!!

Not Registered?

Welcome!  Please register to view all of the new posts and forum boards - some of which are hidden to guests.  After registering and gaining 10 posts you will be able to sell and buy items on our N'porium.

If you have any problems registering, then please check your spam filter before emailing us.  Hotmail users seem to find their emails in the Junk folder.


Thanks for reading,
The NGF Staff.

Poll

Which Flangeway clearance would be preferred?

Large 1mm Flangeways, most RTR locos & stock can run through unmodified
105 (55.3%)
Finer 0.8 - 0.85mm Flangeways, RTR locos & stock will need back to backs checking with a Gauge
85 (44.7%)

Total Members Voted: 186

Author Topic: 'Gauging' Interest- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?  (Read 166442 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Roy L S

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1669
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2011, 01:35:43 pm »
Hi H

Yes, you are correct. I have only seen Easitrack, but never tried it for myself, therefore I do to bow to your experience on the subject of how compatible it is with N. I am given to understand that it works well enough with current N wheel standards but I am still of the view that if Wayne is looking at a new commercially viable finer and more accurate alternative to current N standards (Thinking Peco Code 55 for that) it has to be a range that includes plain track, and if he is going to do that it may as well be correctly gauged to 9mm.

Oh and as a long standing NGS member I do endorse what you say about being a member - well worth it.

Cheers

Roy
« Last Edit: December 28, 2011, 01:44:45 pm by Roy L S »

Offline EtchedPixels

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 16353
  • 2mm Association Number: 4412
  • Posts: 8242
  • Country: wales
  • Gender: Male
    • Ebay
    • Google+
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Etched Pixels
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2011, 03:26:51 pm »
I am submitting artwork for a prototype etched frog to the etching company today. I am hoping that they can turn this around pretty fast. The etch is designed as such to represent the profile section of bullhead rail, its made from 3 layers that will solder together.

Actual rail is two parts that solder together and looks right.

Quote
I am not sure what issues you see with matching laser cut bases with plastic plain track? The material thickness is the same as if using loose sleeper strips. Do you mean the finish of the material?

The finish.  I did look at the proto-87 folks N scale track and some of the other US systems but one of the problems was going to be matching the laser cut sleepers with plastic trackwork. I think the laser stuff looks better for wood but it was sort of decided for other reasons - eg the ease fo assembly of easitrac.


Have you talked to the proto-87 folks by the way. Their jigs and sleepers are for US outline but a lot of the other bits are possibly useful and might cut down the costs if going that way. There are also several sources (one UK) of code 40 rail that might mean you can avoid the need to get rail drawn - which tends to be pricy for the tooling and awkward to store. Same problem with metal roof profiles - 'the tooling is [ouch], and then it's x per 500m', except you can probably shift 500m of rail easier than 500m of coach roof !


"Knowledge has no value or use for the solitary owner: to be enjoyed it must be communicated" -- Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden

Offline Wayne Kinney

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 17722
  • 2mm Association Number: 4584
  • Posts: 335
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #17 on: December 28, 2011, 03:37:37 pm »
Proof is in the pudding I guess, I can show images on here once I get some prototypes.

I haven't been in contact with them, no. I beleive I can source rail.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2011, 03:39:24 pm by Wayne Kinney »
Thanks,
Wayne.

------------

www.britishfinescale.com - Home of fiNetrax Code 40 Track System

Offline thos

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23148
  • 2mm Association Number: 4793
  • Posts: 58
  • Country: be
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2011, 07:18:02 pm »
In addition to the aesthetic advantages of code 40, there is also the issue of outsized bogies.  Replacing RTR wheels with finescale (N=1.3mm) means that Easitrac cannot be used.
K+1.3 >= 9.42 + 0.5
K >= 8.62
which is too wide for 9mm.  If K<8.12 the wheels will fall inside the track.

Therefore if one wishes to use narrow wheels, Easitrac may not be used - Easitrac requires wide wheels.

As regards gauge, there are several options.

1. NEM (K=7.9 to 8.1, S=7.2 to 7.3) 1.3mm wheels will have 0.4mm of 9mm track covered and 0.1mm uncovered. Wheels will fall inside Easitrac.

2. NMRA (K= 8.15, S=7.5)  Wheels will have only 0.03mm on Easitrac.  On 9mm track they will have 0.45mm of the rail covered and 0.05mm uncovered.  This is acceptable.

3. Fine:N (K=8.5, S=8.0).  Ideal for narrow wheels but standard wide wheels cannot be used.

Therefore to use 1.3mm wheels, Easitrac may not be used.  Fine:N may be used if only narrow wheels are to be used.  NMRA standards allow both, but NEM do not.

_________________________________________________________

I had resigned myself to building Fast-Tracks turnouts and plain track for my visible area with Peco-55 for the hidden area.  Your proposed system certainly seems as if it would satisfy my requirements.

You may also find customers in the Fine:N community in America and Europe.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2011, 07:55:28 pm by thos »

Offline EtchedPixels

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 16353
  • 2mm Association Number: 4412
  • Posts: 8242
  • Country: wales
  • Gender: Male
    • Ebay
    • Google+
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Etched Pixels
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #19 on: December 28, 2011, 10:52:21 pm »
fiNe is 1:160 scale unless you are modelling a few obscure tramways and the like or some early pre 1850s stuff. There are also already ranges of relevant trackwork for that.

N in the UK is 1:148 which means it should be about 9.6mm,  which makes 9.42mm a big improvement (visually noticable too).

If you want to run narrow wheels in the UK then you use the 2mmSA wheels and run to 2fs standards. At that point you've got a wide range of wheels, diesel conversion parts and the like available, plus help and guides, easitrac, track templates, jigs and so on - and more importantly a complete specified and compatible standard for all the bits.

You'd have to be pretty perverse to try and do fiNe to a UK prototype !
"Knowledge has no value or use for the solitary owner: to be enjoyed it must be communicated" -- Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden

Offline thos

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23148
  • 2mm Association Number: 4793
  • Posts: 58
  • Country: be
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #20 on: December 29, 2011, 12:46:41 am »
Agreed, 2mm is a set of consistent standards, but that also means that you have to sign up for all of it, which means scratchbuilding, kitbuilding or converting everything, including steamer driving wheels.  Few buildings and figures are available in 1:152.4  For a lot of work your grandson could have a wonderful layout.

FS160 and Fine:N are consistent 1:160.  FS160 is designed to use 2mm wheels and Fine:N has wheels to similar standards.

Alternatively, one could keep to RTR stock and Peco-55 track.  Rolling stock and some buildings and a few figures would be at 1:148 with the rest at 1:160, which is 8% smaller.  Track will look chunky and rolling stock will have wide wheels - leading bogies being most noticeably wrong.

It has been frequently stated that Easitrac may be used for N.  This is true so long as one avoids 1.3mm wheels which would fall between the rails.

I object to both chunky track and wide wheels.  However, I am wary of 2mm because I would have to build or convert everything.  It would seem that Wayne's system would be the answer to my needs because it would allow me to

use Union Mills engines, keeping the wheels and traction tyres
replace bogie wheels with narrower ones when I want to
use 2mm kits such as  by Messrs Johnson and Doherty and N from Messrs Tilson and Cox
use Peco-55 in my hidden areas and helices for extra grip and economy
use prettier turnouts and plain track in the visible area without the expense of Fast-Tracks.

I accept that I would have a hodge-podge of 1:148, 1:152.4 and 1:160 or +-4%.  What I am after is a workable compromise that removes the worst aspects of N without having to go completely to 2mm: a sort of CofE or Social Democrat half-way house, not a UK-prototype Fine:N.

This assumes that both Union Mills engines and 1.3mm wheels will run on Wayne's system - if not it's back to the drawing board.

Offline Wayne Kinney

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 17722
  • 2mm Association Number: 4584
  • Posts: 335
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #21 on: December 29, 2011, 08:24:39 am »
Working with a 0.85mm - 0.9mm flangeway to accomadate British N wheelsets, I beleive 1.3mm wheels would 'fall in the gap'.
Thanks,
Wayne.

------------

www.britishfinescale.com - Home of fiNetrax Code 40 Track System

Offline thos

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23148
  • 2mm Association Number: 4793
  • Posts: 58
  • Country: be
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #22 on: December 29, 2011, 10:08:26 am »
Bognor!

In that case I would only be interested in plain track.

Offline Formerly NtasticShop

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 17713
  • Posts: 854
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
    • Facebook
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #23 on: December 29, 2011, 10:35:20 am »
This thread has surprised me quite a bit, the call for British track has been growing over the last few years. Now someone has put their head above the parapet, it gets shot down.

I do not think you can only produce points, to have a range you need flexi track. Some points might not sell enough to cover tooling, flexi track will sell loads and cover the any short falls.

I do feel that at this moment the NGS should step in and produce some standards. This should have been done 20 years ago, but does Ned to be done now.

It would be nice to see a move to true 1:148 scale track, wheels and the rest. Time to have a serious debate and set the rules for the future.
Regards
Richard
Formerly NtasticShop
Dapol Apologist (according to RMWeb)
Grumpy Old Git (Late 40s)
Member of NGS (but not allowed to comment)
Why am I surrounded by maroons?

Offline thos

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23148
  • 2mm Association Number: 4793
  • Posts: 58
  • Country: be
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #24 on: December 29, 2011, 11:19:19 am »
I do feel that at this moment the NGS should step in and produce some standards.

It would be nice to see a move to true 1:148 scale track, wheels and the rest.
I agree that we need modern UK standards.  However we do not need yet another track gauge - most users of N want tight radii and 9.7mm gauge would not be practicable.  A standard based on either 9mm or 9.42mm should suffice.

In either case, the standards need to be agreed by NGS, Farish, Peco and Dapol - and would they be willing to move away from 9mm?

Alternatively the standard could be based on 1:160 throughout.

Offline polo2k

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 956
  • Country: 00
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #25 on: December 29, 2011, 11:37:10 am »
how did the NMRA create their rule book? that seems to have been universally adopted

Even NMRA is not totally universal (i.e. pizza cutters wont work)
Cheers
-Ash-



The only way to guarantee failure, is not to try

Offline EtchedPixels

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 16353
  • 2mm Association Number: 4412
  • Posts: 8242
  • Country: wales
  • Gender: Male
    • Ebay
    • Google+
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Etched Pixels
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #26 on: December 29, 2011, 11:46:19 am »
Agreed, 2mm is a set of consistent standards, but that also means that you have to sign up for all of it, which means scratchbuilding, kitbuilding or converting everything, including steamer driving wheels.  Few buildings and figures are available in 1:152.4  For a lot of work your grandson could have a wonderful layout.

Rubbish. Most people using 2fs are using 1:152 and 1:148 stuff. As btw are many people using N if they took a micrometer to much of their scenery and the like. Quite a few run things like 1:160 Eurostars and Lemke tampers too. Particularly for buildings 1:160 v 1:152 v 1:148 is actually less than the variation you find just measuring real ones.

For 2fs it takes about 5 minutes to change the wheels on a Farish diesel, 1 minute on a coach. Some of the other wheels are a bit more complicated and either need turning via the 2mmSA service.

Quote
It has been frequently stated that Easitrac may be used for N.  This is true so long as one avoids 1.3mm wheels which would fall between the rails.

Yes but nobody else is proposing to do that - it would magnify the errors in the look of N. If you are using 1.3mm wheels its easier for the UK case to use 2mmSA wheels as they are off the shelf drop ins for many wheel types and a turning service for the others, and then you are back to 2fs.

Quote
use Union Mills engines, keeping the wheels and traction tyres
replace bogie wheels with narrower ones when I want to

Alas probably not because you'll be pushed to build a turnout that will take both, probably it would need a swivelling frog.

Quote
I accept that I would have a hodge-podge of 1:148, 1:152.4 and 1:160 or +-4%.  What I am after is a workable compromise that removes the worst aspects of N without having to go completely to 2mm: a sort of CofE or Social Democrat half-way house, not a UK-prototype Fine:N.

If only track geometry worked like that we'd all be at it 8)

Quote
This assumes that both Union Mills engines and 1.3mm wheels will run on Wayne's system - if not it's back to the drawing board.

Yep.

Union Mills can be converted to 2fs by turning the wheels down but it does sometimes need some slight thinning of the bodywork each side to keep sufficient clearances. It's one of the harder cases I suppose. In the diesel world it's all rather easier.

I use easitrac with current N wheels. It's a compromise but not a particular problematic one for me. As you say it does mean you can get more built and running. Going to thinner wheels would actually make the models look worse from many angles as it would effectively move the wheels inwards. Right now the overly narrow track and overly wide wheels mean that the outside facing surface of the wheels is in about the right place.

Alan
"Knowledge has no value or use for the solitary owner: to be enjoyed it must be communicated" -- Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden

Offline polo2k

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 956
  • Country: 00
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #27 on: December 29, 2011, 11:56:34 am »
You mentioned a swiveling frog in your post, this got me thinking:

would it be feasible to build a point that had the switch rails as a single rigid assembly that includes the frog and pivots under the frog, it would reduce the number of parts and complexity, could be cast with the rails embedded and if the pivot extends below the board you could attach a servo horn and even use the pivot rod for frog switching. this would allow use of solenoids, servos, point roding etc

If you were casting then you could get all fancy and add graphite to the mix so its self lubricating (graphite might be conductive in this application), it would also colour it and avoid scratches showing through.

if you use this idea PM me for the details of where to pay my fee ;)
Cheers
-Ash-



The only way to guarantee failure, is not to try

Offline EtchedPixels

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (+44)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 16353
  • 2mm Association Number: 4412
  • Posts: 8242
  • Country: wales
  • Gender: Male
    • Ebay
    • Google+
    • Twitter
    • YouTube
    • Etched Pixels
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #28 on: December 29, 2011, 12:03:52 pm »
would it be feasible to build a point that had the switch rails as a single rigid assembly that includes the frog and pivots under the frog,

Yes - lots of early toy train track and some cheap modern track is made exactly this way. A variant is to make the frog and upper bits of the switch rails a single part and then below that have a second single part which is the lower switch rails and the tie bar which pivots where the two parts join. Kato #6 do that.

The trick used with swivelling frog points to cope with coarse and fine O scale is that the point of rotation is such that the frog itself moves and forms a continuous section of rail in the direction of travel. It doesn't look terribly good but it can cope with all sorts of weird wheel profiles. It's something I've pondered trying to build offscene to have a section of track which has no visible pointwork but which can be accessed by N or 2fs stock.
"Knowledge has no value or use for the solitary owner: to be enjoyed it must be communicated" -- Charles Pratt, 1st Earl Camden

Offline Wayne Kinney

  • Advertiser
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 17722
  • 2mm Association Number: 4584
  • Posts: 335
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: 'Gauging' Interesting- New fiNetrax code 40 N Gauge Track System?
« Reply #29 on: December 29, 2011, 12:46:04 pm »
Wow, lots of replies :)

The aim is to allow modern British N Gauge (modern build, not modern image, so steam locos also) loco's and stock (farish, Dapol & peco) to run, I am currently running tests to choose the best flangeway clearances to use.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2011, 12:48:22 pm by Wayne Kinney »
Thanks,
Wayne.

------------

www.britishfinescale.com - Home of fiNetrax Code 40 Track System

 

Please Support Us!
May Goal: £55.00
Due Date: May 31
Total Receipts: £55.00
Below Goal: £0.00
Site Currency: GBP
100% 
May Donations


Advertise Here
anything