I am getting ready to start another HO layout, about 15 years since my last one. I have been looking over the turnouts I have accummulated over the years, some Bachman E-Z, a bunch of Atlas and AHM, some that may be old Lambert, a couple old True Scale High Speed switches, and some bits and pieces from my high school days in the 60s when I did some hand-laid track. I was noticing that the older Lambert, True Scale, and hand built turnout stock rails are let in at an angle so that the points lay flat against the rail web, while the others just have the points flat against the base and railhead, without the recess. IIRC, almost every article I have read on building your own specify filing the recess into the stock rails.
It seems to me that the transition from stock rail to points would be more reliable, with less chance of derailments, with the recess. It's been a while since I used any of the recessed switches, but I seem to remember almost never having a derailment at any of the recessed switches (even my teen-aged attempts of home-built switches), while the non-recessed points, even when I was just running an oval on the basement floor with the Bachman track, would send an occasional car onto the floor.
Would it be worthwhile to file the stock rails on the switches that don't have the recesses?
Financially, throwing out 25 or 30 switches and replacing them isn't practical, especially if I can salvage the old double slip and a couple hand built 3-ways.
BTW, the track I have in storage is a combination of Brass, Steel, and Nickle Silver, all code 100. I did throw out the old fiber tie flex track, just salvaging some of the brass rail.
IMO - toss the old stuff and get new. you will be amazed at the 'new' quality and standards.
The only way to determine if YOUR turnouts will work well with YOUR rolling stock is to test them - which can be done on a 'quick and dirty' basis with flex and temporary attachments on a sheet of extruded foam.
IIRC, Lambert turnouts were made by Shinohara, years before Walthers became the sole US distributor.
I hand-lay my turnouts, with points shaped (with a big file) to ride up on the base of the un-notched stock rails. The key is to make the end of the point sharp! Some commercial points are square-end blunt - an open invitation to derailments. Mine are an open invitition to lacerated fingertips if they are run along the rails in the wrong direction.
As for electrical contact, don't rely on the points to power anything but themselves. Mine are electrically dead if not pressed against a stock rail. I power frogs with electrical contacts on the switch actuator, either two-coil machine or electrical switch.
Just my . Other opinions will differ.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
One thing I never see addressed in the issue of fitting and sharpening turnout points is the width of a wheel flange. For an RP-25 code 110 (standard HO width) wheel that is .030". The flange is supposed to have an ogee shape, with two radii meeting at a relatively sharp angle .015" in from the back of the wheel. To me that says that if your point is less than .015" thick at the sharp end it's sharp enough, because it has to stick out more than that to find anything it can catch.
If you want to use the "semi-scale" code 88 wheels, as I do, those have a flange width of .025", so the point has to be less than .0125" thick at the sharp end. For comparison, typical HO scale wire grab irons are .012" in diameter.
That said, I still sharpen and chamfer the ends of my points, but we might as well be realistic about how sharp is sharp enough.
Have a good weekend,
Andy
Andy Sperandeo MODEL RAILROADER Magazine
I appreciate the responses.
In fact, after having several derailments on the Bachman E-Z switches on a small set-up on my basement floor, I did sharpen and angle the points, and it did seem to improve things.
I have about 50 years accumulation of track, structures, and rolling stock. I have a collection of rolling stock that is mostly RP-25 wheels, with a few locos and cars with the older pre RP-25 flanges and some European manufactured motive power where I've attempted to reduce the flange depths, either by replacing wheel sets, or using the motors and a needle file to turn down the flanges. (heck, I still have a couple sets of the old Mantua hook-loop couplers, at least one set of old Bakers, and one car still has a pair of the original Kadee pre-magnetic couplers.)
I wish I could afford to replace most of the older switches, but if I throw out the older brass, and looking at the prices in my Walther's catalogue, that would leave me with about 3 pair of Bachman #5s and maybe the couple True Scale #8 High Speeds, and from the looks, the Lambert Double Slip switches. Limits me to a simple oval with maybe a passing siding and a couple spurs. One of my current thoughts is to use a couple of the older switch frogs to set up my Walther's swing bridge with a Gantlet track, like the old swing bridge my town used to have on the old Nickle Plate main.
I'm still wondering if recessing the stock rails would be worthwhile over and above dressing the ends of the points.
Deals are out there if you look hard enough, I was at the Timonium show back in January and I purchased Atlas code 83 #6 turnouts for $12.00 a pretty good price. The I found an LHS who was not going to carry model trains any longer and I bought all the turnouts she had mostly #6's and a few #8's and #4's the most expenise of which were $6.00. I prefer Walthers turnouts but for the price I couldn't pass them up. I'll use em some where you can bet on that. One other thing you need to consider is if your going to run DCC the old turn outs will not be compatable and will have to be reworked. Even if your staying with DC just hunt the internet for good deals on track you won't be sorry you did.The difference in quality will amaze you. Your best bet will be to run code 100 track. Generally cheaper and trains seem to run smoother over it or so some people say.