Spoke to Andrew at Peco just now. Medium and large radius Code 100 Electrofrogs do now have the DCC-friendly design with the gaps separated away from the frogs. If ordering them, specify that you want only ones that come with frog wires attached. There is nothing on the box to tell the new from the old. The small radius versions have not yet been changed.
Hal
jrc:
Do you still have the boxes the two versions came in? I "d like to know if the version (a) has got a notation of any kind indicating it is an upgraded version.
For clarity: all Code 75 and Code 83 Pecos are of the version (a) type with visible gaps about half-way between the frog and the point rail rivets (pivots). The gaps can be seen on p. 260 of the 2011 Walthers. It's true that these are not DCC-friendly out of the box, so they can be used as is without external frog power. The two steps to make them friendly, however, are designed to be easy. 1, cut the jumpers underneath so the frog and the closure/point rails are three isolated units. 2, (optional, but well-advised) jumper the closure/point rails to the stock rails. Gaps in the plastic railbed are provided for this, although strangely, they are not mentioned in the paperwork. However, as you say, the old Code 100 Pecos need new gaps cut. It solves the problem, but I object to having to do it. The new design is much quicker and safer to change over.
My belief, after looking at other mfg's turnouts, is that Pecos with the new design and jumper changes may be the most DCC-friendly turnout available, since opposing-polarity rails have the greatest possible separation. I have every type of loco and never "hear" shorts occur under any condition except derailments (my PSX circuit breakers with Sonalerts trigger a loud two-second tone with any short). The powered frogs make it less likely brass locos will stumble and sound decoders will reset than with plastic frogs, which also tend to wear out. What's not to like?
bagalI have wondered why people prefer the electrofrog rather than insulfrog. The unpowered section doesn't seem to any longer on the insulfrog.
Then of course the topic of this thread is the big reason our club switched from insufrogs back to the electrofrogs. In my opinion really doesn't have that much to do with the length of the rails going into the frog the their thickness vs an RP25 width metal tire. There are several ways to solve that issue but most of those are a lot harder than just using the electrofrog to begin with. The semi-scale thick tires don't seem to cause nearly the same problems. Neither do I consider it to be a DCC issue, other than DCC reacts to the short much quicker than DC does.
Allowing for the problem of "Stock lag" why not e mail Peco? They're usually very helpful. They can probably suggest solutions or, if you want a specific type, supply direct. The time you might save may offset any extra first cost.
Version (a) is the new upgraded version re-designed in the same way as all Code 75 and 83 are. What you say verifies that these do exist, and it's possible I could get them if I insist that the shipper inspect them before shipment. I want to avoid having to do that cutting procedure. Do you still have the boxes by any chance? If so, can you see any difference in the labeling whatsoever? Something I could tell the dealer I order from?
Thanks
Hi Hal -
A problem here is that the stock of Peco code 100 turnouts at Walthers and elsewhere is not consistent, and do not always match the photos one sees, either. I have purchased a number of 'medium radius' code 100 electrofrogs for our club, and several 'short radius' code 100's, also electrofrogs, for my grandson's layout. Here is a short description of what I received:
None of them are 'dcc friendly' out of the box. ALL have both points electrically connected to the frog, with the point-frog structure getting its juice via little sliding contacts between point and stock rails. This is the primary fault with stock non-dcc-friendly turnouts, making a short possible when a wheel flange bridges the gap between the open point and the adjacent stock rail. (OK purists, I know that in a perfect world, if wheelsets and turnouts were all adjusted to exacting standards, this problem could not occur. Unfortunately, most of us are not precision machinists and these shorts do happen on a normal, well-maintained railroad.)
All of these turnouts need to be modified to have the points isolated from the frog, isolated from each other, and bridged to the adjacent stock rail. NO recent or other production Peco electrofrogs have this feature, to my knowledge - certainly none of the several I've purchased from at least two sources in the past few months.
So neither of the versions you are comparing are really 'dcc friendly' - see the 'wiring for dcc' website (www.wiringfordcc.com) for more info.
That said, the two medium radius versions I've received recently are different:
Version (a) in has a gap - with a small bridging wire underneath - in each point-frog rail about an inch or two pointward from the frog, before one gets to the hinge. Part of the easy conversion to 'dcc friendly' involves cutting this bridging wire underneath.
Version (b) has no such gap anywhere in either point-frog rail; each frog rail is continuous - through the hinge - to the point.
In both versions the two frog rails are bridged underneath - so the frog and both points form a single electrical unit.
I've recently purchased several 'short radius' turnouts, code 100 electrofrog, for my grandson's layout. ALL of these are the Version (b) described above.
Part of the procedure I must go through (and have) with the version (b) units is to cut a gap between the hinge and the frog, in each point rail - to isolate the frog. Again, see www.wiringfordcc.com for complete explanations.
I use electrofrogs because I can modify them to be completely 'dcc friendly'. I do not use 'insulfrogs' for reasons frequently stated elsewhere.
jrc
Well, I couldn't help it, here is a picture of what I have, & the packaging. I looked at the catalog, & they are different, but thery do match the small pictures with the red background. So I got out the Ohm meter & tested the rails exiting the frog, & they are independent & not connected together, but are jumpered to the correct approching rail. The frog is totally dead, & isolated, nothing there whatsoever. Please refer to the pix. I believe this would be easy to modify as listed in a couple DCC books that suggest a couple different options for frog charging. All that is needed on this switch is a wire for each frog rail, which are alone in my testing with the meter. This one should not short in any way as it is in the factory contition. The only concern is the dead zone the frog creates. Also, the back of the ties were marked 'PECO ENGLAND' & 'Patent Pending' I got these in 2002, but they were on the wall in an LHS, so they are ealier ones. Check out the "Magic" section in the catalog for a couple more confusing pix & descriptions.
I hope this helps,
I have wondered why people prefer the electrofrog rather than insulfrog. The unpowered section doesn't seem to any longer on the insulfrog. The insulfrog picture on the Walthers listing referred to above looks more like an electrofrog.
10-4 Just got the catalog this week, taking a look, Thanks. Feel free to ask if you want to have pix, it's no problem..
Thanks, Chad, but probably more work than it's worth. The old type is on the Peco-UK site, and the new type is pictured on p. 260 of the 2011 Walthers book. Look above the right edge of the red text balloon and you can see the gaps. But this shows an 83, not a 100. I'm going to clear this up next week.
I have a R & L pair in 2002-ish vintage, if you'd like a nice shot of them, I would be happy to do so. You could copy & edit the pix to show the issues, if needed.
Just let me know, yea or nea...
Thanks for the URL. Unfortunately, the pic isn't sharp enough, but I do believe that is the original Electrofrog, same as on the Peco-UK site.
I see that you posted this on the electronics/DCC forum also. Anyway, here's a link to a code 100 Peco streamline electrofrog picture: http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/552-1905
And here's a link to a code 100 insulfrog turnout: http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/552-1044. I confess that I'm not sure that I can actuall see the gaps in the closure rail, but there does appear to be two in the closure rails halfway between the point rail pivots and the frog as you describe. Again, these are in the insulfrog, not the electrofrog.
Peco also makes these things in short, medium, and long radius. I did not look at all the pictures to see if there is a structural difference between flavors.
If you recently bought or have nearby a recent-production Code 100 (NOT 83 or 75) Electrofrog, would you look at it and answer a question for me?
Background: their legacy 100 line was not a DCC-friendly design. That is, the gaps (which come jumpered) between the frog and closure rails were right at the frog, where shorts can occur with metal wheels. When the Code 75 line (and later, 83 line) were introduced, they had been re-designed so that the gaps had been moved to a position about halfway between the frog and the point rail rivets, a shift of a couple of inches.
Now I hear from some sources that the Code 100's have been upgraded to this design. The reason I feel uncertain this is true is that I've talked to several dealers who have the same old turnouts in stock. This could just be older stock. The Peco-UK site has old pictures, so no help there.
Would you look at your Code100 Electros and see if the closure rails have gaps that are about half-way from frog to point rail rivets? Our club would prefer to buy these newer ones if they really exist. In that case, we just need to make sure the supplier verifies them as the new type before shipping.
(I know that some people say only Insulfrogs should be used with DCC. This is NOT true. Where the the Electrofrog's gaps are and how it is wired is the key to a very reliable device, which will work better with some engines that might hesitate or reset their sounds on Insulfrogs. So Electrofrogs are actually preferable. I have 36 Code 75's which have been flawless for some years now. The 83's should be just as good)
Thanks for your help.