Why Would I Choose 00-SF ?

[dasatcopthorne]

Next thing we'll know, is that someone decides that using EM wheels on P4 trackwork is a good idea.  Hang on a minute, someone already has.........

 

Ha, ha.

 

I've used P4 wheels on 16.2. track.

 

They fell off until I had the idea of re-gauging them.

 

Dave

Edited September 27, 2015 by dasatcopthorne

[Grovenor]

This isn't really a sound basis for generalising about the state of play in current OO modelling

Ravenser,

The only person generalising about the state of play in current OO modelling on here is you. The others are trying to discuss the potential benefits of 00-sf.

Regards

[gordon s]

Just back from a very pleasant four hours in the sunshine with my golfing friends and I see the discussion continues.  Just to support Martin's post above, I asked Ravenser 20 days ago to tell me any reasons not to use 00-SF as an option for RTR and kit built stock.

 

We all know there are several options open to those who choose to build their own track to run 00 locos and stock.  There is certainly DOGA Fine and Intermediate and I have no problem recognising those are valid options.  

 

00-SF is also an option and each have their own advantages and disadvantages.

 

I happen to have chosen 00-SF as I felt it answered my needs.  Others may choose DOGA standards.  That is their choice and I certainly have no problem with that.

 

Twenty days ago, I asked Ravenser for any reasons not to use 00-SF as one of the options available to those who wish to build their own track.  No answer was forthcoming, but now he has plenty of time to think about it, so I would like to pose the question again.

 

Please tell me any reason not to use 00-SF?  What do DOGA Fine and Intermediate do that 00-SF doesn't?

 

You've had plenty of time to think about it, so please tell me before I embark on another round of hand building 70+ turnouts.

 

I'm all ears…..

 

 

 

 

[dasatcopthorne]

Ravenser.

 

I respectfully refer you to my topic'

Why should I not choose 00-SF'

in which I invited you and anyone else to answer the question posed in the title.

 

No one came up with a sensible( with respect to those that tried) answer.  You don't even seem to have had a go!

 

Dave

[polybear]

As the new layout was to involved a lot of plain track in platforms, I was only prepared to build plain track for the front two lines and used Exactoscale 00 sleeper bases for tracks further from the eye(all alongside platmorms), as it was. 

Hi Dave,

So let me get this right.  For some of the layout you have 16.2mm plain trackwork.  And for other parts you have 16.5mm plain trackwork.  So (and according to some other posters/threads) you are neither one nor the other.  I feel for you mate.....

 

Brian

[dasatcopthorne]

Hi Dave,

So let me get this right.  For some of the layout you have 16.2mm plain trackwork.  And for other parts you have 16.5mm plain trackwork.  So (and according to some other posters/threads) you are neither one nor the other.  I feel for you mate.....

 

Brian

 

Yes mate.

 

That's how it was when I first started and I'm not bloody going back and relaying it the 16.5 now.

 

Not enough years left.

 

Dave

[Derekstuart]

Oh please stop the planet. I want to get off.

 

What's this special announcement they're making tomorrow about Mars? Have they found intelligent life?

 

If so, can we ask for their opinion about gauge flaring for 00SF/4SF? They might even have already had a similar debate about EM wheels on P4 track.

 

Maybe that's why there's no long life on mars- all died during the gauge wars that started 1620 to 1650 and then the second gauge war between 1820 and 1883.

[dasatcopthorne]

 

  What do DOGA Fine and Intermediate do that 00-SF doesn't?

 

 

 

I'm all ears…..

 

Screen Shot 2015-09-27 at 16.09.53.png

 

 

Gordon.

 

Well, DOGA Fine makes you re-gauge all your wheels for a start.!

 

Dave

Edited September 27, 2015 by dasatcopthorne

['CHARD]

Ravenser.

 

I respectfully refer you to my topic'

Why should I not choose 00-SF'

in which I invited you and anyone else to answer the question posed in the title.

 

No one came up with a sensible( with respect to those that tried) answer.  You don't even seem to have had a go!

 

Dave

 

Why should I not choose OO-SF?

 

1. Because whenever I try to learn sensibly about it, every result turns up the same half dozen entrenched individuals (males I think) arguing semantics with such vitriol that if they turned their attention and passion to something remotely meaningful, then their partners, pets, children or other good causes might be experiencing a greatly enriched quality of life.
2. As a consequence of a, I shall not be choosing it because I can no longer begin to try and understand it.
3. And because life is too short.  If I do decide to pursue modelling with anything better looking than Peco, I will start my own thread and explicity bar a number of bores from expounding on it.  You do yourselves, and the hobby, no favours.
4. I am now considering a life in hooliganism and drug addiction to forget this wretched topic and vent my pent up anger at it and the amount of my time it has wasted.

[dasatcopthorne]

ars

 

Oh please stop the planet. I want to get off.

 

What's this special announcement they're making tomorrow about Mars? Have they found intelligent life?

 

If so, can we ask for their opinion about gauge flaring for 00SF/4SF? They might even have already had a similar debate about EM wheels on P4 track.

 

Maybe that's why there's no long life on mars- all died during the gauge wars that started 1620 to 1650 and then the second gauge war between 1820 and 1883.

 

The advanced info I have seen and from the pictures I've seen posted of Mars, they've found evidence of some sort of movementon, as witnessed by the parallel lines on the surface.

 

On closer inspection, they're 16.2mm apart.

 

Yessssssssss!

 

Dave

['CHARD]

This thread has helped me enormously to fine-tune my prototype.  I'm rolling the clock forward and shall now be modelling a scale half mile section of the Waverley Route in plain line as it appeared in Summer 1970.

 

I'm actually suspending any layout building because of the Gauge Wars being waged so interminably. I'm now classing myself in the role of collector only, and shall cease contributing to any layout related threads, except to praise those walking wounded who have come through the other side of the horrible conflict.  They know who they are.

[Derekstuart]

Dave (dasatcopthorne)

That's some pretty impressive trackwork- the same applying to Gordon S.

 

I admit that when I first heard about 00-SF I didn't quite know what to make of it, so I can understand Martin's reason for changing the name. Had I realised that you could get such realistic looking track this way, then I am not sure I would have started in P4.

 

Although therefore I am not a 00SF modeller, I thoroughly respect what you chaps have done- I really wouldn't have thought it possible. As for those "I don't use it because I don't like it and therefore you must not like it either" types. 'ck them.

Derek

[Junctionmad]

:nono: :nono:

 

Not sure where the idea that 00-SF is intended for 16.2mm turnouts with 16.5mm plain trackwork suddenly appears from? Yes, you can do that (and many do/will). Others use 16.2mm 00-SF throughout, with all trackwork being hand-laid. And 00-SF has been that way since at least 2008 (when I began supplying 00-SF Gauges) and quite probably a lot earlier than that, when Martin was hand - building & supplying track commercially.

The term "4-SF" has exactly the same gauge dimensions & standards as 00-SF, just with a different name used within Templot for reasons Martin has already discussed elsewhere. Until a couple of days ago the "4-SF" didn't even exist, except perhaps within Martin's head .....

Brian

Well it's more then that 00-SF moniker was created by Martin and he has decided to undo it. Hence we can use that moniker to represent anything we like now Edited September 27, 2015 by Junctionmad

[Derekstuart]

Yes, we KNOW that. But what I think is desperately important to know is whether those lines taper to 16.5mm apart at the end.

 

And also- should NASA computers be able to detect and render those slight increases in gap size? All life is riding on the answer.

 

ars

 

 

The advanced info I have seen and from the pictures I've seen posted of Mars, they've found evidence of some sort of movementon, as witnessed by the parallel lines on the surface.

 

On closer inspection, they're 16.2mm apart.

 

Yessssssssss!

 

Dave

[Ravenser]

This is somewhat annoying as I've had to read one of Ravenser's post, but only because our Club's name was flagged up to me.

 

Just one thing if you would care to answer please, Ravenser or what ever you name is.

 

Tell us what makes you fully aware of what selection of wheels run on Falcon Road. Please don't use Falcon Road to illustrate your adversity to 16.2  without knowing its history.

 

By the way, I don't ever remember claiming that 16.2 makes for better running when referring to Falcon Road, only that is has 16.2mm track. I'm happy to be corrected though.

 

Please also note that for our Club, 16.2 is NOT an alternative to Peco of any kind. We've never used it in 00.

 

Back when I started using 16.2mm ( I wonder if Martin can remember when that might have been, I can't) the two centre boards of Falcon Road were part of a much larger club layout (and still are). At that time the 'new age' RTR steam locos had BtB wheel measurements of down to 14.2/14.3 and either dropped terribly into the crossings or would not pass through the check rails of the copperclad track I had been building since 1969. It was 16.5 with about 1.25 flangeways. Some of these new steam locos had drivers on stub axles that were 'glued' into a centre plastic part with or without a gearwheel. For many Club members, and myself for that matter, it was a big ask for them to re-gauge these axles to the accepted 14.5mm BtB we used. If you've read my posts, you will remember that this difficulty of re-gauging was the nub of it. Before starting a new layout something had to be done and 16.2mm was the answer. I also wanted much better looking track with proper components and this had lead me to Exactoscale. As the new layout was to involved a lot of plain track in platforms, I was only prepared to build plain track for the front two lines and used Exactoscale 00 sleeper bases for tracks further from the eye(all alongside platmorms), as it was.  Dear oh dear, I remember now, This included gauge widening!! I can remember having to wait some months for the 00 version to be made available by Exactoscale. That will give some idea of the date this started.

 

16.2 cured the two problems in one go.

 

It also assisted in running my EMUs that used PC wheels. (remember them?)

 

So. 16.2 allows us to run a number of differing wheels without re-gauging 'new age' RtR stock and and using 14.5BtB on rollingstock with fine wheels

 

Here's some pictures of the layout that started it all for us.

 

Dave

 

Marshalsea Street1.jpg

 

 

Marshalsea Street2.jpg

 

 

Marshalsea Street3.jpg

 

 

Marshalsea Street4.jpg

 

 

On what you've said the date would be about 2000-1. The first "new age" steam engines from Hornby - the rebuilt MN and one or two others - came out with their "traditional" 13.9mm B2B, and would not run on BRMSB OO. Then very briefly Hornby moved to 14.1mm B2B , before settling on 14.5mm in about 2001/2. I remember a friend showing a small layout of his using Marcway at a club open day. A new Hornby Black 5 would not go through one of the points - he was assuming the B2B would need adjusting until someone suggested scraping our the flangeway with a jewellers' screwdriver . After that it ran...  That would be one of the 14.1mm B2B models , and neatly illustrates the issue of "manufacturing tolerances" on handbuilt pointwork and the risks of very tight flangeway clearances.

 

PC wheels are before my time, I'm afraid

 

One thing about this puzzles me slightly - if it won't go through BRMSB OO (check span 14.0mm) it shouldn't then go through OO-SF (check span 14.2mm).

 

(And both Martin and I are agreed that RP25/110 wheels on 1.25mm flangeways should not result in drop in . The NMRA think the same - their maximum flangway is 1.27mm . There's something else going on here - but I'm not sure quite what)

 

Comments about the stock on the layout were based on the photos posted in the Woking show thread - featuring , amongst other things, a Hornby 56 . A modern image layout will be running RTR locos (or at least RTR motor bogies) , most rolling stock will be RTR and the main range of airbraked wagon kits is Cambrian - with no wheels supplied. Parkside (Romfords) as a supplement. Unless locos had been rewheeled with Ultrascales or Gibson wheels chosen for the kits (and that would not have been the line of least resistance) , nothing on the layout should have had any trouble with traditional OO handbuilt track.

[Junctionmad]

Dave.

 

I've already posted on the subject of how to flair. See below to stat the discussion

 

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

................ The big question, of course is, do you move one rail .3mm or two rails each by .15mm. Personally, if I had to do this, I would move both rails on the point by 0.075 and both rails on the end of the RTR flex track inwards by the same amount. (Hope my maths hasn't let me down there).

 

Once again I reiterate; Why would anyone need an instruction on how to move a rail or rails .3mm. If they can build pointwork they don't need instructions.

 

This is, of course, complete and utter bo**ocks.

 

Or perhaps you are just winding us up like Ravenser loves to do.

 

Dave

I certainly would disagree with modifying plastic flexi track As its a kludge melting chairs and it produces a piece of flexi that can't be used elsewhere. I flair the 16.2 gauge to 16,5 at the entry and exit points of turnout formations, since I build, like many others , the formations on one template. Since I'm building the track, it's easy on both soldered and plastic on ply construction to use a 16.5 gauge to return the 16.2 gauge point work to 00 gauge within a sleeper length or two.

My point remains suitable for use in any future 16.5mm layout without further modification

Dave

Dave.

 

I've already posted on the subject of how to flair. See below to stat the discussion

 

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

................ The big question, of course is, do you move one rail .3mm or two rails each by .15mm. Personally, if I had to do this, I would move both rails on the point by 0.075 and both rails on the end of the RTR flex track inwards by the same amount. (Hope my maths hasn't let me down there).

 

Once again I reiterate; Why would anyone need an instruction on how to move a rail or rails .3mm. If they can build pointwork they don't need instructions.

 

This is, of course, complete and utter bo**ocks.

 

Or perhaps you are just winding us up like Ravenser loves to do.

 

Dave

I certainly would disagree with modifying plastic flexi track As its a kludge melting chairs and it produces a piece of flexi that can't be used elsewhere. I flair the 16.2 gauge to 16,5 at the entry and exit points of turnout formations, since I build, like many others , the formations on one template. Since I'm building the track, it's easy on both soldered and plastic on ply construction to use a 16.5 gauge to return the 16.2 gauge point work to 00 gauge within a sleeper length or two.

My point remains suitable for use in any future 16.5mm layout without further modification

Dave

[Ravenser]

Ravenser.

 

I respectfully refer you to my topic'

Why should I not choose 00-SF'

in which I invited you and anyone else to answer the question posed in the title.

 

No one came up with a sensible( with respect to those that tried) answer.  You don't even seem to have had a go!

 

Dave

 

The OP question was asked in obvious bad faith (as Grovenor picked up) , the thread was essentially without factual content, you had previously said openly that you were looking to confront me, and you had also stated that you wouldn't read anything I posted. The moderators don't like fighting, and that was simply an invitation to a bunfight on your preferred ground. Another dissenter had already been moderated off track topics

 

I'm not quite foolish enough to walk into a trap with so many warning signs

[Junctionmad]

Dave.

 

I've already posted on the subject of how to flair. See below to stat the discussion

 

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

................ The big question, of course is, do you move one rail .3mm or two rails each by .15mm. Personally, if I had to do this, I would move both rails on the point by 0.075 and both rails on the end of the RTR flex track inwards by the same amount. (Hope my maths hasn't let me down there).

 

Once again I reiterate; Why would anyone need an instruction on how to move a rail or rails .3mm. If they can build pointwork they don't need instructions.

 

This is, of course, complete and utter bo**ocks.

 

Or perhaps you are just winding us up like Ravenser loves to do.

 

Dave

Martin has warned of the potential risks in variable gauge construction.

I have mentioned that flaring should be done at the exit and entry tracks of formations. I would advise against doing do within the body of the point

 

Hence a few guidance notes might help a newbie not make an error

[gordon s]

I'm not looking to confront you and I do read everything you post on this subject.  I have no wish to pick a fight with you and you may have picked up I'm close to quitting RMweb because I'm fed up to the back teeth with the arguments/discussions on this particular subject.  

 

When I started my ET thread so many years ago, I did it as a diary of the trials and tribulations of building a reasonable size layout.  I'm not an expert, far from it so what the readers got was a warts and all account of someone trying to build their boyhood dream.  It was not without numerous disasters and indeed I scrapped several attempts much to the amazement of some.  I struggled with numerous challenges and went through the doldrums that we all experience as a lone modeller.

 

I started building ET in DOGA Fine and then moved onto DOGA Intermediate.  Eventually I read about 00-SF from Martin and then started again.  I fully recognise we have the choice of DOGA standards and have no argument with anyone wanting to build to to those standards.  I just happen to have chosen 00-SF as it suited me.

 

All I'm asking is why is that a bad choice?  

 

Nothing more, nothing less.  

 

My modelling urges are slowly returning and I'm already playing around with some ideas based on previous experience.  Some new pointwork will need to be built and my question is a serious one.

 

If there is a reason not to continue building in 00-SF please tell me.  Whatever I do isn't going to change the world or impact DOGA in any way shape or form.

 

It is clear you are far more knowledgeable than I, so please give me the benefit of your experience.  

 

If you want to do that confidentially by PM, please feel free.  

Edited September 27, 2015 by gordon s

[martin_wynne]

Well, DOGA Fine makes you re-gauge all your wheels for a start.!

 

I recall that was the problem you had when you first asked me about the 00-SF setting which you had found in Templot. You were using C&L 00 gauges (which are for DOGA Fine) but didn't think it was reasonable to ask your club members to widen back-to-backs on all their stock.

 

You do realise that this commotion on RMweb is entirely your fault? 00-SF might even now be hiding unknown and unloved on the Templot gauge list, but for you!

 

Or maybe we should blame Brian Lewis at C&L, for selling folks DOGA-Fine gauges without telling them.

 

I'm fearful about what other settings on the list might be about to burst into fire. I have now hastily removed American 19mm 00, just in case.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[polybear]

I'm fearful about what other settings on the list might be about to burst into fire. I have now hastily removed American 19mm 00, just in case.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

Funny you should say that Martin.  I have noticed there's an option for 0-SF.  Should this not be 7-SF?

Regards,

Brian

[polybear]

Well it's more then that 00-SF moniker was created by Martin and he has decided to undo it. Hence we can use that moniker to represent anything we like now

Ah, but Martin has only changed it within Templot.  So my forthcoming layout should be 4-SF when it exists in the Templot virtual world of a pile of 1's and 0's, magically transforming to 00-SF when it's a stack of copperclad and C&L Code 75.........  

[hayfield]

Just back from a very pleasant four hours in the sunshine with my golfing friends and I see the discussion continues.  Just to support Martin's post above, I asked Ravenser 20 days ago to tell me any reasons not to use 00-SF as an option for RTR and kit built stock.

 

We all know there are several options open to those who choose to build their own track to run 00 locos and stock.  There is certainly DOGA Fine and Intermediate and I have no problem recognising those are valid options.  

 

00-SF is also an option and each have their own advantages and disadvantages.

 

I happen to have chosen 00-SF as I felt it answered my needs.  Others may choose DOGA standards.  That is their choice and I certainly have no problem with that.

 

Twenty days ago, I asked Ravenser for any reasons not to use 00-SF as one of the options available to those who wish to build their own track.  No answer was forthcoming, but now he has plenty of time to think about it, so I would like to pose the question again.

 

Please tell me any reason not to use 00-SF?  What do DOGA Fine and Intermediate do that 00-SF doesn't?

 

You've had plenty of time to think about it, so please tell me before I embark on another round of hand building 70+ turnouts.

 

I'm all ears…..

 

Screen Shot 2015-09-27 at 16.09.53.png

 

Gordon

 

Don't hold your breath !! In the days gone by when I used to sell cameras and hifi equipment we would call his type TW's ( "time wasters") and as salesmen would try and get rid of them as quickly as possible.What has he added to anyone's knowledge to date. Have you learnt anything new ? I certanly have not

 

Now what have you achieved to date, given plenty of food for thought, not only with your track building skills, baseboard construction, setting the scene and most of all enjoying yourself modelling.

 

He seems to already put one person off track building with a very negative input. I for one and I think you are much the same do not care if someone models in 00/P4/EM or any other scale/gauge combination or variants of. with my workbench thread like your ET thread if asked a question I try and be as helpful as possible. If they use different methods to the ones I use then I normally learn something. Thankfully most of RMweb's members are much the same, wanting to encourage others. If he upsets you just ignore him. By the way how's the golf ?

[martin_wynne]

Funny you should say that Martin.  I have noticed there's an option for 0-SF.  Should this not be 7-SF?

 

It will be if I get any grief about it!

 

I'm not expecting any -- 0 Gauge modellers are much more easy-going about such matters. That's why there is only one Gauge 0 Guild for all the 7mm gauges. They prefer to expend their energies arguing about committee members expenses.

 

0-SF is actually the Guild Technical Dept's preferred sub-32mm option. No-one actually uses it, they all prefer 0-MF.

 

I should perhaps remove 0-XF because that one doesn't actually work, even though C&L sell gauges for it -- another legacy from the previous owner.

 

Martin.

[hayfield]

Dave.

 

I've already posted on the subject of how to flair. See below to stat the discussion

 

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

................ The big question, of course is, do you move one rail .3mm or two rails each by .15mm. Personally, if I had to do this, I would move both rails on the point by 0.075 and both rails on the end of the RTR flex track inwards by the same amount. (Hope my maths hasn't let me down there).

 

Once again I reiterate; Why would anyone need an instruction on how to move a rail or rails .3mm. If they can build pointwork they don't need instructions.

 

This is, of course, complete and utter bo**ocks.

 

Or perhaps you are just winding us up like Ravenser loves to do.

 

Dave

 

 

I thought flares went out in the early 70's !!