SeeYou190 I just read this entire thread and found no real reasons on why any brand is better than the other. . Come on guys, go to a car show and ask someone if Ford is better than Chevy, you will get an answer. In this thread all I saw was either claims that they had no problems with X brand, or nothing but problems with Y brand. . Here I go... For my layout, old style (non DCC friendly) Walthers/Shinohara turnouts are the best BECAUSE they all match my NMRA standards gauge right out of the package, the points are filed to razor sharp perfection from the factory and seat to the stock rails neatly. They never seem to pick the flanges on the RP-25 code 110 wheels that I use, and the solid metal frogs held reduce dead spots. The power routing capability is very useful on my old style DC operation. . I am satisfied with the overall ruggedness of the design, but if someone made something even better, I would buy it instead. . -Kevin .
I just read this entire thread and found no real reasons on why any brand is better than the other.
.
Come on guys, go to a car show and ask someone if Ford is better than Chevy, you will get an answer. In this thread all I saw was either claims that they had no problems with X brand, or nothing but problems with Y brand.
Here I go... For my layout, old style (non DCC friendly) Walthers/Shinohara turnouts are the best BECAUSE they all match my NMRA standards gauge right out of the package, the points are filed to razor sharp perfection from the factory and seat to the stock rails neatly. They never seem to pick the flanges on the RP-25 code 110 wheels that I use, and the solid metal frogs held reduce dead spots. The power routing capability is very useful on my old style DC operation.
I am satisfied with the overall ruggedness of the design, but if someone made something even better, I would buy it instead.
-Kevin
Kevin, you do realize that most of this thread is 8 years old........
But in this discussion or more recent ones, for me it is not about "better" but about more suited to my needs.
For my needs Atlas Custom Line code 83 turnouts are perfect. And I run DC as well.
Sheldon
Living the dream.
I'm finding this funny! The opinions are so far spread on Walthers vs Peco vs anything! I built my last DCC layout using Wlathers c83 turnouts and track before they started claiming you must use their DCC Friendly ones. On that layout and the one I'm building they work side-by-side with no difficultes noted.
I'm not familiar with Peco other than knowing they exist. I have a friend building a large layout and a few days ago he emailed saying he hated Walthers c83 turnouts because his stuff picks it apart and he always has problems with the points or frogs. He has about 50-50 Walthers and Peco and is replacing the Walthers stuff with Peco when it "fails him".
Personally I prefer to hand lay but as I have gotten older time and eyes have forced me to rely on pre-fab track. So far all my Walthers c83 works great.
oldline1
Welcome to the forum
Atlas is suppose to ship a curved turnout this fall.
You realize you are the first person to reply to this thread in 8 years. You had something new to add so there is nothing necessarily wrong with that.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Hm. All very interesting thoughts. As for my experience, I have a combanation of all three brands on the layout. Atlas #6 for mainline crossovers and shere the main goes throuhg the diverging route, Walthers #5's/Atlas #4's for sidings and yards. One spot I've got, in order: a reused walthers #5, Atlas #4, Walthers three way, and a Peco #5. I've even got two curved Walthers turnouts; a #7 curved where the loop connection splits off the main, and a #61/2 of of the controlled siding and into the secondary yard. The only spot that's given me nothing but greif is the Walthers 61/2. The first one I filed it so much I pretty much ruined it. (Didn't really know what I was doing) Replaced it wiht another Walthers 61/2 I had elsewhere on the layout and it's still a pain in the butt. Granted part of it is probably my cruddy trackwork leading up to the turnout, but still. The pan anyways is to replace the sucker with a Peco code 110 medium radius curved lefthand. (Whew, mouthful!!) A friend of mine has a rather expansive layout over the garage that blends Peco and Walthers in both Insulfrog/elctrofrog plus both newer Shinora and the older power routing.
Jacob Oliver, President of the Hocking Valley railroad
Catch me on my Youtube channel - monthly updates, how to's, etc.https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTkT-p0JdEuaMcMD10a72bg
I'm planning on using foam and was disheartened to hear you can't install under-layout Switch Macines. have you tried installing a small 1/2" piece of plywood glued to the styrofoam with blind nuts in it, positioned to accept a switch machine motor? That way you could replace the motor if it failed. Just a thought. bob@osd
Thank you for the information griz.
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
i am going to jump back in here for a minute to tell you my experience with twin coil switch machines. since i went to hand throws, i have had no problems at at with the points coming loose from the throwbars. i have not used any slow motion machines such as the tortoise but in my opinion, the "snap" doesn't do them any good and with repeated use they will give you trouble.
years ago i worked with an O scale club and we were building switches with code 172 steel rail and using the resistance soldering method of construction. penn central had weaker track than we did. one of the members came up with a bunch of twin coil actuators for the remote switches and it wasn't long before they had hammered them so hard we had to rebuild a bunch of the points.
grizlump
Hi Sheldon
I would cautiously attribute the problem to the twin coil machine and my transfomer, no capacitor needed here understand, I am using a commercial transformer to power these. There is no brown outs if you will, they are getting full clean power everytime, and they actually "snap" very loudly when used. Since the 3 turnouts that I am having an issue with are the most used, I believe I am putting too much voltage to them, and eventually damaging the tabs. I haven't pulled a switch yet since it is ballasted in (of course) and I picked up a new switch yesterday to replace my worst offender. Now that I have looked at the underside of the turnout, I don't think shims are the route I'm going to take. I will put a drop of glue on each tab before installing, lower the output my transformer or install a tortoise. With that said, as I was inspecting the brand new turnout, It took nothing to pop the point off of the tab, I did it while inspecting it, and not even really trying. A drop of glue should reinforce this connection so I will have no more problems. Luckily, only 1 is ballasted and I don't want to have to pull the other 2, glue may work applied to the top of the thowbar instead of shims. If it doesn't I will change turnouts.
Geared Steam I have had an issue with Atlas code 83 turnouts, 3 of 9 turnouts have a problem with the points breaking free of the throw bar and floating instead of being securely fastened. I found (i hope) a solution on this forum, you may want to add this mod on the bench before install,I hope this solves my problem, if not I will have to look for another brand. I have been considering Peco, but I'm not ready to give up yet. http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/p/53355/675723.aspx#675723 I haven't heard alot about this until the other day, maybe it was only a certain batch of turnouts that do this, I don't know.
I have had an issue with Atlas code 83 turnouts, 3 of 9 turnouts have a problem with the points breaking free of the throw bar and floating instead of being securely fastened. I found (i hope) a solution on this forum, you may want to add this mod on the bench before install,I hope this solves my problem, if not I will have to look for another brand. I have been considering Peco, but I'm not ready to give up yet.
http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/p/53355/675723.aspx#675723
I haven't heard alot about this until the other day, maybe it was only a certain batch of turnouts that do this, I don't know.
Regarding this problem I posted the following:
This is very interesting. I use Atlas turnouts and have not had such trouble, nor have a number of others I know who use them.
A few observations if I may.
The REAL problem appears to be that the round plastic pins in the underside of the throw bar have been damaged or the tabs on the points have become bent allowing the points to come loose from those pins, or both. After examining both installed and uninstalled turnouts I found all of mine to be very secure and was unable to duplicate this problem without damaging the throwbar.
Could it be possible the plastic pins have worn off from repeated use with twin coil switch machines? Even rather weak ones like those Atlas sells? I use slow motion machines and my own home made ground throws, so I have data on that possiblity.
Fact remains, as desgined the points are held in correct position by the pin on the underside of the throwbar. The condition shown in the photo is only possible if the throw bar pins are no longer in the holes on the point tabs.
Finding out why this has happened would have been my first step in correcting or repairing it. Becuse of the slip lock nature of this design, I'm not sure I see how the little shims are working?
Is it possible you have some defective throw bars? How many turnots have been effected?
As an additional note, I have removed and reveresed a number of Atlas throw bars and still not had any such problems.
Up til now I was leaning toward building turnouts from Fast Tracks. But I went and bought two #6 and two #8 Atlas Code 83 switches just to see how they would work with my Big Boys on a small test track. Heck, both sizes worked just fine.... this might be an interesting option and YOU CANT BEAT that price. Thanks for suggesting them Atlas. They look just fine too. So this might be a good option for me.
cwhowell2 Steve_F Peco #7 curved Turnout Nominal radii: Outside 60 inch, Inside 36 inch. I use the Electrofrog turnouts, I chose them because I thought they looked the best and I have no trouble with them with DCC. Very interesting numbers. Walthers 6 1/2 curved T/O is 24" and 20". Sixty inch sounds more like O scale?
Steve_F Peco #7 curved Turnout Nominal radii: Outside 60 inch, Inside 36 inch. I use the Electrofrog turnouts, I chose them because I thought they looked the best and I have no trouble with them with DCC.
Peco #7 curved Turnout Nominal radii: Outside 60 inch, Inside 36 inch.
I use the Electrofrog turnouts, I chose them because I thought they looked the best and I have no trouble with them with DCC.
Very interesting numbers. Walthers 6 1/2 curved T/O is 24" and 20". Sixty inch sounds more like O scale?
Turnout number only relates to the angle of the frog. With a curved turnout there are a number of other controling dimensions that effect aprox. radii of each route. Over all length from frog to points, basic radius of 1st curve, frog number, all work together to determine the 2nd radius. A small increase in frog number will dramaticly increase the larger radius compaired to the smaller one.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Tom, I konw lots of people are doing it, but I still can't get my head around the idea of laying track on foam. as for switch machines, a plastic plate can be attached to the bottom of the turnout to support the switch machine, even in foam. With over 100 turnouts on my layout, the difference between $12 and $30 is a lot, for what I see as a very small improvement in appearance. Sheldon
Tom, I konw lots of people are doing it, but I still can't get my head around the idea of laying track on foam. as for switch machines, a plastic plate can be attached to the bottom of the turnout to support the switch machine, even in foam.
With over 100 turnouts on my layout, the difference between $12 and $30 is a lot, for what I see as a very small improvement in appearance.
Sheldon:
In your case, I completely agree. I have approximately 14 turnouts on my entire layout, and most of them are in my yard. If I had your number, I'm sure that I'd certainly be thinking differently.
BTW: Thanks for the idea of the plastic plate. You know, I've never thought of that. Your comment is another helpful example of why this forum is so useful to me.
Thanks.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
RDG1519 Curved turnouts are available from PECO in Code 83 Streamlined series. Both insulfrog and electrofrog. They are listed in the pricelist as the 7 or 71/2 (the package is not in front of me), they are curved not straight. My trackplan software shows these as well. The wye is also available.
Curved turnouts are available from PECO in Code 83 Streamlined series. Both insulfrog and electrofrog. They are listed in the pricelist as the 7 or 71/2 (the package is not in front of me), they are curved not straight. My trackplan software shows these as well. The wye is also available.
Yes, I see on the PECO web site the #7 is indeed a curved turnout. But there is no mention of aproximate radii.
In all my 40 years in this hobby, I have never had a commercial curved turnout be available in the size needed. Personaly , like the prototype, I avoid curved turnouts and slip switches, and when they are needed I build them to fit.
The rest of the time a well painted and ballested Atlas code 83 turnout works just fine for me.
Hudson You gents with the Peco experience. Are you talking about Peco STREAMLINE (US Prototype) or regular PECO?
You gents with the Peco experience. Are you talking about Peco STREAMLINE (US Prototype) or regular PECO?
The code 83 turnouts I replaced in my yard are the new Peco 'Streamline'. Since I am DC, I used the Electrofrog turnouts (selective routing), and they're working just fine. Given that my base is foam and not plywood or Homosote, I can't really install under-table switch machines, so the 'centered' spring on the Peco gives me positive contact with every throw of the turnout bar.
They look good and they operate even better.
Bill, whereas Walthers has this stuff in stock now you could not find their code 83 two years ago when I was starting to build. How does a company let their track "line" get out of stock for months? Don't get me wrong I like Walthers but this was not one of their best moments.
Hope this is helpful.
Chris
Sheldon - I've been using code 83 exclusively ever since it was first introduced. (1970's?) You are right about no Peco curved turnouts in American Style cd83. I didn't read the Walthers catalog close enough and I see that they are available in cd75 & 100 only. Looks like one more reason for me to stick with Walthers. Another good reason is that I checked online and found that everything except the double crossover is in stock. - Bill
cwhowell2 Atlantic Central, Yes, my last layout, an 18" x 16' shelf RR, used Atlas exclusively. They were great and affordable, but this time I'm looking for something a bit more proto. Also have the need for several curved turnouts and I'm just not into handlaying. Thanks for your reply. - Bill
Atlantic Central,
Yes, my last layout, an 18" x 16' shelf RR, used Atlas exclusively. They were great and affordable, but this time I'm looking for something a bit more proto. Also have the need for several curved turnouts and I'm just not into handlaying. Thanks for your reply. - Bill
Bill,
Then I assume you are looking at the new PECO code 83 line? But there are no curves turnouts offered there yet either?
I would agree that the new PECO "North American style" code 83 line is very good looking, their other products not so much so in my opinion. Personally I have never been comfortable with European curved frogs.
Did you use Atlas code 83 or code 100 in the past? The detail on the Atlas code 83 line is much finer than even the improved version of the code 100. Sounds to me like the Walthers product is what your looking for.
I am referring to PECO Streamline Code 83. I model using DCC so I use the insulfrog. I do not have any experience with the Code 100 stuff.
I am quite happy even though they cost more. I would like to see a code 83 three way with insulfrog from PECO.
RDG1519 One reason is the ability to assemble cross overs without cutting the rails. I use 2 inch track centers and the PECO's assemble without cutting. I will use up my existing Walthers for industrial siding turnouts but not crossovers. Another reason is availablity. Does anyone remember a few years back when you could not find Walthers code 83 turnouts?
One reason is the ability to assemble cross overs without cutting the rails. I use 2 inch track centers and the PECO's assemble without cutting. I will use up my existing Walthers for industrial siding turnouts but not crossovers.
Another reason is availablity. Does anyone remember a few years back when you could not find Walthers code 83 turnouts?
These are all reasons I use Atlas code 83 Custom Line. They too assemble into crossovers and yard ladders without cutting, and one product offers you the choice of an insulated or powered frog.
I have switched (no pun intended) to the PECO Streamline Code 83 insulfrogs.
To me they look a little better than the Walthers.
Another reason is availablity. Does anyone remember a few years back when you could not find Walthers code 83 turnouts? I believe it took 6 months for my local Hobby Shop to get these in from Walthers. This is when I first tried the PECOs and I have been sold ever since on PECO.
As to conductivity issues. I have one or two Walthers that are stalling short wheelbase switchers. I am thinking this is more of an installation problem than a Walthers problem. The turnout is not yet permanently installed and it floats up until the loco weight is on it.
Agreed. The newer Peco Streamline Code 83 turnouts are NMRA standardized to a healthy extent and look exactly like your typical N. American turnout. It is the older, curved European style Code 100 Pecos that you must be familiar with.
I use the Streamline Code 83 #6 Insulfrog turnouts exclusively in my yard. Really good turnouts.
-Crandell
Allegheny2-6-6-6 Hands down Walthers/Shinohara in my O/P are much better. Peco's are ok but if you look at the two side by side the W/S looks more prototypical.
Hands down Walthers/Shinohara in my O/P are much better. Peco's are ok but if you look at the two side by side the W/S looks more prototypical.
Are you talking about the new PECO Code 83 or the older PECO C75 and C100? I certainly wouldn't have said that the Walthers look "more prototypical" than the PECO Code 83, which are completely different from their earlier C75 and C100 turnouts. The PECO C83 look great and are also a bit more compact than the Walthers for the same frog numbers, in my experience. But both are fine products and to each his or her own.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Griz, I have found that an occasional spritz of tuner or contact cleaner, from the shack, applied to both the rail-point contact area, and also the pad that the bottom of the point touches romoves any oxides, dust, etc. I also believe that Walther's has a lot more size/varieties of turnouts to select from. I run DCC and am very happy with the Walther's DCC friendly turnouts, though I have run on layouts that are all PECO and found them satisfactory. John