Hi I'm new to the Society, but a fairly experienced modeller. I'm returning to 009 (after well over 20 years), partly as a break from 00 but also because I need a small layout that I can sit down to work on while waiting for a hip problem to be sorted out.
I have 3 locos and a steam railcar from a previous 009 project in the early 1990s. My previous layout used Peco Electrofrog points of that era. I've just bought a Peco 009 Setrack starter pack to see if any of the old locos work and to run them in a bit. I was also intending to use Setrack points for compactness and would eventually use the points on the planned new layout.
The first loco I tried out is based on a Minitrix 0-6-0 dock tank chassis, which I think I bought in 1973 (price £3.50 on the box!) That originally carried an N gauge Highfield kit J63 body (ex-GCR dock tank). In my previous outing to 009, I used it with a Gem (possibly Peco at the time) Vari-Kit body, which it still carries. I was very pleased that after a dot of oil, it still runs quite well, even at slow speed. It definitely hesitates over the points and can stall on them if run at a crawl.
The two other engines are rather nice brass kits of saddle tanks, which I bought second hand from a friend many years ago. They both run on a very short wheelbase 0-6-0 chassis with outside cylinders (possibly Ibertren, but that's a guess). One engine has had the middle pair of drivers removed to make an 0-4-0ST. These also run quite well after lubrication, but with less certainty than the Minitrix chassis. They both stall across the points unless run fairly briskly.
The railcar is a scratchbuild, constructed around an Egger-Bahn railcar with its body cut down to windowsill level. It never was a good runner, even after replacing its power unit with another Egger chassis. It really doesn't like going with the powered end at the front and will only cross the Setrack points run flat out. (I suspect that the directional problem is down to the torque reaction of the powered chassis acting against the 'hinge' between loco and coach lifting one pair of wheels off the track slightly. It's not really suitable for my new layout anyway, but I'm rather attached to it as my very first 009 scratchbuild!
OK, that's the background, now for the question.
I've never used dead frog points before (at least not since my toy train days as a boy) so I haven't any clear expectation of how good they should be. I'm also aware that 1970s N gauge wheels are a lot coarser than current 009 standards.
What I can't tell is if the hesitancy and stalling I'm seeing is just an inherent limitation of dead frog points or if there is an issue with the wheel profile or flange depth through the crossing. I don't have measuring tools that will really resolve this for me (just a digital caliper).
My understanding from reading other postings on the forum is that many members use Peco Setrack points quite satisfactorily. Any thoughts or comments would be very welcome at this stage.
Thanks
Ian
It could be back to backs or flanges but I'm more inclined to think it's basically an inherent issue with the dead frog points, as you've guessed. Modern short wheelbase stuff (Minitrains for instance) use a flywheel which, with careful track laying minimises the issue. If you want tight radius points then really the only way to get round the stalling is either to hand build points with live frogs or use a pickup wagon or coach for the locos which would only really work if you weren't doing any shunting... Or take a run at them! If you can do it the Egger railcar can have home made pickups fitted to the trailing bogie.
Sooner Peco do live frog 9" points the better.
Hello Ian, and welcome to the Society.
I have a feeling that your 'ibertren 0-6-0' chassis may in fact be Arnold chassis, as Ibertren (to the best of my knowledge) never made an 0-6-0 steam chassis for N but Arnold did, and their chassis had a non-driven center axle that was quite easy to drop out to make a long wheelbase 0-4-0.
The Arnold chassis are renowned for their 'pizza cutter' flanges that are too deep for Peco points, especially the more modern ones, and the riding up caused by the bottom of the flange hitting the flangeway will probably cause them (especially in 0-4-0 format) to hesitate. I've not done this myself (though I have a Arnold chassis in stock waiting the treatment) but others have taken a file to the wheels with the chassis under power to reduce the flange depth, or file the flangeway o the points to make it deeper. Personally I feel that its the flanges that are the problem so I'd tackle those rather than the points as it will also mean that the Arnold chassis should run through any points on any layout, not just those that have been modified.
For the typical speeds desiered for 009 running it would be best to avoid dead frog points, especially if running a fleet of 0-4-0 locos. That being said the more modern Peco dead frogs seem to be shorter than the old 9" radius dead frog points which will help. Some of the more modern stuff - MinitrainS for example - have flywheels fitted that help. You can make the frogs live with a coating of conductive paint, but bear in mind that this will probably come off the first time you clean the track and will need to be re-done.
Thank you, Blair and Julien: very helpful comments.
I've now identified the mystery chassis that I mis-guessed as Ibertren. They're actually Joe Works - it says so on the keeper plate in tiny lettering, but I only spotted that after dropping the chassis out of one of the engines! They actually have quite fine flanges which don't touch the bottom of the flangeway. However, the wheelbase is only 15mm, which leaves quite a lot of scope for bouncing around over the crossing and losing contact. The bodies for these I have tentatively identified as models of Peckett 0-4-0ST, but other than being brass, I have no clue as to the kit manufacturer.
It does sound like my feelings about dead frog points are justified. I have hand-built points before in N and in 2FS but have no intention of doing so for this project. I'll redesign the plan with electrofrog points and keep the really tight curves to plain track.
As an aside, I note that Shinohara do live frog points with 150mm and 200mm radius, but they're code 60 rail, which would undoubtedly bring its own problems with flanges.
Ian
There is a way to get round the short wheelbase and dead frog points issue and that is extra pickups. Not something I have done myself, but it is do-able. you require some form of permanently coupled-up trailer with pickups and fine wires into the loco. It could be a tender or a small wagon.
PS welcome to the Society!
The brass locos are possibly gamecocks which were produced for Victors
Cant help with the points problems as I only use 12" or bigger which are live .
If you can fit additional pick-ups at the rear of the railcar (as Blair suggests )it should help a lot .
Good luck with the build and the operation
Before Peco had some sort of brain-freeze and re-introduced the 9" radius 009 points with dead frogs, they once did, a long time ago, have 9" radius points with live frogs. Well worth keeping an eye out for them but you will have to be patient. I've managed to find 5 through the 009 Soc sales stand over the past 6 years which illustrates something of their scarcity, or how highly sought after they are, as when I have been helping on the sales stand, quite often others with the same mission in life have snapped the few up that were on the stand, before I even realised they were there, and sometimes the stock has been transported to a show in my car without my knowledge that sought-after treasures were within!
Regarding filing down the flanges on older N loco chassis wheels, I have found it easier taking a knife-edge (I expect their is a proper name for it) needle file and gently filing a few thou off the depth of the flanges at the frog, and also where the plastic check rails are as these can also cause stalling due to the fairly shallow depth of the "trough" between check rail and running rail.
1960's Arnold 0-4-0 chassis were notorious for stalling on Peco points, including the live frog ones, as they rose up on the frog and lost contact. I have several of these and they all run through my "modified" but quite old Peco points including original 9" live frog, and older versions of both the 12" and the 18" Y points satisfactorily at slow speeds.
Not sure if this helps at all, but possibly offers some hope!
Mick
Welcome to the 009 Society and welcome back to 009.
As mentioned above I would strongly recommend that you do not use the dead frog set track points and stick with the 12-inch (and 18-inch Y) electrofrog Peco points. The Shinohara points and track will give you even more problems with wheel flange depth, there is no hold spring in the points, and they are not as robust as the Peco points. The Peco 12 inch points have the same track angle as the 9 inch points and are only about 24mm longer.
Regarding the locos you have:
The Minitrix:
If you have a conventional controller, with the loco turned upside down using a couple of wires from the controller on ¾ power run the loco by gently touching the wires on the wheels for a couple of mins. You should find that the chassis will run faster and faster as you do this, however, make sure it does not get too hot. This is also a good test for the wheel contacts. On these 0-6-0 chassis they pick up on two wheels on one side and all three on the other via the axles in the chassis. If you get oil on the axles it can mess up the pickup through the chassis. These chassis also ware out causing the axles to twist in the chassis making one wheel lift off the track and loose power.
If well-made the Joe-Works locos do have quite a high re-sale value these days. You can us the same method as above to test the pickups. And again, it may well make it run better as well.
As others have mentioned the wheel flanges on the Arnold chassis at 1.2mm are too larger for the 1mm deep flangeways in the Peco 009 points. I always turn them down; others file the points. Again, the Arnold chassis can benefit from running at ¾ power for a couple of mins, but again make sure the motor does not overheat.
Brian Meldon
Hi Brian - useful comments. One reason for buying the starter pack of 009 was for running in the old locos. Rather than doing the upside-down manoeuvre, I just plonked them on the track and ran them at about 1/4 power (on an ancient H&M Clipper). I watched like a hawk for stalling and checked the motor temperature every few minutes. They do indeed run much more freely than they did.
I wasn't aware of the pickup arrangements on the Minitrix chassis. (Could have looked, but never have!) In the days of its youth with an N gauge body on it, it did probably getting on for 100 hours of exhibition running, so once the oil found its way round everything, it's back to super-smooth running. It's pulling power is also quite impressive - with a Vari-Kit body on it, it's basically a solid block of whitemetal with a motor inside.
Your comments re dead frog do further confirm my suspicions. Likewise, I thought the rail height on the Shinohara points might be an issue.
I'm not actually bothered with the non-sprung tiebar on points. I was used to that with hand made points in the past (in N and 2FS). And just out of interest, I'm going to take a shot at making a point to the same geometry as the Peco Setrack ones. The tricky bit will be that I'll need to have hinges at the closure rail/switch joint, which I've not needed before with finer rail and gentler curvature. It may not end up being usable, but I'll have a go anyway. (And I'll report the results)
Quote from: Ian McAulay on August 22, 2020, 23:13
<snipped>
I'm not actually bothered with the non-sprung tiebar on points. I was used to that with hand made points in the past (in N and 2FS). And just out of interest, I'm going to take a shot at making a point to the same geometry as the Peco Setrack ones. The tricky bit will be that I'll need to have hinges at the closure rail/switch joint, which I've not needed before with finer rail and gentler curvature. It may not end up being usable, but I'll have a go anyway. (And I'll report the results)
A Society member (Keith Angus) produces a pdf set of point templates based on Peco's track geometry for points that vastly expand the range of radii and formations as each of the various radii have left, right and Y and the set also contains double-curved points. It's also possible, by cutting up the paper templates and sticking back together (or printing on acetate sheet) to make various exotica like 3 way points.
These are not the best examples of soldering one's own track but here are my own efforts (before I cleaned the flux off!)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/7388/15961856894_83f4e71a1c_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qjuFXd)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/7355/15844776333_1638b9471b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/q99BYR)
Keith's copyright give free use to pass them on (FOC) as long as full credit is given, so if you'd like to drop me your e-mail address I'll sort out getting a copy of the pdf files to you.
Some very fine work indeed Julien. I'm quite sure it was time consuming, but a labour of total enjoyment. The end result is very pleasing. What code track did you use? Did you use NMRA standards or some other that i am not aware off.
Robin.
Hi Robin.
The rails are Code 55 steel flat bottom from C&L and the sleepers are 3mm SMR pre-cut for 12 mm gauge, both plain sleepers and milled point timbering.
Standards... I used a Micro Engineering 3-point track gauge to set the running rails then some roller gauges I'd picked up from the 009 2nd Hand Sales stand some years ago for the flangeways. It's probably fairly coarse but seems to work with hand-operated stock with Dundas wheelsets (with the back to backs set with an SMP gauge which I think is 7.4 or 7.5 mm). It hand worked at the moment as I haven't (yet) sorted out the servo actuators...
Thanks Julien.Yes, the tricky part will be once a loco transits through the different points and frogs.
Robin.
That looks superb Julien. I was about to work up a template in CAD, but I'll hold off until I see Keith Angus's templates. I'll PM you with my email address.
I'd already worked out that 3mm scale sleepers were about right, so I've already ordered a batch of crossing timbers from 3mm SMR. I already have a pair of N gauge roller gauges and I'll just improvise anything else I need for a first shot. I'll get the rail by butchering a spare length of Peco 009 flex track.
The bit I'm least confident about is the tiebar. I always had trouble with them letting go in both N and 2FS. I'll try for a hinged join between closure rail and switch and see if that takes the stress off the tips of the switches.
Ian
I've just sent you the templates via e-mail.
For the blades I used a double pivot system, initially using small hollow eyelets sold for running electric lighting circuits in dolls houses (solder the flat head to the base of the rail, the rivet passes through a hole in the sleeper / tie bar and is held in place with a collar soldered to the 'back' of the rivet) but on some 6.5mm gauge points I built (for a West Mids Group member's TTe layout that replicated Marklin jobs) I used miniature brass 'brads' (tiny nails) with the head of the 'nail' under the sleeper and the pointed end soldered to a hole drilled in the foot of the rail.
The eyelets (https://hobby.uk.com/small-hollow-eyelets-brass-eyelets-3mm-long-inside-dia-1-1mm-outside-dia-1-5mm-pkt-20.html) and brads (https://hobby.uk.com/brass-brads-3mm-long-x-0-6mm-pkt-approx-60.html) came from Hobby's Limited (catalog numbers CK1023 and CK1021-1 respectively)
Just remembered that I posted a few photos of my point building on Flickr.
Here is one showing the underside of a point
(https://live.staticflickr.com/543/19284653859_a97de4e131_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vo7TJ4)IMG_1950 (https://flic.kr/p/vo7TJ4) by Julien Webb (https://www.flickr.com/photos/julien_webb/), on Flickr
The collars were made from some very thin (0.25mm?) double-sides copperclad.
Actually looking at the other photos in that album there are a few photos of the 6.5mm gauge points and it looks like I used the eyelets on the tie bar but brads on the blade pivots, possibly with the head soldered to the base of the rail and a retaining collar beneath.
In my defence I did make them 4 years ago....
Quote from: JulienW on August 28, 2020, 10:16some 6.5mm gauge points I built (for a West Mids Group member's TTe layout that replicated Marklin jobs)
Wonder who that could have been... ;)
I didn't take any photos of them either so can't help you there, I'm afraid.
Thanks again Julien - very helpful info and photos re pivots. And those eyelets are another product I didn't know existed!
Also thanks for emailing through the point templates. Several hours of CAD work saved!
My order of copperclad crossing timbers arrived from 3SMR this morning and they're the best made products of this type I've seen.Previous ones I've used have been guillotined from plain PCB sheet so have an annoying burr along both edges. These are produced as a complete slotted PCB and are perfectly smooth. I really have no excuse not to get cracking and see if I can still make points that work.
Ian
I have only just seen these but you can now buy nickel silver replacement frogs for Peco Set track. i have not tried them but certainly intend to once I have the money available :)
(https://www.eichhorn-modellbau.de/components/com_mijoshop/opencart/image/cache/catalog/Peco/PECO_ST_R_HZST-500x500.JPG)
Details from here https://www.eichhorn-modellbau.de/en/component/mijoshop/product/445-elektrofrog-peco-crossing-setrak-13st5.html?Itemid=186 (https://www.eichhorn-modellbau.de/en/component/mijoshop/product/445-elektrofrog-peco-crossing-setrak-13st5.html?Itemid=186)
Keep up Stephen, Ian posted a thread nearly three weeks ago dedicated to it! ;) :)
https://www.009society.com/forum/index.php?topic=4482.0
Quote from: Hobby on September 14, 2020, 12:05
Keep up Stephen, Ian posted a thread nearly three weeks ago dedicated to it! ;) :)
https://www.009society.com/forum/index.php?topic=4482.0
I knew i had seen it somewhere!! I was convinced it was on the other place and was searching for a link to the post, this would explain why :)
It's on both, Ian posted on here and I transferred it!
Quote from: Hobby on September 15, 2020, 09:57
It's on both, Ian posted on here and I transferred it!
I have no idea how I missed that then :-)