Which brand of turnout do you like?

[Anonymous]

I have been modeling for close to 20 years and I have used turnouts from several different manufacturers. They all seem to have some drawbacks. Originally I used Atlas code 100 turnouts and they required a bit of work to get them to work well. As I got a little more experienced I switched to Walters/Shinohara code 83. They work well mechanically, but I have had many electrical problems with them. I have them installed correctly with the proper gaps. There seems to be a small "tab" soldered to the rails and if this gets dirty or doesn't make contact the train will stop until I put pressure on the rails. When Atlas released their code 83 track I started using those, but they have some problems too. I haven't tried Peco. Has anybody experienced anything similar to these problems. What type of track do you like?

Thanks
Jim

[IRONROOSTER]

I have been using Shinohara code 100 S scale for several years without problem, worked for me right out of the box.
Enjoy
Paul

[tomwatkins]

I use the Walthers code 83 turnouts, and have had good results from them.

[Kent]

I've only used Atlas but I'm happy with them. I'd like to try some Peco switch though:)
The only thing I don't like is the Atlas switch machines. It's too easy to melt them, see page 4 of my layout website.

[cacole]

I used Peco wherever I possibly could on the Cochise & Western Model Railroad Club's layout because I have had fewer problems with them than any other brand. Even stall motor switch machines can be used with Peco turnouts if you remove the spring that holds the points in position. We also have some Atlas Customline #6 Code 100 turnouts on the layout that we throw with Caboose Industries sprung ground throws. Pecos don't require a ground throw since they can be changed with the built-in throw bar and lock into position, so only turnouts that we couldn't reach to throw by hand are motorized.

[wp8thsub]

I have the best luck with handlaid (great reliability, low cost), but my favorite commercial turnouts are Shinohara/Walthers. They have a good balance of looks and function.

"There seems to be a small "tab" soldered to the rails and if this gets dirty or doesn't make contact the train will stop until I put pressure on the rails."

What you're describing is the most common complaint I hear about Shinohara/Walthers turnouts. The stupid tabs at the bottom of the points just plain get in the way. Get rid of them by breaking scoring them with a knife and breaking them off with pliers. They're easily bent during use, preventing the points from making proper contact with the stock rails causing derailments as well as loss of electrical contact.

Also, the hinged points (pivoting on a rivet on older ones) can become loose enough from the closure rails that contact is lost, giving you a dead spot. The easiest fix for this is to solder a jumper from the points to the closure rails.

The real way around the electrical problems is to install some form of positive power routing through switch machine contacts or other methods that have been described over the years in the magazines.

Some modelers swear by Peco, but they look so little like US prototype track I won't consider them for use on visible track. Their operation through the frogs a bit rough for me too, but if looks aren't as important to you they may be a good option.

[Anonymous]

Peco. Maybe they don't resemble US prototype track particularly closely but they have the major advantage of being easy to find (in UK) and relatively cheap.

[CP5415]

I'm using Peco & Shinohara switches on my layout with no problems.
The Shinohara switches I have are well over 30 years old & still in good working order.

Gordon

[Anonymous]

I use peco turnouts as they are easy to get over here and are reliable and generally maintenance free. They are power routing so providing you can get at them to clean them when needed (once in a blue moon) you don't need any under layout poer routing thingys on point motors etc. They don't match american points too closely but i've never seen an american one so it doesn't bother me.

with regards to the chap who says they are a bit rough running through the frog; I would agree but that is because they are designed with NEM sized guard rail flangeways. Compare them with your NMRA guage and you will find that if you lay a strip of 0.25mm (10thou) styrene down the inside of the guardrails then they will work better.

neil

[Anonymous]

I would like to hear some comments on the ME turnouts especially the code 55 in "N" gauge
Blake

[Anonymous]

Since space (lack thereof) was a primary dictate, I went to Atlas snap switches.
Given more space (next layout!!) I'd favor Shinohara &/or BK.
The solder-a-jumper continuity fix was pointed out at a local club and sure makes sense.

Re Peco not looking USA prototype is a self-fix. If it matters, don't use 'em. I have a few lengths on N plus Pecos for a mining sub-layout. The snap action is flawless so what's to matter. D

[gwrly]

Peco; Only Peco.

I've used Shinohara, and Atlas and have replaced them all, if we are talking about Peco not looking American, so what, who cares? Atlas with their overscale un-prototypical switch machines attached don't look very American either.

Pecos operated well, (I use only Electrofrog), they look fine to me, and they are DCC friendly which is more than can be said about some.

[Anonymous]

I was a member of a club that built a sectional layout for traveling display. All the visable track was hand laid with code 70 rail and BK turnouts. The layout traveled from Minn. to Kansas City to Virginia and many other places during the approximately 10 years we showed it. The turnouts operated flawlessly throughout all this. The track power was routed through the Tortoise contacts. This produced flawless operation.

[Anonymous]

We have been using the "new" line of Atlas code 83 turnouts, on our HO club layout. They have excellent electrical characteristics. They look quite good as well. For some reason MR did not cover them in their recent review of commercial track components. They are DCC friendly right from the package. The same is not true of the Walthers/Shinohara line. I use these as well for more complicated track work. They are good but to make them DCC friendly requires some work. We use Peco turnouts for hidden track in staging yards. They take up less space and don't require switch machines or ground throws. The Atlas code 83's are a very good value. They are less expensive, good looking, and DCC friendly. This is a tough combination to beat.

[locomcf]

Cowdog asked about ME N scale code 55 turnouts.

I have a friend who built a medium-large layout (~80 turnouts) with ME code 55 track. The trackwork looks GREAT - absolutely first class. But operation is a big chore. The turnouts require a lot of work to keep locos running smoothly through them, and (worst of all) on about 20 turnouts (so far) one of the point rails has broken off.

My friend is systematically removing the turnouts and reworking them so they won't fail in future, but it is a big job (they've all been ballasted into place).

I was planning to use the same track for my new layout, but because of my friend's problems with it, I went with Peco code 55 instead. Once ballasted it looks "okay" (but definately not USA-ish). So far it has worked every bit as good as the ME stuff looks. Operationally, I cannot fault it. It's a pity that Peco doesn't make USA prototype track.

I'd like to hear from anyone with experience with the new Atlas code 55 track, as I am about to extend my trackwork.

[Anonymous]

micro engineering code 70, they work great and they have a swell finescale appeareance

[JeremyB]

Im a fan of the Bachmann E-Z Track turnout, mine have lasted forever...

Jeremy

[bruce22]

peco code 100

[joseph2]

Mainly Peco code 100,I would like to try Micro Engineering in the future.

[Anonymous]

Has anyone used or worked with the Central Valley curvable turnouts?

[CBQ_Guy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by gwrly

Peco; Only Peco.

I've used Shinohara, and Atlas and have replaced them all, if we are talking about Peco not looking American, so what, who cares? Atlas with their overscale un-prototypical switch machines attached don't look very American either.

Pecos operated well, (I use only Electrofrog), they look fine to me, and they are DCC friendly which is more than can be said about some.

Yup, same for me.

[Anonymous]

I've just started playing with the Central Valley "semi-handlaid" track and turnouts. The detail, overall looks, and the flexibility of the turnouts can't be beat, but only time will tell how well they work. From what I can gather, though, if they don't perform well, it will have been my fault.

Anybody else have any experience with these?

[aussiesteve]

Currently I only have Peco code 100's as they are readily available out here but I am considering a change to Code 83 probaly utilising Central Valley product. [:)]

[Anonymous]

Gentlemen,

Back in ‘94, before good running ‘N’ gauge steam was available, I was running Rapido 0-6-0's converted to 2-6-0's with homemade tender pickups. Plastic frogs were out of the question so I started using code 55 PECO Electro-Frogs. I have also used Micro Engineering code 80's and 55's with hot frogs. Between the two I guess PECO would come in first in my humble opinion. They just seem a little easier to set up (gauging wise). I can’t speak for Atlas since my layout is at a point where, unless I change something, I don’t need any more switches. If I do, I may try Atlas’ newer code 55's.

JackB

[dwick]

I have had experience with (H.O. scale) Atlas, Walthers, Micro Engineering and Casio.
For performance and reliabilty, I will choose Atlas [code 83] for my next layout. Walthers [Shinohara] code 83 has tab connector problems that are sensative to oxidation and dirt problems. MIcro Engineering has an Achilles Heel spot. The molded plastic pin that holds the drawbar to the movable turnout rails has a tendacy to break and is a real bear to repair with a metal pin. Atlas has power routing thru the rails without any separation needed to keep the locos running. This means that the frog is dead and most locos can pass thru the turnout without serious hesitation. I never had an opportunity to try Peco turnouts, although some of my colleages are quite happy with their performance.

[dwick]

I have had experience with (H.O. scale) Atlas, Walthers, Micro Engineering and Casio.
For performance and reliabilty, I will choose Atlas [code 83] for my next layout. Walthers [Shinohara] code 83 has tab connector problems that are sensative to oxidation and dirt problems. MIcro Engineering has an Achilles Heel spot. The molded plastic pin that holds the drawbar to the movable turnout rails has a tendacy to break and is a real bear to repair with a metal pin. Atlas has power routing thru the rails without any separation needed to keep the locos running. This means that the frog is dead and most locos can pass thru the turnout without serious hesitation. I never had an opportunity to try Peco turnouts, although some of my colleages are quite happy with their performance.
I am glad Atlas finally came up with #8 code 83 turnouts. For the size of my new layout, I will be using Atlas #6 turnouts in the yards and lineside industries. The leads to and from the mainline will be #8s
Don Wick
West Bend, WI

[wp8thsub]

"...if we are talking about Peco not looking American, so what, who cares?"

Well, I care. I want my track to look like a model of real track and Peco doesn't really give me the appearance I want. It's a judgment call based on personal taste. As for their operation you can shim the flangeways and otherwise monkey with the things but the way I see it once I've expended that much effort I may as well have handlaid. Probably anyone with a little practice can scratchbuild a turnout with far superior performance to any commercial product for under $2.00 in materials. I've built about 150 over the years and can build one in under two hours. It fits with my perfectionist tendencies as well as my basic cheapness. I never really saw the point in handlaying until I actually tried it and found out how well it worked and for how little money. Certain situations like crossovers and yard ladders are more time consuming with handlaid so I tend to use commercial turnouts there.

"Atlas with their overscale un-prototypical switch machines attached don't look very American either."

No they don't, which is why I don't use Atlas code 100 outside of staging. I don't use the twin coil snap-bang switch machines either, because I like the operation of Switchmaster or Tortoise machines. Again a personal decision.

The best looking turnouts I've seen in HO ( I haven't seen a Central Valley turnout in person) are from Micro Engineering, but their durability has been poor from my experience.