I'm using SCARM software to do some planning and I find it very easy to use, so that's a positive. However, after reading widely on the web I decided to plan my first ever railway layout using Peco N gauge Code 55. Things went well until I found the length of the shortest curve available too long for the layout I was developing and I kept being pushed into using Flexitrack which I don't feel I want to start using yet.
I then switched the SCARM planning mode to N gauge Code 80 and immediately realised that this profile has a greater selection of lengths, both curves and straights and a greater variety of turnouts. So I recreated the same layout using Code 80 and this went better. I then, with my new found confidence, started pricing up a list of parts for my almost complete design only to be dismayed again by finding that there is also Peco 009/HOe track in 'Mainline' and 'Streamline' and maybe 'crazy track'. Or is crazy track the same as one of the others already mentioned? Again, this profile seems to have a very limited track selection.
It seems to me that most people reject 'crazy track' and use the Code 80 which has the most available track options but which needs alternate sleepers taking out for the sake of realism? Perhaps more experienced modellers use the Code 55 because they are confident cutting, bending and fixing Flexitrack?
To help me make a decision about which track to use, would anybody like to create a chart which compares the different pros and cons for the different types of Peco track suitable for a 009 layout please?
I'm not sure I follow. Could it be a naming issue in SCARM? Peco code 55 N gauge track is all flexible track. There is no fixed geometry other than the points as far as I know. For 9 mm gauge set track there is only N Setrack and 009 Setrack as far as I know.
For Peco 009 track there are three varieties: Setrack, so called "Crazy" track and Mainline. Peco appear to call Crazy track "Irregular" and the set track doesn't appear to have a descriptive moniker on the web page. They are all code 80 (the height of the rail = 0.08 inches, 80 thou', if I remember correctly).
https://peco-uk.com/collections/track/oo-9-9mm (https://peco-uk.com/collections/track/oo-9-9mm)
As far as I can tell the set track is "rustic" but less "crazy" in that there are some very worn-looking sleepers and sleepers at very odd angles in the full lengths of flexible "crazy" track whereas the set track appears to use the pattern of the less "crazy" sleeper sequences.
Code 55 N gauge track is cunningly actually code 80, but looks code 55 because it has a false rail foot part the way down the web and the rest is buried in the sleepers. This means it will join to normal Peco code 80 rail.
Some people reject Peco crazy track as some people reject all code 80 track as being too heavy for most NG railways, but the silent majority appear to accept and use it. One reason for choosing 009 Mainline over "Crazy" and over Setrack is larger radius points and Electrofrog points. The larger radius for longer wheelbase locomotives and Electrofrog for small wheelbase locomotives that might stall on the longish non-powered frogs in Insulated frog points.
I think I've got my facts straight. If not someone will put me right!
Edit - I never really got on with SCARM. It seems a bit clunky in my hands. I use AnyRail which has a free version (limited number of track pieces per file) and I find it much easier to pick up after a period of not using it. If you are struggling with placing and smoothing flexible track, AnyRail is very simple in this respect.
I don't have the knowledge of the various types of Peco track to be able to produce any sort of comparison charts. But for what its worth I'll share they type of track I use.
I've always used the Peco 009 wooden sleeper flexitrack (SL-400) for all trackwork, the sleepers are the correct spacing for 009 so there's no need to cut any out, the sleepers have slightly ragged ends which look much more 'narrow gauge' than square ended sleepers (although square ended is probably better if you're modelling a more 'main line' narrow gauge railway).
The main reason I use flexitrack is that when designing and laying track I'm not restricted by pre-set track lengths and curves, so if the space requires a 10" or 10.5" radius curve or piece of track 27mm long it's not a problem.
It has to be said that flexitrack is not as quick and easy to lay as set-track, and fitting N gauge fishplates on can sometimes be a test of manual dexterity, but I think the results from using it are better, and it's not as diffcult to use as it might seem. There are several parts of my layout where the track geometry couldn't have been achieved with set-track.
To cut flexitrack you need either a nice sharp razor saw or dremel disk cutter, Personally I use a pair of track cutters because I find them quicker and easier to use (some would say I'm also lazy, which might of course be true!).
As Graeme says Peco Code 55 is track launched by Peco to make their N gauge track look more realistic. See this link:
https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/sites/model-railroad-hobbyist.com/files/users/Prof_Klyzlr/code55-code80.jpg
Most (all?) of the well known European manufacturers of 00/H0 narrow gauge track use either code 80 (Peco) or code 83 (the rest!) and it is accepted as being the norm. If you want finescale track use either Peco's code 60 or code 40 rail from other sources and scratchbuild. For the majority the code 80/83 is just fine and the rail height can be disguised using paint and weathering.
Peco's code 55 is just a N gauge product and of no use to use narrow gaugers at all. In your computer programme use Peco Code 80. If it doesn't have the 009 products use the nearest N gauge ones, the settrack is exactly the same, anyhow, and there are similar radius points for the rest.
Thanks for the rapid replies and the advice therein. My problem is that I seem to understand the variations until I get onto a shop site where the vendors descriptions are often confusing.
There are 4 umbrella descriptions for the Peco track suitable for 009 layouts. These are Streamline, Mainline, Crazy Track and Setrack? Then there are 3 different specific track names, N 55, N 80 and 009/HOe? I've attached the available track sections which are shown in SCARM and the difference in variety is clear. Would anyone like to attach the 4 umbrella names to the 3 track names so that I know what I am buying when I eventually get my cash out? To be honest, the only thing that is putting me off using N55 is the limited fixed sections & turnouts available and my reluctance to use flexitrack.
I'm not sure what SCARM is telling you that suggests all the track you list is "suitable for 009". Yes, they all have a gauge of 9 mm between the rails and physically will connect with each other, but you show N scale track as well as 009. N scale track is for standard gauge railways modelled in approximately 2 mm to the foot so sleepers are too small and too close together for 009 which is narrow gauge modelled in 4 mm to the foot.
From the looks of the image you post only the first column is 009. I'm not sure where the Peco-N-55 heading comes from at the top of the column, perhaps it is a collapsed drop-down menu? The left-most column shows all the 009 track as far as I can tell, "Crazy", Mainline and Setrack, but it calls the "Crazy" track "FlexWood". The points appear to be (from the top) 2 Setrack, 2 "Crazy", 2 Mainline with the last point being the "Crazy" Y point.
Confusion is sometimes caused by all 9 mm gauge track being referred to as "N Gauge". I don't know if I still have SCARM still installed to check, but perhaps that is what has happened. In AnyRail the Peco 009 track library is found in the Peco OO group.
Yes, people do use N scale track for 009 but usually either in unseen fiddle yard areas or with the sleepers disguised by covering them completely with ballast and weeds, or sometimes removing alternate sleepers and perhaps beefing up the ones that remain.
If you go to the Peco web site https://peco-uk.com/collections/track/oo-9-9mm (https://peco-uk.com/collections/track/oo-9-9mm) it shows all the 009 track together.
Edit: now I remember why I don't use SCARM and I can understand why you have been avoiding using flexible track. It is so clunky and counter-intuitive. Give the free version of AnyRail a go. Even if you go back to SCARM because it allows you 100 rather than 50 track pieces in the free versions then at least you will have an idea of what can be achieved with flexible track. I'm sure SCARM will do everything AnyRail will but AnyRail is a lot easier to get started with. If you decide to buy there is only about a tenner to choose between them.
Anyway - I see where the odd combination of N-55 and 009 comes from - it is the way SCARM has all the libraries in one list with the one in focus being expanded as a drop-down.
According to the SCARM website it only lists three PECO 9mm gauge track libraries:
Peco HOe/009 C80 (code 80 rail)
Peco N Streamline & Settrack C80
Peco Finescale C55
If it allows you just use the top one only, you can use the second one as, as Graeme says, you can use Code 80 track and disguise it. Ignore any Code 55 items!
"Streamline" is purely a brand name for flexible track and larger radius points for "experienced modellers", as opposed to "set-track", don't worry about it!
"Mainline" and "Crazytrack" both relate to H0/00 scale narrow gauge track with 9mm gauge. Crazytrack is the original stuff and is recognisable by the "irregular" sleepers, some being at angles and some with "rough" ends to them, suposibly done to represent "typical" NG track (whatever that is!!), it covers all the 009 Set-track range, 9", 12" and the Y 009 points. "Mainline" was introduced by Peco when they found they were losing sales in Mainland Europe to the likes of Tillig and Roco whose HOe track was much better looking and "regular". It is designed to represent Modern 750/760mm narrow gauge track and so far the range consists of flexitrack and 18" points. For modern HOe layouts they are very good.
For what it's worth, I found that trying to get the flexitrack to go where I wanted it in AnyRail far more difficult than laying the actual flexitrack on the layout.
Bear in mind that Peco do downloads so you could download all the points, and then mess around with them on the back of a sheet of wallpaper! I prefer that method or paper/pencil to a computer programme but it's just personal preference!
A good suggestion. I used Peco's downloadable templates to check that my track plan would fit as well on the baseboard as it did on the paper plan.
Quote from: Peter Boulter on April 27, 2020, 09:02
... fitting N gauge fishplates on can sometimes be a test of manual dexterity...
You can say that again! But a tip which you may find helpful when you do get as far as laying track is to put a fishplate
by hand onto a short length of rail, and then offer it up to where it is going to go. They are almost impossible to handle with various devices and usually (in my experience anyway) fall prey to the Carpet Monster. If the metal fishplates are tricky, the almost invisible clear plastic insulating ones are even worse...
David.
Thanks for all the effort that's been put in to helping me out here. By picking up bits and pieces from all the posts I have a clearer picture of how the various Peco offerings differ and am going to go ahead with the 009/HOe track and I think by using a combination of the 009/HOe Setrack and the 009/HOe Code 80. I suppose the truth is that until I get some track and start working with it, it's all going to be supposition on my part. I've also installed Anyrail and had a quick play and I do like the feel of it, which is more modern than SCARM.
I'm guessing my next problem will be trying to find a vendor who has any track in stock as I assume Peco is manufactured in China and, even if it's manufactured in the UK, I doubt there'll be any production going on at the moment!
That sounds like a good plan. Whether or not they find their way into the final design I don't think you will go wrong if in your order you include a circle (two packs) of Peco 009 Setrack curves. A circular test track will always come in handy - and it could morph into a slightly large Pizza layout for a bit of fun. :)
Quote from: philserre on April 27, 2020, 20:25
T
I'm guessing my next problem will be trying to find a vendor who has any track in stock as I assume Peco is manufactured in China and, even if it's manufactured in the UK, I doubt there'll be any production going on at the moment!
All Peco products are manufactured solely in the UK, but all production is currently suspended.
Garry
But the likes of Hattons, rails, etc., etc., have plenty of stock!
Quote from: clayliner on April 27, 2020, 20:15
Quote from: Peter Boulter on April 27, 2020, 09:02
... fitting N gauge fishplates on can sometimes be a test of manual dexterity...
You can say that again!
N fishplates are a doddle.. Try Peco or Marklin's Z fishplates if you think N ones are fiddly!
That sounds like good advice Graeme, thank you.
Incidentally, I'm getting along well with Anyrail and just managing to stay within the 50 track section limit in the free/trial version. If I can avoid spending £45.00 on the full version that's good new also.
Apologies if this seems patronising, not intended, however having read through this thread, I can't help wondering if somewhere along the line we are forgetting the "fun" factor which is a keystone of our style of railway modelling and have also strayed off the way a bit in recent years from the KISS principle (keep it simple s........)
It appears to me that there is a bit of confusion going on which revolves largely around compatibility or otherwise with layout design software, there also seems to be some confusion about the various types of 9mm gauge track commercially available, so here is my own sixpennyworth:
1. Paper and pencil! Until the arrival in our homes of PCs and t'internet, layout planning was done (if it was done!) varied from beermats sketched out during social activity through to full size plans hand drawn on the back of a wallpaper roll or lining paper. Basic principle for 009 usually being regarding minimum radius of curve to use - 9 inch usually being accepted as the "standard" minimum, larger where possible. Many successful industrial and quarry layouts however have used much tighter radius curves.
2. Track. Basic and common "standard" for 009 has always been Peco. Continental HOe modellers and a few others have also used Piko, Roco and Tillig etc, but for the purposes of KISS, I'll stick to Peco as that is what in the UK is the easiest to obtain and is widely distributed through what remains of our model shops.
For years and years, the only Peco 009 track available was called "Crazy Track" - this is the familiar one with the jaggy edges to the sleepers, giving a rather run down and worn out impression. And for years and years this was only obtainable as flexi track, first as 18" lengths and in more recent years 36" (that's nearly a metre to the youngsters....)
Crazy track points: Initially 9" radius live frog. Out of production for years and keenly sought by "older modellers" who know a good thing when it appears! There were also 9" radius "dead frog" points, I don't know if these came before or after the live frog ones. General recommendation is to avoid these as the dead frog is large and short wheelbase locos travelling at slow 009 speeds will almost certainly stall frequently on them - do not confuse with the modern "insulfrog" ones - see below.
The main staple 009 points for many years have been 12" radius left and right points and 18" radius Y points. These are all live frog.
Since 009 set track (9" radius curves) was introduced a few years ago, new 9" radius points to accompany have been introduced, these are insulfrog which has spawned a degree of criticism in the hobby, and I don't have any so can't add to the comment on that except to say there are a number of layouts that I know that employ these, and haven't heard of any problems about stalling etc from those layout owners that I know.
The newer range of 009 track which is totally compatible with Crazy Track has a much neater look to it, with "good condition" sleepers and is termed 009 Mainline Track. This is available as flexi track in yard lengths and I believe it also comes as set track, but I have not personally seen that. Other than the neater looking "more modern and well preserved" look of the track, the main feature is the new live frog mainline points, which are 18" radius. I've got a few of these and they seem fine to me.
3. Track joiners/fishplates. Yes, good points, it's a fiddly and frustrating business! My own method, having tried putting them on by hand - it only works with the first one as the second is covered in blood from the first attempt, is to:
(a) ensure that the end of the track is perfectly cleaned up with a needle file to ensure smoothness and no sharp edges to snag the joiner and
(b) to use a fine nosed pair of pliers to hold the item and then gently push it onto the cleaned track edge.
(c) Then marry the piece of track with the fishplate on it to the track to be joined and after ensuring that this one has its edges cleaned up with the needle file, then using the pliers again, gently ease the two pieces of track together.
(d) If the joined rails appear loose, then fine compression of the in-situ fishplate with the fine nosed pliers should solve that.
Right that's the end of sermon, have fun and please don't get bogged down with designing layouts on the computer down to the last millimetre, get the wardrobe door off, pin some track to the back of it and start having fun! The signal is green for the experts to enter the ring and blow me out of the water...................
Mick
Use of the Tracksetta curves is an aid to getting flexitrack to curve correctly- I have a 7inch radius which was made for me and I have no problems with 0-4-0 s and Bachmann Baldwins negotiating the curves although the loading gauge is a bit tight in one direction. My tunnel clearances not the loco's fault.
Steve
https://dorsetrailwaymodelling.blogspot.com/ (https://dorsetrailwaymodelling.blogspot.com/)
Quote from: MickT on April 29, 2020, 11:02
Crazy track points: Initially 9" radius live frog. Out of production for years and keenly sought by "older modellers" who know a good thing when it appears! There were also 9" radius "dead frog" points, I don't know if these came before or after the live frog ones. General recommendation is to avoid these as the dead frog is large and short wheelbase locos travelling at slow 009 speeds will almost certainly stall frequently on them - do not confuse with the modern "insulfrog" ones.....................
Mick
The Peco Crazy track 9-inch radius 009 points were introduced with dead frog only in 1968 I think
It was not until 1975, following endless requests that they were changed to live frog. (electrofrog)
Production of the 9" points stopped in 1980 because the moulding dies had worn out and needed replacing. (Some of the very last batch also had blade to frog connection issues.)
The replacement for the 009 9-inch points were the 12-inch and 18-inch Y points. However, the geometry was not great in these and many found that they got better running with the older 9-inch points! In addition, the plastic used is not the same as in the earlier points and was more brittle.
In 2010 the moulding dies for the 12 inch and 18-inch Y 009 points were updated with better geometry extended plastic check rails and pivots for the point blades. (Previously there was a fishplate as a pivot.)
To confuse matters all the above LH and RH 009 points had the same Peco part numbers!
Quote from: MickT on April 29, 2020, 11:02
Apologies if this seems patronising, not intended, however having read through this thread, I can't help wondering if somewhere along the line we are forgetting the "fun" factor which is a keystone of our style of railway modelling and have also strayed off the way a bit in recent years from the KISS principle (keep it simple s........)
It appears to me that there is a bit of confusion going on which revolves largely around compatibility or otherwise with layout design software, there also seems to be some confusion about the various types of 9mm gauge track commercially available, so here is my own sixpennyworth:
Good point Mick. Layout design software is by no means a requirement. I think though, that if a new modeller "gets on" with computer software rather than finding it a battle it can be a useful tool. If the modeller and computers do not get along then they should not feel obliged to use software.
Looking back at some of my pre-computer layout sketches I see it was very easy to forget about minimum radii and especially easy to make curves look gentle by sketching easements/transition curves that can have very tight radii in the middle. Even easier, by making the sketches "hairy" that looked great but when cleaned up or traced were dreadful. Software is useful here, but compasses or a tech. drawing circle stencil can help keep hand sketches realistic. Hats off to anyone who can sketch within minimum curve specifications completely freehand.
Nothing beats making a full size mock up I think, whether hand-drawn or printed. I remember making several impromptu templates for curves out of old cereal packet card. I have just a minimum (9" radius) Tracksetta which is very useful for checking, but gathering them up is quite a big investment.
Probably best of all is getting some track, any track, a loco and a few wagons to try things out. There have been postings in the past where new modellers have produced CAD layouts and set out to buy track before owning any rolling stock, asking if such-and-such loco will run on it. Also hanging out to save up to buy, or wait for stock to arrive, some handsome but expensive steam loco rather than something to get started with.
Along the lines of building up a toolkit from scratch I was thinking what would make a good reliable "starter pack" of track, loco, wagons and controller?
Thanks again for all the contributions to this thread – they are really all appreciated and I'm pleased the topic has given so much grey matter the opportunity to take some exercise during 'lockdown'.
Quote from: Hobby on April 28, 2020, 08:02
But the likes of Hattons, rails, etc., etc., have plenty of stock!
Hattons and Rails, as two store examples, have most of their 009 track items on, 'pre-order', 'ordered on request' or 'back order'. Very few items 'in stock'. I haven't yet looked anywhere else to see if smaller suppliers have items on their shelves.
Quote from: MickT on April 29, 2020, 11:02
Apologies if this seems patronising, ......
My whole life I've enjoyed designing projects (not railway modelling) with paper and pencil as suggested, in fact I've often enjoyed the planning more than the subsequent making process but, for a novice, there is a key element provided by computer software which the P&P method can't provide and that is the ability to plan with stock items. This provides confidence in the design because if it works on the computer plan, it will (should!) work on the actual board.
Track items are individually inexpensive but collectively, for a layout, (as you will all be aware) they can become a sizeable sum and I've never been one to take a bad purchase without becoming grumpy. My current plan is looking at £250+ for track, £117 for a sound decoder, £144 for a loco, £230+ for a DDC control setup, etc. So, £741 and no rolling stock, scenery yet considered. I know I could start a little simpler but I don't see the point in buying simple and then spending again as I develop my knowledge and skills.
I should add that having worked with IT for 30 years a computer is my starting point when looking for a solution, whether it be for financial planning or to design a replacement kitchen. For me, I get a lot of satisfaction out of using computers and layout planning software has really been my saviour. Without it I think I would have given up on this project by now. On the other hand, I can see where you're coming from Mick – I knew a school timetabler years ago who used to plan next year's timetable on the back of Woodbines packets - it invariably worked and kids and staff were in the right rooms at the right times, etc, ................ and there was nothing patronising about your reply, it was quality.
I enjoy using AnyRail but would look as sternly on somebody who said computers are necessary for layout planning as I would on somebody who said they have no place at all.
I must be a bit of a weird person. I designed my layout using pencil & paper with help from the Peco point templates reduced to the same scale as my plan.
Then after I'd finished all the track laying I used Anyrail to create the track diagram which I've pinned up on the wall of the railway room, and put on the railway's website.
Why not just glue the templates on the plan and pin that up?! Think of all the time you are wasting on the computer duplicating work when you could be modelling!! ;)
Originally I did have the paper plan on the wall, complete with 'stuck on' points, but it wasn't accurate because I'd made a few alterations when I did the track laying. Then about a year later when I extended the layout the plan for the extensions was a slightly different scale, and the whole plan was rather large.
I also wanted a decent version to put on the website, so I created a new up-to-date version in Anyrail.
Quote from: Peter Boulter on May 01, 2020, 08:18
I must be a bit of a weird person. I designed my layout using pencil & paper with help from the Peco point templates reduced to the same scale as my plan.
Then after I'd finished all the track laying I used Anyrail to create the track diagram which I've pinned up on the wall of the railway room, and put on the railway's website.
Not at all! I have taken past doodles and sketches and recreated them in Anyrail. Some early ones were very much wishful thinking and it is easy to see where I was pushing my luck in terms of curve radius.
That's a great idea, reducing the Peco point templates. Many years back, someone in the 009 Society produced a series of templates for points and curves that I printed out full size and cut up. I didn't think of reducing them, but doing so wasn't straight forward then.
Re fitting of fish plates (rail joiners ) I find that using a very fine swiss file to both sides of the rail at an angle means you can push the rail joiners on much easier .
Brian are you sure about the 9" points , as I started around 1968 and my points are live frog .
Quote from: Alan Feldon on May 02, 2020, 15:44
Re fitting of fish plates (rail joiners ) I find that using a very fine swiss file to both sides of the rail at an angle means you can push the rail joiners on much easier .
Brian are you sure about the 9" points , as I started around 1968 and my points are live frog .
No I am not sure, it was so many years ago now!
I will have to check back in the old 009 news from the 70's. But I do know that they were dead frog for some years.
In regard to the Peco 009 9 inch electrofrog points.
As I mentioned above they were at first only available with dead plastic frogs from about 1968 (I do not know the exact date) and this resulted in many complaints from 009 modellers and several articles in 009 news about hand building points.
'Live frog' (not using the term electrofrog) 009 points were first mentioned by Peco in 1973 and they stated that these would be 12 inch. However nothing was produced.
In the May 1975 009 News Nuremberg toy fair report it is stated that Peco were going to 're-introduce the 009 points with live frogs'. However these were to be a 'revamped' version of the 9 inch points, not 12 inch as previously announced. Comment was made that that Peco had mentioned live frog 009 points two years before, but they had not been produced.
I could not find any mention in 009 News as to when the live frog (electrofrog) 009 points were first made available. But it is was certainly after the above report.
As I mentioned in a previous post the 9 inch moulding dies would become worn out and production stopped in late 1979. Peco announced that there would be one last production run in April 1980, but this did not happen. For much of 1980 there were no 009 points available at all other than those retailers with remaining stock. The 12 inch points, and 18 inch Y points started to arrive at retailers in December 1980. By this time there was quite a backlog of orders that were not cleared until January 1981.
The fact that the 9 inch 009 electrofrog points were only in production for four years as opposed to the 7 years of the previous dead frog points would to some way to explain why there are so many more of the earlier dead frog 9 inch points still around than the electrofrog versions.
Quote from: B.Meldon on May 03, 2020, 09:05
For much of 1980 there were no 009 points available at all other than those retailers with remaining stock.
If anyone has recently tried to buy any track or points, etc, they will know that this is much like the situation now, but not just for 009 points, for everything. I have found one supplier who had the things in that I needed but their stock is now further depleted to 'zero' for some items since I placed my order. Ther are some shops/outlets with hardly any points for sale and accessories, live feeds, rail joiners, etc, are also taking a hammering. Hopefully Peco will be able to get back to manufacturing soon and it maybe, of course, that they have their own stock ready to despatch to shops when they get back to work?
I can't remember exactly when I started modelling in 009 but it was around about 1970 and all the model shops were advertising Peco 9" radius points -the only problem was that none actually had any , so I can assure you the problem was much greater then than now .
I ended up with a layout comprising an oval of track with a gap where the point was supposed to be for many months !
I then discovered that Grafar produced a 9.5" radius LIVE frog N point and in the end was forced to buy one of these to complete the circuit .
I've just heard that the PECO warehouse has reopened today.
Hi All and Happy New Year,
Just catching up on this earlier thread when I remembered that I'm part-way through the process of removing every other sleeper on the NG part of my diorama.
This is just an experiment to see what the overall effect looks like. Hence, I have some sections of 'as bought' Code 80 flexi-track mixed in with other sections (with revised ballast) of 'alternate-sleeper' track.
I originally got 2 metres of flexi from the model shop and a point fell nicely at the junction of these going into a station /siding...The point is still fully sleepered (Peco left-hand curved), but, I could take a few shots of the experimental sections ? (As the point is part-located on a viaduct release, it will remain "as is" but with planking to rail level thus concealing the underlying sleepers anyway).
Hope this helps,
Dave
ps Forgot to mention above that my commercial NG track is Peco 'N' gauge, Code 80.
Quote from: Dave Cooper on January 01, 2022, 12:15
........I originally got 2 metres of flexi from the model shop..........
Dave
ps Forgot to mention above that my commercial NG track is Peco 'N' gauge, Code 80.
I have to ask.....
Other than saving 80p on a yard of track why would you purchase N gauge track for a 009 layout?
Why not just get 009 track and save all the bother of trying to make N gauge look like 009 track?
Good questions Brian,
1. When I first started out, the original aim was to see if I could make a diorama /small layout just to see how I got on with the twin gauges of 00 and N.
2. The competing candidates were HO and P4 for SG, plus, I didn't really know what for the NG part !
3. Then I came across 009 at an exhibition (and via an old magazine) but, by that stage, I was 3/4 in to the new baseboard with track and wiring done...
Price didn't really come into it, I just bought what the model shop had in stock. So, I guess the true answer to your questions is "IGNORANCE" !!! However, it was /is a good learning curve (especially trying to go from 00 to P4 via a Toad brake van...) and, fun - that's what it's all about isn't it ?
I'm rather afraid the 'Inveterate Tinkerer' just won't lie down...