03-29-2011, 05:00 AM
Hi.
I'm a newbie who's in the early stages of building a small switching layout.
I'm using Peco Code 75 track as I had some already - intended for an unfinished 'OO' gauge (UK) layout.
I'm experiencing problems with stock crossing a 'crossover' arrangement I've constructed on a runround loop - the wheels are 'stalling' in the gap between the nose of the crossing 'vee' and wing rail which is especially noticeable at extremely low speeds - essential for switching layouts which I'm sure you'll agree - and in one case, the wheels of a box car are striking the crossing nose (which I think I can sort after some advice from a kind contributor on another forum).
Incidentally, the 'stalling' referred to in my previous paragraph is reminiscent of a ball bearing dropping into a hole in one of those children's toys that you used to get years ago where the challenge was to try and locate four, five or even six ballbearings into their respective holes in a glass/perspex covered board by tipping it from side to side - perhaps you're not familiar with them in North America but they were rather popular here in the UK (I'll try and stop waffling on now
).
The purpose of my post is not to try and iron out each of the issues raised (although all contributions most welcome
), but just to ask, generally, whether Peco is suitable for HO scale or whether I'd be better off plumping for another make (provided of course I can get hold of it in the UK 
).
Perhaps I'm being a little too picky here (my wife says she can't see the problem
), however, I seem to have developed an aversion to stock rattling and rolling over crossings.
It just seems to ruin the whole atmosphere.
Don't want to get too far ahead of myself here, but can anybody tell me whether Proto 87 solves this problem?
Provided I muster the courage to cut up a brand new switch in the first place (drop in type) and develop sufficient skill to do so, I would consider it worth the extra hassle and expense if the outcome meant dispensing with the 'shake,rattle and roll' :?
Thanks for looking in and all contributions gratefully received.
Jonte
I'm a newbie who's in the early stages of building a small switching layout.
I'm using Peco Code 75 track as I had some already - intended for an unfinished 'OO' gauge (UK) layout.
I'm experiencing problems with stock crossing a 'crossover' arrangement I've constructed on a runround loop - the wheels are 'stalling' in the gap between the nose of the crossing 'vee' and wing rail which is especially noticeable at extremely low speeds - essential for switching layouts which I'm sure you'll agree - and in one case, the wheels of a box car are striking the crossing nose (which I think I can sort after some advice from a kind contributor on another forum).
Incidentally, the 'stalling' referred to in my previous paragraph is reminiscent of a ball bearing dropping into a hole in one of those children's toys that you used to get years ago where the challenge was to try and locate four, five or even six ballbearings into their respective holes in a glass/perspex covered board by tipping it from side to side - perhaps you're not familiar with them in North America but they were rather popular here in the UK (I'll try and stop waffling on now
).The purpose of my post is not to try and iron out each of the issues raised (although all contributions most welcome
), but just to ask, generally, whether Peco is suitable for HO scale or whether I'd be better off plumping for another make (provided of course I can get hold of it in the UK ).Perhaps I'm being a little too picky here (my wife says she can't see the problem
), however, I seem to have developed an aversion to stock rattling and rolling over crossings.It just seems to ruin the whole atmosphere.
Don't want to get too far ahead of myself here, but can anybody tell me whether Proto 87 solves this problem?
Provided I muster the courage to cut up a brand new switch in the first place (drop in type) and develop sufficient skill to do so, I would consider it worth the extra hassle and expense if the outcome meant dispensing with the 'shake,rattle and roll' :?
Thanks for looking in and all contributions gratefully received.
Jonte