7mm C&L Bullhead Rail

JohnG

Active Member
It is a discussion on the new C&L bullhead rail being close to the the correct 95lb rail profile and therefore really code 131, certainly a different profile from previous, will still be called Code 125, although it is 7 thou taller, it is part of an up grade by C&L. There are pictures on the C&L website.
 

Lancastrian

Western Thunderer
Gents,

Update on C&L website:

"I have received a number of enquiries from customers concerning the new rail profile. The previous supply of rail from the manufacturer was marketed under code 125. However, I had some concerns over its profile. The supplier managing the specification refused to correct the profile, despite my referring to the drawings contained in the 1926 specification for 95lb Bullhead Rail published under Standard Railway Equipment – Permanent Way. These drawings have now been re-formatted for 7mm scale, and the engineering diagrams have been used to produce new tooling for the rail, and rail chairs. The new rail profile is CODE 131, this is in fact the original rail code marketed by C & L, a good number of years ago, and before my ownership. How this change came about, I am not certain. but the original C & L tooling has been modified, or is in the process of being changed to make it compatible with the new CODE 131 rail which I am now producing.

From this date, C & L 7mm rail will be marketed as Finescale 95lb Bullhead Rail CODE 131.

I do have a residual stock of the original CODE 125 rail, both in HiNi and steel, which will be available on request.

This has come about as the result of the on going replacement of the original tooling however where possible the original tooling is being refurbished for further use.

The principle difference other than the change in profile is the rail height from code 125 to 131 is .007 of mm about the thickness of piece of paper

Phil"


Ian
 

Osgood

Western Thunderer
I think this is a simple mistake - he clearly meant to put inches (and I imagine 6 and not 7 :D) as he refers to it being about equivalent to a sheet of paper.
0.006” (0.152mm) is equivalent to approx 110gsm paper - typical good photocopy paper being 80 or 100gsm..
 
Last edited:

OzzyO

Western Thunderer
The one problem that I can see by introducing a rail code height in isolation is that it will not fit the existing point rail filling jigs. Please see below.
IMG_5472.JPG

These are from the Scale 7 society and are for .125" rail so the new .131" rail is not going to fit.

Or is Phil going to produce a new set of filling jigs to suit his rail size?

OzzyO.
 

Longbow

Western Thunderer
Phil doesn't do filing jigs. I believe the S7 Society have anticipated the compatibility problem by buying in a good stock of code 125.
 

Stephen Freeman

Western Thunderer
Phil doesn't do filing jigs. I believe the S7 Society have anticipated the compatibility problem by buying in a good stock of code 125.
There are sources other than C&L of Nickel Silver (Marcway) and HiNi (Phoenix/Karlgarin) Bullhead Rail. I would imagine that Phill will still have some and Steel too.

Steel doesn't get asked for very often, I still have a stack from when Brian Lewis was running things.
 

Tim Clarke

New Member
I like that! What radii are the inner and outer curves? What are they like in use? I only have experience of OO double slips and find them rather prone to causing derailments. I'm in the process of designing an O Gauge layout and think I might need a couple of them to save space.

Tim
 

Stephen Freeman

Western Thunderer
I like that! What radii are the inner and outer curves? What are they like in use? I only have experience of OO double slips and find them rather prone to causing derailments. I'm in the process of designing an O Gauge layout and think I might need a couple of them to save space.

Tim
Because they were switched diamonds in the centre, they didn't cause any problems to 0 gauge finescale wheelsets from such as Slaters. Things could be a bit bumpy if he chose to run something US, (different standards). The problem with 00 is the standards, there are so many of them, which one you choose to use is dependant on the wheels. Best bet is probably 00SF, in 7mm scale 0 Gauge is 0MF.

Basically the more slop you have, the more difficult to achieve good running.

As far as I can tell the two radii were 72 inches and 128 inches. The vee was 1 in 14 and the switches were GWR 12ft heel switch. The main problem was that he had a minimum radius of 6 feet and they had to be on a curve into the station. If the outer radius was smaller the formation would have been much longer and it was already pretty long.
 
Last edited:

Stephen Freeman

Western Thunderer
These days , construction is a little different, 3 bolt turnout this time. Exactoscale lost wax fishplates on the crossing rails and etched brass fishplates of my own design, (etched by PPD) on the stock rails (stocks are getting a little low now and if I sell many more I will need to re-order, no doubt it will be more expensive and I may need to look at the current pricing).

Timbers are plywood (Timbertracks) (paint is Cuprinol black ash Fence paint) and of course Exactoscale chairs, except for the nose which is "Off the rails" slab and bracket. Looks like I need another photo for it.

3boltswitch.jpg3boltstretcher.jpgThe stretcher bars are AMBIS and the rod does go through the rails.
 

Tim Clarke

New Member
Because they were switched diamonds in the centre, they didn't cause any problems to 0 gauge finescale wheelsets from such as Slaters. Things could be a bit bumpy if he chose to run something US, (different standards). The problem with 00 is the standards, there are so many of them, which one you choose to use is dependant on the wheels. Best bet is probably 00SF, in 7mm scale 0 Gauge is 0MF.

Basically the more slop you have, the more difficult to achieve good running.

As far as I can tell the two radii were 72 inches and 128 inches. The vee was 1 in 14 and the switches were GWR 12ft heel switch. The main problem was that he had a minimum radius of 6 feet and they had to be on a curve into the station. If the outer radius was smaller the formation would have been much longer and it was already pretty long.
Sounds like he had a similar problem getting everything to fit inside a room/shed like I do. I'm considering trying O-MF for point work with 6ft min rad, but I don't want to spend a lot of time building custom points only to find my Locos struggle. They are just OK on 5ft rad. 32mm flex track at slow speeds if the track curvature at joints is spot on. No issues negotiating std. Peco points with 6ft rad turnouts at speed.

Tim
 

Stephen Freeman

Western Thunderer
Sounds like he had a similar problem getting everything to fit inside a room/shed like I do. I'm considering trying O-MF for point work with 6ft min rad, but I don't want to spend a lot of time building custom points only to find my Locos struggle. They are just OK on 5ft rad. 32mm flex track at slow speeds if the track curvature at joints is spot on. No issues negotiating std. Peco points with 6ft rad turnouts at speed.

Tim
Not really, basement USA, just the coarser standards in use there, anything British was fine.
 
Top