I have pictures of my Shinohara #6 code 100 and will post them as soon as I can set them sent from my phone.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Wish I had pics for you, checked my stash of remaing flex and it all must have been used on my layout that I tore down, was able to save most turnouts but almost none of the flex.
rrebell We are talking big holes, like maybe some used screws.
We are talking big holes, like maybe some used screws.
Photo?
Of the two Shinohara #6 code 100 turnouts, one of them has bigger holes than the other, possibly big enough for thin screws.
rrebell The early stuff had big holes on the flex, no idea why?
The early stuff had big holes on the flex, no idea why?
My Walthers code 70 flex, which I believe is made by Shinohara, also had holes in it. The code 70 doesn't have big holes but common sense tells me the holes are there to put spikes in and thats exactly what I use to fasten it down.
I'm guessing the Walthers turnouts have holes for the same reason, and I also use ME spike on them too. I use a combination of MicroEngineering medium and small spikes, medium on the bigger code track and small on the code 70.
rrebellmolds changed on Shinohara even as the years went by
I was just looking at 3 of my Shinohara code 100 #6 turnouts and there were some distinct differences in the ties molded on and the pattern. I puzzled over it and figured they must have redone the molds at some point.
Also no worry about turnouts unless I need a curved one "those don't survive saving very well", other wise I must have 100 track components half brand new, 2/4 #4 turnouts as I like them (I run smaller engines).
wp8thsub Micro Engineering code 70 interfaces readily with Shinohara. The rail cross section and tie thickness are close enough that very little work is required to align the rail joints.
Micro Engineering code 70 interfaces readily with Shinohara. The rail cross section and tie thickness are close enough that very little work is required to align the rail joints.
rrinker Only problem with ME is you are stuck with #6's.
Only problem with ME is you are stuck with #6's.
Not really. You don't have to stick with one brand; thats the point of some of the comments above.
Seem to recall many references to them being a bit fragile,a s well. Not that that should be a big deal because I don;t even nail anything down, it's all caulk all the time. So no rough handling of any sort.
It's good to keep in mind to be careful. I actually feel I can be more careful using track nails and ME spikes to fasten turnouts down. I'd be more worried removing a fragile turnout that was calked down. If you pull all the spikes and nails out, the turnout will be just as if you set it there free - it's not adhering to anything.
As for installing with nails or spikes, tap them so they are barely touching the ties and you can wiggle it slightly - it will lay flat and be solid in place and no damage. Of course if you are ham handed with a hammer and not careful, then yeah, thats a recipe for damage. I don't operate that way.
ME flex though, can't stand the stuff. Way too stiff. For a few cents a piece more than ME, I'll take the Peco. It's not floppy like Atlas, but it readily forms smooth curves more like Atlas. I have sections of all 3. Not a chance the ME will get used.
I don't care for the ME stiff flex either. It takes a lot of massaging over and over to get it to conform to a smooth curve. Atlas springs to a smooth curve very well and is easy to make arrow straight. I haven't tried Peco flex but maybe I'll give it a try if it looks better than Atlas code 83, which has a rather wide top rail profile vs other flex. While it is code 83 in height, it doesn't really look it from the top.
I'd just as soon make my own turnouts, but I've tried and it's just not for me.
Many rave bout Fast Tracks, but building a layout is a big enough job that I just don't want to add to it by having to hand build turnouts on top of every thing else.
My wallet's not that fat, but I don;t go and buy all the supplies I need in one giant purchase anyway. Like any other hobby venture, I spread it out over time. --Randy
--Randy
For sure; it's one thing to spend thousands over time, but most, including me, can't do that all at once. Do it in managable chunks and even a very modest budget can build a pretty good sized layout over a period of months or maybe a few years. Granted, I saved a lot of track from a previous layout which saved on building my last 10x18' layout. But for basic materials such as lumber, screws, Homasote etc, I built my 10x18' layout for around $500. I did have to buy some extra track and turnouts after that to add to what I had stored from the previous layout but all in all, it wasn't super expensive.
Occasionally I see someone selling 40 or 50 HQ coal cars or a full passenger train with engines in one go and your looking at $2000 or more; I wonder how they can manage to sell like that, but there must be the odd person out there who can drop a couple grand at once. My wife and I have done that on the house, but not on trains.
Only problem with ME is you arte stuck with #6's. Or you cna finagle #5's with the yard ladder system. Seem to recall many references to them being a bit fragile,a s well. Not that that should be a big deal because I don;t even nail anything down, it's all caulk all the time. So no rough handling of any sort.
My wallet's not that fat, but I don;t go and buy all the supplies I need in one giant purchase anyway. Like any other hobby venture, I spread it out over time.
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
My experience is the same as above using these products together
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
Rob Spangler
When I price code 83 #6 turnouts a mbk:
Atlas $14
MicroEngineering $19
Peco $27
Peco well worth it? Are they that much better than ME. I don't know. Moloco box cars are well worth the $53 or $56 price tag as well but I can only afford so many at that price point. Point being if you need a lot of turnouts, with Peco money runs out a lot faster. Ymmv or your wallet may vary.
Most turnout sizes are under $30, and the flex track is less than $1 a section more expensive than Atlas and about the same as ME flex. Well worth it.
rrinker Peco is releasing North American style Code 70 track - turnouts and flex track. Exact date for availability I haven't seen yet. But if it's anything like their Code 83 line, it will be very nice. --Randy
Peco is releasing North American style Code 70 track - turnouts and flex track. Exact date for availability I haven't seen yet. But if it's anything like their Code 83 line, it will be very nice.
When I first heard of Shinohara closing down, I was a bit concerned as I do think Shinohara is among the best looking HO track availalbe and have a number of pieces in both Walthers code 83 version and Shinohara code 100 versions and a code 70 #8 turnout.
I still feel Shinohara looks very good what with stock rail etc. but my experiences with using it on my last 2 layouts was shall I say, mixed.
- Shinohara turnouts needed a beefy machine to throw the bar as they were a bit sticky or resistant. I used Switchmaster brand slow motion machines to throw some of them as they had tons of torque. Of course you can use Caboose Industries grown throws.
The thing is I had a bunch of Atlas under the table machines and some top of the table types (for staging) and they didn't have enough force to throw those sticky Shinohara points in many cases. That may not be a reason to not use Shinohara but in my case it was a negative.
- I don't care for those bronze wipers under the points used to transfer power to the to the rest of the switch. So you can't rely on them and have to compensate with feeders and/or relays.
- I had issues with one of my Athearn Genesis F9A derailing on one of the Walthers curved #8 turnouts and could see nothing wrong with the turnout itself - may have been a combination of the engine suspension and the turnout.
A reason some may choose Peco or ME over Shinohara is the former have a spring built in to hold the points if you flick them by finger.
For now I'm keeping all of my #8 curved code 83 and 100 turnouts and some of the other Shinohara based turnouts #8 standard, #6 double slip and code 83 3-way.
I have already sold off my code 100 3-way to simpify turnouts in staging and am moving to mostly Peco for staging. For that reason I'm selling off my remaining 3 Shinohara code 100 #6 as well.
Peco is releasing North American style Code 70 track - turnouts and flex track. Exact date for availability I haven't seen yet.
But if it's anything like their Code 83 line, it will be very nice.
And expensive! If you need to buy a lot of code 83 north American style Peco turnouts, they cost about 7 or 8 dollars more than MicroEngineering turnout for turnout, which adds up a lot if you need a bunch.
They are pretty nice but one negative on Peco code 83 is the points are formed metal rather than stock rail. This is where Shinohara, for example, shines.
If they don't happen to line up at the bearing surface on the top of the railhead, simply shim the low rail under the ties and solder the joiner at that angle. You must align the bearing surface on top, and the flange faces as well.
You must align the bearing surface on top, and the flange faces as well.
My rule of thumb is to make sure the top surface and the inside surface (flange face as you put it) of the rails are matched for smooth reliable operation between codes and rails of differing type.
Shim as needed.
If they don't happen to line up at the bearing surface on the top of the railhead, simply shim the low rail under the ties and solder the joiner at that angle. If you don't wish to solder, use ballast under the ties or plastic shims (clear window stock cut from packaging works really well because it won't change shape with the glues commonly used in ballast-fixing).
Remind yourself that there are two surfaces that must align closely, and the smaller the scale the more finnicky this is. You must align the bearing surface on top, and the flange faces as well.
The last information out there was Walthers was in talks go get the molds/plates/designs to continue with the Shinohara track. I mix Atlas Code 100 with both Walthers/Shinohara and Peco and have no issues.
I did a lot of mixing of brands on my last layout and didn't find it a major issue. Worst case scenario is you may need to make (or buy) some transition rail joiners to get everything to line-up properly but if you can do that with code 100 to code 83 and so on, it certainly works with mixing brands in a similar fashion.
To make a transition joiner out of a standard metal rail joiner, I simply grind out a slot in the center so I can bend a step in the middle. Atlas sells them already made that way if you can't make your own, for a price of course.
On my last layout I mixed code 70, 83, 100 as well as Atlas, Shinohara, Peco, Walthers Shinohara.
I know the brands but want to know if they line up so to speak. I know some brands sit higher than others and I already have all the turnouts I will ever need and joiners and such in code 70 Shinohara, just need the flex track.