Crossover on a Curve

[ss122]

I'm aspiring to a small shelf (HO) layout with 2 LDEs separated by a double track mainline that makes a 90 degree curve, probably 32-36 inch radius. Operationally I need to have a single crossover on this curve. Looking at the Walthers/Shinohara offerings, I see my choices are 32" outside radius/ 28" inside radius, and 28" outside radius, 24" inside radius. I fugure I'd like these tracks approx 3" on center, but the Walthers choices force me into much larger, unprototypical track spacing. I'm not interested in handlaying. Any suggestions from the assembled multitude on how to make a smooth crossover on a curve? TIA, Ken

[gmpullman]

Ken,

I did what you are proposing using two Shinohara turnouts as you describe. It took a little clipping and filing of the diverging routes (the crossover tracks themselves) but I recall that I could trim about 2" off each diverging route. I carefully cut the rails to offset the gaps so they were about 1" or about four ties offset. After filing the rail ends I gently slid them back into the "spikes" and put a dab of ACC to hold everything in place. I then glued a thin piece of styrene to the underside of the ties to give the assembly a little strength and filed the cork to allow for the thickness of the styrene. Be careful that you don't trim off beyond where the contact strip is welded to the bottom of the rail base.

I never had a bit of trouble with my curved crossover other than a few Walthers passenger cars that didn't like them. Some of the WKW passenger cars don't have enough "rock" or axial free movement since they ride on the electrical contact strips.

Recently, I removed the crossover when I traded out most of the "power routing" turnouts for the DCC friendly variety on my layout and operationally, I could do without the curved crossover. In any case, with the Shinohara code 83's you are going to have to trim the diverging route on any crossover to attain a 2" or 2.25" track center.

ED

[selector]

On the smaller turnout, probably a #7.5, I found the inner route to be of a smaller radius than advertised.  It was closer to 22".  I turned the turnouts over and cut small bits out of the webbing between the ties under both rails past the frogs...that is, the closure and stock rails.  When I inverted the turnout I straightened the inner route a bit and got my 24" radius...believe it or not.  If you feel that the resultant track center spacing once the crossover has been achieved is too wide, then try doing what I described to the larger radius turnout.  You may get it down to something quite reasonable.

[tomikawaTT]

Just finished laying out the double crossover between curved main tracks at the entrance to Minamijima (passenger staging) on my double garage filler.  All tracks are 610mm (24") radius, with easements.  All four turnouts are curved, as is the crossover.  Once the necessary subgrade/roadbed is in place I will assemble the track, using code 100 Atlas flex and raw rail on wood ties.  No commercial turnouts, no jigs, no track geometry compromises, no problem.

The best part is that I don't have to search the world for, "Close, but no cigar," products that might have major hiccups in the future - totally unacceptable on track that will be hidden and very close to inaccessible once the visible 'roof' goes on.

Hand-laying specialwork isn't for everyone - only people who are willing to pay attention to detail, use a couple of track gauges, a file, spiking pliers and a soldering tool to free themselves from catalog searches, backorder notices and not quite what was wanted trackwork.  Added bonus - it's a lot less expensive than store-bought.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with flex track and hand-laid specialwork)

[Texas Zepher]

ss122

probably 32-36 inch radius. Operationally I need to have a single crossover on this curve. Looking at the Walthers/Shinohara offerings, I see my choices are 32" outside radius/ 28" inside radius, and 28" outside radius, 24" inside radius.

Hmmm there is another turnout that is missing from these choices.  They also make a 36" outside, 32" inside curved turnout.  As the others have said one would need to trim the inside track of one and the outside track of another to make them fit at a more prototypical 2.5" separation between rails.  There would have to be some slight adjustments in the approach and departure radii to maintain a reasonable separation on a double track.

 

These are the ones I would use, unless you can be convinced to scratch build them.  Scratch building is not that hard, and one gets exactly what is needed for the situation. 

[dante]

I have plotted various radii on a board and checked the Walthers/Shinoharas by overlaying them.  The previous writer is correct:  there is typically a 6" difference between the outer and inner, diverging radii.   The larger radii are correct; the inner are 2" sharper than published and printed on the turnouts.

Dante

[wedudler]

 Central Valley turnuts are curvable ! I did so with my Diamond Valley module.

And you have the choice of scratch building!

 

Wolfgang

[MisterBeasley]

The smaller-radius Peco curved turnout is approximately 18 inches inner, 22 inches outer.  I have several of these on my layout, and they work very well.  This is a bit tighter than the Walthers/Shinohara turnouts you've been looking at, and may help you in your design work.

[ss122]

Thanks all, for your answers. My original concern was with the differing radii. I must have overlooked the 36/32 inch turnout, that one seems to be my best option, with some of the modifications you guys have suggested. Another concern I have is manual turnout control. Let me take this opportunity to thank Wolfgang for the pictures you've published on this forum in the past of your different solutions. I have a file at home with prints I've made of your work for use once the yard switches are laid. I hope to try handlaying track and turnouts in the future, right now I just want to get something running.

 

My thanks again to all, Ken

[R. T. POTEET]

On those radii--32"/28" and 28"/24"--4 inches ain't really a bad combination. I would come off of both outer and inner tracks and easement them back into a parallel tangent.