bambuko loco works 0-6-2 (Fowler)

[bambuko]

Yes indeed ttg as long as you avoid modern lead free sh*te

Another thing that makes such a difference to final result is the silicone brush for working the solder.
Would be lovely to get a source for some decent ones off the shelf.
My DIY contraption is rather crude and the only ones I've seen in the shops are meant for kitchen or BBQ and are rather too big for our needs...

Next job (I have decided ) is putting my loco on wheels.
Need to get some track as well to get the feel for it - what size do you guys use in 16mm circles? 250 or 180 (like G1 tracks)
Would like some flat bottom rail, rather than bullhead, but I guess that will be difficult?

[IrishPeter]

Code 250 is common in 16mm scale. Both my 32mm and 45mm lines use it. I get code 250 f/b rail from Sunset Valley in Oregon, but you may have a more local supplier. Code 180 can be a bit light, as our wheel standards are either Gauge 0, or Gauge 1 coarse scale depending on gauge. With code 180 you might have a problem with flanges hitting spike heads or chairs if the coarse scale is really coarse. From what I have seen anything over code 200 is acceptable.

Cheers,
Peter in Va

[bambuko]

Thanks IrishPeter,
Code 180 or 200 would probably be more close to fine scale prototype, but 250 is likely to be more practical and robust indeed.
The only source I know (here in UK) is PECO
Going to have to visit local hobby shop and see what they've got.

[tom_tom_go]

Peco SM32 is code 200 bullhead rail.

Peco G45 is code 250 flat bottom rail type.

[bambuko]

As far as I know majority prototype narrow gauge rails are flat bottom?
So I'd rather have slightly large code 250 rail with flat bottom than correct size but wrong shape code 200 bullhead.
The argument often voiced in favour of bullhead is that it is easier to bend (flat bottom requiring rail bender),
but afaic this is "lazy" logic - rail bender is such an "easy to make" contraption that there is no reason to be afraid of flat bottom rail,
unless one wants some crazy tight bends...

[laalratty]

The Peco sm32 rail is actually flat bottom, although the shape of the head is perhaps more reminiscent of bullhead, with quite a deep head size. At garden distances it looks fine anyway.

[bambuko]

I guess, (looking at the webpage) there is somewhat flat bottom, although it is clearly described as "Code 200 Bullhead Rail"
SM-32 CODE 200

For comparison "Code 250 Flat Bottom Rail" is:
G-45 CODE 250

I will have to have a look at real thing to make my mind
It's not a show stopper

[IrishPeter]

The Peco sm32 rail is actually flat bottom, although the shape of the head is perhaps more reminiscent of bullhead, with quite a deep head size. At garden distances it looks fine anyway.

That description reminds me a bit of the rail section Calthrop used on the Barsi Light. It was f/b with extra meat in the railhead to make it more resistant to wear.

Peter in Va

[GTB]

I guess, (looking at the webpage) there is somewhat flat bottom, although it is clearly described as "Code 200 Bullhead Rail"

I will have to have a look at real thing to make my mind

Since you are building a Fowler that ran on a cane tram in Qld., technically the rail would be flat-bottom, probably no heavier than 40lb/yd in the steam era, and spiked direct to the sleepers. Bullhead rail wasn't used in Oz, although a few of the early broad gauge lines were laid in double-headed rail, which preceded bull head rail.

Peco rail sections have an unusual profile in any scale in my opinion......

The code 250 rail availble in the US from several suppliers has a reasonable cross section, but scales out around 60lb/yard. Looks fine for my purposes, as the VR ng lines were heavily built to bg branchline standards.

Tenmille in the UK have code 215 flat bottom rail available that looks more like flat bottom rail than the Peco effort and the rail height would look OK for light ng track in SM32, provided you want to build the trackwork yourself. They have a lot of parts for making your own turnouts and track.

http://www.tenmille.com

Their SM32 flex track uses chaired code 200 bullhead and would look strange on a cane tram, if that is something you would worry about.

If all you need at this stage is a bit of track to test the chassis on, it doesn't really matter what it looks like, just get some bits of setrack in your choice of gauge and minimum curve radius.

My bench test track is a couple of LGB R3 curves and a couple of straights. I build my models for a 4' radius minimum curve, even though the track minimum will be 7'3" minimum radius. I can set the LGB set track up on the bench to see if a rolling chassis will need any modification to sideplay before work has advanced too far. Also useful for checking coupler sideplay by setting up a reverse curve.

Sunset Valley in the US makes flex track and #6 turnouts in 32mm gauge ng with code 250 rail and a sleeper design which would be suitable for colonial ng track, but I don't think they have a UK dealer. Atelier Vaporiste in France list it, but that could soon get interesting the way the Westminster circus are going.

Regards,
Graeme

[bambuko]

Thank you GTB, for detailed response!

...Since you are building a Fowler that ran on a cane tram in Qld., technically the rail would be flat-bottom, probably no heavier than 40lb/yd in the steam era, and spiked direct to the sleepers...

yes, that is exactly what I had in mind

...Peco rail sections have an unusual profile in any scale in my opinion......

you can say that again



that is code 200 SM-32
it was the only they had in the shop today, so I got it
it will do for what I want for the moment

...The code 250 rail availble in the US from several suppliers has a reasonable cross section, but scales out around 60lb/yard. Looks fine for my purposes, as the VR ng lines were heavily built to bg branchline standards...

I will get this one later, to compare

...Tenmille in the UK have code 215 flat bottom rail available that looks more like flat bottom rail than the Peco effort and the rail height would look OK for light ng track in SM32, provided you want to build the trackwork yourself. They have a lot of parts for making your own turnouts and track...

didn't know about this one
useful info
thank you!

...Their SM32 flex track uses chaired code 200 bullhead and would look strange on a cane tram, if that is something you would worry about...

not going to loose sleep over it
but it useful to educate oneself
I presume, by "strange on a cane tram" you mean that it would be too light?

...If all you need at this stage is a bit of track to test the chassis on, it doesn't really matter what it looks like, just get some bits of setrack in your choice of gauge and minimum curve radius...

that's exactly what I have done

Once again thank you for all this and as you say I will have to try both code 250 and Tenmille (I quite like making my own track).

[IrishPeter]

It would look strange on a cane tram because their track was light section rail spiked directly on to the sleepers, whereas the PECO SM32 track looks chaired to me, which was the Festiniog's way of laying track, and that of some of the earlier British NG lines.

Peter in Va

[philipy]

Another thing that makes such a difference to final result is the silicone brush for working the solder.

Could you give a bit of info about using a silicone brush in soldering, please? I've never heard of this technique?

[bambuko]

Sure, it's an old technique for wetting/tinning stuff with soft solder.
The modern enhancement is to use silicone brush, which allows you to work the solder without burning the brush
Rather than use many words to describe the technique, below is the link to Youtube vid showing the thing in action:



While there, you might want to look at myfordboy's playlist about building Kerr Stewart Wren 16mm Scale Steam Locomotive, starting with part 1:



Anymore questions - ask (although I am not doing any videos )

[bambuko]

...Tenmille in the UK have code 215 flat bottom rail available that looks more like flat bottom rail than the Peco effort...

just had reply from Tenmille:

Unfortunately we no longer supply this rail due to low demand. We can supply bullhead rail instead in case this is of interest to you.

[dewintondave]

Sure, it's an old technique for wetting/tinning stuff with soft solder.
The modern enhancement is to use silicone brush, which allows you to work the solder without burning the brush
Rather than use many words to describe the technique, below is the link to Youtube vid showing the thing in action:

Very interesting. I've been using the soldering iron to distribute the solder

[philipy]

Very interesting. I've been using the soldering iron to distribute the solder

Yes, it is interesting, thanks. Like Dave I also used my big soldering iron. Actually I stopped using Bakers Fluid years ago because it is so corrosive, especially when you knock the can over! I prefer Fluxite which is much more controllable and less likely to cause a disaster.

[Keith S]

As far as I know majority prototype narrow gauge rails are flat bottom?
So I'd rather have slightly large code 250 rail with flat bottom than correct size but wrong shape code 200 bullhead.
The argument often voiced in favour of bullhead is that it is easier to bend (flat bottom requiring rail bender),
but afaic this is "lazy" logic - rail bender is such an "easy to make" contraption that there is no reason to be afraid of flat bottom rail,
unless one wants some crazy tight bends...

In favour of the "Sunset Valley" rail from America, I have quite a bit of this rail, which is flat-bottomed, one comment I will make is that the aluminium rail is so incredibly inexpensive that it might well make up for the shipping cost.

I find that the distance between the sleepers seems to have more effect on the sense of scale than either the size of the rail or even the gauge.

Aluminium rail is weird though. Steam oil and oxidation make it very black on top and it is quite soft. unlike brass rail it never changes colour with age and so will always be a dull silver-y colour. A wipe with thinners and a rag cleans off the black slippery stuff, otherwise locomotives will slip.

But did I mention the incredible inexpensive-ness?

[FWLR]

Interesting video and very helpful. Thanks...

[GTB]

I presume, by "strange on a cane tram" you mean that it would be too light?

Once again thank you for all this and as you say I will have to try both code 250 and Tenmille (I quite like making my own track).

For education purposes on the subject of Qld. cane trams you can't go past Lynn Zelmer's Cane-Sig website. He's a refugee from Canada, but I've no idea how he survives in the Qld climate.....

http://www.zelmeroz.com/canesig/

No, even code 200 rail would be a bit heavy for dead scale cane tram rail from the steam era. My objection to Peco SM32 track appearance wise is the use of rail chairs, which weren't used on Aust. ng track. Aust timber and cane tram track had the rail spiked directly to the sleepers. The rail wasn't canted, nor did they use sleeper plates. Sleepers weren't necessarily completely squared off either. The nearest thing in the UK to Qld. cane tram track would have been lines built with recycled WDLR material. eg. the Ashover Light Railway.

If you like making your own track, then all you need is a source of suitable rail.

Llagas Creek Railways in the US have code 215 and code 250 flat bottom rail. Sunset Valley Railroad have code 250 rail only, but also make 32mm track.

https://llagascreekrailways.com https://www.sunsetvalleyrailroad.com

I'm using Accucraft code 250 rail which is available in the US and Aust., but I don't know if Accucraft UK stock it. The rail profile is the same as Sunset Valley rail and they are interchangeable.

I've just been through all this while planning my new track.............

Have fun,
Graeme

[tom_tom_go]

Just to make choosing even harder check out Cliff Barker's code 180 rail:

http://www.cliffbarker.me.uk