… according to “he who should know” aka Jack Lynch.
It will be interesting to read the first reports - and the first frustrations on account of the different geometry. Teaching an old dog new tricks can be tricky. 
Can’t be any worse than when Aristo was first in the track business. Things there didn’t fit always either. LGB came out with their 1600 turnouts…Aristo responded with their wide radius… The slightly different shape of the rail can be frustrating…and the tie spacing is slightly different…which can throw things off that clamp to the track. But we survived as well as Aristo. Might turn out that people will like Piko’s geometry over the old LGB geometry. Or there could be total revolt…!! Never know…
Warren,
I’ve done a bit of testing with the PIKO library - you know throw a bit of this and that together and see how it matches when you get back to the starting point. Well things work quite nicely within the PIKO system … but those who think that you can substitute PIKO for LGB on any given track arrangement will be scratching their heads.
Just a matter of time until they find out … as far as going from LGB to PIKO profile, that shouldn’t be a problem. Of course the smart people will start the “mix and match” routine to get the best of whatever they are after … that is once they figured out how to do that. That’s where a CAD program is of good use. 