I have a spare dining table measuring 47.25" X 31.5" (inches). Would it be ok to place an 8 X 4 sheet of, say 1 inch ply on it for a layout, or would I need some framework? I am aware that wiring and so on would be a problem unless I raise the ply off the table a little. Worth the effort? Any help will be appreciated.
Ron.
Definitely frame it with a grid of 1x4 or 1x3 lumber. Not only will this improve its rigidity and provide a way to route your wiring, but it will make the setup easier to handle when lifting it on and off the table for storage. And you'll be able to use thinner plywood, like 1/2", which will be both cheaper and easier to drill through for under-track devices like switch motors and uncoupling magnets.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Why do you want to use the table? just because its there?
Have you checked out 1in ply? how heavy it is, cost ?
As mentioned a frame with 1/2 ply or 2in foam would be way lighter and cost less,once you get the materials for a frame and top ,legs and a few braces aint that mutch more. I would guess total to be less then 1in ply.
IMO these portable tables arn't the answer; if I had to put it up then take it down every time to mess with trains I would soon lose interest.'' But thats me''
Hi Ron Hume
I tend to agree with the previous posts that purpose built model train bench work is the way to go.
It would have to be a fairy compeling argument for me not to build proper bench work for a model railway.
Even my tiny HOn30 test and experement track has proper purpose built mini bench work all be it with very short legs and soft feet.
I can live with the set up put away for the HOn30 but not with the normal HO
regards John
Thanks Steven, framing sounds good. There will be no need to move the layout from the table, but the framework and 1/2" ply will be cheaper and easier to work as you point out.
No need to move the layout from the table, Uncle. It seems wasteful to discard a solid table and then build one. And it will save time and effort.
Thanks for your response, John.
The layout would be fixed to the table and quite strong. I'm toying with the idea of hinging the top to the table length to be able to work on the wiring etc. on a vertical plane rather than from underneath.
Another issue with using a dining table is that they are far to low for a layout. Most layouts are 42-52 inches off the floor. A dining table is more like 32".
A few 4-foot 2x2's won't put much of a dent in the budget and will produce a much better result.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
Years ago we had a 5' x 10' sheet of ply on the dining room table covered in Thomas track. One day my son asked me about the trains I had at his age. We cleared off the Thomas and made a dangerous scary trip to the farthest reaches of the crawlspace and returned with all my electric train stuff. We didn't realize how ( not flat ) the plywood was until the train had trouble dealing with the grades caused by nothing more than slightly bent/bowed plywood.
Do your back a favour and get a sheet of 2" foam and use 1" x 4"s to support it. It will most likely cost less as well.
This bench is 6' x 18'. My neighbour and I carried it around the house from the garage to the trainroom with ease. It is 1" x 4" grid with 2" foam.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Ya know; you could build the new train table above the dinning table, no more space used. If you don't care to get rid of said table, it woul make a good work bench,wish mine was that big
just thinking
A hinge to work underneath seems like a good idea but will never work because you have to remove EVERYTHING (trains, loose track, Tools, trees, scenery) from the top. Even the neatest person has stuff laying on top of the layout during the build.
Steve
I would not recommend using the table for the layout base. The wood needed for a frame and legs is the cheapest investment you will need to make in this hobby. The frame will be the height you want, more stable, easy to access, and expandable in the future.
There would be lots of sag and easy to tip over. Almost half of the plywood would be unsupported.
Hey Carl, the height issue is something I had not considered, thanks for pointing that out. So the decision is made thanks to everyone's advice - benchwork from scratch!
The next decision; I'm leaning towards the "Cactus Valley RR" plan, but I would like a return loop incorporated to facilitate any one train travelling in both directions. Any help with that will be appreciated. I have only a very small picture of the plan and will need to print a full size template for trackwork.
Ron Hume I'm leaning towards the "Cactus Valley RR" plan, but I would like a return loop incorporated to facilitate any one train travelling in both directions.
That is a challenging layout in terms of tight curves and steep grades as it is before any additions. There are compromises in many published plans that make them challenging for newcomers, unfortunately. The layout was discussed at length on this forum a while backhttp://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/213620.aspx
And of course, most rooms with space for an HO 4X8 and its aisles would also have space for a track plan with fewer constraints.
Good luck with your layout.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group