Wheel profiles

[jayell]

I for one am not going to buy the magazine in question, I peep at it each issue to see if there is anything specifically related to my interests, if not the purchase money goes into my tool-buying piggy bank.

So far as the P4 standards are concerned I am going to stick with Alan Gibson wheels and the Society L-shape b2b guage, plus I will build track using the Society guages. I discovered at Scaleforum that my Gibson 850 loco with wheels that have distinctly wobbly tyres (for reasons I won't go into again) and that I thought would need replacing ran perfecly well on the big test track as well as the short demo stretch on the Society stand.

So this beginner to P4 modelling is quite happy with the current standards and will not be 'fiddling'.

John

[Tim V]

I'm going the same way John. The latest MRJ has very little of real interest, even the Pendon article looks like a rehash of an old Pendon guide I have somewhere.

The article on wheels says nothing about any other variables he might have tried.

Now Pendon is supposed to be doing a book on their scenery methods, I hope these MRJ articles aren't a way of avoiding this.

[Terry Bendall]

So this beginner to P4 modelling is quite happy with the current standards and will not be 'fiddling'.

Quite right. The P4 standards have been shown to work time and time again. For those who doubted that they do, the proof was at Scaleforum with Calcutta Sidings with scale length trains running at scale speeds. I believe that there were a few derailments but certainly not when I was looking and no doubt the things that did fall off can be solved with a bit of tweaking.

With time and care there is absolutely no need to use anything else.

Terry Bendall

[Horsetan]

Nothing wrong with Ray Hammond's S4 standards

[jayell]

Nothing wrong with Ray Hammond's S4 standards

Stirrer!

[allanferguson]

the proof was at Scaleforum with Calcutta Sidings with scale length trains running at scale speeds.

But could they reverse a train of short wheelbase wagons over pregroup pointwork?

Allan F

[Terry Bendall]

But could they reverse a train of short wheelbase wagons over pregroup pointwork?

Unlikely Allan since neither of those occur on Calcutta Sidings. However there is a video which was posted on here a while back of a rake of HEA wagons, which have a fairly short wheelbase, reversing at around a scale 50mph over the trackwork and the turnouts.

On Pulborough we regularly used to move 10 pre grouping cattle wagons and two brake vans from the yard on one side of the main line to the cattle dock on the other side and it did work successfuly but it did need care to make sure that the wagons were set up correctly.

Terry Bendall

[allanferguson]

My point, which was partly, but not entirely frivolous, was that anyone can pull a train at any reasonable speed along straightish plain track; it's when you try to do something different that the problems occur. To argue from the specific case to the general issue is specious. And I don't disagree that Calcutta sidings is a most excellent piece of modelling, and reflects much credit on it's builders. But it doesn't prove that P4 "works" (not that I think it's builders have tried to argue that case; but others have.

[John Bateson]

If I may add a small thought here, it would seem that flange depth is not the main issue on using EM wheels, but flange width.

I found the EM diagram not sufficient to give me a good answer, but my findings 3 years ago were (assuming that I have found the right record after searching for much of the afternoon)
a) P4 Flange Depth 0.0144" or 0.38 mm equivalent to 1.09" at full size - this is the same as the flange width (see drawing http://www.clag.org.uk/p4standards.html)
b) EM Flange Depth 0.027" or 0.68 mm equivalent to 2.06" at full size - or almost double the P4 depth - but definitely not the same as flange width - see drawing EMGS Data Sheet 3
c) it is all but impossible to determine the flange width for EM, there is not enough data on the official drawing from 1976 to determine this

AG sell their '00' wheels with the EM flange depth.

So I submit this discussion is probably fruitless. I for one, will stick with the P4 standards. Others will choose to do their own thing for their own reasons.
In fact it would be interesting if the EMGS do actually specify flange width. And where is it hidden?

John

[jayell]

So I submit this discussion is probably fruitless.
John

I agree and it is becoming tedious. So perhaps it is time to call a halt on this Forum, if proponents of the hybrid system want to continue discussing it let them do it elswhere

John Lewis

[grovenor-2685]

But it doesn't prove that P4 "works"

P4 has been "working" since 1966. I don't see any reason to prove anything.
Keith

[stevecarr]

Well said Keith!

This whole conversation is bonkers. Let's leave it shall we.

[jim s-w]

the proof was at Scaleforum with Calcutta Sidings with scale length trains running at scale speeds.

But could they reverse a train of short wheelbase wagons over pregroup pointwork?

Allan F

Can you reverse a train of 75ft coaches over a scale 50mph crossing? What's your point? As you might have seen I've just started playing with short wheelbase wagons for Brettell Road and I have to say compared to long wheelbase modern wagons they are an absolute doddle to get running well.

You might not realise this but one of the HSTs and the weed killer train on Calcutta sidings are powered at both ends. So they were effectively pushed round the layout (in he case of the HST at close to a scale 100mph) all weekend.

Cheers

Jim

[martin goodall]

So I submit this discussion is probably fruitless.
John

I agree and it is becoming tedious. So perhaps it is time to call a halt on this Forum, if proponents of the hybrid system want to continue discussing it let them do it elswhere

John Lewis

I haven't contributed to this thread recently, and don't propose to do so now.

But if people want to go on debating it, I see no reason why they should not be allowed to do so.

If you don't want to read it, then all you have to do is to refrain from clicking on this title in the menu.

(It's rather like people who complain about the content of TV programmes - they could use the 'off' button, or if they have some inkling of the content beforehand, simply not switch it on in the first place. Simples!)