Scaleseven and WT

[jc2001]

I came to this forum from a 7mm narrow gauge finescale background

Hi P-J,
You will find quite a few S7 modeller dabble in things narrow, although I'm not sure how many frequent WT. I'm finding myself far more often on WT these days as there is much more of a focus on building things.
John

 

[mickoo]

Hello Mick -

I can well see why you've etched them!

We chose to represent them as outlines - which you could highlight with ink after painting to accentuate them, as a lot of military modellers do - for budget considerations, as the surrounds you have etched are actually much much thinner than the doors themselves.

Had we gone your route of including them as raised areas though, we would have gone to relief-etched side panels overlaying full thickness back-plates.

Also, we would have had to go beyond a 24"x12" main sheet [four panels within it] to include them and that was 'way beyond' for a budget kit like the 08/09 - this is the same reason only the detail fret is etched in N/S - price is all to most customers these days, especially when we have to add 20% VAT to our pricing!

We don't offer 2 or 3 versions of the same item [say with extra parts or nickel options] because we try to carry every item in stock from a range of around 800 subjects and we need to ship any orders in 1-2 days max. if we can. This is very important if you are soley an online trader exporting around 75% of everything you sell, as otherwise you just get 'swamped' and hopeless confusion reigns!

Regards,

DJP/MMP

David,

Fully concur and understand your logic and reasoning, the variety of door types and sizes precludes anyone offering sensible variations within a kit and within a budget.

To be fair most I have spoken too have never noticed, it's just that I have one one my door step to crawl over I think your right, a better way would be to do the whole door as one piece with the stamping as a half etch on top, that would mean that the stamping would be one depth and not dual depth like 1:1, I.E. thinner stampings around the hinges and catches but a small and I think acceptable compromise none the less.

I may well do that on a second set of etches for the unbuilt kit I have.

 

[S7BcSR]

Ian
Ref your comments on Brightwell. I haven't shown April your comments yet but no doubt she will have a "word" - and take it from me you don't want to be on the end of those - at RailEx.
Also she does do some modelling, she built most of the scenery on my layout and has done some for that place in Long Wittenham, I forget what they call it now, memory is going She is going to have get her scenery cap on again soon to do my 2 new boards.
Rob

 

[Scale7JB]

and although I tried I couldnt find anyone actually counting rivets !!!!.
Cheers Tony.

I was counting whilst hiding in the corner..!

JB.

 

[ZiderHead]

This probably isnt the right place to ask but ... does anyone make decent flexitrack in S7? I checked C&L and they only appear to do FS.

Jon

 

[Heather Kay]

This probably isnt the right place to ask but ... does anyone make decent flexitrack in S7? I checked C&L and they only appear to do FS.

It's been something discussed by the S7 committee, and with various manufacturers. Sadly, it hasn't really happened yet. Short answer: no, there isn't S7 flexitrack.

 

[ZiderHead]

Ok thanks.

 

[ZiderHead]

hehe, I'll already be building turnouts but since I ultimately want to run trains alfresco, flextrack is a bit of a must ...

 

[Caggers]

Short answer: no, there isn't S7 flexitrack.

Unless someone will put chairs on sleepers on 1m lengths of rail for you, which would be sort of flexible track???

 

[Pugsley]

It's been something discussed by the S7 committee, and with various manufacturers. Sadly, it hasn't really happened yet. Short answer: no, there isn't S7 flexitrack.

Which is a shame, because if it was available one of the major barriers to building an S7 layout would be removed. Having built just 1.2m of track for a photo/display board the other week, I know how tedious building a layout's worth of plain track is going to be!

I'd have thought this would be a priority for the committee, now that a range of S7 wheels are available, and that RTR S7 models are becoming increasingly available.

 

[JimG]

Which is a shame, because if it was available one of the major barriers to building an S7 layout would be removed. Having built just 1.2m of track for a photo/display board the other week, I know how tedious building a layout's worth of plain track is going to be!

I'd have thought this would be a priority for the committee, now that a range of S7 wheels are available, and that RTR S7 models are becoming increasingly available.

Isn't the problem one of gauge widening, or the lack of it, with flexible track? I think I remember reading some years ago of a flex track which had automatic gauge widening as a feature - I think it was for P4/S4 - but I haven't read of anything recently.

Jim.

 

[Pugsley]

I don't know, but does the current flexitrack available for P4 feature gauge widening? That seems to be used with a lot of success.

Given that the max gauge widening on the prototype is 19mm, equating to 0.4mm in 7mm scale, would the lack of it really matter?

 

[Dog Star]

Given that the max gauge widening on the prototype is 19mm, equating to 0.4mm in 7mm scale, would the lack of it really matter?

If the track is laid in a straight line then no...

Being serious, from practical experience I have found that gauge widening of 15thou is needed when running engines such as GWR Pannier tanks around curves of circa 7'0" radius. Therein lies the nub of the question. What radius might be used by those who wish to buy flexible S7 track?

regards, Graham

 

[Pugsley]

OK, so practical experience suggests that gauge widening is required at certain radii.

Now the next question, given that the 15 thou mentioned above is close to the 0.4mm mentioned above, what would be the effect of having the plain track incorporating that degree of gauge widening?

Presumably the lack of gauge widening in P4 is less of an issue due to the smaller measurements required. Having said that, the equivalent to the 7mm scale 6' radius curve in P4 would be roughly 3'5" - does anyone have any experience with P4 at this kind of radius?

I would expect people to want to use flexitrack down to the minimum they could get away with, so likely 6-7 feet.

 

[JimG]

Not P4/S4 but S scale at 42" radius and I've used maximum gauge widening for those curves - +0.012". 42" radius in S scale is pushing it and locomotives will be limited to short wheelbase prototypes with some form of sideplay as well. Jas Millham uses similar tight radii in his Yaxbury layout and he has built an o-6-o loco with a Cleminson style chassis to get round these curves. Normal S scale modellers normally don't venture under 48" radii.

Jim.

 

[ZiderHead]

Interesting, I hadnt thought about the issue of gauge widening with the tighter tolerances of S7. In that case I suppose S7 flexitrack might have to be offered in 33mm and 33.4mm, with 33-33.4 transition pieces (which would be more costly). or perhaps just 33.4mm? surely there wouldnt be any problems with running on straight sections of 33.4mm?

 

[S7BcSR]

All the points above are valid and I can say that low key discussions are on-going in the S7 committee about Flexi-track but the question always is "gauge widening". 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 and I wouldn't hold your breath for an answer. It may happen one day.
Rob (with his S7G Secretary hat on)

 

[S7BcSR]

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)

 

[Eastsidepilot]

Surely if you introduce gauge widening in plain straight track you will end up with the same slop that F/S has and you'll loose the fine running that we get in S7, and with the fine flanges could cause problems.
This would also cause problems when connected to pointwork.
I can't see how you can have automatic gauge widening on flexi-track as what ever radius it's curved to the dimension between the chairs will all ways be the same as when its straight, the chairs wont spread apart

Any flexi-track produced must be made to 33mm gauge.

Gauge widening on the prototype was used on curves of radius
between 10 and 7 chains ...+1/4"
7 " 5.5 chains..+1/2"
under 5.5 chains.........+3/4"
All these must be fitted with a check rail.

ATB, Col.

 

[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