Slightly confused here.... can you help clarify?
I'm building my new layout and I haven't laid any track yet, but I'm only a few days away from first lengths of track being put down. I have Peco code 83 HO and NCE PowerPro. I've read up on DCC and track and stuff and I have bought Electrofrog turnouts. I was going to use insulated joiners at the turnout ends of each switch.
Reading the February 2008 article on laying track on part 2 of the WSOR (pageS 43 -47) I read that (page 44 second para) 'Peco also sells 'Electrofrog' versions of these code 83 turnouts. The Electrofrog type has all metal frog construction so these turnouts will require gaps and jumper wiring like any other brand of all metal turnout.'
What's all that about then? I thought that insulated joiners would do the job. Or am I wrong? Do I buy Insulfrog turnouts instead?
Now confused (slightly).
Cheers
Barry
As I understand Peco nomenclature, an Electrofrog turnout is just like the ones I hand-build, requiring the frog to change polarity as the points are thrown, and requiring insulated joiners at the frog end of the turnout if there is another turnout 'frog end to frog end,' as at the other end of a passing siding or runaround. Reliable frog power calls for contacts on the switch machine.
OTOH, the Insulfrog is similar to the Atlas design. There is a strip of plastic in the frog, and the closure and frog rails are powered all the way through. This does not require any frog power circuitry. Where Peco differs from Atlas is in the absence of that long dead section through the frog - long enough to cause problems with power pickup on my short wheelbase DMU cars.
Which you use depends on your personal preferences. My personal bias is to go with the Electrofrog, but others are sure to disagree.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Hi tomikawatt
My understanding precisely, that's why I went for 'electrofrog' as there's no 'dead' area which can momentarily stop a loco on it's way thru. Also, insulated joiners at the end of each line of the turnout will prevent any probs with power shorts. So what's with the need for wiring as mentioned in the article? Is that is you don't use insulated joiners?
So can the Insulfrog become a power routing frog like the Atlas design. IE the ability to electrify the frog in congunction with the switch machine's direction.
If that is true than I believe that would be the better route. My thinking is that insulated joiners do a horrible job of aligning track. And unless you cut and cement styrene into rail gaps staggered accross the track, that is the only way to insulate the electrofrog or solid metal turnouts.
Bighurt wrote: My thinking is that insulated joiners do a horrible job of aligning track.
That may be true. HOWEVER, I believe you only need to insulate one rail on each diverging track-- the rail that goes through the frog. The outside rails do not need to be insulated, therefore you can use at least one metal joiner to help align each track.
Barry,
More opinions from my experience, your mileage may vary.
I pretty much agree with Chuck. I use electrofrogs (live frogs) because I don't want the dead spot in the turnout and because insulfrogs can (not always, many times there are no problems) cause a short if the wheels touch both rails at the frog.
Don't use insulated rail joiners. Cut gaps instead. The insulated joiners are oversize and are a pain in the Neck....If you haven't already, Learn to cut gaps with a dremel cut off disc.
As for power routing turnouts: If you are in DCC this is pretty much irrelevant and relying on the points for power routing is a poor choice reliabiltywise. When the track is painted and ballasted you will find that the conductivity of this arrangement becomes suspect. If the switch has internal contacts like Atlas snap, I probably still would avoid relying on them over time. I'm not sure which arrangement Peco insulfrog uses.
If you want to be able to kill the siding power, use a toggle from the fascia and cut gaps and feeder the siding from the toggle...Much more relaible. I know a couple of large layouts in my area that rely on power routing turnouts throught the points. These guys are always messing with the turnouts....
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
Hi Guy
Yes, have a Dremmel and cutting discs. But, in the summer heat don't you run the risk of metal expansion closing the gaps? I seem to remember when Dave Frary built his PRR layoui in a series of articles in MRR (10+ years ago?) slid in a piece of flat plastic and cut it to shape. Anyone do this?
Use what you have, and just leave the next sections of rails beyond the through and diverging routes (after the frog) gapped. You don't need joiners of any kind, and you don't even need styrene fillers if you take a deep breath, have a pair of needle-nosed pliers, and a track nail or two handy. Lay the properly dressed rail ends (Chuck's Command - file a gentle bevel on the rail head, both top and flange face, to ease passage of the wheels) within about 1/16" from the turnout route rail ends. Insert one nail for retention of alignment and spacing, and move on to the next job. You do your trimming and fiddling on the other end of this segment you have just aligned from now on, and leave the one nearest the turnout alone until you go back to ballast and weather. Once the ballast is dry, you have the option of removing the nail or leaving it for almost-ballast-looking insurance.
It is what I have become content to do, and it works.
bsteel4065 wrote: Hi GuyYes, have a Dremmel and cutting discs. But, in the summer heat don't you run the risk of metal expansion closing the gaps? I seem to remember when Dave Frary built his PRR layoui in a series of articles in MRR (10+ years ago?) slid in a piece of flat plastic and cut it to shape. Anyone do this? CheersBarry
I haven't had any close up (yet), but the fix you describe is what I have done where I want to be sure (which is pretty much everywhere). Plus it looks better to fill in the gaps around the turnouts. I use the plastic stock, gap filling crazy glue to secure it and then a trim with the exacto to size after the glue has set. Pretty quick.....Much better IMHO than insulated joiners. Do be carefull cutting gaps that you are perpendicular to the rail and that you don't let the cutoff wheel drift or you will get a very large gap (don't ask how I know this). I practiced on scrap until I got a feel for it.
Among the modelers I know, no one uses insulated joiners, cutting gaps is the standard and has been for many years.
I'll go for that. Sounds OK. I used insulated joiners the last time I laid track which was about 12 years ago. Yes, not very attractive and very over sized.
Thanks!
I actually found a PROTOTYPE insulated rail joiner, which was not only way oversize, but made out of the same ugly orange plastic that Atlas used to sell before they changed their insulated joiners to clear plastic. (UP, North Las Vegas, on track laid during the 21st century - rails are dated 2000. The turnout is a #7.) Rail creep and expansion are issues on my layout, so I use insulated joiners - but I don't rely on them to maintain mechanical alignment of railheads.
Selector,
"Chuck's Command?" I don't think so. Chuck's Recommendation, or maybe Chuck's suggestion. Sergeants don't give commands, they just pass on other people's orders. That said, knocking the sharp corner off the railhead at every rail joint is the single best derailment preventer I ever discovered - especially useful at rail gaps.
Chuck [MSgt, USAF(ret) modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Would the Sarge settle for "recommandment?" I was an officer, and even I follow that tip.
-Crandell
I use Atlas insulated frog turnouts with DCC. With these it doesn't matter where your power feeders are located. All rails are powered correctly all the time no matter which way the turnout is thrown. So, this is rather fool-proof.
Now, I occasionally get a temporary stall when a loco hits the frog area. This is usually only at very slow speed but it happens so seldom it isn't really a problem. I never get shorts in the frog areas. I have an SW8 switcher than will some times stall at only one of my 22 turnouts. So I kind of think that this is due to some unevenness in rail elevations that may be slightly lifting a loco wheel off the powered rail.
Do Peco insulated frogs turnouts work the same way as Atlas'? Or is there something different about them?
In previous posts on this thread cutting gaps in the diverging routes is mentioned. Does this mean that you then need additional power feeders to power rails beyond the gaps?
Jerry
Rio Grande vs. Santa Fe.....the battle is over but the glory remains!
I was going to ask that next. Who has problems with Atlas frogs and what Loco's in particular do you have problems with.
My pike will be mostly EMD powered with the smallest units being GP-38's and maybe a dedicated local MP15AC down the road. Most of which have power pick ups in both trucks, I don't see having problems in the switch, but I also plan to power route the frog.
But to answer your question the Atlas and Insulated Peco's are essentially the same asthetically the Peco loks more prototypical. And yes you would have to power the frog with gaps, but again this would have to be selectable with the direction of the switch.
"You show me a man with both feet on the ground and I'll show you a man who can't get his pants on." -anonymous
I have been using Peco Code 83 insulfrog turnouts for several years without a hitch usIing only a Proto 2000 SW9. I had more issues with Atlas Insulfrogs.
Larry
Can you expand on the problems you had with the Atlas turnouts, Where they mechanical or electrical. Seeing as this thread is mainly focused on the electrical properties of turnouts. I would be curious to here about your problems.
The reason why I want electorfrog is merely that threat of a momentary pause as a loco crosses the turnout. I used Peco electrofrog on my last layout which was DC. Obviously DCC is more 'aware' of shorts.
Taking up the point of the oversize ugliness and failure of Peco plastic joiners to mechanically align the track and turnout routes, it seems the best route is to solder metal rail joiners at the end of each turnout and then cut isolation gaps further up on straighter track. The gaps can be left if temperature doesn't vary too much. However, if it does, fill the gaps with a plastic that can be shaped and carved so as to 'disappear'.
I do have problems with temperature becuase my layout is in my loft. (Freexing in the winter and boiling in the summer). BUT, I'm putting in air con!
Thanks all you guys! As usual, this forum is attended by a great bunch or very experienced people.
Happy new year!
Hi Camaro
I prefer Peco anyway.... but I am lucky as they are british made and I live in the UK, so the cost is pretty good for me over here. (However, the $ rate at the moment is so low that I'm buying BLI and Precision at a very good price! A pound £ is currently running around $1.97)
As to the switch mechanism, yes I like the snap action, on my last layout I used a CDU with SEEP mechanisms from Guagemaster another british company. But this time for main line stuff and the visible layout, I'll be removing the mid springs and using Tortoise via and NCE controller. I really want a realistic open and close. But may use the snap action in my staging area.
I do appreciate that the Insulfrog versions do not actually stall an engine, it's just that I've always used Electrofrog.
By the way, nice handle... is that a Z28 Camaro?