Ignoring Prototypical RR dimensions
I might suggest that there are a number of occasions where were we might just well ignore prototypical RR dimensions in our modeling pursuits.
One such case is in coupler sizes. Yes, there are makers of prototypical size couplers for our scale models, and while they look great, have you ever tried using them? Your track work has to be SO GOOD that there are NO unusual little dips. Your turnouts need to have no dips, your mounting of them on the cars has to be very precise,...etc, etc.
Personally I much prefer to utilize my good old reliable Kadees. And why would you think that MOST commercial manufactures stick with these 'oversize couplers',...reliability.
Same thing applies to our model RR size wheels. Seems most commercial manufactures of HO scale model train cars supply them in stock condition with .110" tread width wheels. Why, because in general they are the most reliable in general operating conditions.
That's what I am seeking,..reliable operation, no derailments (or very few).
I might suggest that there are a number of occasions where were we might just well ignore prototypical RR dimensions in our modeling pursuits.
One such case is in coupler sizes. Yes, there are makers of prototypical size couplers for our scale models, and while they look great, have you ever tried using them? Your track work has to be SO GOOD that there are NO unusual little dips. Your turnouts need to have no dips, your mounting of them on the cars has to be very precise,...etc, etc.
Personally I much prefer to utilize my good old reliable Kadees. And why would you think that MOST commercial manufactures stick with these 'oversize couplers',...reliability.
Same thing applies to our model RR size wheels. Seems most commercial manufactures of HO scale model train cars supply them in stock condition with .110" tread width wheels. Why, because in general they are the most reliable in general operating conditions.
That's what I am seeking,..reliable operation, no derailments (or very few).