After looking at prototype tracks, I came to the conclusion that the standard flex track is not going to cut the mustard for me. I am planning an HO scale layout based on the B&O Shenadoah Subdivision based in the 1920s. I noticed that prototype tracks have the following features: variation in crosstie color; variation in crosstie condition; variation in crosstie separation and not all crossties are exactly perpendicular to the rail. I am waffling between the fast track jigs or using the paper track templates for turnouts, crossing etc. I would be interested in hearing anyone's experience with hand laying track. I am gravitating towards the fast track jigs because it appears to me that one can achieve better track geometry, thereby less derailments. If anyone achieved bullet-proof tracks and turnouts using the paper template I would be interested in your comments.
In my opinion you are sort of putting the more difficult before the horse. If it were me, I would get myself a 3-foot section of something to use for roadbed, purchase a bag of ties (and stain them), some rail, spikes, a spike inserting tool, a three point gauge or two (or three), an NMRA gage, plus whatever the handlayed track experts tell me I forgot, and handlay a section of track with maybe a curve or two.
Then, if I found that I have the patience for that, then I'd look into jigs and paper templates. You will still need all the stuff I mentioned above anyway, so nothing will go to waste except the material you used for your experiment.
I strongly agree with you on this.
While there are plenty of good reasons to handlay track, unless you are going for individual tie plates and scale-size spikes, it will never look better than the better quality flex track. The old way of spiking every 3rd tie for example - no way that looks better than commercial track. You CAN get nicel etched brass components to have proper tie plates and all, but that it a lot more work than the traditional handlaid track. Fast Tracks uses PC ties that you solder the rail to at critical points, then the space in between is filled in with laser-cut wood tie strips. No spikes on every tie. Smooth flowing trackwork, turnouts that fit the layout rather than making the layout fit the turnout - those are reasons to hand lay.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
if you have the ambition, then the skill will come with time. i tend to agree with the others, though. unless you are building a small layout or expect to live another century, i would think twice about this project..
i have always admired those who do handlay their track in the smaller scales but to me it is something like cutting the lawn with nail clippers.
charlie
rrinker The old way of spiking every 3rd tie for example - no way that looks better than commercial track.... Smooth flowing trackwork, turnouts that fit the layout rather than making the layout fit the turnout --Randy
The old way of spiking every 3rd tie for example - no way that looks better than commercial track....
Smooth flowing trackwork, turnouts that fit the layout rather than making the layout fit the turnout
I have seen layouts and photos with hand laid track and I like it a lot better then the premium flex track. As for flex track, those tabs that hold the rails don't do it for me. Individual tie plates however would be too much for me. I usually don't notice tie plates when I am looking at track work from a distance. I like your comment about the smooth flowing track work.
1920's would look better with Code 55. That would require hand-laid.
I have a "what-I-did" about laying Code 55 at:
http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/1905/code_55/
I used paper templates because I was replacing Atlas Snap-Switches. Fast-tracks jigs are the way to go because a precision switch can be made in about 45 minutes.
Thank you if you visit
Harold
You can make flex track look just as good as the handlaid wood ties. All you have to do is paint and weather the track.
I use Walthers/Shinhora flex track. Its got some nice spike details, and comes in 39" sections.
First I lay the track get everything to fit. Remove it take it to the paint booth or outside. Then I use spray can of weathered black and railroad tie brown. Then wipe the rails off with paint thinner before it dries.
Once its ballasted it looks pretty darn realistic to me. If you don't paint the flex track, of course it won't look as good as wood ties.
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
hminky 1920's would look better with Code 55. That would require hand-laid. I have a "what-I-did" about laying Code 55 at: http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/1905/code_55/ Harold
I glanced at your tutorial and your track work and I have one comment, SWEET!
Thank you very much.
russ_q4b I glanced at your tutorial and your track work and I have one comment, SWEET! Thank you very much.
Thanks, code 55 really looks good with older equipment. Once you get some down the larger rail looks toy-like, even code 70.
Three comments:
First, this is about to grind itself down to, "Code 55!!?? Bloody luxury!! We had to force coat hangers through dies using our teeth to get Code 40, and we put four spikes into each and every scale tie plate, two per tie!"
Secondly, a quick glance at overhead views of examples of modern mainline trackwork shows ties to be rather uniform in all the respects you mention. This is especially true with modern concrete ties and their twisty 'spikes'.
Thirdly, you can still use flex track. Just nip the spike head details, and in some cases the plastic tab spacers under the rails that run between ties, and skew and space the ties as you see fit. Painting them up to be different is just a bit more work, but easily done by the purist. Handlaid track doesn't look very realistic in my view, not unless you do the scale tie plates and four spikes. On every tie.
Crandell
The original poster said "1920's" which has no relationship to "modern" track. Code 55 is the most appropriate and looks the best.
Totally different animal.
I have some Code 55 Micro engineering Flextrack and you can't see the spike heads or tieplates because they are scale. Don't make it anymore.
EDIT: As far as time, I redid my 4x8 On2-1/2 layout with hand-laid track in On2-1/2 and the Code55 HO in a week of evenings and a weekend both times.
My first experience with handlaid track was in the 1970s using code 70 rail (code 55 wasn't available then) to model a short line in 1925. Layout was a 4x8. I couldn't afford commercial track, and there were no Fast Tracks jigs.
Even with the oversize spikes back then, and spiking every 4th or 5th tie, it looked a lot better than any commercial products precisely for the reasons the OP mentions - lack of uniformity that prevails with commercial track.
I used redwood ties - no stain needed - on my 1st layout. In later efforts with sugar pine or bass wood ties, I brushed on Minwood oil-based stain.
Handlaid track for me is a 2 night effort per turnout or 6 foot section. First night, I mark centerlines on the Homasote roadbed. I solder a feeder to each rail piece using 24 gauge magnet wire. I then paint the rails a rust color, omitting one corner of the rail head. I also stain the ties by brush with an appropriate color wood stain (beach gray for most, cedar or maple or oak or similar for new ties - no creosote on my protoype). I then loaded a home-made piano key jig with the stained ties, painted the roadbed with glue, and moved a strip of ties to the roadbed with a piece of masking tape. Remove the masking tape, adjust ties by hand as desired, and add ballast while glue is still wet. First night completed in about 2 hours.
2nd night - it can be a long time between nights with my methods - is putting the rail and wiring in. I sand the tie tops level, and gently restain where and as desired. Vacuum up the sanding dust and any excess ballast. I drill holes for the feeders, feed the wire through, position the rail, and spike in place. Since I didn't use rail joiners (avoids the bump up on level sanded ties), the rail needs to be pre-curved before spiking. Curving by hand to approximate curve is plenty good enough - you are just looking to eliminate side pressure by the rail "spring" at the rail joints. Curving the last 1/2 inch is too hard so I just cut it off. Get underneath and solder the feeders to the bus, and you are done.
Turnouts are a little harder because of the extra pieces, the throw mechanism, and the extra feeders. I did one turnout in a 2 night sequence. I filled my frogs with solder to avoid a real accurate fit, and then sawed the flange ways out with a hack saw blade (almost perfect dimension for HO).
A common technique for getting a template for a free-flowing turnout is to fasten a piece of flex track about where the points start. Fasten a piece of folded light weight paper parallel to one path of the turnout. Curve the flex track to the desired curve, unfold the paper on top of the track, and trace the rail head locations. Curve the flex track to the other turnout leg, and using the same paper, again mark rail head locations. Remove the flex track, unfold the paper, and lay your turnout right on top of your paper "template". You have the frog location already done where the rail head tracings meet and cross.
Just some ideas I have used and learned from others (Jack Work, Steve Hatch).
As mentioned by Harold, prototype track varied considerably in appearance with era. Something to think about. My methods are not as good for 1920s and later, when prototype track used machine sawn ties treated with creosote, and much more consistently laid in straight lines and even spacing - at least on main lines. Tie plates and rail joiners were also standardized as the 20th Century prototype trains went faster and weighed a lot more.
Fred W
Handlaid is definately a "thing"; I've found that I prefer the look with the individual tie plates, which I think is not worth the effort (for me), although I do enjoy all the other aspects. Folks often gussie-up the foreground (highly visible) track and use prefab where the appearance doesn't matter. I believe Central Valley makes some pretty nice looking tie strips, I am considering those. An old article "Track is a Model, Too" in MR (pretty sure) or possibly RMC, really got me started on this stuff.
Mike
russ_q4bI noticed that prototype tracks have the following features: variation in crosstie color; variation in crosstie condition; variation in crosstie separation and not all crossties are exactly perpendicular to the rail.
WEll, you looked at the line you want to model and saw what you saw, and that is what you want to build.
So be it: I wish you well.
But if you look a new tracks, the kind with either concrete or wooden ties that bulk produced to be exactly identical, and laid with absolute precision with automated track and tie laying equipment, well, simply stated it can be a beautiful thing!
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
All these replies and no one mentioned CVT!!! I have been building my turnouts at the bench on Central Valley tie bases. Takes about an hour to build one turnout and runs flawlessly. Fast tracks jigs cost too much for my liking. The CV ties have the tie plates and simulated spikes already. Just add rail. I am also doing a pre war layout and used code 70 for the main and code 55 for everywhere else. Turnouts from number 5 to 9 frogs. You will need 8 different fast tracks jigs for that.
I also did away with the rail joiners and solder the P87 etched joint bars on the visible side of the rail.
Track is a model too.
http://www.cvmw.com/turnouts.htm
http://www.proto87.com/
Pete
I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!
I started with nothing and still have most of it left!
A couple of random thoughts from a modeler who handlaid everything, four spikes per tie - but doesn't any more.
Track is a model, yes. But unless you are going to model EVERYTHING to a preposterous level of detail, you really don't want your track to be too detailed. It will detract from other things that aren't up to that standard. The exception is if you want to use a scene for close up 'just like the prototype' photos - but do you really want to lay five hundred full scale feet of track to that standard? (That's 8,25 miles in HO, 14.57 kilometers for me.)
As originally laid by a prosperous railroad, ties would be lined and ballast would be neatly trimmed. Time, traffic and lack of hands-on attention would change that - but isn't really noticeable if you are looking from a distance. (Does the, "Three foot rule," sound familiar?)
in HO scale, Code 55 rail is equivalent to ASCE 75#, while Code 70 scales to (approximately) 100-105#. Depending on prototype, there were a lot of BIG locomotives in 1920. Granted, little logging lines or older branch lines on the prairies were laid with 75# rail. None of the Northeastern, coal, rust belt or transcons were. A Y3 or almost any USRA loco would convert 75# rail into steel pretzels. I don't know when PRR put 155# rail on the Horseshoe, but it was well before WWII.
My own modeling is close to half a century more recent and my choice of rail sizes reflects that. Some of my trackwork will resemble the photo The Lion posted, concrete ties and all, except that there won't be any third rail. My motors take power from catenary,,,
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - flex and hand-laid specialwork to a roughly uniform level of mediocrity)
Some thoughts;
I've been handlaying my rail and turnouts since I taught myself how at age twelve. I can freehand a turnout at it's location in under an hour, using nothing more than a ruler and a pencil to lay it out initially. My straight and curved track costs me about $2.50 a 3' section, with the average cost of a turnout between $3-4 for a regular one, and the most expensive one, a double slip on my previous layout $12. I save money by cutting my own ties from a piece of knotless white pine I bought several years ago. these are cut first on a 12" table saw, and the ties themselves are cut on a 4" table saw.
I use no jigs or commercial parts at all, because you're limited to the track geometries these items are produced in. CV's frogs only go from #4-9. The Fast Tracks jigs are almost $200 apiece, meaning than you'll have to need at least 20 turnouts made from the jig, just to get the cost under $15 per turnout, provided that there is a jig made in the size needed. Each one of my turnouts match the NMRA standards.
My layout is 17'x23'. Except for my staging yards, the roundhouse and some hidden track, there are no commercial components on the layout at all. I used commercial parts here to make the maintenance easier in these cramped areas. My layout is also 3 levels, and I need to build about another 15' of benchwork, and lay about 35' of track and the layout's trackwork will be done.
I find handlaying track is more relaxing, and easier to do than using flex track. One thing that handlaying does teach you, other than patience, is how to handle any and all problems with flex or sectional track. If you can handlay, you can lay super smooth commercial track.
I'll be 60 in a couple of weeks, and I'm too set in my ways to change. Click on my homepage link in my signature and look at the track I've got down. Plus except for yard areas, all the track is laid on spline sub-roadbed and homemade roadbed. While I still have about 2/3 of the track on the third level to do before I'm finished, it's taken about 6 years to get where I am now. It's actually been less as several times I've stopped due to various reasons, but none of those reasons have involved a shortage of rail. As an aside, where I'm not using Caboose Industries switch machines to throw turnouts, I've built my own machines, out of 2 different craft sticks, screws, washers, nuts, plastic furniture "feet", a steel rod, and some braided steel wire.
Carey
Keep it between the Rails
Alabama Central Homepage
Nara member #128
NMRA &SER Life member
i think trackwork will look more consistent if the non-turnout sections were made similar to the turnouts if you plan to make hand-laid turnouts as well.
I also read that a little imprecision may be more realistic if your modeling earlier era railroad.
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Trackwork gangs in most earlier eras laid the track with great pride.
Even logging and mining roads were precise. There is a common misconception of sloppiness.
Even the woebegone branchline used in Disney's Great Locomotive Chase had good track:
I've done some handlaying (not a lot, but some) and it is relatively easy. I use a pair of pliers and a standards gauge, but it would seem to me that a 3-point track gauge would be much easier to use.
The "sloppiness" that is though of on spurs and backwoods trackage was not the result of bad laying, but of little or no maintenance. Over time the track would heave and shift, and the result would be "sloppy" track.
This could be modeled through careful handlaying and a lot of testing.
S&S
Modeling the Pennsy and loving it!
locoi1sa All these replies and no one mentioned CVT!!! I have been building my turnouts at the bench on Central Valley tie bases. Takes about an hour to build one turnout and runs flawlessly. Fast tracks jigs cost too much for my liking. The CV ties have the tie plates and simulated spikes already. Just add rail. I am also doing a pre war layout and used code 70 for the main and code 55 for everywhere else. Turnouts from number 5 to 9 frogs. You will need 8 different fast tracks jigs for that. I also did away with the rail joiners and solder the P87 etched joint bars on the visible side of the rail. Track is a model too. http://www.cvmw.com/turnouts.htm http://www.proto87.com/ Pete
Did too....
Mike.
Sorry must have missed it. I love the CVT system. May cost a little more than flex but is easy to work with and can be weathered and ballasted before the rail is glued down which is a great plus.
Quote
Not exactly what I want to model. I'm doing a branch line in the 1920s. It might have looked pristine when the tracks were first laid, but I am sure it has not received much tender loving care later on. Also the spurs and sidings have more imperfections and a obvious more spacing between the ties.
gregc i think trackwork will look more consistent if the non-turnout sections were made similar to the turnouts if you plan to make hand-laid turnouts as well. I also read that a little imprecision may be more realistic if your modeling earlier era railroad.
Howdy, Greg,
A little imprecision may be more realistic if you're modeling a railroad that only does track maintenance after a derailment, regardless of era. One that I saw in 1979 had allowed some tracks in a small yard to sink into the mud, then embargoed them by nailing an X of scrap wood to the switchstand targets. (If you guessed Penn-Central, you got it in one...)
As for making the non-turnout sections the same as the turnouts, in 1964 my prototype was switching to concrete ties. The specialwork remained on wood ties. The same thing can be seen in The Lion's photo.
Has anyone ever hand-laid concrete-tie track? If so, where did you find the model Pandrol clips? I presume you molded the ties from Hydrocal, or maybe real Portland cement. (I model Pandrol clips on Atlas 'concrete' ties with a black Sharpie)
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with Atlas concrete-tie flex and handlaid specialwork)
By 1979, that would have been ConJob, err, ConRail.
tomikawaTT As for making the non-turnout sections the same as the turnouts, in 1964 my prototype was switching to concrete ties. The specialwork remained on wood ties. The same thing can be seen in The Lion's photo. Has anyone ever hand-laid concrete-tie track? If so, where did you find the model Pandrol clips? I presume you molded the ties from Hydrocal, or maybe real Portland cement. (I model Pandrol clips on Atlas 'concrete' ties with a black Sharpie) Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with Atlas concrete-tie flex and handlaid specialwork)
UP does the same thing. Turnouts are built on wood ties, all the rest is concrete. I suppose it makes sense. Ever try to drive a spike into concrete?
Schuylkill and SusquehannaUP does the same thing. Turnouts are built on wood ties, all the rest is concrete. I suppose it makes sense. Ever try to drive a spike into concrete?
There are some turnouts just south of Orlando Florida that CSX has that have concrete ties.........and most of the newer turnouts on Amtrak`s northeast corridor have concrete ties too.
Dennis Blank Jr.
CEO,COO,CFO,CMO,Bossman,Slavedriver,Engineer,Trackforeman,Grunt. Birdsboro & Reading Railroad
I took a stab at hand laid track and I am very pleased with it. I got a "scrap piece" of 3' x 8' plywood and laid a straight section and a 33" radius curve section. I used code 70 rail and Kappler crossties and cork roadbed. I stained the ties with black shoe polish and rubbing alcohol and let it soak overnight. I spiked every third tie. Believe it or not I was having a blast. I am currently experimenting with different colors of chalk to weather the ties and give it more character. I then ran a small train back and forth, so far so good.
I am going to purchase the Fast-Track jigs for the number 5 turnout and build a siding on my scrap plywood railroad empire. After that I am going to run a train back and forth to make sure the turnout is bullet proof. The big question I have at this point is how do I make the PCB ties blend in with my stained wooden ties?
russ_q4b The big question I have at this point is how do I make the PCB ties blend in with my stained wooden ties?
The big question I have at this point is how do I make the PCB ties blend in with my stained wooden ties?
Perhaps not a particularly helpful answer, but -
I have not found a need to use PCB ties in handlaid HO or HOn3 track. The frog is soldered together right on the wood ties, as are the guard rails to the stock rails. Some use shims under the frog for extra strength.
I do lay turnouts in place on the layout, not make them on the workbench. This means I do not need the PCB ties to hold alignment while I transport the turnout.
The only place I use PCB is for the throwbar, and I am looking at trying alternatives to soldering the point bases to the throwbar. The rigid soldered throwbar creates stress on the joints as the points are moved. I have used separate points with the hinge point much closer to the frog than prototype to relieve some of the stress. By using rail spikes as the hinge, there is some longitudinal movement of the point heel when the points are thrown.
I am looking at using upside down pins through the throwbar, then soldered to the point base, as a method with even less stress. Proto87 Stores has a more prototypical throw bar I may look into.
To make my existing PCB throwbars look like ties, I remove the copper surface as much as feasible - leave copper under point and stock rail. I distress the top surface with a wire brush and paint in a color similar to the stain I use on the wood ties.
just my thoughts and experiences