Heartland Division CB&QTyco and other train set HO have couplers on the trucks instead of the carbody to accommodate 18" curves.
Athearn,Roundhouse,Atlas,Intermountain,Red Caboose and other brand of freights cars with their body mounted couplers that is 40-50' in lenght will go around 18" curves.The "train set" cars with truck mounted couplers was cheaply made for train sets and not to be used as example for 18" curves.
Locomotives up to a 4-8-4 or a SD40-2 will go around 18" curves-don't look very pretty but,around they go.
18" curves isn't a evil thing if properly used with nothing larger then 2-8-2s, 4-6-2 or 4 axle diesels with 40-50' freight cars.Passenger cars should be restricted to Athearn's BB passenger cars since these was made to run on 18" curves.
AHM and IHC passenger cars will go around 18" curves but, again not very pretty to watch.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Garry,Good point. One can simulate transition track by putting in a larger radius section before the straight away, but flex track works the best for spiral transitions or easments as they are called. I've been using easements since I read John Armstrongs book back in the 80's. This is the next level for model railroaders as they level up their skills from sectional track to flex track.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
The problem with sectional track is where a staight section connects with a curve section.
If you have two cars connected together with one still on the straight section and one on the curve section, the couplers do not line up especially with long cars. This can cause derailments as the couplers pull against each other.
With flex track, transition tracks can connect the straight track with the curve track.
Otherwise, short railcars and locomotives should be used , and the coulers should have long shanks or be in a swing bracket.
Tyco and other train set HO have couplers on the trucks instead of the carbody to accommodate 18" curves.
GARRY
HEARTLAND DIVISION, CB&Q RR
EVERYWHERE LOST; WE HUSTLE OUR CABOOSE FOR YOU
I currently use bachmann sectional, mostly due to that I recieved a bulk of it as a gift.
S. Connor I could not find an HO scale club in my area. Even if I had, I have limted free time for running trains, and cannot make time for a commute longer than a walk down the basement stairs to a layout. I am now planning to widen my layout and install 24'' curves. Fortunately, my layout has not progressed beyond track-laying, so it is not too much of a set-back. Thanks for all the help, S. Connor
I am now planning to widen my layout and install 24'' curves. Fortunately, my layout has not progressed beyond track-laying, so it is not too much of a set-back.
Thanks for all the help,
S. Connor
I don't blame you. I didn't have a layout for many years and finally got in touch with a modular group in this area, but now I have a layout I'm building and have less motivation to go haul my trains to meets to run them when there is a layout down stairs. Plus, alot of my trains are HQ detailed models and I'd rather not expose them to the vagaries of little kids touching the trains as they run around the layout with parents who don't supervise them and let them run wild, as they did at the last show I ran at. Certainly the lesson is to bring only cheap trains to those club meets in the future.
Just curious, are you using sectional track or flex? Of course with flex you can draw any radii you want, but some brands such as KATO unitrack offer a wide variety of curve radii so you can still build a layout to your design with a good deal of flexability. KATO HO unitrack is also code 83 too, so it looks closer to scale. I bought some to use for test track before starting my current layout and it works great.
hardcoalcase The simple solution is to just run half of the locomotive through the 18" curve at a time! Jim
The simple solution is to just run half of the locomotive through the 18" curve at a time!
Jim
Uh, does it matter whether it's the left half or the right half that goes through first?
Paul
snjroy Is there a club in your vicinity? I now run my larger steam (8 and 10 drivers) at our local club and have no problems there (it has 24" curves). It gives me another reason to go at the club on a regular basis! Simon
Simon
I could not find an HO scale club in my area. Even if I had, I have limted free time for running trains, and cannot make time for a commute longer than a walk down the basement stairs to a layout.
I am now planning to widen my layout and install 24'' curves. Fortuantly, my layout has not progressed beyond track-laying, so it is not too much of a set-back.
Hi. I have an IHC 2-10-4 and it runs on 18" curves. But it won't go through some of my number 4 switches, and it struggles through a small "S" section in my layout. Track also has to be impeccable. Is there a club in your vicinity? I now run my larger steam (8 and 10 drivers) at our local club and have no problems there (it has 24" curves). It gives me another reason to go at the club on a regular basis!
I have a BLI 4-6-2 Pacific that runs through 18" curves and Atlas #4's all day long.
I have some IHC 2-8-0's and 2-8-2's that handle 18"r track without a problem. However, they may have made some modifications to achieve this.
Good luck,
Richard
Also, I don't know if Kato makes steam locos, but I've had great results with running their longer rolling stock through 18" Radius curveS. They may look a bit funny, but 58' stack cars and 85' superliners run great, while equivalent cars from other manufacturers do not. Maybe Kato takes extra steps to support smaller layouts?
I've had good luck running an Athearn 2-8-2 through 18" radius curves. I don't know the minimum recommendation for that loco though. I run a lot of newer 6 axle diesels from Athearn and Intermountain without any problems. Some manufacturers do a good job of stating if long loco or piece of rolling stock I'll work on 18" curves. If they don't list it though, and it's ove 50', my experience has been that you'll likely have problems.
my question is off topic from the op's but i would like to personaly know if my engine will not operate on 18" how will it go through #4 switches should I change to # 6 switches before going father on building?
slow train Ed
2-10-2 is a pretty long/stiff wheel base for a steamer generally speaking. Either it has some blind drivers or will require bigger radius I would guess, but steam people know way more than me!
I would, if possible, rebuild with the biggest radius you can go with. If you can go up to 24-inches, it will pay dividends in the future. Bigger is always better for curves.
I don't expect to be running any larger than a spetrum 2-10-2. If that doesn't run on 18'' turns, then I will rebuild with 22'' or 24''.
Thanks for all the info, guys! This information has really been a lot of help.
Depends on what you mean as larger, I run Spectrum Decapods on 18" radius and they look fine and run well. But if you want to run big steam then you will need the larger radius, sometimes much larger. With our limited spaces you need to decide what your prioritys are!
riogrande5761 (btw, Windows 7 64 bit recommended minimum is 2 Gb, I'm running on 4 Gb quite happily - I'm on a tight budget too)
It has come of the functions of Win 8, but retains the start menu and other features required in the work environment.
It looks to be a very good release.
ROAR
(Nobody knows why there is no Windows 9.)
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
BroadwayLion Curves are like computer specifications. When Microsoft says it will run with 4 GB of RAM, what they did not tell you is that you should have a minimum of 8 GB RAM. Thus it is with locomotive curves: If they say it will work on 22" radius what they really mean is it would work (and look) much better on 26" or 30" radius curves.
Curves are like computer specifications. When Microsoft says it will run with 4 GB of RAM, what they did not tell you is that you should have a minimum of 8 GB RAM.
Thus it is with locomotive curves: If they say it will work on 22" radius what they really mean is it would work (and look) much better on 26" or 30" radius curves.
Sound advice which translates into the trainworld. In general, you should expect some disappointment if you are going with recommended minimum radius as well as minimum recommended memory. (btw, Windows 7 64 bit recommended minimum is 2 Gb, I'm running on 4 Gb quite happily - I'm on a tight budget too)
On Route of LION him cut tables with 24" radius edges, the plan being that the curves would *have* to be much bigger, like 26, 28, 30, and 32 for the four track mane lion of him. TRUF IS some of those curves are way to tight for 85' cars but fortunately subway cars of LION are all 50' long and can take any corner I can throw at them.
If you must renovate your layout to accommodate a larger locomotive, you would be wise to go all the way making 24" your minimum and 26 ot 30 your standard. After all, this will not be the only locomotive that you will buy and LION does have som 85' cars that cannot ever run on a 32" radius. That is to say, he has never run them, but they look great parked in the staton.
Computer of LION has 32 GB RAM.
The old 18 inch curves are still here to haunt us, probably due in part to the 4x8 sheet of plywood and what will fit on it - 18 and 22 inch curves.
This comes up time and again, and modelers end up finding out how hamstrung they are by tight modular track curves.
[preach] So even if space is tight, break free of the straight jacket and get curves which are nominally larger, such as 24 inch curves or larger. It only take a little more space and you can run so much more and have a smile on your face. KATO Unitrack in HO offers modular track in a wide variety of cuves so YES, you can do it! You'll be glad you did.
As others have noted, running trains on radii will not damage them, they will more than likely derail so if they fall off the layout, thats the only damage that will occur.[/preach]
I have two Athearn Genesis SD70ACe. They has a minimum radius of 18", and a recommended radius of 22". I run them on 18" radius curves, but they really overhang ( you can see the outer rail sticking out from under the fuel tank, and one has a habit of tilting cars in the entrances to the corners, or just derailing them. They do run on 18", but for no worries it would be best to go with 22".
Considering the slight problem with the SD70ACe, I wouldn't think about running large steam on 18" radius. Remember, when it comes to the curves on your layout, bigger is always better.
Soo Line fan Bowser and Mantua 4-8-4 and 2-8-2 engines used blind center drivers so 18" radius could be run all day. Best bet is to go with the manufactuers recommendation.
Bowser and Mantua 4-8-4 and 2-8-2 engines used blind center drivers so 18" radius could be run all day. Best bet is to go with the manufactuers recommendation.
I remember a review of a model loco where the reviewer complained of the unprotypical blind drivers. Turned out the reviewer was wrong. The prototype had bilnd drivers.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
selector I can tell you with confidence that ain't no steamer engineered for a 22" radius that will stay in the rails on an 18" radius curve.
I can tell you with confidence that ain't no steamer engineered for a 22" radius that will stay in the rails on an 18" radius curve.
You HAD to know this was coming:
I got my Tenshodo GN S-1 4-8-4 to go around 18" radius curves--it was specced for 22". I filed the hole in the drawbar to allow it. But it happened.
Yeah, it looked like an Irish Wolfhound stuck in a dog carrier. REALLY REALLY sad.
And it DID NOT derail while doing it.
Will it ever happen again? No, never.
Ed
Our prototypes (and this modeler) routinely embargo certain routes to certain rolling stock - for a variety of reasons, substandard curvature being one of them.
The solutions available are:
Why 24 and not 22? Two reasons:
Do I practice what I preach? My mainline has 24 inch radius (and larger) curves, while my shortline wraps itself around curves tighter than 14 inches. At that, all the rolling stock cleared onto the Tomikawa Tani Tetsudo (including a couple of articulated locos and a four truck machinery flat) have been test run down to less than 12 inch radius.
Obviously, my larger locomotives and longer cars are never sent up the hill on rails surveyed by chasing a mountain goat up the valley. They still have lots of roaming room on my visible mainline and in the netherworld of hidden staging yards and thoroughfares.
As for the prototype, if you follow the UP through Wyoming by satellite, you'll see lots of places where curves were widened and wiggles were straightened, changes made possible by modern earthmovers and made necessary by the purchase of Big Boys.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Another thing to be aware of, is what company is suggesting the minimum radius. For example, the Bachmann Acela Express has a 22" radius as a suggested minimum, but I've managed to run the train around flat 18" curves. I wouldn't recomend it, but I could.
On the flip side, Walthers' passenger cars have a suggested minimum radius of 24", but I've heard that they really need 26" minimum curves to run reliably.
I can tell you with confidence that ain't no steamer engineered for a 22" radius that will stay in the rails on an 18" radius curve. No way, no how. Those 4" represent an out-of-spec underage of 18.2%, or about 20% in easy figures.
I can think of the extra friction on the linkages outside the drivers (even assuming the rods don't scrape the flanges), the extra wear on the brass bearings, God-knows-what happening at the wipers, more flange wear (a LOT more flange wear) inside the rail head, and the potential for shorts with metal frame components or cylinders (bad news for decoders potentially). I could even see some scraped-bare painted sections.
A responder already mentioned overhang and coupling problems. Yewbetcha. As an example only related to coupler problems, will you have to drill another hole in the draw bar under the steamer's cab so that the tender trails sufficiently further back to keep its forward bulkhead corners or grabs from snagging on the cab? I'd lay a few coins down for that one.
-Crandell