Are you bothered by wide wheel tread?

[tpatrick]

It bothers me. Sometimes I look at a photo of an exquisite model and wonder if it maybe it's the real thing. But the giveaway is always the wide treads we have on our standard HO wheels. So, when I found Branchline produces a line of "fine tread" (.088") wheels I had to have them. Now I am not a trackwork guru. My main lines are wavy at best, and most of my turnouts are old, very used Atlas Custom Lines. Despite that, I threw caution to the wind and bought a pack of 100 said wheels and installed them. The result: fantastic! Nary a derailment. They run great and look good. The only problem was in a single turnout which had a bit of a bow in one rail. So, if you ever thought of trying a better looking wheel, I am here to tell you to go for it They work! Now if I can just find replacements for my steam loco lead trucks...

[grandeman]

Yeah, the wide wheels look out of place. One of these days we may lose them like you're doing.

[cacole]

If the wheels don't get your attention, that horribly oversized coupler head; bright, shiny coil spring on the side of the coupler head; or one-foot diameter air hose dangling down is a good thing to look for, too, to determine if an items is real or a model.

[mustanggt]

I've considered proto :87. too bad I do more N scale now. But your right, Those fat treads are a bit ugly.

[Anonymous]

I didn't think HO treads looked too bad until I spent some time driving on a highway nearby that runs parallel to the tracks.

I've seen many trains go by, and seeing them from 15 feet or so below track level, those shiny super thin width wheels REALLY stood out at me. They look so thin after spending so much time looking at Model Railroad photographs.

This is making me seriously contemplate Proto:87. (I'm currently just an armchair guy).

I do not forsee joining a club at any time in the near future, so I'm not too concearned about compatability with other people's track/equipment.

Iain Rice's project article in MR a year or so ago also got me thinking about this.

[Anonymous]

The wide tread is certainly a compromise to ensure good running and tracking for the model. You can use Proto:87 wheel sets for pictures, but most layouts will not handle the real width wheels without derailing.

What I can't understand is the # 1 gauge having such large flanges and width.

[jeffshultz]

I dunno... the lighting on my layout is bad enough that I don't see the wheels on my cars and engines unless they derail...

[Pruitt]

Well, let's see.....

Most of the stirrup steps on my equipment are the ones that were molded on by the kit manufacturer - about a scale 6 inches thick and deep.... A lot of molded on grab irons that are really just ridges in the plastic.... window mullion thicknesses of six inches or more in the caboose and loco cab windows (not to mention quite often three or four inches wide on top of it!).... "Broad" curves on my layout that, if full sized, an 0-6-0 would have trouble negotiating.....

No, at this point the wide wheel tread doesn't bother me a lot.

[IRONROOSTER]

And then there is the Proto 87 group http://www.proto87.org/p87/intro.html which advocates even narrower treads.

For me personally, I find that the 110 wheels in S scale work quite nicely.
Enjoy
Paul

[tigerstripe]

Not even a little bit. I have to many unfinished projects already.

[DanRaitz]

Nope :)

[CNJ831]

Considering how many features (grabs, ladders, roof walks, couplers, steps, door guides, brake wheels, et al.) that are truly obvious to the viewer in a passing HO scale train are out of scale on many of our models, the last thing I'm worried about is wheel tread width!

CNJ831

[soumodeler]

At the moment, all I really need is metal wheels on all my cars. Having the "correct" width is not important at all to me anyways. It looks just as good to me.

soumodeler
-----------------
The Southern Serves the South!

[Virginian]

Nope. I only look at things from the side. :-)

[cspmo]

On cars that you can see the wheels from the end. Like tank , & hoppers I put .088, other cars it don't bother me.

[Anonymous]

Cool thread. A good compromise for me may be the semi-scale .088" thick wheels.

From the proto:87 page:
wheel widths:

prototype: .063"
proto:87: .064"-.069"
Standard HO: .108"

Maybe the branchline .088" will be the way to go for me - a good compromise.

[nfmisso]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tpatrick

They work! Now if I can just find replacements for my steam loco lead trucks...

NWSL, .088" or .064"

[West Coast S]

It didn't perturb me until I ordered a georgous 2-6-2T finescale kit which had drivers and wheel tread/flange depth machined to Proto:64 standards. Heck, wish I could purchase just the valve gear and drivers to retrofit on the rest of the fleet.

[WilmJunc]

No, I have too many other things to worry about....like ever finishing my layout[:)]

[mersenne6]

Depends on the period you are modeling. If it is the 1880's it is very prototypical.