Hand Laid turnouts (and track in general - a few pics)

[NeO6874]

Not sure if this will fare better in the general discussion, although I think it fits here better...

This is my planned Turntable/Roundhouse diorama to put in my dorm room next school year:

The four tracks that go off to the right will (space permitting) extend into the servicing facilities and the "rest of the world".  However I'll probably only build out the first inch or so (pretty much anything between the turnouts and the TT pit wall).  The next two pics are the service facilities extension and the entire diorama (again, assuming I have the space)

 

Now, onto the main questions I have:

1. I want to handlay everything (excepting the TT... I have my eyes set on the walthers 130' one), what would be the best way to make the turnouts without spending a small fortune on fasttracks jigs for the 2 or 3 I need?
2. two of the turnouts are  3-way.  Will I drive myself crazy trying to handlay these?
3. with regard to the rest of the handlaying, I'm assuming all i really need is track, ties, railjoiners, and spikes - am I missing anything key?
4. No soldering (something tells me that setting off a fire alarm with a soldering iron won't go over too highly with the school).  So I'd rather have to only solder that which is *absolutely* necessary.  will relying on only spikes/glue present a lot of problems?

I don't plan to power the layout/diorama.  My main reasons for wanting to build this (or at the very least the TT/RH diorama) is to have a nice place to store/show off my loco collection (and a few of the kits I've built) 

[Bob grech]

Central Valley offers downloadable scale templates for turnouts and crossings. You simply lay the paper template down on your workbench and lay your rails. This is the method I used to hand-lay mine. But be advised, I highly recommend the use of a NMRA guage and two or three track gauges to keep everything in spec. You will also need to obtain or purchase a rotory tool such as a Dremel to file your frogs angles and points. In addition, you'll need a 35-40 watt soldering iron. Let me know if I can be of more help to you, since I don't know how much experience you have handlaiding track.

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

You can file frogs with a plain old file.  You could buy the Fastracks frog point tool, but not the jigs.  You will need to solder the frogs together.  You won't set off the alarm if you don't leave it on, but they may well have a rule against doing it in the dorm.  You might be able to find a shop or lab where you could do it though.  I think it would be fun to do this.  Fastracks also has templates you can download and print.  A lot of their technique will work even without the jigs.

[dante]

Small point unrelated to hand-laying track:  the TT drawn appears to be the size of the Walthers 90' model.   The 130' will occupy much more space.

[tomikawaTT]

Having just hand-laid several three ways (unlike yours, all curves diverge to the left when viewed from the point end,) they aren't any particular problem.  Just be willing to take care in fabricating parts, and be willing to scrap any rejects.

Tools I use are an NMRA gauge, two three-point gauges, a 10" flat file (which I can control lots better than I can control a Dremel tool,) rail cutters, long-nose pliers and a razor saw (for cutting ties.)  Tools I use that you don't need are a drill and small bit (for making feeder wire holes in roadbed,) and the 320 watt hand cannon I use to solder frogs and guard rails.

I don't use jigs or templates as such.  After I locate the center lines I bend flex track through the turnout area and mark the line of the tie ends.  I lay ties, tack down the stock rails and build the rest of the turnout by measuring inward with the NMRA gauge to locate the frog point.

Since you won't be powering the display you should be able to get away with simply spiking everything securely in place.  If necessary, you might use a little glue - away from the frog assembly if you might want to solder it up sometime in the indeterminate future.

Back in 1980, I built a 'temporary' display module, hand-laid track, four spikes per tie, since I didn't have any space for a 'real' layout.  That 'temporary' display has survived orphanhood and three model railroads, and is now scheduled to become the end-of-the-line terminal for the short line on my post-retirement double garage filler.  I humbly suggest that you build your display solid enough to last as long.  (Incidentally, there are a pair of three way switches on that module.)

Happy tracklaying.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

[SpaceMouse]

I don't see why you wouldn't want to power it. That would have to be the cheapest aspect of the layout.

[NeO6874]

I'm not planning on powering the diorama because I haven't fully thought out of anything about the diorama beyond it being a storage/display place for my locos.

I'm also using this as a learning experience, so i'm more concerned with building the kits and things .  as for the soldering, I could probably do it at home, and bring the soldered assemblies back to school and spoke them in place...

Bob - I have absolutely no experience handlaying track, but after being in the hobby in a real capacity for only a year I've found I love doing all the intricate/exacting work (tearing apart a locomotive, kits with a million small parts, etc)

Dante - you're right. I was looking at the 130' as I wrote the OP, but I did design in the 90' one

[Sperandeo]

Hello "NeO6874,"

I recommend the article Tony Koester wrote on handlaying turnouts in the December 1989 "Model Railroader," with confidence because I build my own turnouts almost exactly the same way. The article is reprinted in the Kalmbach book, "Trackwork and Lineside Detail," available in hobby stores or by going to the top of this page and clicking on "SHOP."

For three-way (actually lap) turnouts and other special trackwork, I think the best published instructions are in articles by Robert F. Cushman published in MR in the 1950s. You can find them through the index of magazines under "trains.com resources" on the main MR Web site at www.modelrailroader.com. Do a keyword seach on "Cushman, Robert F." in "Model Railroader" and you'll find all these articles listed. Photocopies of articles from out-of-print back issues are avaialble either from the "SHOP" section of this site or by e-mail to [e-mail].

My approach, like Tony's, relies on using a standard tie arrangement for turnouts that you set up with a homemade tie jig. Once the ties are transferred to the layout, you can locate all the important parts of the turnout by counting ties and making a few measurements with a scale rule.

Good luck,

Andy

[fwright]

There are almost as many different ways to hand lay turnouts as there are folks hand laying track.  Personally, I come closest to Jack Work's methods described in April 1963 Model Railroader, "Birth of a Turnout". 

Turnouts are built in place on the layout without any jigs or fixtures.  He (and I) fill the frog with solder, which reduces the effort needed to get the filing angles exactly right.  He (and I) then use a hacksaw blade to cut the flangeways.  A standard hacksaw blade comes very close to NMRA spec for flangeways.  A file finished the process.  I did depart from Work's methods to use a throwbar cut from PC board to which the points are soldered (PC board wasn't readily available when the article was written.).  The only soldered areas were the frog, the guard rails, the point-to-throwbar connection, and the feeders (I used 26 gauge magnet wire).  A 40 watt iron worked well for me with code 70 rail. 

If you are hand laying the track and turnouts, I recommend adding the feeders to the rails before spiking.  This will make powering the track much easier when you change your mind.  If you have gone to the trouble of hand laying a mess of turnouts, you would have uncommon self-discipline to not want to see how well your locomotives and trains run through them.

If you want the ultimate in detailed trackwork, http://www.proto87stores.com/p87stores/index.htm offers all the parts and various kits to make your turnouts look as close to prototype as possible - in both NMRA and Proto87 spec.  This includes very small and scale size spikes, various sizes of tie plates, ties, throw bars, and so on.

yours in handlaid track

Fred W

 

[NeO6874]

If you have gone to the trouble of hand laying a mess of turnouts, you would have uncommon self-discipline to not want to see how well your locomotives and trains run through them. 

 

No... but I do belong to a local club.... that *might* help (ok, so it won't)

 

ooh... i like that proto87 stuff... I might just have to go get that as well... it'll be easier than making my own tie plates and putting 4 spikes/tie into the rails... 

 

Two more questions - what code of rail should I use to represent a 1935(ish) engine facility?  Everything runs alright on the c83 at the club, although I think that's a bit heavy for the time period. If I go with c70 (possibility) some of the loco pilot/trailing wheels and the tender wheels flanges will be a bit on the big side, short of trying to file them down myself what can I do to fix them?

If it helps any, the offending locos are Mantuas.

 

Thanks for all the help so for guys  

[fwright]

Two more questions - what code of rail should I use to represent a 1935(ish) engine facility?  Everything runs alright on the c83 at the club, although I think that's a bit heavy for the time period. If I go with c70 (possibility) some of the loco pilot/trailing wheels and the tender wheels flanges will be a bit on the big side, short of trying to file them down myself what can I do to fix them?

If it helps any, the offending locos are Mantuas. 

Thanks for all the help so for guys  

I would use the code 70 rail.  The drivers on the Mantuas will definitely be fine, and the tender wheels should be, too.  Using Micro Engineering micro spikes or the Proto87 near scale spikes is key.  With the very small spike heads, you should have clearance enough for any wheels that meet NMRA specs (deeper than RP25) on code 70 rail.  If the pilot wheels won't work under those conditions, you would probably want to file them down anyway for a better appearance.  I can run RP25 flanges on code 40 rail with the Proto87 spikes.

yours in handlaid track

Fred W 

[NeO6874]

Thanks for clearing that up for me Fred (and thanks again to everyone else who has helped me out)

 

I'm hoping to avoid the filing down of the pilot/tender wheels if I can.. I would probably end up with a square flange (or blind wheels...) on at least one of them.  I might look to some supplier (NWSL?) for replacement trucks if that's the case.

 

Now, even bigger question now that I've researched the approximate weight of the rails... c70 is 100lb/yd rail which, as far as i understand it, would have been used in mainline trackage in the mid '40s.  Would this have been used in servicing facilities as well, or should I go with something lighter (I realize this would probably force me to change the pilots then)?

 

I'm not averse to the difficulty that using the lighter rail will entail - since I'm using this as a learning thing, i figure I might as well jump in as fully as possible... (possibly even to the point of over my head) 

[fwright]

Rail size in the '40s depends on your prototype and the actual year.  During the '30s, the railroads suffered like the rest of the economy, and often tried to stretch the life of whatever equipment they had.  Nevertheless, big power was becoming far more common, and was wearing the rails at a faster than desirable rate.  WW2 affected supplies of many things, from locomotives to rail, yet saw the heaviest traffic loads on the railroads ever.  Anything not worn out before the war was definitely worn out during the war.

Heavy rail (132# and up) started coming into regular use in the 1930s on main lines.  Engine terminals while not seeing the speeds and resultant wear of the main line, still had to have track good enough to support the weight of modern steam.  I would think code 70 (100-100lb rail in HO) would be a good choice.  Code 55 (75lb in HO) would not carry the load of modern, heavy steam locos.  Axle loading is why many of the lines who had not upgraded their main line rail or bridges in the '20s and '30s had to be very careful about what engines they bought, or where they ran them.

The November 1962 Model Railroader had a very good Clinic article about rail sizes, both model and prototype.  Most of what I know came from that article, with additional help from riding on operating narrow gauge lines (WP&Y, D&S).

yours in track

Fred W

[NeO6874]

in that case, code 70 it is.

 

Don't think management would be too happy if their brand new Niagara sunk into the mud...