the gauge. Such a retrograde process seems hardly a step forward.
Maybe "Finescale 00" is really EM?
Maybe I should run for cover...
Mind you, someone left an example of Monsieur Hankey le Caca Noel in the loo at work this morning, so Project CAC is more pleasant than some alternatives!
