Hi all,
I was looking at the possibility of using Peco Code 75 Streamline track and turnouts for my layout, but I was wondering if anyone has any experience using this with steam locos, and if any brands are known to have issues. My big concern would be flange depth compared to rail height. Don't want the spike heads pushing the flanges over the rail.
BLI's service team says they can't recommend code 75 because they don't test their equipment on it, and I haven't heard back from Bachmann yet. Has anyone used this track with typical "off-the-shelf" locos/rolling stock? Were any modifications needed?
I've done some math using a "train set" grade loco I have, and the flange vs. rail depth seems to be ok, but the items I have now will likely not be in use on the layout that I'll use this track on. And since buying a better quality loco just to test on a length of track is not in the budget right now, I wanted to throw this out there and see if anyone has any insight.
Thanks
- Adam
When all else fails, wing it!
There is no reason to worry! If your locos can run on code 70 rail (which they can if their profile meets NMRA RP 25 standards), then they can also run on code 75 rail from Peco, which is designed to handle the slightly larger flanges according to NEM standards.
Folks like the late Stein Rypern or Jon Grant all used Peco code 75 rail and never reported a problem.
While the size of the rail is not an issue, the switches may be one. You should in any case avoid the "small" tunouts and choose the the "medium" or "large" ones.
Happy times!
Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)
"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"
Tinplate Toddler While the size of the rail is not an issue, the switches may be one. You should in any case avoid the "small" tunouts and choose the the "medium" or "large" ones.
Thanks, Ulrich. With the small turnouts, is it the radius or the clearances between the guards and the stock rails that's the issue? I read somewhere that the Peco Small Turnouts are comparable to a #4 turnout by Walthers, but with a curved diverging leg instead of straight.
duplicate
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
LonehawkI read somewhere that the Peco Small Turnouts are comparable to a #4 turnout by Walthers, but with a curved diverging leg instead of straight.
All of the Code 75 and Code 100 Streamline HO turnouts use about a 4.5-4.75 frog with different radii on the curved diverging leg. Small 24"Medium 36"Large 60"
cuyama All of the Code 75 and Code 100 Streamline HO turnouts use about a 4.5-4.75 frog with different radii on the curved diverging leg. Small 24"Medium 36"Large 60"
Ok, so it sounds like the problem isn't in the frog/radius... unless I'm missing something (possible). I'll be running 40 foot cars and my biggest loco would be a Heavy Mike, which is spec'd for an 18" minimum curve (Bachmann or BLI models), so a 24" diverging leg shouldn't be an issue. And the smalls would be used for yard/spur trackage, so they would be crossed at low speed.
If your largest engine is a BLI Mikado, than you should not encounter any problems! My BLI USRA Light Mikado did not have any issue negotiating the small switches.
Tinplate Toddler If your largest engine is a BLI Mikado, than you should not encounter any problems! My BLI USRA Light Mikado did not have any issue negotiating the small switches.
Thanks for the clarification. I was a mite concerned there, and I wasn't about to go against the recommendation of someone who probably knows more than a little more than I do without careful consideration. When you said to avoid them, I was thinking either there was something wrong with the small switches as a product, or some part of them only played nice with very small or European equipment, or some other such hidden gotcha. But knowing it's just a matter of equipment size is good news indeed.
Thanks!