Mobilman:
I laid out my engine terminal with Peco #5 turnouts, and I've had no problem at all with steamers (that's all I run, BTW). And largely brass steamers at that, which have tighter, more prototypical clearances than the current plastic ones. My largest non-articulated steamers are 4-8-2, 4-8-4 and 2-10-2's, and my articulateds range from 2-8-8-2, 4-6-6-4 to large 2-8-8-4's.
No problem. #5's are not as tight as the #4's, yet take up much less space than the #6's, and my locos take them very smoothly.
So you might consider the #5's, either from Peco or Sinohara. Either one is a good bet, at least IMO.
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!
Yes, the "problem" with wyes is that there is that "S" curve if you are looking to end up with two parallel tracks diverging from it. For yard tracks with my 40-50 ft postwar rolling stock and small wheel base switchers, that's no big deal.
But for running the longer based locos, that "S" curve could be a problem - and even if its just occasional, that's too much.
I played around with shortened #6s and that should work out just fine.
Thanks again!
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
mobilman44The Wye (I have two - neither ever used on a layout) intrigues me, so I may play around with it. But I think my best bet is to cut down a couple of #6s and that should work just fine
I have no problems with #4's and big Diesels. But my Big Boy and Y6 b sure do not like them. My Hudson, M1 and Mike are OK with them going slow. And as I am finding out 3 X 6 is not much spaces when it comes to turnouts.
I do have some number 5's and the Big Steam is fine with them.
Ken
I hate Rust
Thanks all! Your input is always appreciated!
I put in #6s for the diesel tracks and that is not a problem in any way.
I sure did not want to use #4s for the steamers, but wanted your input. Given its a loco service area, perhaps #4s would be more the norm....... Obviously, using #4s is now out of the question.
The Wye (I have two - neither ever used on a layout) intrigues me, so I may play around with it. But I think my best bet is to cut down a couple of #6s and that should work just fine.
I really want this to be as good as I can make it, and getting your input really is a major plus in helping me make the right decisions.
I would stay with the #6's for locos that big.
The Atlas wye is a #3, each route being equal to a #6 so they might help in a few places.
The Atlas #6's can be curved SLIGHTLY if needed.
My Spectrum Heavy 4-8-2's don't really like Atlas #4's - and yes as others have said, they are actually #4.5 at a 12.5 degree frog angle.
I prefer Atlas because of the isolated metal frogs, the lack of "excess" track on the diverging route and the feed through wiring.
Peco and Walthers do not hold enough advantage to me to justify their much higher prices - and again I prefer the feed through wiring.
Painted, ballested, and weathered, Atlas code 83 turnouts look more than fine to me.
Sheldon
mobilman,
I am in the #6 turnout camp.
I can tell you from experience that #4's and larger wheel base steamers go together like oil and water.
I am currently in the process of replacing #4 turnouts with #6 turnouts around my coaling tower for just that reason.
Rich
Alton Junction
Just a suggestion. If you have some samples of the switches you're thinking of using, build a mock up of the tightest secion of the trackage you're going to be laying and see how it works with your longest wheelbase locos. That'll let you know if it'll work, or if adjustments need to be made. I've done this with a cheap 18" wide pine shelving board 8' long. Saves some work.
My 4-8-4 handles that Atlas #4's ithout a problem. I don't know about a larger loco with 5 driving axles. As noted, they actually are not as sharp as a real #4, they are #4.5. Wyes would work - remember the actual angle of a wye is half the rated frog number. I believe the Atlas wyes are #4, which means each diverging route angles off with the equivalent of a #8 turnout. Or if you need more room, what about using the 4's for the diesel section to make more room to use the 6's for the steam?
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
The Atlas Code 100 #4 is actually supposed to be closer to a #4.5, and this was so that more people could use them with impunity. I would advise against them if you are running steamers with scale HO driver wheel-bases longer than about 14', although many are meant to run fairly quickly on 18" radii. Even some 6-axle diesels are not going to be happy. I would agree, and be much more confident, with using a true #5. I have Peco Streamline Code 83 #6 turnouts that I like very much, and I expect I'll continue to use them in future layouts. But they are considerably longer. As for the two-way or three-way (lapped) turnout, I have one of each and have found them to be quite useful. I have a three-way as one of my yard throats. But you should know that, as an integral unit, a Walthers/Shinohara version is going to be about 14" long!
Crandell
Looking cramped may be the least of your worries.
I would shy away from #4's especially if you are going to be running larger steam. They just don't seem to navigate them that well.
A wye switch is a possibility and should give you {far?} less grief.
As mentioned, a three-way switch {a wye with a straight through track in the middle as well} is also a swell idea.
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
Yard space was valuable, so the railroads would usually have tighter turnouts than the mainlines... now, without having a sketch of what you're planning to do, I can't give a definitive answer, but here's a few thoughts:
Most all of the solutions will also limit you to yard speed (<10 smph), though since it's a yard, you shouldn't be going much faster than that anyway
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
what about #5 switches
Hi,
Well, all the trackage is in place - wired and tested - on my new HO postwar layout, with the exception of the loco facilities area.
It is planned and centerlines are in place, and is basically a two long track diesel servicing area, which is alongside a 4 track steam servicing area. The space (to me) is relatively large, about 6 x 3 feet.
The scale plan calls for # 6 turnouts. For the diesel section, this works out just fine. For the steam area it works, but the # 6 s do take up more space than I would like.
I was experimenting with using an Atlas "Wye", or maybe even #4s - either of which would give me more room, but might look too cramped.
What do you think on the subject? Would the use of a wye or #4s hurt the look of the scene? Also, I have the BLI 4-8-4, 2-10-2, and 2-10-4 locos. Would I be asking for derailment problems with the wye and/or #4s? As an aside, all other turnouts on the layout (other than the yard) are #8s or #6s.
Thank you!