Peco 00 gauge sleeper spacing

Nothing for me destroys the illusion of reality on a model railway depicting British prototype as much as the size and spacing of the sleepers of Peco streamline track. It just doesn't look like proper chaired bullhead track. And nothing - at least for me - so identifies the character of the Victorian railway system like the 'built-like-a-dreadnought' nature of chaired track.

There are dodges around this, of course ... like cutting the webbing between the sleepers and readjusting the spacing (but this doesn't address the chair issue), or buying the more expensive C&L track. And of course you could say that if you really want that sort of realism, you should move up to EM or P4. But for me the gauge isn't the issue. If you don't have something to compare the width of two relatively tiny lengths of rail, it's actually fairly easy to confuse 00 for the larger, more accurate gauges. I would point to the number of exhibitors who remark that people confuse their 00 layouts for EM because they've used one of the two dodges I mention above.

That said, for someone residing as I do in the U.S., can somebody enlighten me as to why Peco do not produce proper chaired track for 00 gauge? Their 0 gauge track is chaired, and C&L have shown that it is perfectly possible to do it in 00 ... so why not a line of Peco Dreadnought (tm) 00 gauge track to satisfy those who want that, well ... built- like-a-dreadnought look for their layouts? Yes, I'm certain that by making the track look more un-British (for lack of a better word), they knew they could sell the track on the Continent and in the U.S. (and they do indeed sell bundles of it here). But surely another, more accurate line would sell well in the U.K. ... I'd imagine that modelers would snap it up in bushels.

Thoughts?

Dave Richtmyer Ann Arbor, Michigan

Reply to
Dave
Loading thread data ...

That could be due to Peco (oo at least) track being flat bottomed .......

Just a thought,

Jeff.

Reply to
Jeff McGhie

"Dave"

That's because Peco's largest market is North America. While Peco track looks nothing like any track on both sides of the pond, it's sleep spacing and "chair" type is closer to North American than UK.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway

formatting link

Reply to
Roger T.

Yes, I more or less asumed that the decision was based on the $ they could rake in the North American market. Lots of North American modelers (and, for all I know, Central and South American modelers as well) use Peco because it is reliable, even if it doesn't look anything like North American track (though you are right, it looks closer to North American than U.K. prototype). But now that they've gone ahead with their code 83 line supposedly specifically designed after U.S. prototype (and I say "supposedly" because I've seen other North American modelers grumbling that the points are less than authentic), one would think that they would now do a line of authentic 00 as well. I mean, it's not as if they don't have *lots* of other lines of track ... what's one more line that might well do very well? But then again, I'm not on the Peco Board of Directors ... :-)

Cheers,

Dave

Reply to
Dave

Atlas track has been greatly improved in recent years, both Code 100 and Code 83. I wonder if it's reclaimed some of the N.A. market from Peco?

Reply to
MartinS

In message , Dave writes

What's the difference between code 75 and code 83? 0.008 of an inch rail height. Since Peco are now touting their code 83 line as based on North American prototypes, it would make sense for them to change their code

75 line to be more like UK track and change the sleeper spacing to that of OO.
Reply to
Jane Sullivan

Precisely my point ... I'll second that!

Dave

Reply to
Dave

"Jane Sullivan" wrote

It's been suggested to Peco on numerous occasions that they should consider a genuine fine scale OO track, rather than the current HO scale offerings, but the response has been one of indefference. I think they're unlikely to bother as long as UK modellers continue to buy their current offerings.

I think it would really take a serious competitor to enter the market with a comprehensive range of ready-to-use track & pointwork, to generate the kick up the rear end necessary to convince them that sitting on their laurels is not the way forward.

I suspec the 83-line range has been introduced at the behest of Walters in the USA. They are, I believe, the main distributors of Peco in the USA and I suspect they wanted a range of 'scale' USA prototype track to be able to compete with other manufacturers in an increasingly bitter and competitive market. The difference between Peco's code 75 and code 83 track is significantly more than just 0.008 inch in rail height - the sleepering is significantly different as is the point geometry.

John.

Reply to
John Turner

In message , John Turner writes

But Walthers already do a code 83 line, made for them by Shinohara of Japan, and it has a lot more items in it than what Peco are proposing to do, such as a No. 8 scissors crossover, and No. 10 switches/points/turnouts, although where you can get these from in the UK, dog only knows.

Reply to
Jane Sullivan

Jane Sullivan wrote: [..]

Yes, and Atlas also has a very good code 83 line. In addition, Micro-Engineering makes a superb line of prototypical track, the best I've ever seen - I doubt that anyone can hand lay track to match it. That's Peco's competition. They also have a price problem IMO.

Well, Peco does have to make enough of the commonly desired stuff to warrant tooling for the rarer stuff. Not many people want to build a #10 crossover... :-)

I can quote on Walthers track if you're really interested. Mail me off-group: there is no e in the correct address.

HTH

Reply to
Wolf Kirchmeir

Their OO/HO track was originally designed to cater to both British and US customers - sort of "we're right, the prototype is wrong" theory.

Reply to
Greg Procter

"Greg Procter" wrote

British and Continental Europe if I recall correctly. Peco has never been particularly big in the USA, although it does have its adherents.

John.

Reply to
John Turner

I dunno about the USA, but in most Canadian model shops it's displayed right alongside Atlas, even if they don't sell any other UK imports.

Reply to
MartinS

Errr ......... what IS the correct spacing for Wooden Sleepers in the UK ?

Keith

Reply to
Keith Lanham

"Keith Lanham" wrote

Don't think there's such a beast, certainly sleeper spacing traditionally varied towards the end of a 60 foot length of track with sleepers closer together below a joint. On the other hand I believe there is a standard 'size' for a sleeper, but don't ask me what it is.

Incidentally we don't have 'sleepers' below pointwork, for some reason they are referred to as 'timbers.

John.

Reply to
John Turner

In message , John Turner writes

You're right, but a good "average" sleeper spacing is 2 ft 6 in between centre-lines. Sleepers are 10 inches wide by 8 ft 6 in or 9 ft long depending on when they were laid.

Timbers are 12 inches wide.

Reply to
Jane Sullivan

Standard sleeper spacing for woods is 24 per 60ft length or 700mm centers, not sure when this came about but afaik its been here or here abouts since before nationalisation.

I'd imagine as they're different dimensions (thicker and wider) than 'standard' sleepers. For info concrete 'timbers' are known as bearers ;-))

HTH

Jeff.

Reply to
Jeff McGhie

There is no one answer as each railway company generally had their own ideas, but for the latter half of the grouping and the first 15 years or so of BR rails came in standard 60ft lengths and 24 sleepers were used per length, as has been mentioned 3 or 4 sleepers each end closed up a bit, the rest in between spaced evenly at just above the average. Sleepers being 10 inches wide, 5 inches thick and 8 feet 6 inches long.

Keith

Reply to
Keith

"Jane Sullivan" wrote

And the length varies depending upon their position in the pointwork.

John.

Reply to
John Turner

True, but, then, not many people have got the space I have for my garden railway. I was thinking of using them for the crossovers between the fast and slow lines just before the main line staging yard, where trains can still be running at full speed.

Thank you. I'm definitely interested, but to start with I only want a couple for playing around with. Ideally right hand No.10 but if they're not available (the Walthers web site says "out of stock"), No.8 will do. It's not worth sourcing just a couple of items like this from across the pond, which is why I was wondering if there is somewhere in the UK I can get them from.

I want to see how they, and all the associated wiring and switching will stand up to the rigours of a British winter. I'm not going to attach an electric point motor to them, but rather one of those pneumatic ones from Del-Aire (who have gone out of business, but I've got a stock of them).

Reply to
Jane Sullivan

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.