Warning: This post later develops into what could be considered 'rivet counting'.
|Two skips parked on a length of Peco 'SM32' SL-600-track. The height of the rail and the heavy rail fixings are obvious.|
|In this close up af a rail joint, the high rail head is visible. The Peco fishplate is only gripping the feet of the rails.|
|Compared to a real Vignoles rail profile, the Peco Code 200 rail has a rail head far too large and square and a foot lacking in size. It looks a lot more like a Bullhead profile rather than a Vignoles profile.|
While sturdiness is probably a fine thing there are a few things about the Peco track that I'm less fond of:
- First the rail is of a heavy profile not reminiscent of the majority of the rail used at Nystrup Gravel. The rail height is 5 mm matching a 22 kg/m rail in 1/1. It's a bit too substantial for Nystrup Gravel. Painting and weathering may help to disguise that.
- Second, the rail is of a weird profile not matching a typical Vignoles profile. While you can't see the profile clearly the way I plan to install the track, the very high head of the profile is obvious also when seen from the side.
- In addition the type of rail fixing is different to what was usually used on Danish industrial railways. I could perhaps change that, either by 'sinking' the track in ballast or by exchanging sleepers and fixings.
|Peco track panel from above.|
Knowing that I run the risk of getting dissatisfied if I install the Peco track without having tried something else, the hunt is now on for some rail profiles of a smaller size and some rail spikes. Having built track in 1:35, in real life in 700 mm gauge and working for a railway contractor, I do tend to like track that's looking good prototypically.