Ahhhhh, wonderful, ta!

Yes, personally not remotely interested for any challenge, would be interested in just trying it for my next layout, but a very quick tot up suggests about 1000 axles on my layout. Not keen on replacing all those! Someone suggested 2FS plain track would be fine with 'normal' wheels, as long as you built pointwork to N gauge standards.

Quote from: njee20 on August 03, 2017, 02:29:00 PM
Someone suggested 2FS plain track would be fine with 'normal' wheels, as long as you built pointwork to N gauge standards.

Hi

In that case why would you not use Finetrax rather than either 2mm SA Easitrac or soldered construction?

Cheers

Paul

Because it's not so much the reduced rail section that appeals with handbuilt track it's the flowing pointwork. I've got enough space I could have some really long crossovers. I also model present day, so I'd want flat bottom rail and concrete sleeper.

It's all a complete pipe dream mind, I haven't got the time to work on my layout with code 55, and I have the finesse and patience of a stressed gorilla with Parkinson's.

After getting frustrated that the range (or rather the lack of) proprietary pointwork in code 55 to fully do justice to a real location, I've just made the decision to adopt 2mm Finescale standards for the trackwork for my layout, while keeping my Farish and Dapol stock.

I've already joined the 2mm SA and have started to accumulate the necessary track components and jigs etc. needed for the hand built track.  I too am after the flowing pointwork look and whilst waiting for a couple more jigs to come back into stock, I'm starting to convert some of my rolling stock over to 9.42mm. 

Yes I know it's going to be a big task but the end result should be worth the effort in the long run - just hope my eyes hold up.

Regards to all,

TimothyB

at this risk of heresy a good move try and get to the local area group your get lots of help and advise

Nick

It is of course entirely possible to build your own track & pointwork without having to adopt 2mm FS standards and re-wheel all of your stock. In fact you can quite easily build "fine" N gauge pointwork with 0.8mm flangeways and anything modern, and even some decidedly not very modern, stuff will work just fine.

Maybe one of these days I really will get somebody to turn me a set of gauges for 9.69mm gauge and have a crack at building some true-scale 1:148 trackwork

A set of gauges for proper 9.69 mm, 1:148 track would have been my ideal solution too, but despite searching on-line there doesn't seem to be anything out there and the only N-gauge track laying gauges I could find were for code 50 rail.

When comparing head on photos of the 1:1 models vs N-gauge the thing that really bugs me is how narrow the track appears in relation to the width of the rolling stock, at least 9.42 is heading in the right direction.  As I stated in my earlier post it's a long term project I'm embarking on and converting my stock is the price I'm willing to pay.

Kind regards,

TimothyB

Quote from: TimothyB on September 09, 2017, 01:55:42 PM
A set of gauges for proper 9.69 mm, 1:148 track would have been my ideal solution too, but despite searching on-line there doesn't seem to be anything out there and the only N-gauge track laying gauges I could find were for code 50 rail.

As far as I am aware, nobody has ever built anything to 9.69mm. Or at least certainly nothing like a running model. The closest I've ever got was a tiny stretch of test track (a few spare copperclad sleepers and Code 40 bullhead) and some very badly adapted Peco delrin wheels. It was really an experiment to see what the clearances were like on the chassis: the answer is "Not much" and I suspect it would require some replacement chassis to be built to get rolling stock to work on 9.69mm gauge (although it may be that the 2mm SOC chassis could be adapted)

One day. One day...