O-27 Question

[Anonymous]

I'm getting back into model railroading now that I have plenty of space. I'm basically inheriting all of my dad's O-27 Gauge trains and was curious about a few things since I haven't been in the train scene since I was a young teen.

Is O-27 still a good way to go? Should I just go to O and abandon O-27 or run in a mixed mode of O-27 and O? Is that even possible? I have tons of 3 rail steel lionel O-27 track so any where I can reuse will save me big bucks.

I realize there a diameter issues with O gauge engines running on O-27 track but from what I see online and in stores it's mainly O Standard. Are most O compatible with O-27? What am I missing.

Any insight is appreciated, I posted a similar topic in the model railroad forum and they said the O-Gauge-Gurus reside in this forum so I apologize if this is a repeat topic for some.

Thanks
Joe

[Roger Bielen]

Joe - the O-27 will limit you on the type of, and length, of equipment you can run. Many of today's engines are designed for a min. of O-31. The problem I've run into when I used O-27 track was with the overhang, or some other part, hitting the housing for the switches. Also with the sharper curve longer cars may tend to derail and also longer trains may derail.

A possible way around the derailing may be to insert a 1/2, or whole, straight section between curved sections, this will "open up" the curve.

As far a mixing rolling stock you can be selective and see what looks good together, after all real trains are a mix of different size cars. I usually will taper down, or up, from large to small or small to large.

I'm sure others will have more input for you after they come on board later today.

[daan]

The only reason not to go with the 0-27 would be that the tracks are not as realistic as realtracks or something. As far as I know you can get 31 and 42 curves for it too, which will allow you almost every train to run. There are some big models which ask for wider curves, but those are mostly the very expensive models.
To start with, it should be more then sufficient. (my 2 cents..)

[spankybird]

Welcome to the CTT forum



PERSONAL I like 027 track but then again my whole layout is made of it. (click on the web icon below to see it.)

The good thing about 027 it there is plenty of it on the used market at a very reasonable price. The only thing I don’t like and don’t use is the Lionel 027 switches. I like the newer K-Line low profile type. This will allow much larger engines - cars to pass thru them. So if you don’t mind the overhang, there isn’t anything wrong with 027 IMHO.


tom

[dougdagrump]

[#welcome]
Even new 027 track is reasonably priced compared to "O".
That's what I plan to use on the very short term "Halloween" layout. I've got some old track and if I can't clean it up enuff I'll go with new. All this work for one night. [D)] But it should be fun to watch the little ones. [^]

[lionelsoni]

I'm not aware of any O31-diameter curves made in the O27 profile, although you can get O34, O42, O54, and O72 curves. O27 rail and ties are more realistic than O31 (which, however, is not saying much). It is common to insert extra ties to fill in the gaps. I like popsicle sticks for this. They are a little narrower than the metal ties, but not enough to be obviously different. Modern O27 ties have the same curved edge as O31, which is easy to cover up with ballast. Some folks paint the center rail black (except for a thin stripe along the top) to hide it.

The O34 track was made by Marx but is not hard to find. Marx also made some very good switches, in both O27 and O34, with low switch machines. These can be improved for non-Marx trains by disabling the spring frogs and adding guard rails.

[Anonymous]

Wow, thanks for the replies. Seems like a cool community and I'm looking forward to posting more as I go through my trials and tribulations of setting up my layout.

I never realized about the switches, that's a good thing to know. I think I'm going to look into getting wider diameter curved pieces that way I can get rolling stock that won't derail on me.

I find it funny that HO is HO and N is N but O has these variations, you would think they would want to standardize to make it easier for people to plug and play.

[dougdagrump]

That's the best thing about 3-rail, I consider myself "Electrically Challenged" but with 3-rail it is almost as you said"Plug-N-Play".[:D]

[lionelsoni]

O is a much older gauge than those others, which may explain some of the diversity. There are even more variations if you consider the scale modelers.

However, even the next younger scale, HO, has several variants around the world. The British make their HO-gauge trains to a scale of 1/76 rather than 1/87 (and call the result "OO"). The Germans run on 3-rail HO track, using AC rather than the DC that is usual in HO, and make their center rail out of individual studs ("pukos").

And just about every scale and gauge uses a variety of couplers, not unlike the prototypes.

[Anonymous]

Three-rail O gauge is about as easy as it gets in model railroading, so I'm not sure how they could make it any more "plug and play" friendly.

Two-rail O scale, and all of the other two-rail model railroading scales and gauges, involve a little more effort, but certainly not anything that a person of even average intelligence can't learn and quickly apply.

Within three-rail O gauge there are plenty of options to choose from. Smaller O27 stuff for those who have limited space or who just like the somewhat smaller items (I'm in that category), and scale-size models for those with deeper pockets, a propensity for more detail, and more space to run the stuff in (generally).

What you choose simply depends on what lights your fire. There are no right or wrong choices, and no best or worst products. It's a hobby, so the only person you ever have to please is yourself.

[jimhaleyscomet]

Often many of us use 027 inside of our layouts and then have a loop or two of larger curves (still "027 track") on the outside "mainline". Then if you get very big engines you can run them just on the"mainline". I had a lot of 027 track and sold it (went to MTH real trax) and then had to go and buy some back when I wanted a smaller layout. The big advantage to O27 is the k-line switches are MUCH cheaper than all the other switches and the cost of switches can add up in a hurry!

Jim H

[Anonymous]

I too exclusively use O-27 track on my layout. As others have noted you can get 42, 54 and 72" curves. I also have been converting my Lionel O-27 27" switches over to the K-line ones - these seem to cause less derailments and look better.

[Jumijo]

Allan Miller is an O27 guy? Popsicle sticks for ties (I was wondering what to do about those)? I'm learning a lot in this thread!

As prizm76 correctly noted, this is a pretty cool community.

Jim

[FJ and G]

027 track is more realistic than O in its lower profile. You can find 027 track that is even 72 inches in diameter (a bit confusing b/c it's called 027 in 072). Unfortunately, turnouts in 072 are not made for 027 and probably never will, esp. since Lionel's new thing is fasttrack.

However, you can get a Ross or Atlas 072 or for that matter a #4 or a #8 switch and mix that with the 027 track. Just line it up and solder the pieces together or solder wires between them. Take you about 5 minutes. I may even try that myself on my next layout.

Also, you can take the metal ties off with a screwdriver and replace with more realistic wood ties. They take just minutes to cut on a table saw and you can stain them with paint or black coffee and spike w/HO spikes.

In short, there are many ways to use good old 027 track.

[Anonymous]

Jim:

Yes, I'm partial to the O27 stuff. I've always regarded three-rail as being a toy train oriented niche, and do all of my scale modeling in Z, On30, and Large Scale. I like O27-size trains and I like O27 track, although these days I use Atlas track for all of my O gauge. I'm probably in something of a minority these days, what with all the highly detailed scale-size stuff currently being offered, but that doesn't bother me a bit. I'll continue to enjoy my hobby any way I care to. I still have plenty of O27-size trains in my collection, and they'll likely be there for as long as I'm around.

And, of course, I'm a big fan of Marx because I really apprecite the art of lithography as it was applied to toys. I don't have much of the original Marx (I'm not big on beat-up originals--just a matter of personal preference), but have a fairly large collection of the nicely done New Marx trains formerly made by the Flynns

[Jumijo]

I'm an O27 guy myself, Allan, and am happy to count you as "one of us".

Speaking of lithography, I was on vacation a few weeks back and came across two old tinplate lithoed diesels that I thought were Marx. Then the shop owner told me to look at the name on the back - Unique Arts. I also came across some Lionel replica flatcars with missiles made by Chicago City Line complete with boxes. Any one ever heard of this stuff?

Jim

[brianel027]

Welcome Prizm! I don't call myself "Agent 027" without good reason.

As far as derailments go on 027 track, refer to the following thread:
http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=42073

In addition to what's been said above, yes there are some locos and cars that need more than the 27 inch diameter of normal 027 track. But most of those cars and locos look as silly and "toyish" going around 031 curves as a Lionel GP9 will look going around 027 curves. With a number of engines and cars, the large switch box housing on the Lionel MPC-era designed (still made today) switches are the culprit. Sames goes for the older K-Line switches before their recent redesign.

These 027 switches still suffer from the large footprint base which also is somewhat limiting when designing a small layout. I've chopped and hacked my Lionel 027 switches down to literally just the track itself. This opens doors for more layout possibilies and more scenery options.

Just as a though, the Gargraves and Atlas 0 switches can be matched to 027 track and don't have the large footprint. The Gargraves switches are a decent deal when compared to the Atlas ones, and probably just as well made.

Granted, some items won't run on 027 track, but you won't be spending hundreds of dollars for engines either. There are many that do make the 027 curves and clear switch housing just fine:
-Lionel 14inch length (with folded sheet metal frame) locos: GP7, GP9, GP20, GP38, U36B, and the Williams GP9
-Most 14 inch length Railking locos (they they are a little big on the height and look large and boxy on an 027 layout). The RK SD-45 from around 1998-9 and the current Rugged Rails SD90MAC are IMO the best proportioned modern looking MTH locos for small layouts. The older RK F-3 that is shorter in length also runs and looks great on a smaller layout with 027 track.
-Plus you have the Lionel and Williams NW-2's, Centercab Switchers, Alco FA's, The RMT Beep and Buddy, K-Line's MP-15, Alco FA and the retired S-2 that all run and clear fine on 027 track.

You can also make additional ties for 027 track from Balsa wood (as I did) or from black foam core board (as I did for my nephew's layout). I got scrap pieces of foam core board for free from a local art and frame shop. There are also commercially available rubber ties made for 027 track: there's an ad in the current issue of CTT for them.

You can save even a few more bucks and using the manual Lionel 027 switches, you can drill a few holes and operate them from the front of your layout using nylon fishline. You can also disconnect the wires on the uncoupling track and run the UC track from a separate voltage post (not off track power) and have good response ever time, regardless of how slow the train is running.... the slower you run the train, the less voltage to the track and the less voltage to the UC track. Same goes for the Lionel electric 027 switches which are made to run off track power. Note, the new revised K-Line 027 switches have a very very low switch housing and are made to fun off auxiliary power also.

I suspect there are way way more 027 guys out there than these train forums would lead you to believe. My own numbers tell me this. Just as by the very best estimates, those using TMCC is around 40% at the very best number... more common numbers put it at between 25-30%. Even Lionel admitted a couple years ago that they were disappointed by the TMCC numbers.

[waltrapp]

Too bad that a thread that someone tried to initiate and keep going died a slow death. The thread was to be a listing of engines that people KNEW could handle 27" curves, overhang ignored.

My layout is all O27 track with 27, 42, and some 54 inch curves. About 1/2 are 27". Yes, I have to watch what I buy but I've found that many engines listed as 31" minimum will handle 27". I've asked both OGR and CTT why, in their reviews, they don't mention that an engine will handle 27" curves irrespective of what the manufacturer claims. I did get an answer from both magazines and both said that they can't go against what the manufacturer states unless they tried it with every type of track and switch made, and even then they'd be leery to make the claim. I still think that the mags could somehow qualify their statement such that we 27" guys could know if the engine under review would 'work' for us.

I've asked the same question of MTH and Lionel, with MTH only answering. The said basically the same thing that the magazines said. My feeling though is that MTH's smallest track curve that THEY MAKE is 31" so that's all that they care about.

I agree that the Lionel O27 switch's motor housing is the biggest single problem though.

- walt

[GPJ68]

The K-Line switches are a major improvement over the old black O27 Lionel 1122's and the newer brown Lionel 5122's. One of the best advantages is being able to power them separately from a fixed voltage lug on the transformer, which can't be done with Lionel's, unless you enjoy performing major surgery on them. The newest low profile K-Line's also look alot better (and seem to function better) than the older ones with the really large switch covers. Give any you might buy a good look though - I've had to tweek one or two new ones to keep the swivel rail flush and tight to the outside rails.

I also really like the Marx low profile switches with the plastic switch covers. The few larger/longer engines and cars I have will clear the O27 Marx switch, when they catch on the Lionel's housing. The 34" Marx switches and curves are also a great compromise if space is somewhat limited to prevent/reduce the use of 42" switches and curves. The Marx switches are also powered separately from a fixed voltage lug, and the small Atlas switch controller (the one usually seen with HO switches) can be used to control them. The one caveat with the Marx switches is that you must add a guide rail inside the outer turnout rail to prevent a steady diet of derailments. Marx made these switches to be able to pass the infamous Marx "fat wheel" of many older Marx engines. It should go without saying (but I'll say it anyway) that once a guide rail is glued in, "fat wheel" Marx engines won't be able to pass through the switch.

Certainly don't give up on O27 profile track. It's easy to trim to any length needed with a cutoff wheel, cheap to replace if necessary (like if you fowl up some trimming), and available in wider radius curves and switches if desired. While there's several sources for more realistic appearing O guage track (at least as "realistic" as one can get with a center rail), nothing's as easy on the wallet as O27.

Ebay is the best source IMHO for the Marx 34" curves and switches. Look for the curves with 5 ties instead of the normal 3 ties for 27" curves (42" Lionel also has 3 ties).

GPJ

[tmcc man]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dougdagrump

That's the best thing about 3-rail, I consider myself "Electrically Challenged" but with 3-rail it is almost as you said"Plug-N-Play".[:D]

i am not challenged, but when i recieved mine at 8 years old, i was able to figure it out. and now i need no help at all with the tmcc system[:D]

[tmcc man]

when i started i had all 027. in 2001 i recieved the the MTH turbine set. it had 031 curves, better known as realtrax. i still have all of my 27 curves and track, and i am thinking of suspending it from the ceiling along with my garden trains in my basement with my other layout. if you are starting out i would go with 031. i am converting my inner loop to 031 to allow me to run my tmcc diesels, and some new steamers i plan to purchase. i would say to go with lionel's fastrack system, because of its ease to assemble, and it comes in multiple diameter curves up to 084 (they require 32 per circle)i would stick with 072 because no company has made something requiring larger diameter curves. these are curves for speeding around, and i was thinking of putting a new layout around the walls.

hope it helps

[Anonymous]

In O gauge, I try to select track that "matches" my trains. That's why I tend to prefer traditional O27 track or Atlas track for O27-size trains. In my opinion, both FasTrack and RealTrax present too large a footprint to look right with smaller (traditional size) O27 models. The track and roadbed tends to overwhelm the trains, making them appear even smaller. Both FasTrack and RealTrax are fine for on-the-floor layouts, of course, but for more permanent installations I prefer the significantly smaller profiles provided by traditional O27 and Atlas O track.

I also like smaller locomotives--K-Line's Plymouths and Porters, Lionel's Dockside, RMT's BEEPs, and the like, all look better, in my opinion, on the smaller rail profiles, as do most traditional-sized locomotives and rolling stock in all brands. I pretty much stopped buying MTH RailKing items, though, because when they became more scale-size, they lost me as a customer. Still have some of their "Bantam" locomotives, which look great with traditional size O27 rolling stock, but that's about it.

For that matter, even full-scale-size items look far better on smaller-profile rails--far more akin to what one sees when looking at the prototype, where the trains seem to overwhelm the track, and not the other way around.

My scale-size O gauge trolleys and PCCs look great on O27 track, and even though I use Atlas track for my O gauge these days, I still have a large quantity of traditional tubular O gauge track on-hand for use with dedicated trolley lines.

Bottom line though: Go with whatever floats your boat, 'cause it's your railroad and you don't have to please anyone else.

[csxt30]

Allen: let me ask you your thoughts on using Gargraves track with the smaller or traditional 027 cars, as that seems to be what I started out doing this time around. I wanted to stay away from the big cars this time in hopes of having more of the smaller ones. So, I just wanted your prospective on track, as I think the Gargraves just looks more real like to me, & using manual switches seems cheaper also. Don't get me wrong, I like the traditional track, too, but I was able to purchase a good amount of the Gargraves, & like to see thoughts on the two. Thanks, John

[Anonymous]

Certainly nothing wrong with Gargraves, John, and I apologize for having left it out in my comments. I used Gargraves extensively for a good number of years, and certainly have nothing but good things to say about it (although I prefer Ross switches to the Gargraves switches).

It's just that my recent experiences--the past five years or so--have all been with Atlas O and with tubular O27. As a result, I tend to focus on those two the most in my comments. I have also used MTH RealTrax and Lionel's FasTrack in the past--and still have some of each around here--but keep going back to my two favorites.

Track, like the trains themselves, is very much a matter of personal preference, variety of items offered, cost, and availability. About the only O gauge track I don't much care for is traditional Lionel tubular O gauge. Didn't much like that oversized track when I was a kid, and didn't much like it when I got back into the hobby some 25 years ago or so. I practically gave away a ton of the stuff about six years ago, and still have some around here that needs yet to be uncovered (or discovered) in my train storage room.

[csxt30]

Thanks Allen, I don't see many many comments on The Gargraves, & just wondered if it was still very popular. I have a friend that really likes the highrail Lionel tubular track. I like it too, as it has a look of real strength & ruggedness. It seems harder to work with, though. In a way, every time I see someone else's track, I like it ! Well, thanks again Allen ! John

[Anonymous]

John:

Yes, Gargraves is most certainly still very popular. My guess is that it is the preferred track in the Hi-Rail community, and has been since the time when folks began to strive for a more realistic look to three-rail railroading.

I'm not sure that Lionel's O gauge track is really all that much harder to work with than their O27 track (both require a good pair of work gloves to put together, in my opinion), but I've always liked O27 because that lower rail profile looks a whole lot better to my eyes and because I found it easier to construct more realistic looking ties for the track. I even like the brown metal ties that hold the track together better than the black, open-ended, inverted U-shaped ties of O gauge track.

But I'm just stating my preferences, and I know others stand by other brands and types of track for various reasons. I have no problem with that, and don't much care what track I see on a layout as long as the hobbyist has trains up and running and, preferably, has gone beyond the bare plywood approach in making the layout into something distinctive. But I'll even happily tolerate the bare plywood pike as long as the owner is having fun with the hobby and growing his or her interest in trains.

[csxt30]

Well said Allen ! Sure is nice to see what everyone else is doing, & the way they do it. I didn't have internet before when I had trains & only depended on train shows & the magazines & maybe a couple of friends. but today, a person can grow in knowledge in leaps & bounds with the internet, plus find parts or make purchases quickly. Boy, I really enjoy trains, now, & of course the people ! Thanks again, Allen, John Oh, also let me add, that we have so many choices in track today, & switches.

[Anonymous]

GP J68 qoute

"The one caveat with the Marx switches is that you must add a guide rail inside the outer turnout rail to prevent a steady diet of derailments. Marx made these switches to be able to pass the infamous Marx "fat wheel" of many older Marx engines. It should go without saying (but I'll say it anyway) that once a guide rail is glued in, "fat wheel" Marx engines won't be able to pass through the switch."

Could you supply more details and maybe pictures on this modification?

Is it used on the plastic Marx switches that have the plastic frog or the older all metal switches with the center throw part with two pieces of rail on it?

I have had trouble with the plastic Marx switches when the frog wears. I have therefore settled on the older all metal switch with nails installed to fill some of the gaps that catch some pickups.

Thanks

Charlie

[GPJ68]

Well, they say a picture is worth a thousand words....

Bear with me - this is the first time I've used a picture hosting site, so things might not go smoothly at first....





Now, assuming the links are working, the white rail is what I glued in extra. I used StripStyrene .080" x .250" and cut it to @ 5" long for the O34 and @ 4" long for the O27. It's spaced out from the rail @ same distance as the guides on Lionel 1122 switches. I Also beveled each end and let them stick out a little wider to (in theory) prevent the possibility of a wheel flange hammering the blunt end and derailing. Lionelsoni made an earlier comment about needing to disable the spring loaded frogs as well, but I haven't done that, and so far haven't had a problem (at least one that I can readily attribute to the frogs). Maybe I've just been lucky, or my switches aren't worn enough to start having frog problems. The only other thing I might do eventually is go back and bevel the top of each end of the guide rails - I can hear some occasional "clacking" when some cars with operating shoes pass over the guides - found one formerly poorly mounted low hanging shoe lying suspiciously close to a switch once. Gotta get around to replacing that too.....

Before adding the guide rails, I couldn't get any engine I have to successfully take the turnout portion in either direction. Now, my Williams diesels, 2343's, and K-Line Allegheny all handle them flawlessly (knocking heavily on wood....). Well almost - the Allegheny's pilot truck will sometimes jump on one switch in particular, but I think that's more a problem with the pilot (spring/weight) and not the switch (does it also on one K-Line switch as well).

The only other problems I have with the Marx switches are some random stalling/e-unit cycling of some Post-War steamers (1666, 2035) and Beeps, which I attribute more to electrical pickup problems than switch problems (happens at random on the K-Line O42's as well). A few switches seem to be a little rough/bumpy, but I'll get around to tweeking them, someday.... My trackwork as a whole isn't anything close to smooth either.

The other neat thing about these Marx switches is that they're quasi-non-derailing. They're not intentionally "automatic" like the K-Line's or Lionel's (wired to throw automatically in the event a train approaches the switch with the swivel rail in the wrong position), but a diesel will usually force the swivel rail into the proper position if needed without derailing. Steamers are another matter - the pilot truck will sometimes jump the swivel as one would expect. And rolling stock just doesn't have the weight like the diesels to force the swivel without jumping. There is a method or two of creating a truly "automatic" non-derail function for them, but they involve more rail cutting, isolating, and wiring than I've felt like messing with.

All in all, I really like the O34 versions - have 8 of them, along with 5 K-Line O42's on the layout. O27's are only used for dead-end sidings, so they get alot less use (turnout side-wise).

GPJ

[lionelsoni]

Well, I seems that I didn't disable the frogs after all. I think I must be remembering trying that before I added the guard rails.

I checked my stock of 20 unused switches and found that someone else has already added guard rails to 4 of them. Two of the guard rails are glued on, like GPJ's, and two are soldered, which is how I do it. You don't have to use plastic. The rails on the Marx switches are full (O27) height; so you can just cut a piece from regular O27 track. The guard rails that I made are only 2 inches long, much shorter than everyone elses'. At that length, the curvature is not very important. I bend the railhead away from the stock rail very slightly at each end, to catch the flange and ease it toward the stock rail. If you butt the flanges of the stock and guard rails together, you get about the right flangeway width.

Adding the anti-derailing feature is not hard. The trick is not to do it to the switch itself but rather to use a separate piece of track, next to the switch, with an insulated control rail.