Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Metal Benchwork

9724 views
82 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February, 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 25,548 posts
Posted by rrinker on Saturday, October 21, 2017 9:24 AM

 Yes, but extra heavy duty shelf brackets plus all sorts of metal supporting structure isn't building adequate benchwork, it's building a bomb shelter. Foam, supported on brackets at every stud, with NO horizontal members is plenty strong enough. Add a thin wood frame, 1x3's, and it's stronger still. There's a lot of people seem to claim you need to use 2x4's and inch thick plywood and support it every 8 inches or it will sag - no way! 1x4's, 2 foot centers - no sag! Those that say they had sag with such construction probably didn;t have sag - they had moisture problems contracting the frame members and causing the sheet material to bow up or down, or something similar. 

 Look at the ulta lightweight benchwork used by the S&SS of NC. Yes, a bit more complex construction but not one heavy piece of lumber in it anywhere - I've seen their construction demo, their modules are incredibly light weight. Even our club modules tend to use 1x3 framing members and no more than 1/2" plywood. Yet they stand up easily to constant handling in and out of shows and being loaded on trailers and in the backs of pickup trucks for transport. You don't need a house for benchwork. Especially where there is a space concern - every extra inch taken up by thicker framing is an inch less space for the track in an already constrained situation. Thin and lightweight is the way to go, unless you have a gymnasium to fill and expect huge public traffic. 

 Even in public shows - we don't set up a 'moat' around our layout, visitors can walk right up to the edge - there has never been a problem of someone falling into the layout. To build with the idea that you need to do chinups on the layout, or use it for a dance flooor - why? WHat are you making, a train layout or a dance club? It's ooonce thing to build up a raised floor for a mushrooom style layout - that FLOOR needs to be built to proper flooring standards to make it safe and stable, but that doesn't mean the rest of the benchwork ALSO has to support a huge static load. I haven't climbed on my layout since I was a little kid and couldn't read the middle of the 4x8. With a shelf style layout, it shouldn;t be so wide that you can't reach in with minimal leaning. Even my previous realtively lightweight layout - more than once I put a hand on the layout to help get myself up off the floor. It didn't break. It didn't rattle cars off the track. 

 Especially is the inside studs are exposed - a simple wood bracket cut from 3/4 plywood, maybe with a bit of a radius on the inside but not a solid triangle, on every stud, will easily hold shelves 24" wide and less. No legs, no supports dropping down from the ceiling, and no long diagonal braces to get in the way. That will easily support a layoout, and not collapse if you need some help getting up and lean on it a bit. With support every stud, even 1/2" plywood won't sag. Add a layer of foam to carve rolling hills in, and you have a thin, stable layer for trains. Design and use of these plywood brackets have appeared in various model press over the years, all similar.

 I've even seen plain box benchwork, 1x3 or 1x4 box frames, hung right on the walls as an upper deck, to minimize intrusion on the lower deck. The horizontal part of the box against the wall is screwed to the wall, and this is reinforced using 4" L brackets - not the fancy diagonally braced ones, the cheap 90 degree brackets. Plenty strong.

                           --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Saturday, October 21, 2017 9:59 AM

Randy, I agree with you mostly. I also think many layouts are 'overbuilt' in strength.
 

Yes Carl, I do realize that I am extending those cantilivered beams out quite a bit,...and that is why I intend on having vertical leg supports available when I suspect that lower deck will need them,....such as when I intend to rest my weight on it to gain acess to the upper deck, or work on it. They will be nice solid legs supporting the cantilivered ends of those metal beams.

I also believe that I do not want any 'fragile' roadbed edges out there, and for that reason I will chose to use plywood for the lower deck rather than foam. 

  • Member since
    August, 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,574 posts
Posted by carl425 on Saturday, October 21, 2017 1:25 PM

rrinker
Especially where there is a space concern - every extra inch taken up by thicker framing is an inch less space for the track in an already constrained situation. Thin and lightweight is the way to go, unless you have a gymnasium to fill and expect huge public traffic.

It doesn't matter if the roadbed is supported by 4x6's or floating on air the amount of track you can have on top of it is the same.

If you want to build your railroad on 4x8 sheets of 1" foam supported by cheap TV trays, go for it.  I'll stick with the tried and true methods developed by guys like Linn Wescott (and the three little pigs Smile)

I have known people who have regretted building too weak.  I have never met anyone that regretted building too strong. (portable layouts excluded of course)

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.

  • Member since
    February, 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 25,548 posts
Posted by rrinker on Saturday, October 21, 2017 7:31 PM

 If you read the benchwork books, you'll see there are lots of ways recommended by the 'experts'. There's a lot of pooh-poohing of foam methods buit it seems to be serving Bill Darnaby just fine, multiple decks and all. And plenty of 'serious' operation.

 Particularly Linn's L girder method - the basic design uses a 1x2 and a 1x3, not bigger lumber, and gets quite a distance between legs - and no intermediate legs.

 Building a framework of balsa wood = not a great idea. Building a frame with 2x4's = overkill. 

 Consider foam - the Owens-Corning pink products, the number indicates the crush strength is PSI. The 2" stuff is usually Foamular 250, 25 PSI compressive strength. If I lean a good portion of my body weight on 1 finger, I will dent the foam. If I lean over and place my whole palm down to support my weight, nothing happens. Stuff is a lot stronger than you think.

 No, I would not cantilever a frame out over 4' from a single bracket with no additional support. Not unless it also went 4' out the opposite side of the wall. And even then, something that deep I would want some diagonals. For 12 to 18" wide benchwork - just the basic brackets will be plenty strong.

                                         --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 9,274 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:07 PM

Brian, I sent you a PM in response to your request about 3rd PlanIt.

Dave

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:12 PM

Yes David, I got it,...thanks
I've got a little medical procedure I have to go thru tomorrow, then I thought I might offer a reply

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 9,274 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Wednesday, October 25, 2017 4:08 AM

railandsail
've got a little medical procedure I have to go thru tomorrow,

Best of luck on the medical front Brian!

Please understand that I wasn't trying to send you away. If you can't make things fit I will be happy to help. Tonight I was working on a fellow club member's layout plan. What he started out with was totally undoable, but after a few hours I was able to come up with a plan that solved almost all of his issues. Quite frankly, I was suprised at what would fit into his very limited space.

Dave

By the way, all my friends call me 'Dave'. Some of my family members still insist on calling me 'David' but they are too elderly to try to change their habits. If somebody outside of the family calls me 'David' I immediately think that I'm in trouble for doing something wrong!Smile, Wink & GrinLaughLaughLaughLaugh

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Thursday, August 23, 2018 10:02 AM

Over the past year I have been thinking and experimenting with ideas for my benchwork for my new layout in a shed.

I was over at my local metal scrap yard this past Fri and noticed some hollow square steel tubing they use to mount street signs with. Its 2" square verses my flanged 1-1.25" bed rails, and its really strong, and its galvanized. So now I am definitely considering this stuff.

 

I was originally considering making vertical brackets at each of the wall stud location to support the plywood shelves. then I ran across these steel square tubing at the local metal scrap yard.

My contractor friend. who was going to weld up the considerable number of vertical brackets I had sketched up, came back with an interesting idea. Why not lay these square tube 'beams' horizontally along the walls and lag them into the wall studs. Then the plywood shelves (decks) could be attached along their wall edge and cantilevered out. And where the shelf/deck is of a substantial depth, the outer edge might also be supported primarily by another long piece of this horizontal square tubing with only an ocassional vertical support.

I am now planing on utilizing this 'horizontal framing' idea on my staging track level and my lower primary deck. I may even utilize the idea for my upper deck, particularly as they will be more shallow than the primary deck. I will definitely utilize the larger 2" square tubing to support the lower primary deck. For the staging level (relatively shallow), and the upper deck I may utilize my 'bed frame angle iron'. I'll document this more thoroughly as I get to building it.

Quick update,....the first piece of horizontal steel tube framing along the back wall of the shed. The large size square tubing is the type that will be utilized to support the edge of the plywood deck next to the walls.. This will be selectively placed around the perimeter of the shed. There will also be central pieces at the inner edges of the shelf somewhat like shown on this preliminary dwg.
 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    August, 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,574 posts
Posted by carl425 on Friday, August 24, 2018 10:47 AM

Really?  Why would you use something so heavy and hard to work with for a job that can be easily done by a pine 1x2?  

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.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Friday, August 24, 2018 1:14 PM

carl425

Really?  Why would you use something so heavy and hard to work with for a job that can be easily done by a pine 1x2?  

 

It's really not as heavy as it looks. And it really is STIFF and strong enough to bolt my 3/4 plywood to and maybe just cantiliver it out with very little other support. I will have virtually no need for multiple vertical post. I have no need for plank-on-edge stringers under the plywood/foam subroadbed.

This also allowed me to put my staging tracks relatively close up under the lower main deck, which in turn probably saved me adding an extra loop in my helix down to staging.

I admit it looks heavy duty/overdone, but it has saved me extra heights and lots of extra materials, and will likely give me a pretty clear space underneath for storage/access.
 
Not so hard to work with,...cut with a chop saw with metal blade...not much drilling as it already had MULTIPLE holes. Just lag bolt to the studs behind the wall. Not really that much material in total

Had I not gotten that used 'highway sign post' material from my local scrap yard, I was considering using old bed from metal, or old channel iron from used metal shelfing. I have some of that as well that I might use selectively in other areas (upper deck??). We'll see.
  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Saturday, October 06, 2018 6:19 PM

Update on my Metal Benchwork

I have discovered a detail that needs to be cautioned against. When you look at this particular photo you will see a piece of galvanized channel being used to support the staging level plywood (that bottom piece).

I have discovered it is too flexible in twist to span the 24" of stud spacing it is attached to.


If one is going to use 'channel/angle' material of that shape it needs to be considerable thicker steel that resist twisting. I have some much better steel angle iron that came from a nice HD shelf storage rack.

The full box metal piece of steel resist twisting to a much greater degree (almost non existant), just by its configuration, and likely even it was a made of a thinner steel.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Friday, October 26, 2018 10:36 PM

If nothing else this benchwork idea went pretty quickly today. In 4 hours this afternoon I got a number of the other beams up for both levels,...including those 14 foot long ones by myself.

 

 

I had to tilt the plywood out from the wall on this side to get the beams in behind them,...

 

One item that made things go quicker is my use of those 2x4 'vertical specers' . I used those longer ones to hold the lower beams in place off the floor while I drilled and bolted the beams to the wall. The shorter 'spacers' were used to locate the upper level beams up from the lower ones.

 

I had a spare piece of 3/4 plywood lying around and decided to set it in over in one corner. It was not bolted onto the beams as I do not have those bolts yet,...and I was still trying to determine the exact method/tools I need to countersink those carriage bolts into place.

I also had a couple of pieces of the steel beam material that was close to the vertical size I might need. Placed that under the outer corner there, ...(that 'foot piece' is something I've had laying around since I first moved my carport  support columns outward in order to get my shed back under my carport,...somehow I figured I might find a use for them,...waste not, want not)

 

 

BTW, just a simple chop saw cuts those metal beams (belongs to that construction friend)

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: 4610 Metre's North of the Fortyninth on the left coast of Canada
  • 5,520 posts
Posted by BATMAN on Saturday, October 27, 2018 12:36 AM

I hope you checked the beams with a large level. Using spacers to set the height is one thing, however, if the building or a wall is not level it can create a doozy of an unwanted grade that your train will have to climb. 

Brent

It's not the age honey, it's the mileage.

https://www.youtube.com/user/BATTRAIN1

  • Member since
    June, 2007
  • From: Northern Virginia
  • 6,327 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Saturday, October 27, 2018 6:53 AM

Did you by any chance have an erector set as a kid?  Big Smile. Shades and memories triggered here.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road

Silly Aspie's, I have NT syndrome

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Saturday, October 27, 2018 7:01 AM

riogrande5761

Did you by any chance have an erector set as a kid?  Big Smile. Shades and memories triggered here.

Got a good chuckle out of that one, and yes I did have one of those erector sets

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Saturday, October 27, 2018 7:06 AM

BATMAN

I hope you checked the beams with a large level. Using spacers to set the height is one thing, however, if the building or a wall is not level it can create a doozy of an unwanted grade that your train will have to climb. 

 

I thought about that use of a level, but decided to make everything level with the floor of the shed. Then if the shed moves somewhere else its just a question of leveling out the shed to make it ALL level.

My shed is sitting on the carport concrete, and yes it is just slightly out of level. If that ends up presenting a problem I can always go back and shim up the shed as a whole.

  • Member since
    January, 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,258 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Saturday, October 27, 2018 7:49 AM

How large is the head of the carriage bolt you're using?

If it's under half inch, the right size trust drill will do fine.  Anything bigger and you'll probably need a spade bit. If using the spade bit approach, use that first, and go deep enough for the countersink, then use the pilot hole to get the clearance dead center. 

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Saturday, October 27, 2018 8:49 AM

How large is the head of the carriage bolt you're using?

If it's under half inch, the right size trust drill will do fine.  Anything bigger and you'll probably need a spade bit. If using the spade bit approach, use that first, and go deep enough for the countersink, then use the pilot hole to get the clearance dead center.
Dan

 

Carriage bolt is 3/8" dia with a 7/8" dia head on it. And I have a spade drill of that size.

Here is my dilemma. I need to get the 3/8 hole in the steel beam and the plywood lined up. I could drill upwards thru the steel beam with the plywood resting on top and acceive that, but then I have too large of a hole in the plywood to utilize the spade bit.

i could try drilling up thru the hole in the steel beam with a much smaller drill to acceive a 'centering hole', but then this is much harder to get correctly centered in that just over 3/8 hole in the beam,...and it would require at least 3 drilling operations per fastener.

I'm searching for another method and/or tool??

  • Member since
    February, 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 25,548 posts
Posted by rrinker on Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:47 AM

 The only problem I see with this method is that over time, the force on the relatively small head of the carriage bolt will draw it further into the plywood, countersunk or not, cause the bolts to all loosen up. Or the shelves to sag except those in the corners supported oon 2 sides. You almost need something to sprea the load, like a fender washer on top, and not countersunk, if there are going to be no outboard legs holding things up.

 The metal is nice, but on the long wall of the shed, you could have easily done an L girder with no more than 2 legs on the aisle side to span the entire distance, with another simply bolted to the wall studs like the steel channel. 

 Possibly, only one leg, if the span is 16 feet and the front and rear ends are attached to the front and rear walls, a single leg in the middle means a max span of 8 feet, and a 1x4 with a 1x3 L would be MORE than strong enough to cover an 8 foot span. I want a few legs as poossible on my layout, both to do work on the underside and to then maximize the use of under-layout space for storage, and that is the approach I am taking. Where things go along the wall, the back edghe will be attached to the studs, no legs at all, and the front endge will use as few legs as possible, based on allowable spans for various size girders. At least for the lower level.

                                        --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: 4610 Metre's North of the Fortyninth on the left coast of Canada
  • 5,520 posts
Posted by BATMAN on Saturday, October 27, 2018 12:06 PM

Can you get your drill close enough to the wall to drill a straight hole?

I have some reservations about what you are doing, however, I am not there and you are.

What if you run a 10/32 machine screw up from the bottom and into a "T" nut in the plywood.

Regardless, I think you need a flex shaft for your drill to accomplish what you want to do. You could loosen the beams or take them off altogether to mount or line up the plywood.

Brent

It's not the age honey, it's the mileage.

https://www.youtube.com/user/BATTRAIN1

  • Member since
    January, 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,258 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Saturday, October 27, 2018 12:27 PM

Yeah, I was thinking this was the "aisle" side at first.  If it's against the walls, perhaps a sandwich using some 1/8" thick bars (e.g. 5/8 wide -- only like $7 for 6 foot lengths from crackmaster carr)

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    August, 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,574 posts
Posted by carl425 on Saturday, October 27, 2018 3:47 PM

railandsail
I'm searching for another method and/or tool??

After drilling up through the plywood, use one of these for your countersink instead of the spade bit.

Maybe you use this to get from 3/8 to 7/8, then use your spade bit to flatten the bottom of the hole.

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.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, October 29, 2018 10:57 AM

rrinker

 The only problem I see with this method is that over time, the force on the relatively small head of the carriage bolt will draw it further into the plywood, countersunk or not, cause the bolts to all loosen up. Or the shelves to sag except those in the corners supported oon 2 sides. You almost need something to spread the load, like a fender washer on top, and not countersunk, if there are going to be no outboard legs holding things up.



Yes I thought about fender washers, but I wanted things countersunk just slightly in order to have a flush, flat deck. I think the combo of a 7/8" head on that carriage bolt, good grade plywood, and only 1/16" countersinking will work well. Plus I can always easily retighten the nut on the bottom (against the bottom steel beam face). And I can always add more of these bolts (certainly more of a pain in the ___ once the track is down over it in certain areas).

 

The metal is nice, but on the long wall of the shed, you could have easily done an L girder with no more than 2 legs on the aisle side to span the entire distance, with another simply bolted to the wall studs like the steel channel. 

 Possibly, only one leg, if the span is 16 feet and the front and rear ends are attached to the front and rear walls, a single leg in the middle means a max span of 8 feet, and a 1x4 with a 1x3 L would be MORE than strong enough to cover an 8 foot span. I want a few legs as poossible on my layout, both to do work on the underside and to then maximize the use of under-layout space for storage, and that is the approach I am taking. Where things go along the wall, the back edghe will be attached to the studs, no legs at all, and the front endge will use as few legs as possible, based on allowable spans for various size girders. At least for the lower level.    --Randy



I'm not so sure that single piece of 1x3 on it's edge would be that effective at an 8 foot span?

I also like the thinner idea of the 2" supporting beam rather than wood-on-edge approach, as it may have saved me adding another loop in my helix to get down to a lower staging trackage.

 

 

 

  • Member since
    February, 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 25,548 posts
Posted by rrinker on Monday, October 29, 2018 4:55 PM

 Not a single 1x3, a 1x4 with a 1x3 attached on edge in an L shaped (the L in L girder). One or more of the benchywork books (definitely the original Linn Westcott one) has a rule of thumb for size of the wood used in the girder and the maximum span between legs. Then there's the overkill method using those manufacturered I beams they use sometimes instead of steel beams in houses - the web is usually a manufacturerd wood product while the two flanges are dimensional lumber. Those things can support, well, a house, and certainly would be overkill for a moodel railroad, but with the light loading of a layout you could probably put one down with legs on either end of a 40 foot span and have no problem.

                                           --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, October 29, 2018 10:23 PM

BATMAN

Can you get your drill close enough to the wall to drill a straight hole?

My friend has a cordless 18v Makita drill-driver that is very powerful, and yet small enough in girth to allow for drilling these holes.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,274 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, October 29, 2018 11:08 PM

rrinker

 Not a single 1x3, a 1x4 with a 1x3 attached on edge in an L shaped (the L in L girder). One or more of the benchywork books (definitely the original Linn Westcott one) has a rule of thumb for size of the wood used in the girder and the maximum span between legs. Then there's the overkill method using those manufacturered I beams they use sometimes instead of steel beams in houses - the web is usually a manufacturerd wood product while the two flanges are dimensional lumber. Those things can support, well, a house, and certainly would be overkill for a moodel railroad, but with the light loading of a layout you could probably put one down with legs on either end of a 40 foot span and have no problem.

                                           --Randy

 

 

Have you seen the dimensions of those webs of those house I beams,...often over 8-12 inches. And it is still VERY important that there is a good connection/bond between the flange and the web of an 'I' beam.

If I had only a 4" 'web' stiffener on the bottom of my plywood shelf (as opposed to my 2" beam, then I would only have a 4" overhead on my staging tracks rather than the 6-8 inches I have now. So that might mean I would consider increasing that clearance,...which would mean I would likely have to put another loop of track in my helix,...to get down to that lower level.

  • Member since
    February, 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 25,548 posts
Posted by rrinker on Tuesday, October 30, 2018 7:17 AM

 I wasn;t suggesting using those I beams, it's way overkill. Even for a really large layout - although I've seen at least one that used them in order to have REALLY long spans with minimal legs. They do come in various sizes - one used to hold up an entire house absolutely is far too big for model railroad use, you'd NEVER need that kind of load carrying, even building O scale and using cement for the scenery. Or using the layout deck as a dance floor for a neighborhood party. Any of the thicker types of benchwork are not really suitable other than supporting the lowest level when a multiple deck design is used, the upper layers need to be as thin as possible to maximize clearance for a given height seperation.

                                     --Randy


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    December, 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 3,941 posts
Posted by cuyama on Tuesday, October 30, 2018 1:08 PM

L-girders and joists (or open-grid) go below staging. Then staging and the deck above are each supported by risers from the framework below.

  • Member since
    December, 2008
  • From: In the heart of Georgia
  • 2,897 posts
Posted by Doughless on Tuesday, October 30, 2018 6:29 PM

railandsail

  


I'm not so sure that single piece of 1x3 on it's edge would be that effective at an 8 foot span?

 

If you glued it to the underside of the plywood making it one L shaped structure, it would probably keep it from sagging along its front edge just fine (and assuming the ply is attached to the wall along its back edge as you suggest). 

I said glued instead of periodically attached like with screws to make the beam and ply one unit, inhibiting deflection of the beam and then the ply sagging from deflection.

But I'd use a 2x3 just to be safe, properly crowned of course.  

- Douglas

  • Member since
    November, 2018
  • 4 posts
Posted by Cosmasndamian on Friday, November 16, 2018 8:59 AM

Wow, that looks really neat!  The wood looks like it is laid flat on the brackets, and it would be stronger on edge.  I was wondering if steel studs might work?  That may be lighter weight also.  Those brackets are plenty strong.  The fasteners into the wall or from bracket to extension will fail long before that L bracket fails.  That is such a trim look, I love it!

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!