I am testing with some unmodified Atlas #6 turnouts (#0505, #506), Atlas flextrack and some Caboose ground throws the best track plan for my new layout.
I am astonished how solid the test operation is over switches without the usual wires to feed the switch blades and with dead frogs. The ground throws are no problem as everything is easy to reach.
I have from my last layout my Tortoise switch machines and the Digitrax DS64 ready for installation. I am also willing to add the tiny jumper wires to the switch blades and connect the frogs to the switch machine.
But is that really necessary? I did it on all previous layouts because it is recommended and it looks like everybody does it. Do I have simply luck with the quick and dirty approach of unmodified Atlas #6 switches? Will I face massive problems when dirt, dust and glue from ballasting creeps into the switches and isolate the switch blades? Will the dead frog be never a problem for contemporary layout (GP15,38,40 …. etc)?
Living under the layout for some days to do possible surplus and overdone wiring would be some burden I would like to prevent as I am getting older.
I would like to read about your experience.
Reinhard
I do not add any extra wireing, turnouts are installed right out of package.
Other then cleaning the peco points, no issues. Luck??
I have found that turnout issues don't run rampant on my layout and it is a much smaller investment in time and energy to deal with the problem "if" one comes up. I have added feeders to one, frog juicers to four, have caboose ground throws on many. I have less than 40 turnouts, I have really never counted.
I Have only caulked down one T/O and that is the only one I have feeders on. For some reason, it was trouble until I stuck it down and added feeders. All my T/Os sit unstuck, however, the track on either side is well secured and they have all worked flawlessly.
I hope to add switch machines to all one day, however, it is down on my list of priorities. It all comes back to how complete vs size vs time spent on a layout.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
I moved one step further to KISS and replaced the Caboose ground throws with a U-shape bend spring wire to operate the switches. Looks better and want to know if it works reliable too.
Your experience and comments are welcome.
It's just me, but ever since I was a teenager I've always used switch machines. I just like running my layout hands-free. When I'm just "running trains" I prefer to sit in front of the control panel and not have to walk around to throw turnouts.
As for wiring, it's always going to be easier to do as you lay the track. The space under your layout will gradually acquire more clutter and wires, so wiring your turnouts will never be easier than it is now.
I installed turnouts with Tortoises first, but I didn't wire the frogs because I didn't know if it would be necessary. I finally did them, and found that a lot of little stalls went away, even for 4-axle diesels but particularly for tank engines and trolley cars. After that revelation, I just automatically made frog wiring part of the process.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
faraway I am testing with some unmodified Atlas #6 turnouts (#0505, #506), Atlas flextrack and some Caboose ground throws the best track plan for my new layout. I am astonished how solid the test operation is over switches without the usual wires to feed the switch blades and with dead frogs. The ground throws are no problem as everything is easy to reach. I have from my last layout my Tortoise switch machines and the Digitrax DS64 ready for installation. I am also willing to add the tiny jumper wires to the switch blades and connect the frogs to the switch machine. But is that really necessary? I did it on all previous layouts because it is recommended and it looks like everybody does it. Do I have simply luck with the quick and dirty approach of unmodified Atlas #6 switches? Will I face massive problems when dirt, dust and glue from ballasting creeps into the switches and isolate the switch blades? Will the dead frog be never a problem for contemporary layout (GP15,38,40 …. etc)? Living under the layout for some days to do possible surplus and overdone wiring would be some burden I would like to prevent as I am getting older. I would like to read about your experience.
Reinhard. Hope all is well overseas.
I've been running modern 4 axle geeps like IM GP10's, Athearn GP15's, and Atlas GP38s and MP15s over #6 Atlas turnouts for many years. Never a problem. Turnouts wired at all three legs, but otherwise straight out of the box.
I've switched to OnBoard sound and still no problems.
Once in a while I would have a problem with a Proto SW or a Bachmann S2 with Onboard sound but I attribute the flickering to the locos and not the turnouts. Shorter wheelbases and a less robust pickup system, IMO.
I can't speak to ballast/water schmutz ever working its way under the rivets, but I've never had a problem with that either.
I wouldn't hesitate to use them right out of the box, thrown manually or with caboose throws, as long as all three legs were wired. And I do that just to be conservative.
Save your self the hassle of wiring.
- Douglas
faraway I moved one step further to KISS and replaced the Caboose ground throws with a U-shape bend spring wire to operate the switches. Looks better and want to know if it works reliable too. Your experience and comments are welcome.
Are you referring to the home made spring that goes between the rails?
I've read about them,watched videos, even seen one. But I can't get them to work. Must be some small thing that I fail to understand.
If you got yours to work, would you mind shareing your method ?
Our club's new (still under construction) layout is almost all Atlas Customline #6 turnouts. They are all getting live frogs and point/closure/stock rail jumpers. I am doing all the wiring. Why am I going to all the trouble? Two reasons: One is Murphy's Law. The other is that I have several two axle critters that I want to be able to run on the layout.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
farawayYes, I installed the over center spring version. This video is quite helpful https://youtu.be/uXGEjuDhwhY In short: The little U with a 30° kink is a tad longer than required and tends to jump to either side as the center position is the shortest one. The 30° kink is your tool to adjust the length.
That's the video I needed to see
Thank you
Thanks for the feedback. I intend to proceed with the KISS approach for the next time. Ballasting the tracks will not happen soon and I have plenty of time to test the KISS approach intensive. I will move to the full approach if I encounter problems with the switches prior to ballasting.
ps. We are talking about seven switches in the very easy to access foreground. That make the risk manageable.
MisterBeasleyI installed turnouts with Tortoises first, but I didn't wire the frogs because I didn't know if it would be necessary. I finally did them, and found that a lot of little stalls went away, even for 4-axle diesels but particularly for tank engines and trolley cars. After that revelation, I just automatically made frog wiring part of the process.
I will second Mr. B's point. I operate a lot of narrowgauge and I would never omit feeding the frogs with them. The loss of reliability and performance is rather obvious with them and the small 2-axle critters in standard gauge without hot frogs.
Modern diesels with all wheel pickup, especially when MUed, generally do OK. However, even if I didn't finish wiring the turnout, I'd always leave a feeder coming down from above and tuck it away below just in case. You can attach later, but usually it's not as easy and is harder to conceal.
I've never wired any points, so I generally consider that to be unnecessary unless I'd run into a problem with them I couldn't solve with other means. So far that has worked for me.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
If you want to see why people add feeders, just run an 0-4-0 thru the system and relise that if your larger stuff has a hichup at the wrong place on a turnout, it can stall and with sound this is very noticable.
Thanks for the skeptical comments. I would never considered the KISS approach for a larger layout of I run narrow gauge or small engines especially steam. All my prior layouts had live frogs and extra fead blades.
This layout is a contemporary small ISL (industry switching layout) with modern diesel engines and with seven switches only and all are very easy to reach. The KISS positive feedback make me confident I am not totally nuts and I will give it a try.
So far testing is successful. All engines (GP15/38/40) have sound (Tsunami 2) and run very reliable. Tomorrow will an important day. I will do the ballasting. That is the time when the water/glue mix might creep into the tiny blade hinges and may disturb the power feeding of the blades.
I will come back in some days with
a. a good news
or
b. my plan to redo all track work with live frogs and blade feeder wires.
DCC or not?
I haven't seen this question asked in this discussion of adding extra wiring to the turnouts?
Many folks recommend powering the frog, particularly if running DCC. My question is it that really necessary if your locos are equipped with 'keep alive' that most DCC users utilize? Won't they make a smooth transistion over an unpowered frog by using 'keep alive' ?
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
railandsailMy question is it that really necessary if your locos are equipped with 'keep alive' that most DCC users utilize? Won't they make a smooth transistion over an unpowered frog by using 'keep alive' ?
Hi Brian:
Yes, locomotives with a 'keep alive' capacitor will roll over unpowered frogs just fine. The problem is that adding a keep alive circuit to some (many) locomotives can be a challenge. Many modellers would rather not attempt to solder the necessary wires to the very small soldering pads on the decoders, and in many cases there just isn't enough space for a larger keep alive circuit like the ones that TCS offers in the locomotive (the Loksound Power Pack will fit in tiny spaces but it doesn't offer a lot of running time). Powering the frogs is a much easier solution.
Powering the frogs is a much easier solution.Dave
Via frog juicers, Tortoise machines, etc,....but what about just manual operated turnouts ??
My thoughts were that MOST dcc operators wanted keep alive in their locos, so should not need to double down with this extra wiring needed to power up frogs.
Then with powered frogs don't you end up with potential shorts when wide wheels bridge over the tracks that come together at the frogs?
The tracks and switches are ballasted now. It went quite well with two observations:
a. I tried to protect the joints of the blades from the glue (white glue, water and detergent). That failed. The glue creeped up but it did not interrupt the electric connection. Lots of worry but no problem at all.
b. I assumed no mechanical problems but the lack of a powerful switch machine made it clear how much glue interfered with the simple mechanic. It toke about 10 minutes per switch to remove all set glue to get a smooth operation with a simple over center spring. All switches in perfect maintenance location at the layout front!
Summary: It work fine at the afternoon after ballasting.
Let’s see how things develop over time.
Anyhow I do not recommend it for larger and more complex layouts. It would also not use it with other than robust contemporary HO diesel engines.
ps. I did never use any keep alive. The “huge” US diesel don’t need it and my former “tiny” German narrow gauge steam locomotives (Weinert) had no space left after the DCC decoder was installed. May be small US HO steamer (0-4-0) with space in the tender are a good candidate if the tender is not used for pickup.
railandsailbut what about just manual operated turnouts ??
Caboose Industries makes manual ground throws that have contacts built into them. Scroll down a bit:
http://www.cabooseind.com/product-info
railandsailThen with powered frogs don't you end up with potential shorts when wide wheels bridge over the tracks that come together at the frogs?
No. If the frog is properly isolated there shouldn't be any shorts. You might want to study 'Wiring For DCC' by Alan Gartner:
http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches.htm
A standard Athearn SW1500 stalls on some switches when both wheels of one truck are on the dead frog (the wheel distance of the SW1500 truck is less than the #6 frog length) and the elevated frog raises the other two wheels of the same side over the rail.
A standard situation with the well known Atlas frog alignment failure and the stiff mounting of some Athearn trucks that can not be handled with a dead frog.
faraway A standard Athearn SW1500 stalls on some switches when both wheels of one truck are on the dead frog (the wheel distance of the SW1500 truck is less than the #6 frog length)
A standard Athearn SW1500 stalls on some switches when both wheels of one truck are on the dead frog (the wheel distance of the SW1500 truck is less than the #6 frog length)
and the elevated frog raises the other two wheels of the same side over the rail.
Brian, that is right.
A frog mounted a tad to high -and- a truck mounted quite stiff -and- a frog that is as long as the truck -and- a dead frog
is asking for to much luck :-)
The KISS way I am going is fine under certain circumstances but you just add one more risk to your layout.