Wheel and Track Standards


Mike Calvert
 

As in P48, and I'd guess in P87, many of the arguments against ProtoNN
contain a lot of nonsense designed to justify avoiding the conversion.
However it's not "better" or "worse"- everybody makes his own decision,
based on his view of the world; each to his own. You either do it, or you
don't, and I hope you enjoy your hobby.
I cannot see many on this list converting to P87, because most are in the
category with big investments.
But the cat is out of the bag- especially for this Group of fanatical
disciples of Getting It All Right, there is an obvious inconsistency in
achieving truly remarkable accuracy in every other feature on the car, and
having wheel treads that are 20-40% overscale.
You'll never be able to look at a model photo again without seeing it, as
SGL points out.

I predict this thread will end soon!
Mike Calvert


C J Wyatt
 

<< ... But the cat is out of the bag- especially for this Group of fanatical
disciples of Getting It All Right, there is an obvious inconsistency in
achieving truly remarkable accuracy in every other feature on the car, and
having wheel treads that are 20-40% overscale.... >>

As much as Proto:87 appeals to me because of the better looking track,
wheels, and trucks, what's the point if 3/8" thick structural pieces become
0.004" or 5/8" handholds become 0.007". These model dimensions have to be
greatly increased to have any strength. Inconsistencies are unavoidable with
Proto:87. Because of my perfectionistic tendencies, I think I'm going to go
with Proto:64. Some details with S scale still have to be oversized, but not
nearly as bad as with HO. I'll be giving up a lot of products that are
available in HO, but they are just not satisfying anymore.

Jack Wyatt


Tim O'Connor <timoconnor@...>
 

Jack Wyatt wrote

I think I'm going to go with Proto:64 .... I'll be giving up a lot
of products that are available in HO, but they are just not satisfying
anymore.
I think I just heard a huge sigh from the general direction of Albany NY.

Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...> -->> NOTE EMAIL CHANGE <<--
Sterling, Massachusetts


Charles Morrill <badlands@...>
 

Or you could try O scale (as in Proto48) where scale wheels and scale
operating couplers have been available and in use for decades and almost
nothing on a freight car has to be made oversized. For instance, .015"
diameter wire is fine for 3/4" diameter grab irons. Of course, you will
then have to put up with endless arguements on gage (5', 4'-81/2", On30,
On3, etc.), two rail vs. three rail, DC or AC, ------and on and on 8^))
Charlie

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Wyatt" <cjwyatt@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Wheel and Track Standards


Inconsistencies are unavoidable with
Proto:87. Because of my perfectionistic tendencies, I think I'm going to
go
with Proto:64. Some details with S scale still have to be oversized, but
not
nearly as bad as with HO. I'll be giving up a lot of products that are
available in HO, but they are just not satisfying anymore.

Jack Wyatt