Get free stuff!

Get free stuff!

Postby ConducTTor » Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:10 pm

I'm doing some market research and need info from you guys. In return I'll send 3 of you free stuff (courtesy of Zeuke-TT/rdikken). I can not tell you what "winning" answers I'm looking for since I don't want to skew your responses.

So, if you're interested, here we go:

If a rail system is available that is lower profile than Tillig but is not NA proto, how likely are you to use it? Definitely, maybe, absolutely not? And what are your reasons?

This is assuming that it's readily available in North America and the cost is less than or equal to the cost of Tillig. For those of you needing a reference, take a look at Tillig track prices here at Euro Train Hobby (in New Jersey) http://www.eurotrainhobby.com/track-system-tt/c173

Also, the ties are injection molded, the turnouts are assembled, flex track is available and, the turnout geometry is comparable to a #6 turnout.
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby AstroGoat760 » Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:35 pm

As far as we are concerned, the answer to the question that we would use track with lower profile than Tillig would be that we are highly likely to use it, so much as the price is on par or less than Tillig, and that availability of track and track parts is better than that of Tillig.
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3473
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Lidgerwood, North Dakota, USA

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby Bill Dixon » Sun Jul 13, 2014 8:46 pm

ConducTTor wrote:I'm doing some market research and need info from you guys. In return I'll send 3 of you free stuff (courtesy of Zeuke-TT/rdikken). I can not tell you what "winning" answers I'm looking for since I don't want to skew your responses.

So, if you're interested, here we go:

If a rail system is available that is lower profile than Tillig but is not NA proto, how likely are you to use it? Definitely, maybe, absolutely not? And what are your reasons?

This is assuming that it's readily available in North America and the cost is less than or equal to the cost of Tillig. For those of you needing a reference, take a look at Tillig track prices here at Euro Train Hobby (in New Jersey) http://www.eurotrainhobby.com/track-system-tt/c173

Also, the ties are injection molded, the turnouts are assembled, flex track is available and, the turnout geometry is comparable to a #6 turnout.


I would prefer a code 55 rail height for realism however if we want a track system that will accommodate both N/A and European equipment, Code 70 is the way to go.
I would like a minimum of a real #6 turnout. If number 8s were available I would use a mix of them.

Costs: Shinohara code 70 turnouts are in the Twenty-something range. Atlas code 83 flex track is over $ 7.00. I would have no problem with those prices. Peco Code 83 products cost more but are better looking. If the track system was of comparable quality I would have no problem paying Peco prices.

If #8 turnouts cost more due to a lower demand I would have no problem paying more for them.

For those who want to know what model railroad rail height translates to in real sizes.
Code 40 is about 80 Pound rail - pre WW II railroads
Code 55 is about 115 pound rail - Post WWII through the transition era.
Code 60 is about 132 pound rail - Modern Railways
Code 70 is larger than 155 pound rail, the largest rail used on railways.
Code 80 is much larger than anything ever used on a railway.

For the new track system to be successful the buyer needs some choice.
So you need flex track, two types of turnouts (medium and broad) and both insulated and regular rail joiners.
To expand the system and a wye to match the medium turnout, and perhaps a sharper turnout for industrial areas.
I do not know how much demand there would be for crossings (30 degree, and such). I suspect the lack of them in other TT-Scale track systems indicates how much demand there is for them.

Anyway that is my opinion.

Everybody else step forward and voice your opinions and be prepared to support the product with your wallets when it comes out.
Regards
Bill Dixon
TT-Tracks
North Vancouver, BC
Bill Dixon
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:57 pm
Location: North Vancouver, B.C.

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby railtwister » Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:09 pm

I agree with Angry, but would add that particularly in the case of turnouts, they need to be operationally reliable and of good quality of construction. How non-NA prototype are we talking here? Since I already am using Atlas and Peco code 100 turnouts in both HO and On30, and Kato UniTrack in N scale, so I'm not a real stickler for prototype fidelity, but reliable operation is crucially important to me. Of course, NA appearance would be a plus, but not having it isn't a deal-breaker as far as I'm concerned.

As for rail size, I think code 70 or code 60 rail may be the best compromise for durability, and I am not really interested in code 55 or smaller since I still have equipment with HP wheels. The trick Peco used with their double-footed rail in N scale that appeared to be code 55 at the upper foot, but really was code 80, since the bottom foot was buried in the plastic ties.

So, in summary (for me anyway) first on the list is operational quality, followed by competitive pricing, with NA prototype appearance at the bottom of this list of three.

Bill in FtL
Last edited by railtwister on Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
railtwister
 
Posts: 699
Images: 4
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:39 am
Location: Oakland Park (Ft. Lauderdale), FL, USA

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby CaTTwoman281 » Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:49 pm

railtwister wrote:I agree with Angry, but would add that particularly in the case of turnouts, they need to be operationally reliable and of good quality of construction. How non-NA prototype are we talking here? Since I already am using Atlas and Peco code 100 turnouts in both HO and On30, and Kato UniTrack in N scale, so I'm not a real stickler for prototype fidelity, but reliable operation is crucially important to me. Of course, NA appearance would be a plus, but not having it isn't a deal-breaker as far as I'm concerned.

As for rail size, I think code 70 or code 60 rail may be the best compromise for durability, and I am not really interested in code 55 or smaller since in still have equipment with HP wheels. The trick Peco used with their double-footed rail in N scale that appeared to be code 55 at the upper foot, but really was code 80, since the bottom foot was buried in the plastic ties.

So, in summary (for me anyway) first on the list is operational quality, followed by competitive pricing, with NA prototype appearance at the bottom of this list of three.

Bill in FtL


I agree as well.
Real Women Not Only Drive Diesel Trucks, They Drive Diesel Tractors!
User avatar
CaTTwoman281
 
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:12 am
Location: Bowdon, Georgia, USA

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby AstroGoat760 » Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:58 pm

railtwister wrote:I agree with Angry, but would add that particularly in the case of turnouts, they need to be operationally reliable and of good quality of construction. How non-NA prototype are we talking here? Since I already am using Atlas and Peco code 100 turnouts in both HO and On30, and Kato UniTrack in N scale, so I'm not a real stickler for prototype fidelity, but reliable operation is crucially important to me. Of course, NA appearance would be a plus, but not having it isn't a deal-breaker as far as I'm concerned.

As for rail size, I think code 70 or code 60 rail may be the best compromise for durability, and I am not really interested in code 55 or smaller since in still have equipment with HP wheels. The trick Peco used with their double-footed rail in N scale that appeared to be code 55 at the upper foot, but really was code 80, since the bottom foot was buried in the plastic ties.

So, in summary (for me anyway) first on the list is operational quality, followed by competitive pricing, with NA prototype appearance at the bottom of this list of three.

Bill in FtL


That is a good point, as the bulk of our North American rolling stock is HP or similar, so the rail height has to at least accommodate HP flanges, otherwise we would not even consider the track.
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3473
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Lidgerwood, North Dakota, USA

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby CSD » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:02 pm

rail twister wrote:... I am not really interested in code 55 or smaller since in still have equipment with HP wheels...


Just a note. HP wheels do work with code 55 track.
Mark
//S
User avatar
CSD
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: St. Albert, Alberta, Canada

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby AstroGoat760 » Mon Jul 14, 2014 1:31 am

CSD wrote:
rail twister wrote:... I am not really interested in code 55 or smaller since in still have equipment with HP wheels...


Just a note. HP wheels do work with code 55 track.


Thanks, I did not know that.
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3473
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Lidgerwood, North Dakota, USA

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby j p » Mon Jul 14, 2014 2:51 am

I think this is getting misunderstood. Maybe the formulation was slightly unfortunate?
People answer to something else than what was the question...
Selecting the Code is not an option. Code is fixed, but it is better than Tillig.
German/Euro style of the ties. The "bolts" can be filed or sanded as with Tillig's track if it has to look more NA.
Nr.6 turnout (even with German geometry) would be very close to NMRA standard. The most important for me is if the branch after frog can be straight (as on the prototypes). If 2/3 shortening for the track is accepted, this turnout could stand in for number 9. The turnout is the key.
I would not worry about the crosses, those are relatively easy to make. My only concern is double slip turnouts.

My answer is: definitely yes
(but I'll buy it from Zeuke-TT in Europe)
j p
 
Posts: 1199
Images: 69
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: Get free stuff!

Postby railtwister » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:00 am

Is this is a product already being manufactured? If so, what is the rail code being used by this line of track compared to Tillig? It really boils down to questions about the switches, will the flange ways and check gauge measurements be compatible with wheels already in use in NA (and please don't overlook the new Fox Valley wheelsets just announced on this list)? Track and wheel dimensions must be properly matched for reliable operation, you can't simply improve one without affecting the other.

As for crossings, I have no inclination to hand lay track in TT scale, and that includes crossings! Having a crossing of the same angle as a turnout plus a 90 degree angle seems like a minimal requirement. And my past experience with slip switches in other scales leads me to want to totally avoid them in the future!

As for German bolt details molded into the plastic ties, a picture would be worth 1000 words, since I have never seen the prototype. Unless it is really obviously different in appearance, I don't think it would be a major issue...

Bill in FtL
railtwister
 
Posts: 699
Images: 4
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:39 am
Location: Oakland Park (Ft. Lauderdale), FL, USA

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests