Look at my site crossings. There's at the bottom a electrical plan for these turnouts. Maybe it helps.
Wolfgang
Pueblo & Salt Lake RR
Come to us http://www.westportterminal.de my videos my blog
Chuck, thanks for the correction. I don't really understand at the moment how an SPDT would work, but I'll chew on it.
-Crandell
Hey foible,
check ou this link, it is a site I have found to be invaluable.
http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches_peco.htm
That page will tell you all you need to know about the Peco switches and how to wire them for DCC.
BTW - I have Peco electrofrog switches, I think around 67 of them and I think they work great. I did follow the wiring directions on WiringforDCC to power route the frogs and point rails as I had problems on a previous layout with ectrofrog point rails loosing contact with the main rails therefore loosing power. I think you will want to look at supplying power to point rails on any switch you decide on and as far as a powered frog, the only reason I can think of to have is if you plan on running short wheel base locos, which I do. I have two of the new Kato (N scale) switchers that need a powered frog to make it through a Peco #6 without running through it at Mach 7.
Crandell, it only takes SPDT contacts to power a frog. Tortoise, RIX (with contacts) and the more expensive Atlas machines come with DPDT contacts. My antique Katsumi rock-smashers have 3PDTs!
As for reasons to power a frog - I own EMU and DMU cars which only pick up power from one truck per. Not to mention the TTT's collection of 0-4-0T and 0-6-0T kettles. If my long curved frogs were dead, they would even kill my pet Baldwin 0-8-0T, my ED14 juice motors and the two JNR 2-6-0s with their short 6-wheel pedestal tenders. (Maybe that's what I get for running locomotives four decades old.)
Then there's the mechanical side. Since I hand-lay specialwork, I really don't want to deal with short lengths of rail - even if I cut the gaps later. Having something held in place by a dozen or so spikes (into soft wood ties) isn't my idea of bulletproof construction. I gap frog rails at the clearance point - the farthest clearance point, in the case of multi-turnout throats.
Just my . Other opinions may differ.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with live frogs)
Wolfgang has a perfect example of an intance where insulated frogs are problematic...depending on what you are running across them. For his little critter, the power gathering axles are quite close to each other, and by the time the lead axle is just about to leave the dead frog, the other crosses the gap at the same end just entered, and the loco stalls dead on the tracks. He must power his frog, either with a Tortoise type of machine or with a DPDT. In my case, with Pecos and Fast Tracks handlaid turnouts, including the rather long #8's that are gapped, even my tiny SW8 will negotiate the frogs. Mind you, the SW8 would not negotiate any of my turnouts until I removed the rubber tire axle and substituted it with a metal tire set. Now it's a champ.
Unless you are running old models, say from the 70's and earlier with few pickup points, you should be fine with any modern steamer models. The reason is that they have pickups under the boiler as well as under the tender...so rarely less than 6 full inches of pickup base, much longer than insulated frogs you'll encounter. Small diesels could be a problem, especially the NW/SW models.
I disagree.
I'm just reworking my Central Valley frogs with my own. I need powered frogs for my GE 25-ton! If you like critters you need powered frogs.
foible Pardon my dispicable grammar
Pardon my dispicable grammar
If it's just an artifact of your namesake, it's okay. If not......
Seriously, the insulfrog ones keep the frog inert electrically so that any out of gauge wheels don't inadvertently get the wrong orientation of power as they encounter the frog, as they may in non-insulfrog turnouts where power to the frog is dependent upon the points and how they line the turnout. Electro-frog turnouts route power to the frogs, which are obviously not inert electrically thereby, and this can be desirable, even highly so, for older engines with poor power pickup distributed over only two or three axles. With modern designs, and multiple axle pickup on diesels and steamers (including the tenders), the live frog is not a strict necessity, and some would say it is actually a potential danger to sensitive decoders to have a hard short at the frog caused by inadvertent contact with the wrong orientation of power. So, the idea is to just get rid of powered frogs altoghether and let the improved pickup designs do what they are meant to do; straddle the dead frog anyway, and thus keep good reliable electrical pickup.
I guess i don't exactly understand why it would really make a differance
The layout will be in DCC.
I am currently planning a new layout for my basement and I am planning on using Peco brand turnouts. My question is should I use the Eloctrofrog or insulfrog versions?