!!

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.

Author Topic: Peco scissors  (Read 9082 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bealman

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23151
  • Posts: 19809
  • Country: au
  • Gender: Male
  • Promotion remains in the future
    • Awards
Peco scissors
« on: July 17, 2011, 05:19:59 AM »
Just purchased a scissors crossover by Peco. An impressive looking piece of trackwork. Would be interested to hear from people as to how it performs
Vision over visibility. Bono, U2.

Offline poliss

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1647
  • Country: md
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2011, 01:02:48 PM »
The wiring is far too complicated for my liking. I removed it from my layout and used the Kato version instead. Only two wires.

Offline Newportnobby

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+98)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 21962
  • Posts: 35321
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2011, 03:06:15 PM »
As Poliss - took mine back and exchanged it for something less brain taxing. Good luck with yours, though. Keep us posted. :)

Offline REFaust

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 20356
  • Posts: 312
    • My N Gauge YouTube channel
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2011, 04:39:09 PM »
The wiring is far too complicated for my liking. I removed it from my layout and used the Kato version instead. Only two wires.

Just wondering did you use the 4-pole double throw switch that Peco sell for the scissors or wire it up a different way?

R E Faust

Offline poliss

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1647
  • Country: md
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2011, 08:22:44 PM »
Yes, I know how to wire the Peco scissors crossing, but why bother when I have the Kato two wire version?

Rocket science is easy. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It's rocket engineering that's hard.

Offline Lawrence

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: Closed
  • Posts: 4289
  • Country: scotland
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2011, 08:44:08 AM »
Rocket science is easy. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It's rocket engineering that's hard.

 :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing: :thumbsup:

Offline BlythStationLad

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: 11784
  • Posts: 105
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2011, 07:31:07 PM »
I have a Peco scissors crossover on my DCC layout. It works very well, although I have modified it to aloow the frogs to change polarity and I've bonded the stock and closure rails together. All my stock runs through dead slow with no problems.

The only snag I did encounter was the ability of the pre-wired feeds to fall off the rails almost at will - not soldered well enough at source, in my opinion.

By the way, I have wired the opposing crossovers together so they throw simultaneously. As for the electrical set up, I used the excellent booklet on 'Wiring Your Layout' that Peco did about 5 years ago as a freebie in RM and still available for purchase at model shops. Well worth it, it's in colour and very easy to understand - believe me there are few people out there with less electrical undertsnading than me!!!

I didn't see the Kato version as an option - not very reaslitic to me, not sure what Code rail size it is? I have a feeling it has slightly sharper radii than the Peco version too.

Offline poliss

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1647
  • Country: md
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2011, 07:35:47 PM »
The Kato version is code 80. The radius is smaller than the Peco version as I recall.

Offline Bealman

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23151
  • Posts: 19809
  • Country: au
  • Gender: Male
  • Promotion remains in the future
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2011, 08:17:05 AM »
Thanks for all the interesting discussion. Actually I am not so much worried about the electrical side of it as i am about performance and looks. I have a layout called the Beal & Castle Eden which featured in RM several times during the nineties. It has lain dormant and damaged virtually since then. I am now in a position to rejuvenate and complete it.  As the existing layout is code 80, and the remaining part will be the new stuff - including the scissors - will operation across it be fine, will old locos be able to make the transition to the new track without problems, and, last but not least, will the new track make the existing layout look bad? Sorry about the long paragraphs & sentences but I am writomg this on a smartphone after work.
Vision over visibility. Bono, U2.

Offline poliss

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1647
  • Country: md
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2011, 01:45:45 PM »
As I recall, Peco code 55 is actually code 80 rail buried deeper into the plastic track bed, so there should be no problems.

Offline upnick

  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2917
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2011, 02:14:31 PM »
Thanks for all the interesting discussion. Actually I am not so much worried about the electrical side of it as i am about performance and looks. I have a layout called the Beal & Castle Eden which featured in RM several times during the nineties. It has lain dormant and damaged virtually since then. I am now in a position to rejuvenate and complete it.  As the existing layout is code 80, and the remaining part will be the new stuff - including the scissors - will operation across it be fine, will old locos be able to make the transition to the new track without problems, and, last but not least, will the new track make the existing layout look bad? Sorry about the long paragraphs & sentences but I am writomg this on a smartphone after work.


Hi
I  have mixed both  code 80   &   55  where a curve watight & the code 80  flexitrack  offered a better option, i have seen   suggestion to  allow for the difference in height of the rails  a  rail  joiner should be  used the  bottom  of the rail   kept  level &   the top  edges of the rails filed flush  for smooth running of course.

I use code  55 normally &   did the transition  a different way  so  not to  file the top   edges  of the rails which only  creates scratches  on the rails which over time attracts dirt,  i    sunk   the  code 80   track  into   the  underfloor insulation i use to cover my   boards  before  laying track, although in your  case you'll  need to  pack the underside   with thin   card /plastic  the code 55  to   bring the rails to the same height when  your happy  everything is level  &  stock  runs over the join   flawlessly fix   your  track leave  a  tiny  gap  for track  expansion  at the  join  ........  when  your track  is firmly  attached to your boards  use a  fibreglass pencil   to   clean the rail  ends  either side of the  join solder  a very short section  of  thin  wire for continuity with a  very small  amount of slack  in  for the track  expansion.  

Indeed Poliss is correct the code 55  rails  are  sunk  into  the  plastic of the sleepers, heres a picture of the two codes of rail  side by side

« Last Edit: September 06, 2011, 02:16:11 PM by upnick »

Offline JosephP

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 37
  • Country: gb
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2012, 11:40:00 AM »
I can't imagine what inspired Peco to promote a 4-way panel switch as a sensible option to wire up this piece of pointwork. It is superfluous and makes operation so much more of a chore.

If you arrange point motors to be interlocked correctly as they would be on the prototype, it is perfectly simple to arrange switching via extra contacts on the point motor.

Offline Sprintex

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • N Gauge Society Number: CLOSED
  • Posts: 7154
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2012, 12:40:10 PM »
I have two of these installed on my layout, both in the fiddle yard at either end to save space on point crossovers so sadly no-one but me will ever see them! The 4-pole switch isn't actually necessary as two of the crossing points always stay the same polarity anyway, so really all that's needed is a doube-pole switch to change the two frogs where the curved stock rails meet, and even then only when a train is crossing from one track to another - if going straight across it doesn't matter. Wiring is easier if you fit insulated joiners to ALL rail-ends and give the scissors its own supply, and I've had no trouble with the pre-attached droppers that BlythStationLad mentions above either  :)

For a good guide to wiring and switching have a look at this site:-

http://www.sodigi.com/new_page_11.htm

I certainly wouldn't avoid the Peco Scissors Crossing just because it needs a switch to operate, it's a great looking piece of trackwork and works well. Hope that helps  :thumbsup:


Paul

Offline Bealman

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 23151
  • Posts: 19809
  • Country: au
  • Gender: Male
  • Promotion remains in the future
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2012, 11:07:34 AM »
Hi everyone
I started this because of a genuine worry about the scissors. I bought it because of a nostalgia trip. As a kid I remember a formation at Darlington in the 50's. When I (ever) finish my layout, the pointwork will be livin' in a double track bay platform deep in the bowels of my envisaged townscape. But my questions about Code 80 to Code 55 still remain.
I need REAL help from this forum!! Mainline and branchline trains will be approaching the new section (often at speed), which I would like to be Code 55. Seriously, should I stick to what I know, or lay the rest of the trackwork with the new stuff?
Lets say I finish the remainder in Code 55, I don't want extra problems as they leave Code 80. Maybe I should stick with what I know and am comfortable with. I get encouraged by Elvinley which I understand is the older code.
Basically the question is: should I switch to Code 55 for the rest of the project, or finish it with the old stuff?

I am incapable of making a decision on a good day, yet alone one when Sunderland haven't won the FA Cup (1973), so opinions appreciated!
George (and yes, Minzapint, I've had one tonight. I'd love to buy ya one, one of these daze..).
Back on track (uhh) again, opinions needed as I'm about to go buy track.



Vision over visibility. Bono, U2.

Offline Newportnobby

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+98)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • N Gauge Society Number: 21962
  • Posts: 35321
  • Country: england
  • Gender: Male
    • Awards
Re: Peco scissors
« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2012, 11:19:36 AM »
I am quite sure there are many of us on the forum who have combinations of code 55/code 80. (me included)
Joining the two does leave a small rise/drop but this is easily sorted with a small shim placed under the end of the piece of track where they join. I think someone worked out the thickness of the shim to 0.93mm. Code 55 certainly looks better (see photo earlier on in the thread)

 

Please Support Us!
August Goal: £60.00
Due Date: Aug 31
Total Receipts: £60.00
Below Goal: £0.00
Site Currency: GBP
100% 
August Donations

SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal