General Discussion (Garden Railways)

OK I should know this , BUT my trains are pack-up for the big move. WHAT IS THE MINAMUM RADIOUS ( IN FEET PLEASE ) THIS ENG CAN CAN RUN ON.
I would like to know both suggested and actual[%-)], tred it so I know it will work.

It can work on a 4 foot, but it would look good going around a 8,9 , or 10.

Matt, thanks since I have to redo part of my logging/tourist line I mite as well go with 6.5 and 8ft. I didnt try my shay on the 5 ft part of my xmas layout but it worked well on 6.5. so as not to waste the 5ft i have it will go to my wife for her new toy she gets for her birthday .
Thanks for your help.[bow][bow][bow]

No problem! Yes, 6.5 will work nicely also for your locos. I just recommend 8 foot cause thats all I use and it is the minimum for 99% of all commercial G scale locomotives.

Original question was radius, but I believe everyone responded with diameter!!!!!!!!

When giving answers, you should always specify whether it is radius or diameter in your measurements, never assume that the next person knows how you measure..

From the Bachmann forums:

The 2-8-0 will go around a 4' radius (8' diameter) curve without issue. It will also go around a 2.5' radius (5' diameter) if the small coal pile on the front of the tender is modified so the deck plate does not hit it. It will not go around a 2' radius (4' diameter) curve.

I'm of the opinion that a 4' radius is the absolute minimum that should be used in the garden for the "average" railroad. (i.e., one that can accommodate much of what is on the market, not just the small industrial stuff like 0-4-0 porters and such). Many of the larger 1:20.3 models such as those from Accucraft, etc. require a 5' minimum radius (10' diameter).

BTW, the LGB curve labels are as follows:

R1 - (1100 or 11000) 600mm or 2' radius (4' diameter)
R2 - (1500 or 15000) 780mm or 2.5' radius (5' diameter)
R3 - (1600 or 16000) 1195mm or 3.9' radius (7.8' diameter)
R5 - (18000) 2320mm or 7.6' radius (15.2' diameter)

note: LGB's R3 curve is close enough to 4' radius (8' diameter) where it becomes the practical minimum. I build all my equipment to accommodate these curves, just to have the flexibility to run them on others' railroads.

Later,

K

Now thats an ansure worth a GRR scribblings on the workshop wall item, thank you. I have often wondered what the R's ment now I know, I been using a lot of aristocraft track and its not marked wirh the radious . I'm stocking up on Stainless for the new DNRR.
[:-^]

kstrong wrote:

The 2-8-0 will go around a 4' radius (8' diameter) curve without issue. It will also go around a 2.5' radius (5' diameter) if the small coal pile on the front of the tender is modified so the deck plate does not hit it. It will not go around a 2' radius (4' diameter) curve.

That is not true.  If you remove the deck plate from the locomotive; it can easily go around 2' radius (4' diameter) curves.  It is best, though, to always go with the largest radius/diameter curve that you can.

"Easily?" It may negotiate those curves, but the #2 and #3 drivers drop below the railhead because the rail curves enough so it moves out from under the drivers. I just sat mine on a section of 2' radius to check--it's right on the edge. Move the loco to one side, the drivers drop off. Move it back, they're still in contact, but only by a hair's width. It may not be enough to cause derailments, but it may put extra stress on the gears, especially since it's the #3 axle that's driven. If that drops below the rails, then the energy usually put to moving the loco forward is now being used to try to force the wheel back on the rail. That could potentially lead to some binding. If that binds, you run a great risk of stripping the gear.

You'll also cause undue flange wear on the #1 and #4 drivers, and/or wear away the inside edge of the rail--which will exacerbate the problem with the #2 and #3 drivers falling off the rails. And when lead flanges are pressed that tightly against the inside edge of the rails, they will have a greater tendency to walk up and over any irregularity such as a gap at a rail joint.

Granted, Bachmann's literature does not state an absolute minimum, leaving us to fend for ourselves. But it does state that "medium and large radius curves" are recommended for "optimum performance." Your milage obviously varies, but I'm definitely not comfortable telling anyone this loco will negotiate a 2' radius curve. From what I've seen with mine, it's just not a good idea.

Later,

K

Hey, SnoqPass.......

 

You know the three-track maintenance yard by the outbound hatch?

That's 4' diameter.  The only place on the entire railroad.

Even with the deckplate lifted out of the way, and the drawbar on long, park an OF 2-8-0 in there and you'll flip the tender or lead drivers off the track.

It's the corner of the frame under the cab hitting the tender end beam.

The other issue is pilot overhang.

My mainline is 6'8" radious, #6 mainline turnouts, #4 on spurs and branches.

I cut my frame back 7/16" and shorten the coupler back as far as I can get it so I can nose couple.

Youngster Strong says 4' radius (8' diameter) as minimum, and I would concur, if for no other reason that to actively rebel against some outfit's beloved 1100 rule.

 

TOC