Peco set track

[StuLarge]

Thanks @moawkwrd that picture helps loads!

As @Paul-41ATI says Peco quality + Tillig geometry... That would be fantastic.

[StuLarge]

Thanks @moawkwrd that picture helps loads!

As @Paul-41ATI says Peco quality + Tillig geometry... That would be fantastic.

[Peachy]

15 minutes ago, Silver Fox 17 said:

One thing I have just realised is what will the other radii be?

It is mentioned that 2 Peco points give a 35mm spacing so does that mean any new radii will follow suit and be different to Hornby, or stay at 43 meaning the points will need a short length between them? 

Steve Haynes at Peco said the set track points and further radius curves would match the standard 43mm spacing 

[Silver Fox 17]

Just now, Peachy said:

Steve Haynes at Peco said the set track points and further radius curves would match the standard 43mm spacing 

At least that is a good point for others.

Out of interest is the rail the double T section as in their flexible track?

[Peachy]

Yes. All the Peco TT120 code 55 is double t

[Skelton Junction]

One thing I’ve found using a combination of Tillig, Hornby and Peco track with Hornby fishplates and droppers is the clickety clack over the join is quite pleasing. 

[Peachy]

4 minutes ago, Skelton Junction said:

One thing I’ve found using a combination of Tillig, Hornby and Peco track with Hornby fishplates and droppers is the clickety clack over the join is quite pleasing. 

😃 for me the lack of clickety clack with this new Peco set track is a bonus. But that’s just personal preference 

[Peachy]

BTW thanks everyone for joining in, that’s what this forum is all about after all 👍

[Rallymatt]

Is Peco compatible with Hornby track?  
Yes and No. you can quite successfully join Hornby to Peco track (via Hornby fishplates for less blood and swearing) and in operation they are absolutely fine. The Hornby rail is slightly taller but not to make a running issue. 
Although the geometry of the Peco Set Track is different, it is compatible to a degree as in a combination of components can be used however there will need to a an element of ‘balancing up’ it could make for some interesting track formations. It would be more involved though. 
I can see why Peco have launched a Set Track series to counter the issue of laying tighter radius curves in flexi and it matches perfectly to existing Streamline series points. The straights are clearly an intention to have a full track package. Peco must see a very strong growth in TT:120. 
It does mean other loco/rolling stock manufacturers can look at TT:120 in UK and accept it is not a Hornby benefit. 
Of course there are already other track systems available from a number of continental manufacturers too. 

 

[Silver Fox 17]

3 minutes ago, Peachy said:

😃 for me the lack of clickety clack with this new Peco set track is a bonus. But that’s just personal preference 

I am the opposite with sound, I don't like that but found the clickety clack quite nice. I don't have many areas where it happens so quite good where it does but we are all different.

In the 60's and 70's people  used to describe filing small grooves every scale 60' apart but that did not really work as all locos and coaches had a different wheelbase so it was not effective. In real life term you were either on a train in the same position going over the joint so it was noticeable, on the ground you only heard it on the joint near you. There is no way all wheels would hit a joint at the same time so on a model it was defeating the object, to me anyway. 

[Renoir]

@Silver Fox 17 You mentioned using Peco HOm track...presume this joins to Hornby TT120 track okay with just a slight height difference that could be smoothed down at the join (Code 75 vs Code 80) ? I'd be interested to know as I have a number of lengths of HOm flexible that I'd like to use in a staging yard. Thanks.

[Silver Fox 17]

11 minutes ago, Renoir said:

@Silver Fox 17 You mentioned using Peco HOm track...presume this joins to Hornby TT120 track okay with just a slight height difference that could be smoothed down at the join (Code 75 vs Code 80) ? I'd be interested to know as I have a number of lengths of HOm flexible that I'd like to use in a staging yard. Thanks.

There is very little in it, certainly not enough to worry about. My upper level (when done) will have Hornby plain track with H0m point work.

I will only be using Hornby on the high level as I needed the r3 and 4 curves.

[Rallymatt]

Just for reference, one of the differences between Hornby and Peco track is the size of the rail head and the precise gauging. 
Hornby Gauge 12mm; Rail head width 0.7mm; Rail depth 2mm

Peco Gauge 12.2mm; Rail head width 0.5mm; Rail depth 2.15mm

Peco is the closest to being scale correct and to some that might be important but ironically the Hornby Set Points will look better for radii than the Peco Set Track points although the Streamline ones are more elegant. 

 

[Renoir]

24 minutes ago, Silver Fox 17 said:

There is very little in it, certainly not enough to worry about. My upper level (when done) will have Hornby plain track with H0m point work.

I will only be using Hornby on the high level as I needed the r3 and 4 curves.

Interesting, I'll be using Hornby R3 and R4 on my extension too; I already have these so a way of keeping costs down. Presume you prefer the HOm pointwork to Hornby or PECO TT120? I'm thinking of Hornby points in the staging yard to reduce costs.

All in all, I imagine many of us will end up with a mixture of track work. I have a couple of lengths of Tillig dual gauge track (HO and HOm) and am thinking of making one track in the staging yard dual gauge so I can test out the odd OO locomotive. Trying to save space...not sure where the O Gauge test track will live, though 🤔 

Edited August 11 by Renoir
Additional information

[Grenkin]

@Rallymatt  @Peachy There is great opportunity to make a tutorial vide about how to work with the flexible track. What instruments to use, what are the techniques. I know there are tons of videos about this in other scales and this is not scale dependent topic, but me personally would watch TT video other than some other.

To much to ask? 🫣😶‍🌫️

[Silver Fox 17]

2 minutes ago, Renoir said:

Interesting, I'll be using Hornby R3 and R4 on my extension too; I already have these so a way of keeping costs down. Presume you prefer the HOm pointwork to Hornby or PECO TT120? I'm thinking of Hornby points in the staging yard to reduce costs

I prefer all Peco H0m track over any of the others.

I dislike Peco 120 due to 1) it is harder to joint to other identical track having to remove sleepers and then need special smaller ones, with any other you can just cut the chairs at the end and slide fisplates on, 2) I don't like.the look of it where every few sleepers there is a silver part showing (rail?) and 3) the sleepers look too high.  It is harder to bend as well but that has good and bad points.

Just my views.

[Tim Allen]

In the catalogue Hornby have a Long straight for future release, I know that would be a relative simple drop in replacement for any sections that have two double straights (Where my station is). If I used Peco would it be as "simple"?

[Peachy]

8 minutes ago, Tim Allen said:

In the catalogue Hornby have a Long straight for future release, I know that would be a relative simple drop in replacement for any sections that have two double straights (Where my station is). If I used Peco would it be as "simple"?

No

[Ilmson]

5 hours ago, Peachy said:

...
My personal view was, initially that bringing out set track was a waste of Peco’s time, and that I wished this announcement was for more Streamline specialist point work or concrete sleeper flexi. However, after actually using it, I was impressed with actually how well it performed. 
As a “Streamliner” I think the r2 could well be a good compliment to Streamline as getting the code 55 flexi to join sweetly is always a testing task. Also if they do bring out 3 & 4 I’ll definitely be looking at using it for a helix. ...

Hello Peachy,

Enlarging and diversifying the selection is never a bad idea for the customer. Now they can also rely on a world-renowned and experienced rail manufacturer, which is considered to be unbeatable in terms of quality.

Above all, this can cover gaps that were not covered by the previous standard.

 

A small note regarding your R3 and R4 (Hornby) spiral.
I have a spiral like this made of Tillig tracks.

Hornby R 3 and R4 correspond to the Tillig radii "R2" (353mm radius) and "R3" (396 mm radius).

However, I noticed that when climbing my Duchess with the BR57' carriages (5 coaches on 3% gradient) , it had problems on the inner curve because the friction in the curve was too great. On the outer curve, the same train had no problems climbing.

So remember that climbing must take place on the outer track (right or left traffic if necessary).

 

Edited August 11 by Ilmson

[Peachy]

Absolutely agree with your climbing - descending advice. I plan to pop along to York Model Rail to discuss before I commission one

[ntpntpntp]

I bought a few lengths of Peco TT:120 flexi and a couple of points when they first came out, as I've been using Peco N code 55 track since the 90s.  I've had it incorporated into temporary table-top layouts of Hornby track.    I'll definitely use Peco Streamline in preference to Hornby track when I do eventually get round to building a layout (other projects to finish first).   It's better looking sleeper spacing than using the the HOm track for TT, the visible rail profile is lower and more to scale,  I disagree with @Silver Fox 17 regarding  the occasional visible section of the lower rail profile:  it's no issue at all as once the track is painted and ballasted it's completely hidden below ballast level just as it is in the equivalent N flexi track.   The stiffness the embedded "double T" rail section imparts to the code 55 flexi is definitely a good thing, it holds a curve much better when you're laying the track and there's no risk of the rail ripping out of the chairs if you get over-enthusiastic with your bends 🙂 

This is Peco N code 55 track I've been painting, ballasting and weathering this weekend.  Exactly the same as how I'll do the TT:120 flexi when the time comes. 


To the original question of whether or not the Setrack range is needed and a sensible thing to be introduced?     I'm not sure, I certainly buy into the idea that people will be mostly starting out with a Hornby set and its accompanying track.   I can't see me using the Setrack components other than maybe fixed curves for hidden tight curves to avoid fighting to bend Streamline flexi.  I won't need Setrack for visible trackwork on the layout. 

[Peachy]

@ntpntpntp

I couldn't agree more… 

Edited August 11 by Peachy

[david_watts1]

I think Peco may have missed the boat. For people like me who prefer the simplicity of set track, I already have 2 sets plus a lot of extra stuff to make my desired layout. I like the clickety-clack produced by the Hornby lengths. The geometry of Peco is different to other providers which is a strange decision, along with the code 55 rail. Surely it would have been better for Peco to make all of their track compatible with current stock. I wish them well in their endeavour, but I shan't be buying any.

[Silver Fox 17]

1 hour ago, ntpntpntp said:

It's better looking sleeper spacing than using the the HOm track for TT,

It is each to their own and I personally have never been bothered about "to scale", to me it is simply 1) looks good, 2) easy to lay, 3) trains run well on it.

With those 3 things then H0m does it for me.

[Kenneth-365689]

My layout (on, I think, 4th attempt) is all Hornby settrack, with the exception of the fiddle yard. For the fiddle yard I have used Peco flexi track with Hornby 1/4 straights fitted at each end with Hornby fishplates, and as I want the flexi track to stay straight, I've soldered a 2 inch length of piano wire along the outside edge at the joins. That helps to keep the flexible track straight and makes it easy for me to move it around until I settle on how I want things. Would I buy Peco set track? That will depend on what Hornby offer in the future. I'm not a rivety county type of person, if it is easy to use and the trains run OK, that will do for me.