 |
Herb Kephart
Moderator
|
Better watch who youze insult wit yer ''gentleman'' talk.
Herb
____________________
Fix it again, Mr Gates--it still works!"
|
|
|
Salada
Registered
| Joined: | Mon Nov 4th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1190 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
My apologies Herb. I would never dream of insulting you by calling you a Gentleman !.
Regards, The Turntable Turncoat
|
|
|
Salada
Registered
| Joined: | Mon Nov 4th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1190 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Si,
You've pinched my CAD joke before I've even posted it !
Remember our previous comments about Peco having a Code 82 AND a Code 83 ?.
There IS a significant difference: the rail-head width of C. 83 is .030" but C.82 is .035". That + .005" makes quite a difference in appearance, the C.82 looks way heavier than the C.83 - more like U.K. 'O' Gauge very light industrial/vintage colliery stuff.
The Chavez PW gang have now chewed their way through a pack of 6 x 1 yd Code 83 but having opened a pack of C. 82 tonight none of their special jigs/tools will fit 'cos they were made using a C. 83 sample !. So the PW's will probably head to a bar in town awaiting re-ordering some C.83. Grrrrrr !!.
So choose C.82 or C.83 - don't mix them unless you want to mix rail weights. The American On30 track manufacturers, Micro Engineering, use C.83 which looks more like the older D&RGW 40-45 lb rail. C.82 looks more like the 70 lb + stuff that was laid for the K's. Had I known I would have standardised on C.82.
Confused ? ..... you soon will be (the original Soap).
Cheers, Michael
|
|
|
Salada
Registered
| Joined: | Mon Nov 4th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1190 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Si,
"£ per yard" - very droll, should confuse a few 'furriners' !.
Agreed, Peco website is rather uninformative.
Yes, ME Code 83 & Peco Code 83 profiles are exactly =, but not from the same die (there is a minute difference of no significance).
At 35:1 Code 83 gives a rail height of 2.905" (to 3 deci places !) but the rail-head would look very light IMO @ 35:1.
How about Code 82 for the MMMM RR ??! - same height as C.83 but a little chunkier looking.
You sure have to be daft, mad, very wealthy or a Heath Robinson lateral thinker to attempt proper looking U.S. NG from a U.K. postcode. Or just use ready-made Peco stuff off the shelf.
Regards, Michael
|
|
|
Salada
Registered
| Joined: | Mon Nov 4th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1190 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Si,
See below: the centre rail is Code 83, the two outer rails are Code 82 - photographed from directly overhead. The side view shows the difference even more. The difference is greater to the eye than the camera suggests :
The high-tek Code 82 track gauge jig was made from this accurately made Code 82 master. I've superimposed the jig over the pencil plan drawn by my CAD system to demonsterate it's accuracy - better than that other cheap electronic CAD stuff - & you can light a bonfire with it once finished with. Try warming your hands over some digi-lektrik 'puter 'programme'.
Regards, Michael
|
|
|
Si.
Moderator
| Joined: | Thu Feb 23rd, 2012 |
| Location: | London |
| Posts: | 5940 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
A while back, I got some Caboose Industries No.218 HO ground-throws, from Trainworld in N.Y.C.
I like the nice positive 'sprung' action & the simplicity of operation.
With a little bit of 'tarting up' & painting, they look pretty good to me as well.
My only reservation on these is...
...locating any scenic 'objects' within a hands width or so of them; is sure to lead to problems.
Mmm...
Anyway, I needed a frog-polarity changeover switch to test 'em out.
I have a ton of OEM electronic component books here...
...& checked out every slide-switch manufactured, this side of Pluto !
99% of these switches were totally unsuitable.
- Not high enough current rating.
- Wrong 'throw' distance.
- Too much friction, 'tough' to slide.
- Poor unsealed construction.
etc. etc.
In the end, I came up with pretty much only 1 option.
A switch which has been lurking in the OEM parts books for years...
...& will probably continue to be produced for years as well ( nice to know ).
Made by APEM, it is available from CPC, Farnell & RS in the UK...
...& from Digikey, Newark & Mouser in the US.
( you might even find it on eBay; but overpriced )
The travel matches the 0.165" throw of the C.I levers perfectly.
It has a nice easy slide 'tactile' feel, with slight freedom of movement at either end.
It's well sealed.
Current handling is good.
20,000x mechanical life.
& 3 options of 'actuator', depending on your 'cunning plan'...
...I bought the 'standard top button' one, 1st in the pic.
Basicaly part of my cunning-plan...
...to sort out all the 'lecy-stuff at M.M.M, from the word GO ! ...
...& not have to think about it again.
Ta ta fer noo.
Si.
____________________
' Mysterious Moose Mountain ' - 1:35n2 - pt.II
http://www.freerails.com/view_topic.php?id=7318&forum_id=17&page=1
' M:R:W Motor Speedway !!! ' - 1:32 Slotcar Racing Layout
http://www.slotforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=59295&st=0&a
|
|
|
Si.
Moderator
| Joined: | Thu Feb 23rd, 2012 |
| Location: | London |
| Posts: | 5940 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Michael.
Thanks for your rail info.
It caused me to stare blankly at a yard of PECO track, for well over an hour...
...& have further anxiety-dreams !!
I think your highly-inflammable track-gauge looks great !
I made some DIY brass roller-gauges for 9mm, in the last millenium...
...OK for billiard-table straight-track...
...but I think the Heath Robinson assorted measuring lash-ups approach, will be used at M.M.M.
- - - - - - -
The APEM slide-switch, perfect for Caboose Industries 0.165" travel ground-throws...
...& 2 more cute teeny-weeny switches, procured by Mysterious Moose Mountain sparkeys !
I thought the 2nd slide-switch could be great for locos with batteries...
...with a tool-box or sumptink, glued to the slider, for stealth ops.
It is a truly teeny-weeny switch !
High-current as well.
The mini micro-switch, with lever-actuator, is also pretty high-current...
...it might be good for frog-polarity change duties...
...but I had it in my sights for turntable indexing experiments.
Si.
____________________
' Mysterious Moose Mountain ' - 1:35n2 - pt.II
http://www.freerails.com/view_topic.php?id=7318&forum_id=17&page=1
' M:R:W Motor Speedway !!! ' - 1:32 Slotcar Racing Layout
http://www.slotforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=59295&st=0&a
|
|
|
Salada
Registered
| Joined: | Mon Nov 4th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1190 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Si,
So YOUR Peco Code Confusion Anxiety Syndrome was MY fault for demo-ing the C. 83 & C.82 side by side ?! (Paul Daniels: "You'll like this, but not a lot !").
Yup, we both have much to decide re: turnout operation/polarity change etc.
Have you any further info please on that side actuator lever switch (RHS in your above photo) ?. Such as required lever travel & operating force (not in those Napoleanometer NewtonPascal whatsits (NM's or whatever) - ozs per inch or foot will be fine.
ps: I recently bought a gas strut for an overhead locker door "Go for the big one" said Madame (she would) so the Postie duly delivered a 130 Nm strut which I can hardly compress in a 10" engineering vice !
Cheers, Non-Metrical Michael
|
|
|
|
|
|
