Modelling Standards - a general discussion. Be nice, please

 
  miktrain Deputy Commissioner

Location: Adelaide SA
I wonder what a comparison between real (prototypical) steam roller wheels and the model wheels fitted to some models would show. I don't think that they would be anywhere near the width of a steam rollers. Which does sort of put the kibosh on the statement which appeared multiple times in the previous post.  He speaks like a politician, repeating the same old mantra over and over again, with no consideration as to whether it is correct or not...
duttonbay
I think it would show a very flat squashed model wheel Smile

Tony

Sponsored advertisement

  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Terry all my layouts use code 100 Peco track and points and all my wheels are gauged to NMRA wheel back to backs and all the modern stuff I simply plonk on this layout straight out of the box works equally as well bar a rogue wheelset here and there, I have Auscision, Austrains, OER,SDS and God only knows what others and I have zilch problems with them the points are straight out of the box Electrofrogs connected straight up according to Peco's instructions. And guess what no derailments are happening for me. I used to get a lot using the Peco insulfrog points but they were nearly all second or third hand having done a few layouts in their time and well worn as well. All the Electrofrogs were bought new and simply fitted in where previously an Insulfrog went.

So what have I done wrong if it all works. Can you explain this to me simply please.
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

Terry all my layouts use code 100 Peco track and points and all my wheels are gauged to NMRA wheel back to backs and all the modern stuff I simply plonk on this layout straight out of the box works equally as well bar a rogue wheelset here and there, I have Auscision, Austrains, OER,SDS and God only knows what others and I have zilch problems with them the points are straight out of the box Electrofrogs connected straight up according to Peco's instructions. And guess what no derailments are happening for me. I used to get a lot using the Peco insulfrog points but they were nearly all second or third hand having done a few layouts in their time and well worn as well. All the Electrofrogs were bought new and simply fitted in where previously an Insulfrog went.

So what have I done wrong if it all works. Can you explain this to me simply please.
David Peters
The only mistake you have made is to assume you are using NMRA standards. You are using part of the NMRA wheel standard, the minimum wheel back to back =14.4mm. For most wheels this is a good back to back minimum. If you are having no trouble, it simply means all your wheels and track are within the AMRA standards limits. Good to hear your fine scale wheels are not a problem.

The old Peco insulfrog turnouts mentioned probably were built to Peco's older coarser flange ways, typically over 1.5mm wide, some were over gauge and others had a check gauge that was to small for today's models.

Cheers,
  hosk1956 Deputy Commissioner

Location: no where near gunzels
Come on Mod's, shut this thread down, it has become a very pointless thread that will achieve absolutely nothing towards improving our hobby, quite the opposite I believe. If Terry truly speaks for AMRA, i feel for the future of that organisation.

Wayne
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
I lack of understanding does make a pointless thread. You might not like or understand what Terry says, but that does not change the fact that by and large he knows what he's talking about, and generally is spot on.
  Teditor Deputy Commissioner

Location: Toowoomba
I lack of understanding does make a pointless thread. You might not like or understand what Terry says, but that does not change the fact that by and large he knows what he's talking about, and generally is spot on.
Aaron
And you are related in what way?
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Come on Mod's, shut this thread down, it has become a very pointless thread that will achieve absolutely nothing towards improving our hobby, quite the opposite I believe. If Terry truly speaks for AMRA, i feel for the future of that organisation.

Wayne
hosk1956
Letting the thread go on.  Like many we seem to have returned to it , and restarted it all again. best way is to ignore thread if you wish.
  Teditor Deputy Commissioner

Location: Toowoomba
Letting the thread go on.  Like many we seem to have returned to it , and restarted it all again. best way is to ignore thread if you wish.
dthead
David, I have to agree, you can just skip over or delete what you don't like, but getting good comedy back can be a difficult task!
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
And you are related in what way?
"Teditor"
Related? I have never seen the man, but I do understand engineering principles and even more importantly I know better than to argue with someone who knows what they are talking about.
  hosk1956 Deputy Commissioner

Location: no where near gunzels
I lack of understanding does make a pointless thread. You might not like or understand what Terry says, but that does not change the fact that by and large he knows what he's talking about, and generally is spot on.
Aaron
I take exception and see it as you are having a go at me regard "lack of understanding", I do understand very well, my argument is that Terry seems to have become very contradictory and has got to a point where he is admits that the NMRA standards do work, sure his AMRA standards work as well, the big item in the still relatively course nature of H0 is the B2B measurement, he is admitting they are the same, I machined up some wheels many years ago on my little Unimat lathe, I had basic knowledge of NMRA and hadn't even heard of AMRA back then, I couldn't measure tapers and to the thou's (Oh sorry Aaron, being a psuedo engineer you probably measure in microns), but the wheel and flange looked OK and the B2B was the same as other wheels I had, and surprise surprise to you that all know better, they worked, and have worked for many years.
And I have to disagree with your comment that Terry knows what he is talking about, in past posts, Terry has continually said our trains will derail on Peco points with NMRA wheels, many have responded to say that is not the case, but Terry kept waffling on against quite strong criticism, he his now saying that if NMRA wheels are set for the minimum B2B they will be OK, if that is not a back down I don't know what is. That is not a sign of someone who knows what he is talking about, more the sign of a very arrogant, ignorant man, sounds like a lot of engineers I have met actually.
What I find most amusing is that good old Terry can get on here and tell us we are all wrong, now to put this into another context, we (Australia) are a population of 23,166,662, USA has a population of 316,564,000, now if we estimate that 2% are model railroaders who model H0 and use Peco points (but that is a very generous estimate I reckon), that makes 263,222 Aussies and 6,331,280 yanks have had it wrong all these years, don't you think the yanks might have jumped up and down a bit by now and developed there own Terry to bat for them.
I have issue with his term fine scale wheels, RP25-88 or the AMRA equivalent may be a 'finer' wheel than RP25-110 or the AMRA equivalent, but they aren't fine scale wheels, as far as I am concerned 'fine scale' should be limited to the P4's and P87 modelers.
Now don't take me wrong here, I actually have to agree with others that the funny factor of Terry's comebacks have been amusing, I would sort of like to meet the man to see what sort of personality he has and how many friends he has (the mod must be one), I am another that has baited him for a responce as well but my comment to shut this thread down is for the general benefit of the hobby as whole, everybody has had there say, all the points (no pun intended) that can be made have been made, but now we are right where we were on page 1, that's a sign that it has run it's course in my mind.

Wayne
  hosk1956 Deputy Commissioner

Location: no where near gunzels
Related? I have never seen the man, but I do understand engineering principles and even more importantly I know better than to argue with someone who knows what they are talking about.
Aaron
I learnt a long time ago to not bother arguing with an engineer, they never admit mistakes and it had always become more satisfying to watch them fall on their face, as long as they didn't bring me down with them, I'm street smarter than them though, I had to be.

Wayne
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Yes you are most probably right about those Insulfrog points being to wide in the checkrails and gauges but are you now stating that the newer Peco points and Electrofrog points in particular are now finer and closer to scale. You said that all modern Australian rollingstock of recent years would not work on Peco points and now you say they do in fact work. There is a big gap between will not and will work though. So I will just keep on using them and my NMRA track and back to back gauge and sit back and run some of my model trains while you work out the mathematics and other things that say it will not work.

If you had just said it might not work at times depending on a few variable things you might have got away with it, but to say outright it will not work is really a lie and you have virtually admitted it. Now where did I put that Auscision rolling stock I wanted to Run. Laughing
  LaidlayM Chief Commissioner

Location: Research
..............
What I find most amusing is that good old Terry can get on here and tell us we are all wrong, now to put this into another context, we (Australia) are a population of 23,166,662, USA has a population of 316,564,000, now if we estimate that 2% are model railroaders who model H0 and use Peco points (but that is a very generous estimate I reckon), that makes 263,222 Aussies and 6,331,280 yanks have had it wrong all these years, don't you think the yanks might have jumped up and down a bit by now and developed there own Terry to bat for them. ........................
Wayne
hosk1956
Wayne,

a far higher proportion of Australians are Peco universal users that US citizens.  Your figures assume that the proportions are equal (2%).  Australians typically use set track then move up to Peco universal then stop.  US citizens may well start at set track then go various ways such as Atlas, Shinohara or Peco code 83 (sort or NMRA standard), few go to Peco universal.

Mark
  miktrain Deputy Commissioner

Location: Adelaide SA
...You said that all modern Australian rollingstock of recent years would not work on Peco points and now you say they do in fact work. There is a big gap between will not and will work though. So I will just keep on using them and my NMRA track and back to back gauge and sit back and run some of my model trains while you work out the mathematics and other things that say it will not work.
David Peters
Yes, we have to remember here that according to science a bumblebee cannot fly, the body weight is too heavy for the lifting power of the wings. It would seem though that the bees have not been told this life changing fact.

Tony
  sunnysa Junior Train Controller

This thread is like the fly wheel on a stationary engine, round and round it goes and yet goes nowhere.

There are always those that want to prove they can pee over the fence higher than everybody else.

An electronic guru/engineer I am not and over the yrs I have been told by so called experts that some of the things I do won't work. Often after I have been doing it for some time and proved to myself (and often others) it does.

Cheers

Ian

PS expert = ex is a has been.   spurt is drip under pressure.
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

I take exception and see it as you are having a go at me regard "lack of understanding", I do understand very well, my argument is that Terry seems to have become very contradictory and has got to a point where he is admits that the NMRA standards do work, sure his AMRA standards work as well, the big item in the still relatively course nature of H0 is the B2B measurement, he is admitting they are the same, I machined up some wheels many years ago on my little Unimat lathe, I had basic knowledge of NMRA and hadn't even heard of AMRA back then, I couldn't measure tapers and to the thou's (Oh sorry Aaron, being a psuedo engineer you probably measure in microns), but the wheel and flange looked OK and the B2B was the same as other wheels I had, and surprise surprise to you that all know better, they worked, and have worked for many years.
And I have to disagree with your comment that Terry knows what he is talking about, in past posts, Terry has continually said our trains will derail on Peco points with NMRA wheels, many have responded to say that is not the case, but Terry kept waffling on against quite strong criticism, he his now saying that if NMRA wheels are set for the minimum B2B they will be OK, if that is not a back down I don't know what is. That is not a sign of someone who knows what he is talking about, more the sign of a very arrogant, ignorant man, sounds like a lot of engineers I have met actually.
What I find most amusing is that good old Terry can get on here and tell us we are all wrong, now to put this into another context, we (Australia) are a population of 23,166,662, USA has a population of 316,564,000, now if we estimate that 2% are model railroaders who model H0 and use Peco points (but that is a very generous estimate I reckon), that makes 263,222 Aussies and 6,331,280 yanks have had it wrong all these years, don't you think the yanks might have jumped up and down a bit by now and developed there own Terry to bat for them.
I have issue with his term fine scale wheels, RP25-88 or the AMRA equivalent may be a 'finer' wheel than RP25-110 or the AMRA equivalent, but they aren't fine scale wheels, as far as I am concerned 'fine scale' should be limited to the P4's and P87 modelers.
Now don't take me wrong here, I actually have to agree with others that the funny factor of Terry's comebacks have been amusing, I would sort of like to meet the man to see what sort of personality he has and how many friends he has (the mod must be one), I am another that has baited him for a responce as well but my comment to shut this thread down is for the general benefit of the hobby as whole, everybody has had there say, all the points (no pun intended) that can be made have been made, but now we are right where we were on page 1, that's a sign that it has run it's course in my mind.

Wayne
hosk1956
Wayne,

Your post contains claims about what I have said which is simply untrue. Go back and read exactly what I have said in the past. I have never said 'NMRA standards do not work '. I do however have plenty of examples of wheels complying to NMRA standards that do derail on PECO turnouts. That is what happens when you mix track and wheel standards. NMRA wheels are designed for NMRA track. Peco code 100 and 75 is not built to NMRA standards. That is a hard fact, irrespective to what you and others think. There is no back down, you and others simply have not understood the importance of the different check gauges in the 2 standards. If you bothered to read the AMRA standards you would realise the wheel back to back distance of 14.4mm is the AMRA recommended minimum for the AMRA H0 wheel, the same as the metric version of the NMRA standard. This allows AMRA recommended wheels to fully comply with the NMRA standard, allowing use on track work built to NMRA standards.

The fact is the NMRA still uses the term 'finescale H0' to describe their  standard with wheels with a RP-25-88 size. This term existed before the invention of NMRA proto87. AMRA uses the term fine tolerance instead for it's 'fine scale' standard. The English also have a number of fine scale standards including 00-SF, (SF= special fine) which is 100% compatible with the AMRA H0 gauge fine tolerance standard.

Here is a US based modellers view of the NMRA standards included on his tips web page http://www.railwayeng.com. He designs his track and gauges to suit wheels gauged to the NMRA gauge, which works as long as you keep as close to the minimum value of the NMRA wheel gauge as practical, or better still, use a set of metal digital calipers to gauge your wheels. His track gauges produces track that complies to the AMRA fine tolerance standard. His track does not comply with the NMRA standard.

QUESTION: #1 When handlaying track, is it best to use a three-point gauge on curves to get a slightly wider gauge, or is it better to use two-point gauges to get the exact gauge?
ANSWER:
Here's what we've found:
The NMRA standard has you laying your rails over an inch (prototype) wider than the wheel sets. This means you already have enormous space for play. Curves ... straight ... whatever..
Now if you use a three point gauge and widen the rails just a bit in the curves, your just increasing the slop. If your laying your curves sharper than 18inch radius, then use the three point. But if you are using any radius larger than 18, and you wish to run your trains forward and backward with no length/weight limit, then I have by absolute experience found that you don't want to widen anywhere.
As a matter of fact, you can narrow the track about .005 to .010 thru the frogs, and you will get much better performance.
In 1980 at the NMRA convention at Disneyland, I took a portable railroad (HO) set it up and ran 65 car trains backward with three four five units. Some on front.. ... some pushing ... etc. with my back to the display for six (6) days with absolutely no derailments using the narrow track standard to prove once and for all that the wider gauge of the three point gauge just causes derailments. That's all it does. Period.
By the way, I used both Athearn and Atlas units running together with no problems. If the track is the right gauge, you have fewer problems. Please understand that I don't care what gauge you use and I make the two point gauges for those who want them. At 9.95 for four of the gauges plus the time to package and send them, believe me I don't make any money from the gauges.
One last time ....... Don't widen your track anymore than you have to. There's already too much play. Way more than is needed for your curves. (by the way, the same ratio is in N scale as well)
A little insider info: John Allen didn't use a track gauge.
He used a wheel set for gauge and his
trains ran very well.
I have done all the research to prove this both theoretically as well as physically. If you want to reduce your derailments..... this is one way that works well.
Happy Railroading. I hope this helps some of you.
QUESTION: #5 Please send me or point me to correct specs. for track gauge.
ANSWER:
My problem in answering you is this:
The list for all gauges is quite extensive.
Do you want NMRA standards (which will derail your trains)?
or do you want specifications that work?

You see NMRA had two standards committees. One did the track spacing and the other did the wheel spacing. Now since the wheels on locos and such are very dificult to change it seemed best to change the distance between the rails especially thru turnouts to match the wheel gauge provided by NMRA.
By the way the heads of each commitee hated each other (jealosy) and never spoke to each other. Most commercial track including turnouts are a bastard compromise between these two dimensions.
What scale do you wish accurate specs for?
I/ll be happy to answer.
-Steve  

I take some of his above comments with a pinch of salt but his conclusions about track gauge are spot on.

From my desk calender
'If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing' ANATOLE FRANCE
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

I believe that Steve knows what he is talking about. He builds and sells turnouts for all sorts of scales and gauges, and they work superbly with wheelsets gauged to the NMRA standard. I have many turnouts of his on the Dutton Bay, and they give me no trouble at all.
  Teditor Deputy Commissioner

Location: Toowoomba
He designs his track and gauges to suit wheels gauged to the NMRA gauge, which works as long as you keep as close to the minimum value of the NMRA wheel gauge as practical, or better still, use a set of metal digital calipers to gauge your wheels. His track gauges produces track that complies to the AMRA fine tolerance standard. His track does not comply with the NMRA standard.
NSWGR1855
WOT!

He designs his track and gauges to suit wheels gauged to the NMRA gauge?

His track does not comply with the NMRA standard?

Again - WOT!

Which one does he doesn't do?
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
I take exception and see it as you are having a go at me regard "lack of understanding", I do understand very well, my argument is that Terry seems to have become very contradictory and has got to a point where he is admits that the NMRA standards do work, sure his AMRA standards work as well, the big item in the still relatively course nature of H0 is the B2B measurement, he is admitting they are the same, I machined up some wheels many years ago on my little Unimat lathe, I had basic knowledge of NMRA and hadn't even heard of AMRA back then, I couldn't measure tapers and to the thou's (Oh sorry Aaron, being a psuedo engineer you probably measure in microns), but the wheel and flange looked OK and the B2B was the same as other wheels I had, and surprise surprise to you that all know better, they worked, and have worked for many years.
"hosk1956"
Pseudo engineer? There's nothing pseudo in what I do. As for microns, I am sure I have mentioned this before, 90+% of the dimensional work I do towards my engineering would be in imperial. The only time I use micro anythings would be uA, uV, uF, uS and uH on the extreme of never I might have used uG I don't even regularly use micro SD. On occasion I would use microns as a standard linear measurement, but why would I? In general, my resolution becomes 25.4 times greater if I dimension in thou, so long as I can find one of those fitter people who knows what a thou is!

And I have to disagree with your comment that Terry knows what he is talking about, in past posts, Terry has continually said our trains will derail on Peco points with NMRA wheels, many have responded to say that is not the case, but Terry kept waffling on against quite strong criticism, he his now saying that if NMRA wheels are set for the minimum B2B they will be OK, if that is not a back down I don't know what is. That is not a sign of someone who knows what he is talking about, more the sign of a very arrogant, ignorant man, sounds like a lot of engineers I have met actually.
"hosk1956"
As an engineer I work in a real world of tolerances, I know you had something to say about tolerances once before, clearly demonstrating you don't know what they represent, but I think it's a fair assumption that most people likely to try and make my designs will aim for the nominal measurement. That is entirely reasonable, and in general that's exactly what I want them to do. How is that relevant here? Well we see NMRA gauged wheels are less than ideal for Peco track UNLESS they are gauged for the absolute minimum B2B, and that assumption, that you or anyone else would naturally seek the minimum B2B for wheel sets on the NMRA gauge is not reasonable for a population that is not aware of that fact. The fact is, and Terry is right, that if you gauge your wheels for the NMRA nominal (as the NMRA would expect, and reasonable people would attempt) you do run the risk of having them at an incorrect, increased B2B for Peco track. Terry's statements therefore hold water. Maybe you just need to be an engineer to know how production people behave.

What I find most amusing is that good old Terry can get on here and tell us we are all wrong, now to put this into another context, we (Australia) are a population of 23,166,662, USA has a population of 316,564,000, now if we estimate that 2% are model railroaders who model H0 and use Peco points (but that is a very generous estimate I reckon), that makes 263,222 Aussies and 6,331,280 yanks have had it wrong all these years, don't you think the yanks might have jumped up and down a bit by now and developed there own Terry to bat for them.
"hosk1956"
I think Peco's track market in the US might actually be closer to non existent than you appear to think. I have seen lots of layouts in MR et al and I don't recall a single one using Peco track.
  sol Assistant Commissioner

Location: Evanston Gardens SA
Aaron, when I get new rolling stock, I usually check the B2B with the NMRA gauge & 99% of the time,  they are OK and running through my Peco Code 100 & 75 without derailment,  either pushing or pulling. Handmade points/turnouts-  I used the NMRA H0 track gauge.

On a large layout here in SA that I operate on, wheels of various breeds get  checked & adjusted if needed, also with the  NMRA gauge to run on Peco code 100. The big majority of the latest Australian outline stock was just unpacked & run without even checking & no problems has occurred to date.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
I think Peco's track market in the US might actually be closer to non existent than you appear to think. I have seen lots of layouts in MR et al and I don't recall a single one using Peco track.
Aaron
Which is why Peco went into the US with Code 83 in the first place, to try and win some market share.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Aaron, when I get new rolling stock, I usually check the B2B with the NMRA gauge & 99% of the time,  they are OK and running through my Peco Code 100 & 75 without derailment,  either pushing or pulling. Handmade points/turnouts-  I used the NMRA H0 track gauge.

On a large layout here in SA that I operate on, wheels of various breeds get  checked & adjusted if needed, also with the  NMRA gauge to run on Peco code 100. The big majority of the latest Australian outline stock was just unpacked & run without even checking & no problems has occurred to date.
sol
Ron you and me and plenty of others must be doing something wrong then according to Terry. I do the same and have no problems at all and all my track and points are Peco Code 100 as well. Could we all be fluking the measurements you reckon, or is it just a furphy that he wants to get across just so his standards are adopted. I go with what works and like you in this case it works for me. And I know of a lot of others that use Peco Track and Points and never hear a word about constant derailments at points etc. I could probably scrape up about 20 people that have Peco track and modern Australian rollingstock and I doubt you would get a complaint out of any of them actually otherwise most would have got me in to find the problem but there is none, not one of those 20 have even so much as said that their trains derail somewhere let alone at a point or something. I am in a big association that has a large membership and all those into model trains within this group usually seek me out or other fellow modellers within the group for advice etc, eventually I get word of it. But the silence is deafening really.
  a6et Minister for Railways

No matter what anyone says, it still comes back to personal choice in regard to almost every aspect of modelling.  I no longer have any issues with my Peco 100 track, & only had a couple issues anyway, readily solved & a lot less expensive than replacing the points with 83, 75 or 70track, & I see no reason to rip all the layout up, toss out the 100 & replace it with an alternative.  I have no specific demand on what RP I get with a model either, whether its 88, 100 or 110, if no problems, I keep them, if problems I replace them.  As the Meerkat says- Simple

As for standards, to me the worst case of failure that I have is still with the junk Chinese couplers that are now used by only primarily one or two of the importers, although there could be others, but the sad part is that it also affects one of the cottage industry dealers.

At the cost we are now paying for RTR models & the resulting kits also, I cannot understand the reason behind them still being used, what cost would it add to the overall price of the models to fit Kadee's, it matters not whether they are the old 5's or scale head types.  So far out of somewhere near 10 multi packs of wagons & carriages I have found at least 1/3 of them with failed couplers, failed owing to either no spring in the head & either finding them floating in the bottom of the box, or not at all.  If the spring is in the box, try refitting & its too short, & drops straight out again.

The other aspect is that the factory now used by the importer are worse than the old one, why go to all the trouble of doing such a wonderful job in putting all the underfloor detail which much of not being seen on the track, & settle for some cheap & nasty coupler.  The amount of underfloor detail actually makes it much more difficult to replace the couplers, especially on the hand brake spindle & ratchet handle end.  At least with every successive replacement the familiarity aspect makes it easier.

I can buy a multi pack of scale head or 5's whisker couplers for around $60.00 for 50 pairs when on special or $50.00 for 25 pairs regular price. Surely if I can buy them for at the regular price for the equivalent of $2.00 a model, at what bulk rate would the importer/manufacturer pay for them? I would likely pay $1.00 extra for a model if they were factory fitted with the Kadee product, as it would be a cheap alternative.
  Captain Underpants Train Controller

Ron you and me and plenty of others must be doing something wrong then according to Terry. I do the same and have no problems at all and all my track and points are Peco Code 100 as well. Could we all be fluking the measurements you reckon, or is it just a furphy that he wants to get across just so his standards are adopted. I go with what works and like you in this case it works for me. And I know of a lot of others that use Peco Track and Points and never hear a word about constant derailments at points etc. I could probably scrape up about 20 people that have Peco track and modern Australian rollingstock and I doubt you would get a complaint out of any of them actually otherwise most would have got me in to find the problem but there is none, not one of those 20 have even so much as said that their trains derail somewhere let alone at a point or something. I am in a big association that has a large membership and all those into model trains within this group usually seek me out or other fellow modellers within the group for advice etc, eventually I get word of it. But the silence is deafening really.
David Peters

You can add me to your list. I use Peco Code 100 track and points and have no issue with derailments running modern Australian rollingstock or locos. I have a mix of streamline and some setrack curved points and have no problems.  I think the issue could be the way in which the track is laid.

Cheers
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

WOT!

He designs his track and gauges to suit wheels gauged to the NMRA gauge?

His track does not comply with the NMRA standard?

Again - WOT!

Which one does he doesn't do?
Teditor
Steve Hatch designed his own standard for track. The inspiration to develop an AMRA fine tolerance standard was from his idea that you can go less then the NMRA minimum track gauge of 16.5mm. That is why his turnouts are within the limits of the AMRA standard and not the NMRA standard.

Terry Flynn.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.