--- In STMFC@..., "Benjamin Scanlon"
the reason i am interested in them is because they sound like they are quite close to the 3mm (UK) finescale standards that i want to use and perhaps less likely to have problems in 3mm flangeways than code 64 wheels.According to my imperfect math, 3mm = 1'-0" scale (assuming I interpret this correctly)is 1:101.6, or just a bit smaller than the new scale I'm about to launch one of these days, D (for Dennis) scale, which would have a proportion of 1:100. :)
A scale width wheel at 1:101.6 would be .052 wide, so Code 72, 64, and 54 wheels would all be too wide. It appears that 3mm scale has specified overly coarse track standards, just like all the other "small" scales.
If you are committed to adapting HO scale wheels, it would appear that your choices these days would be Code 88 or Code 64 (P:87 wheels). The Code 64 wheels should work if you fill the flangeways to match the .014" flange depth. Of course, that's going to cause a problem with Code 72 wheels with their .020" deep flanges, but that's why railroad wheels are designed to NOT be flange bearing, which forces the wheel to be more than twice the width of the max. flangeway, plus the width of the frog point, which is exactly the same reason the NMRA won't adopt the Code 99 wheel as the standard for HO.