Dunmar Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 Hi, For my latest layout I have opted for Seep point motors with the built in switch and they are fitted to Code 75 'Electrofrog' points. Why did I use them? My local club seem to favour them for there layouts! However, I have noticed that a lot of layouts featured on the site seem to favour Peco! It's purely down to choice - or is it? Bill. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 I just don't understand why people bother with either of them when there has always been available the far superior Tortoise and now the also ran Cobalts and TT3000. For solenoids to operate well they require a CDU Peco's solenoids require the addition the the remarkably unreliable switches for the frog polarity and the Seep "on board" switch has a bit of an issue (though nowhere near as bad) The one (actually two) that comes with a Tortoise are excellent. Also the Tortoise requires only a single wire to fire it. Peco and Seep both require two and must be driven with a (on)-off-(on) momentary contact switch. Oh and they are both clunky. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted April 18, 2011 Share Posted April 18, 2011 Peco and Seep are both considerably cheaper than the more sophisticated point motors. Perhaps you could argue it is a false econmy but when you have a large number of points to motorise the difference can buy several locos. I have gone with Peco on my current layout for 2 reasons. Firstly I had a whole bunch left over from a previous project (waste not, want not). Secondly they do have the advantage that they clip to Peco points to ensure a positive throw. I found in previous layouts that trying to align the point motors with the points through the board was incredibly difficult. I have seen people resort to templates, protractors and all sorts of complicated solutions to what should be a simple problem. In the past I found that even with the best effort I could only get about half my points to reliably throw in both directions through 12mm of baseboard. For that reason I have gone with attaching directly to the points, even if it does mean drilling out large holes in the baseboard for the motors. Now if only Peco could be persuaded to supply pre-cut plasticard collars to cover the holes with, life would be peachy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunmar Posted April 18, 2011 Author Share Posted April 18, 2011 Hi, My sentiments entirely! Whilst I am now happy with the operation of the point motors it's been the wiring of the dammn things that's held me up! I have had to solder every connection to accomodate the 'change of polarity' and if I had known the bother I was to have encountered I would have thought again! I am aware of the other makes but seroiusly there wasn't much evidence of them being used as frequently? Bill. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold kipford Posted April 18, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18, 2011 I would go with SEEP any time as they are much easier to mount than the Peco units. I used then for 10 years on an exhibition layout and apart from needing a good CDU, they never missed a beat and never had to replace any (I did the only Peco unit on the layout!!!). What do I use now - Cheap Servos with ESU Switch Pilot Servos to drive them. The ESU units allow both with analogue (mimic panel) and digital control at the same time. If you are prepared to a bit of work, then you get a TOU that has easy to set electronic end stops with a variable throw speed. They work about £8 a point twice price of a SEEP, but two thirds the price of a Tortoise and a lot cheaper than a Cobalt or TT3000. you pays your money etc.............. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattog Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Seep over Peco hands down. Have both on my layout and Seep are much easier to install and with the built in switch are more economical. I'm sure Tortoise switches are better but they're expensive and bulky. Cobalt from my fellow countryman here in Australia would be the better option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Peco and Seep are both considerably cheaper than the more sophisticated point motors. Perhaps you could argue it is a false econmy but when you have a large number of points to motorise the difference can buy several locos. A bit of a long standing myth that one. By the time you factor in the cost of switches and then add the time and reliability (or lack of) on the cheaper alternatives. Then you have the fact that the Tortoises have been shown to be so reliable and virtually indestructible (the others may well be - time will tell) Add to that the serious additional cost if you are going DCC that the TT3000 is already built in. Of course it always comes down to what cheap really means to you and what the savings of a few pennies really gives you in terms of operational pleasure. I would much rather spend a few pennies extra on something that is going to work reliably and be totally trouble free and easy to install that spending hours of frustration fault finding and fixing under the baseboard just to have yet another RTR loco or pint of beer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 If the up-front motor cost figures heavily, another alternative is the Fulgurex motor, the drive from which is double ended; so for a little extra work when installed will drive a pair of points in crossover formation for the same price as a pair of solenoid motors. The benefit continues: that's half the number of connections and items of control kit as well for every pair of points; it all adds up if you are trying to keep to a modest budget. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I would much rather spend a few pennies extra on something that is going to work reliably and be totally trouble free and easy to install that spending hours of frustration fault finding and fixing under the baseboard just to have yet another RTR loco or pint of beer. But that is the point. I find the physical alignment to be the troublesome area with point motors. This is the advantage of pecos from my point of view. I prefer to be able to just clip them on and know they are correctly aligned. On my previous layout I spent a long time fiddling with the point motor mountings to try and get them exactly perpendicular to the points (on the other side of the board) and exactly half way along so that they would throw reliably in both directions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 If the up-front motor cost figures heavily, another alternative is the Fulgurex motor... I'll admit they do have some benefits as you suggest, but they are not that much cheaper than a Tortoise or Cobalt. They do require you to construct some sort of actuating crank mechanism and are very noisy, even if run on a lower voltage. Also, the plastic mountings of the switch mechanism are easy to melt and require some nifty soldering. Mine have been consigned to the spares bin in the hope that one day I'll find a use for them... But that is the point. I find the physical alignment to be the troublesome area with point motors... With the Tortoise or Cobalt, the spring steel actuating wire is much more tolerant of slight misalignments than the solid pins of the solenoid motors, or even the TT300. However, I've not had any problems aligning the TT300s that I've recently fitted*. One tip here is to ensure that the dropper wires from the stock rails are arranged symmetrically. That way you have a clear guide from underneath the board to help when aligning the motor. Nick * I do have one that doesn't work properly and needs to go back, but that's another story. The other six work very well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted April 19, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 19, 2011 IMHO First: Seeps are easier to fit than Peco. I don't have a problem aligning them through the baseboard! Second: Seeps and microswitches are easily cheaper than Tortoise Three: Seeps and Microswitches and DCC control are as cheap as a Tortoise without. Why do I have this opinion? For control of about 40 points: Seep PM1 £3.50 - £3.75 each in bulk (various sources, bought in 2010) (Proper) Microswitches £0.45 each in bulk (2010) DCC control per switch £6.66 using LS150s (LS150s at £40 average, bought 2009/2010) - have gone up recently. others could be cheaper. The argument that a Seep plus all it's 'extras' costs as much as a Tortoise does not hold water. I have also a couple of TT300s and would choose them for any extra isolated points that need controlling (I notice the recommended price has gone up by £2.50 recently - why such a steep increase?) Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzie Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I find the Peco much easier to mount and align correctly than the Seeps, and you can use the superior PL15 switch on the Peco which is much better than the Seep built in one. The slow motions are probably easier to install and wire, and Servos are cheaper if you make your own controller, but Peco and Hornby motors are all I have ever seen for sale in a model shop which is why they are probably the most popular. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunmar Posted April 19, 2011 Author Share Posted April 19, 2011 Hi, Certainly a lot of interesting views on this subject- so really it boils down to the individuals choice, cost- size- ease of fit- etc. For myself I previously used the 'rod in tube method'- now not a lot can go wrong there? This was the first time I had used point motors and electrofrog points together and despite the various books available I for one found it really difficult to comprehend. Glad to say the amount of help I have received from the forum has been amazing- so many willing helpers to dig you out! Much appreciated Bill. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 On my latest layout I built my baseboards to accommodate Tortoise point motors. No sooner had I built the baseboards that I started being plagued with back problems - sciatica, 3 epidurals later it's still present, so I dropped the idea of Tortoise for top mounted Peco (PL10 & PL11's) operated with my own operating mechanisms - no problem. ps I've heard the PL15 called my things - but superior - that's a first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted April 19, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 19, 2011 Personal experience is that Peco are bombproof, Seep aren't. The coils on the Seep units are held to the PCB with plastic lugs that break. Dagworth has 24 Peco units and I've only ever had one fail on me and that was a wiring error on my part that led to the coil cooking, whereas I've seen multiple Seep motors fall to bits at critical moments. Also the Seep ones are a ###### to get lined up accurately for the switches, unless the motor hits both ends of its travel the switch ends up in the dead spot in the middle, whereas the Peco switch fits on the opposite side of the motor allowing it a bit more play as well as a smaller dead spot. The Peco switch can also be replaced without removing the motor from the layout., the Seep one can't. I've never had a Peco switch fail on me. Peco I'd recommend, Seep I wouldn't touch with a bargepole. (though neither are a patch on slow action machines such as the Tortoise) Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted April 19, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 19, 2011 If using Peco points, then it's Peco motors every time, because they can be directly clipped to the point base. If anyone worries about the large hole required, then that's no problem. Before you clip the motor to the point, cut a piece of paper (ideally brown), larger then the hole and fix the motor to the point, trapping the paper between the motor and the point. Using the tabs of the motor housing to press through the paper. Move the point motor back and forth a couple of times to create a slot in the paper for the actuating rod. Then lay the track and lightly glue the edges of the paper down. et voila - a continuous trackbed that you can lay ballast on. I've used this method since 1982......... and if electricnose was up and running, I could point you to pics of it. I've also fitted the PL15 microswitch. Seeps were removed from one of our club layouts in favour of Peco. The only Peco faults I've had were an actauting bar snapping, and one falling out completely. If I want slow action, then Tortoise is my preferred choice, although the Cobalt may be evaluated for the next layout. Cheers, Mick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzie Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 ...ps I've heard the PL15 called my things - but superior - that's a first. The Peco PL13 is very prone to going open circuit because it gets dirty very easily and has to be dismantled regularly to clean the contacts, and even then it can still be very unreliable. The Seep switch has a very big dead section in the middle which can make alignment difficult as discussed above. The Peco PL15 on the other hand is a pair of microswitches with very reliable contacts. You can use a single one with a guaranteed no dead spot, or you can use a pair and accurately adjust the dead spot if you require one (e.g. when using the short 'y' point that has no links to cut). I am sure that you will see the PL15 described as superior many more times in the future. It is a well thought out product like the Peco passing contact switch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted April 20, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 20, 2011 Also the Seep ones are a ###### to get lined up accurately for the switches, unless the motor hits both ends of its travel the switch ends up in the dead spot in the middle, whereas the Peco switch fits on the opposite side of the motor allowing it a bit more play as well as a smaller dead spot. The Peco switch can also be replaced without removing the motor from the layout., the Seep one can't. I've never had a Peco switch fail on me. Andi If you use separate proper microswitches mounted below the Seep, alignment is a doddle and any failures (unlikely with proper switches) can be replaced without touching the solenoids. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Seep cheap? most certainly. Peco cheap? errr no ! - total myth. example..... ..£5.65 - PL10 or 10E switch machine +£7.30 - PL15 twin microswitch =£12.95 (using Antics as a typical High st. price) - or £10.50 (Hattons discount price) Use the better PL10W or WE version and those prices are £14.04 (Antics) and £11.00 (Hattons) Don't forget to factor in the cost of a CDU either. For comparison... Tortoise - £13.30 or £12.50 each in packs of 6 (Bromsgrove models). - n.b. there are still ways of getting them for less than that. Whenever this old Chestnut comes up, I've always said that cheaper doesn't mean better and in the main you get what you pay for. Comparing the price of Seep switch machines and proper point motors like Cobalt, Tortoise etc, isn't an equal comparison IMHO. Of course the main reason for choosing proper motors like Cobalt, Tortoise, TT300 etc, is that if you have solenoids, everybody will point and snigger at you. Just like the bloke in a Tank-Top and open-toe sandals at a disco (Oops! some railway modellers will probably think that's cool?) I'm only joking of course! More seriously though, with their awful toy-like SNAP! solenoids are an anachronism IMHO. A hang over from the days of Dublo and tin plate toys. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Yeah right, but sorry, instead of the Peco PL15 microswitch why not use a bog standard NTE with lever,priced at about a quid each from decent electronics suppliers. If you use the 'electric pencil' type of switching system, you don't need a CDU. Yes Tortoise point motors are the best, have used them for years, but now I need surface mounted point operation because of a bad back. As;- Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karhedron Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 instead of the Peco PL15 microswitch why not use a bog standard NTE with lever Sorry but what does NTE stand for? If they cost that much less than PL15s I might take a look at them. If you use the 'electric pencil' type of switching system, you don't need a CDU. Why is that? I thought a CDU was a good idea regardless of the trigger. Whilst a pencil and stud is not likely to stick and melt a coil, surely a good boost to the current is a good idea? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Has anyone a picture of how to fix seperate microswitches to the underneath of the baseboard when using Peco points. I use Seep as i have found Peco to be bulky and a pain due to the hole cutting required. Never had a problem with lining up Seeps . I tried to use a Peco switch with microswitches and gave up as i couldnt get it too work awful design and very overpriced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RedgateModels Posted April 21, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 21, 2011 How's this Mick? They are the long lever types commonly sold as anti-tamper switches (about £2.60 each from Maplins). The lever acts off the drive pin. The long lever makes for easy adjustment Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Sorry but what does NTE stand for? If they cost that much less than PL15s I might take a look at them. Why is that? I thought a CDU was a good idea regardless of the trigger. Whilst a pencil and stud is not likely to stick and melt a coil, surely a good boost to the current is a good idea? NTE is the brand, or manufacturer, the initials are printed on the casing, you can get them from Expo, Radio Spares, Squires etc. The electric pencil method means just a quick prod on the required control panel terminal of the point you want to change, one at a time. If correctly installed 16vac is sufficient to fire a Peco point motor easily enough, if set up correctly. It's the system I had on Bembridge, my old exhibition layout, 15 years of trouble free operation - well apart from a power supply failure, and it's still going strong with another owner.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 How's this Mick? They are the long lever types commonly sold as anti-tamper switches (about £2.60 each from Maplins). The lever acts off the drive pin. The long lever makes for easy adjustment Sorry I meant to say when using Seep motors . Thanks for the picture, very interesting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.