Scaleseven and WT

[Dog Star]

...Whether to permanently widen the track by 0.3/0.4 mm or something else is a difficult one to answer as it immediately will cause others to say but you are not true scale if you lay straight track at 33.3/4mm. This is a circular conundrum ....

In the last year or so I have built S7 track for the following:-

* LNWR 30' rails with 10 sleepers per length;
* LNWR 60' rails with 20 to 24 sleepers per length;
* Met Rly with 30' rails and 11 sleepers per length;
* GWR 32' rails with 13 sleepers per length;
* GWR 44'6" rails with 18 sleepers per length.

And the point is?

Blow the discussion about gauge widening, which of those five different rail / sleeper arrangements is going to be offered in flexible, ready to lay, track? Noting that none of the above works as a simple mulitplier to one length of RTR track.

Whatever you offer as RTR S7 flexible track, with or without gauge widening, a fair proportion of potential customers are likely to be disappointed if prototype fidelity is an important criteria.

regards, Graham

 

[john lewsey]

Please correct me if I'm wrong but when scale severn was adopted the guage was rounded up to 33mm some of Bob Esserys friends actually work to exact scale and he was telling me that he was pleased that their models ran on his layout ok

 

[Dog Star]

The difference between exact 7mm scale for a gauge of 4' 8 1/2" and what is used by the S7 Standards, 33mm, is less than 1/16" in prototype terms... which is significantly less than the variation in adopted RF-RF dimensions within this country.

regards, Graham

 

[john lewsey]

Hi graham I'm glad you cleared that up .I somehow new that you would answer it

 

[Wagonman]

In the last year or so I have built S7 track for the following:-

* LNWR 30' rails with 10 sleepers per length;
* LNWR 60' rails with 20 sleepers per length (and no joint sleepers);
* Met Rly with 30' rails and 11 sleepers per length;
* GWR 32' rails with 13 sleepers per length;
* GWR 44'6" rails with 18 sleepers per length.

And the point is?

Blow the discussion about gauge widening, which of those five different rail / sleeper arrangements is going to be offered in flexible, ready to lay, track? Noting, if necessary to say, that none of the above works as a simple mulitplier to one length of RTR track.

Whatever you offer as RTR S7 flexible track, with or without gauge widening, a fair proportion of potential customers are likely to be disappointed.

regards, Graham (PW S&C and bone)

Quite so Graham. The whole point of working to S7 is to get your models as accurate as possible. Ready-to-plonk metre lengths of flexi-track would be a hindrance, not a help.

Richard

PS: it would probably have the wrong chairs too....

 

[Wagonman]

If you do build your own track the MINT Gauge (solid brass one) gives you automatic gauge widening into any curve. The three point gauge will also do it but some claim not so successfully. S7 MINT Gauge available from S7 Stores and shortly there will be a write up on it on the website.
Rob (without his hat on)

How about a short write up about the MINT gauge and how it works for the Newsletter? Please.


Richard

 

[john lewsey]

I think that there is a possible case for flexi track it is used on quite a few scale four layouts it's not for me but I can see that it might possibly attract people but I'm not sure that enough people would buy it to make it economic to manufacture

 

[BrushType4]

You'll never produce s7 RTR flexi track that is right for everyone, but instead of producing flexi track in metre lengths, why not produce the just the webs so that people can slide on to own track?

Produce two types to start, 33mm and 33.4 to accommodate straight and a degree of gauge widening on curves.

Go for a BR/LNER chair and produce further variants, if sales/demand is really there. I expect most people in the market for S7 RTR track will be flexible on 100% chair authenticity so long as the trains run.

Just my pence worth.

For myself on my KX layout, ill be using C+L track cut and widened. The gap will be filled over with ballast and ash anyways.

 

[ZiderHead]

I dont see how it could be a hindrance, no one would be forced to use flexitrack on their layouts. It strikes me that if you want accurately modelled train lengths, speeds and acceleration/deceleration as well as the rolling stock and display sections of a 7mm layout you have to have a lot of track, which usually means taking it outside.

I only brought it up because I'm starting out in 7mm and my instinct was to go S7 because the wheels and pointwork look and work better, and the engineer in me would be happier if he knew everything was properly to scale. Since I want to set up in the garden at some point I cant model S7 because handbuilding 100m of track as well as the other work is just not realistic.

 

[BrushType4]

I dont see how it could be a hindrance, no one would be forced to use flexitrack on their layouts. It strikes me that if you want accurately modelled train lengths, speeds and acceleration/deceleration as well as the rolling stock and display sections of a 7mm layout you have to have a lot of track, which usually means taking it outside.

I only brought it up because I'm starting out in 7mm and my instinct was to go S7 because the wheels and pointwork look and work better, and the engineer in me would be happier if he knew everything was properly to scale. Since I want to set up in the garden at some point I cant model S7 because handbuilding 100m of track as well as the other work is just not realistic.

Don't let perfect get in the way of better... You could reprofile your wheels to S7 but keep to a 32mm gauge with narrowing on the point work to 31.5mm. A kinda miss mash, but you get better looking track and wheels but you get over the hand building of hundreds of metres of track...

 

[ZiderHead]

hehe thats pretty much what I've decided on: O-FS wheels and 31.5mm pointwork. Is that called MF with the smaller guide rail gap? Ive seen some and it looks a big improvement despite being even narrower. I understand theres a lady in ?Abingdon that has machined up some roller guides for it.

 

[S7BcSR]

Richard

Be patient!! The MINT write up and drawings are done as is one for a radius gauge. You will get them in time for the next newsletter.

Rob

 

[S7BcSR]

Ziderhead

I can't see O-FS wheels satisfying the engineer in you. Why not, as Phil suggested, use S7 wheel profile but with FS b-b.

I am now waiting for the firing squad from all angles.

Rob

 

[ZiderHead]

Interesting, will S7 profile wheels with FS b2b run ok on straightish sections of 32mm track? And how much does it cost to have wheels reprofiled?

 

[Overseer]

Ziderhead

Not sure what your prototype is but I find with building smaller steam locos particularly the scale back to back distance combined with scale profile wheels makes it far easier to build models which capture the character of the prototype. I think you may become dissatisfied over time with the compromises which follow from using mismatched gauge/clearances/wheels. Personally I would recommend using Scale7 standards, particularly as you don't have lots of stock to convert. More and more wheels are becoming available off the shelf. Flexible track may not be available now but it is perfectly feasible to have short lengths of sleeper bases with chairs tooled up and moulded, as has been done by the 2mm Scale Association. Threading rail is quick and undemanding work. Why not get involved and instigate the production of S7 track with the S7 Group?

Fraser

 

[ZiderHead]

Hi Fraser

My interest is '70-'75 WR at the moment and that will keep me amused for a few years, although I would never rule out something much more historical and coal fuelled at some point.

Threading rail into moulded sleeper/chair bases would be great if they were available. Its not my field but I understand quality injection moulding tooling runs into 5 figure costs and given what has been said above it would require numerous dies, so it would not be a trivial project.

Jon

 

[mickoo]

There may be two ways around this, if your track is stuck down then you can slit all the sleepers in current FS track, clue one rail down and then with an S7 gauge glue the other to the corresponding gauge with or with out widening, the gap in the sleeprs is then filled with ballast, many main lines now have an overburden ontop of the sleepers to assit in keeping it in place, certainly WR main line in the 70's could feature that.

Second, buy stock flexi track, remove the rail, slice off the chairs, buy a big bag of C+L or whom ever plastic chairs of your choice, stick on to your desired gauge, slide in rail, lay and play.

Personally I'll probably opting for the second if and when I get out side, the adhesives used these days will bond the plastic chairs to the plastic sleeper as good as the molded ones you cut off.
I'd do one rail at a time to preserve sleeper spacing, or an even easier (bodge) just slice one set of chairs off and glue new ones on to S7 gauge. The latter will have two issues, sleepers not centered on track.....would you notice in a garden rail senario? I doubt it and I may adopt that approach myself for track furthest away. Two, you'd need to get matching chairs which may not be possible.

HTH

 

[Phill Dyson]

I would stick to 7mm F/S if you are contemplating a garden railway

 

[eastsidepilot]

.............And how much does it cost to have wheels reprofiled?

I offer a service for re-profiling wheels

Col.

 

[Wagonman]

Richard

Be patient!! The MINT write up and drawings are done as is one for a radius gauge. You will get them in time for the next newsletter.

Rob

Great! Thanks.