Frank
Full Member
Pulling for you!
Posts: 248
|
Post by Frank on Aug 15, 2022 15:08:29 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. Donnell This is just plain wrong, as others have stated in this thread. I'll chime in that ME and CV+DW switches support an .088 fleet flawlessly. I second this. The CV-DW combo was the choice I made for a small switching layout before.. Most of my cars used the semi scale wheels and performed just fine. I did not change the wheels on my locomotives and I am sure they are not semi scale, yet they too did just fine.
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Aug 16, 2022 2:48:38 GMT -8
... manufacturers have to give us the parts option, and SXT refuses to do so. And they're the only ones that you can't "get there from here." I had a recent email exchange with them and now that they have some more people on staff they're looking at doing this again. I'm still extremely hopefully that they will eventually make them available.
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Aug 16, 2022 2:51:05 GMT -8
... locomotive wheelsets ... seems to be an undeserved market. I hope you meant unde rserved and not undeserved.
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Aug 16, 2022 5:15:27 GMT -8
When other folks make a lot of the same cars maybe it's easier to just buy the whole thing from someone else.
|
|
|
Post by sd40dash2 on Oct 17, 2023 9:54:29 GMT -8
OK just over a year later, have things changed? It would be nice if our hobby progressed to the point where we have Kadee 158 couplers (with no trip pins) and semi-scale wheels on RTR cars and parts trucks by default.
It does kind of suck having to buy trucks with $ metal wheels you know will have to be changed out straight away. Not only is it a waste of money for the customer but some of us are starting to have a growing stock of overscale wheels and #5 couplers on hand. Surely there are already a lot of these for sale on the 2nd hand market but it would be nice if we weren't forced to buy them in the first place.
Feel free to offer rebuttal if most hobbyists still disagree.
|
|
|
Post by middledivision on Oct 17, 2023 12:24:39 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. Donnell This.
|
|
|
Post by grahamline on Oct 17, 2023 12:40:57 GMT -8
... It does kind of suck having to buy trucks with $ metal wheels you know will have to be changed out straight away. Not only is it a waste of money for the customer but some of us are starting to have a growing stock of overscale wheels and #5 couplers on hand. We sort of escape this issue by buying bulk packs of trucks from Accurail , and pairing them with aftermarket wheelsets. Unfortunately, Accurail has limited variety. If there are swap meets in your area, surplus couplers and wheelsets are very easy to sell -- assuming you can move enough to pay the cost of a table. We have no trouble with 88 wheels on Fast Tracks and Micro Engineering track switches. The newest Walthers switches might be worth exploring but we have not used any.
|
|
|
Post by cemr5396 on Oct 17, 2023 13:19:26 GMT -8
It would be nice if our hobby progressed to the point where we have Kadee 158 couplers (with no trip pins) and semi-scale wheels on RTR cars and parts trucks by default. yes to the first point, but the second is never going to happen, nor do I think it necessarily should. There are a lot of people (IMO) who are far more interested in operating and switching than there are in having show piece models. The ability to magnetically uncouple should not be overlooked, when the alternative is reaching over active tracks to spot a car at an industry along the back of the layout. For the people that don't want them.... it takes 1 second to snip it off with a Xuron rail cutter. I've done it to a lot of my locomotives and cabooses, but the ones on the freight cars are staying. As for the third point..... yeah that is never happening either. A lot of (most?) modelers don't build good enough track to run trains with code 88 wheels on, and quite frankly none of the manufacturers are interested in being the one to take all the crap from those modelers because "your cars won't run". It happened to Athearn 20 years ago or whenever that was with the Genesis cars and it will happen again if someone tries it again.
|
|
|
Post by hudsonyard on Oct 17, 2023 14:54:41 GMT -8
god i hate uncoupling magnets, they are a relic from a different time in model railroad operations and design, if you cannot reach a car by hand comfortably there shouldn't be an industry there. a friend in a local operating group has them throughout his 18" deep layout and i think once a session i will make a cut that i don't want to because i forgot where the Boomer Magnet is on a yard track or industry. a simple cut down bamboo skewer with the tip coated in graphite is all you need.
I thought about using code 88 wheels when I first begun building my car fleet up, then i realized that the only place i could get any run time or testing on them is the club, the idea went away very quickly.
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Oct 17, 2023 14:58:18 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. Donnell This.
Have to start somewhere or we'd still be horn-hookin'.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Oct 17, 2023 15:24:55 GMT -8
My position on this is that it's largely related to commercial frogs. Typical commercial turnouts in HO allow at least some bouncing across the flangeways with code 88 wheels that tends to be absent with code 110. Most of us with large layouts have a lot of commercial turnouts that would be difficult and/or costly to retrofit so that code 88 wheelsets operate with no wobble to destroy the realism. For my own purposes, watching cars with semi-scale wheelsets exhibiting toy-like motion through turnouts, even if it's slight, negates any visual advantage from the narrower wheel treads. I'll also note that most viewing of cars on a layout tends to occur from the side, where wheel width is far less apparent than from the end. Were I a contest modeler I might think differently. I have no derailment issues with code 88 wheelsets, so I don't usually replace them, but there you have it - I prefer code 110, but won't refuse to purchase a car or a set of trucks if equipped otherwise. If manufacturers cooperated with better turnouts, I'd wager that acceptance of code 88 would gradually increase as older layouts aged out, and more serious modelers started replacing turnouts (as I would). I'm with Rob on this.
|
|
|
Post by prr 4467 on Oct 17, 2023 20:00:31 GMT -8
I just voted yes. I have very ordinary Code 83 Kato Unitrack, glued down into position. In parts of the railroad, it has been relaid with wider radius curves through the years. That means my track is not all dead perfectly level in the areas where curves were relaid, and the joints are not all perfect, and there are more joints than would be the case if I had used flextrack everywhere. Turnouts are Kato #8.
I have some Code 88 rolling stock. It performs equally well for me on my imperfect trackwork as any of the standard wheelsets. I don't have any problems.
The problems I do have are where I used the Kato superelevated track and the surface to which the track is now glued was not perfectly even, so there are a few loco issues with that, due to the effective rate of cross slope transition being too fast. However, code 88 wheelsets have no problems there--it is some locos that have limited lateral and vertical movement in their trucks. All loco wheels need to evenly touch a pane of glass. On those locos where they don't I might have issues. Typically one can twist the loco truck a bit to get all the wheels touching the glass.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Oct 18, 2023 3:39:08 GMT -8
I just voted yes. I have very ordinary Code 100 Kato Unitrack, glued down into position. Isn't HO KATO Unitrack code 83?
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Oct 18, 2023 4:38:09 GMT -8
a simple cut down bamboo skewer with the tip coated in graphite is all you need. I'm thinking more along the lines of something resembling a real-life brake stick shrunk down to a size that would work on HO size trains....
|
|
|
Post by prr 4467 on Oct 18, 2023 5:29:59 GMT -8
I just voted yes. I have very ordinary Code 100 Kato Unitrack, glued down into position. Isn't HO KATO Unitrack code 83? My mistake. I always thought it was Code 100. After I checked online, it appears that it actually is Code 83. Sorry for the misinformation.
|
|
|
Post by columbusrrfan on Oct 18, 2023 13:25:58 GMT -8
Does anyone here have experience running code 88 wheels on the new Walthers track and turnouts? Do the wheels perform more reliably/ realistically on this track? Any comments? Thanks! Jack Mougin
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Oct 25, 2023 11:52:53 GMT -8
Does anyone here have experience running code 88 wheels on the new Walthers track and turnouts? Do the wheels perform more reliably/ realistically on this track? Any comments? Thanks! Jack Mougin They drop in the frog, at least on the 8s and 10s. Some styrene inserts fixes that problem in short time, however. The bigger problem with those switches are their guardrail and frog wings that are 25 carlengths long. The designer had obviously never laid eyes on a real switch in their lives. It's pretty ridiculous that the hobby has advanced to where the equipment looks and operates like it does, but the only regularly-usable switch one can take right out of package that is aesthetically and operationally compatible with our excellent equipment is a Micro Engineering #6. End of list. Name one item the proto modeler (who runs their trains) needs more than a Micro Engineering (or equivalent) #8, #9, and/or #10 switch. The CVs build up beautifully with the cast frog of your choice, but if you're trying to build a layout much bigger than a shelf switcher, those become a time suck liability very quickly. (I'm using the Walthers where their ridiculous appearance isn't visible.)
|
|
|
Post by trainguy99 on Oct 25, 2023 13:01:00 GMT -8
Here's a little context re modern turnouts. UP #8UP #10Personally I would like the guardrails on the Walthers turnouts one tie shorter past the frog, but I'll live with that to get good operation. A little paint makes a difference too. Maybe some clever person will offer 3D printed inserts.
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Oct 26, 2023 2:40:39 GMT -8
Those are really neat. Particularly the bills of materials. One thing I noticed that was new to me is that the width and thickness of the ties are greater under the frog.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrianick on Oct 26, 2023 14:06:22 GMT -8
if you cannot reach a car by hand comfortably there shouldn't be an industry there. OK, but that's not the driving factor for a lot of people. I prefer to use magnets because I don't want to reach into the scene, no matter if it is 2 inches or 20 inches.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 26, 2023 15:28:55 GMT -8
I view myself as a Very Large Brakeman.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 26, 2023 15:30:40 GMT -8
While most of us view these turnout sizes as main line switches, the prototypes are used in yard service. So you're looking at drawings of yard and industrial trackage. Ed
|
|
|
Post by bridge2nowhere on Oct 26, 2023 17:50:04 GMT -8
The #8 is a yard or industry turnout. The #10 is a mainline turnout for serving an industry or other low speed track off the mainline. Note the spring or jump frog options, along with the heavier construction, not really needed in a yard.
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Oct 26, 2023 20:02:51 GMT -8
While most of us view these turnout sizes as main line switches, the prototypes are used in yard service. So you're looking at drawings of yard and industrial trackage. Ed
That's too much of a generalization. There's no reason the diverging leg of a #10 can't be on the main, it will just result in a greater speed reduction. Real estate and budgets for trackwork are finite, not every railroad operates in a geographic or financial world like UP in Nebraska year 2023. Urban areas will often have sharper curves and turnouts on the main because there's literally no room. In the past lower # frogs were more common. It always involves trade-offs between land costs, ROW construction costs, value of train speed thru turnout, etc...
Even today some yard and industrial frogs are as sharp as #5s. Street railways & transit even less.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 27, 2023 5:28:03 GMT -8
|
|