3 RAIL TRACK WHAT BRAND SHOULD I USE?

[runtime]

I bent some Gargraves flex track with the wooden ties. It didn't seem that difficult. I was creating an approx 031 rad curve. Just bend, hold, nail.??

runtime

[sarpilot]

I made what I thought was a pretty good JIG out of some old O-31 pieces of track. Didn't seem to help. I really messed up two perfectly good sections of gargraves. After I got done with it a snake would have broken his back trying to crawl along the rails. I guess I just don't have the patience and light touch.

[dwiemer]

sarpilot,  While I don't have gargraves, I did read an article that was written on it.  The guy made a "bending jig" that he used to make consistant curves.  Can't recall if it was in CTT or OGR magazine, but it was in the last few years.  It can be quite difficult, unless done correctly.  dennis

[sarpilot]

I'm using gargraves just because the local hobby shop owner had a bunch of older gargraves that was unused but from a collection he had purchased. I got 30 long pieces for 15 dollars. The problem with this stuff is if that it is very hard to bend accurate curves of o-42 or smaller. I messed up 2 sections and gave up. I went out and bought gargraves sectional curves. The track is very fragile. Its not like the O guage lionel stuff that is really rugged. Switches are less expensive than the O-22s even with the DZ-1000 motors.I you want to reduce the frustration factor use lionel O. I you have the time, patience and a naturaly low blood pressure the gargraves looks really good once its down and ballasted.

[Rescuedtrains]

How about Gargraves and Ross? As far as I know the only two still made in the USA. We all bemoaned the transformation of made in USA trains to made in Asia products. Here is a chance to keep the money right here. Remember that you can actually talk to someone at the factory that speaks English and can answer any questions you might have about there products.

Just my opinion.

Steve 

[Anonymous]

runtime,
I have Atlas O on my layout, but currently don't have any Prewar to test the rail height to flange depth (that is your issue). My FiL has some Prewar stuff, but it hasn't been run in many years and I don't know if it even runs. My 1688 is out for restoration, so can't test that till it gets back.

If you are close to MD, you are more than welcome to bring something over to test... email me if interested.

[runtime]

This is an old thread, but I just read it. Found it useful. I'm currently Lionel tubular 031, with one Gargraves (98 radius?) switch and siding squeezed between 031 ladder.

I'm trying to decide what track to use for future expansion. I want to add a new set of sidings and want them closer than would be possible with lionel 031.

The problem I found with Gargraves switches is that they derail prewar rolling stock. Since no one mentioned this I guess very few people run any prewar. This seems to narrow my choice to Atlas 0. I would like to hear from any Atlas 0 users or any one else who runs prewar.

I'm also considering a seasonal addition, for which it seems fastrack may be best, if it can handle prewar.

All feedback appreciated.

runtime

[dougdagrump]

Amazing work Frank !

For you guys using tubular I found a good way for assembling NEW track w/o chewing up your hands or having to wear gloves. When I put together my "G" gauge track with rail clamps I added some LGB conductive grease to retard corrosion. When I was setting up the halloween layout it requied some new tubular track, to try to make assembly less painful I squeezed a very small amount of the grease into the tube and the pins went in with ease (keep your minds out of the gutter guys). The plus is that it is conductive and reduces the potential of rust/corrosion.  

[Frank53]

they are 10.5. If i knew then what I know now, I would have gone 12" as I can't run long locos on the bottom level

[Wes Whitmore]

Frank,

Are your shelves about 12" deep? 

What's the magic depth from the wall to the rail's edge?

What are your rail center distances?

Thanks for the other diagram!

Wes

[Frank53]

The top level kind of looks like this, except I used two swicthes back to back at each end as opposed to these crossovers shown here:

[Frank53]

wes:

you are thinking of my top level which is mostly complete. Not sure I have a track plan for it but I will look.

[Wes Whitmore]

Wow, much different than I thought it was...I remembered longer parallel tracks...oh well.  Thanks for the diagram.  I do much better digesting everything when I have a track plan to stare at.

Wes

[Frank53]

Frank,

Do you have any track diagrams?  I know that you pretty much build off of feel, but it woud be great to see that second level and how you keep your trains from hitting each other.

Wes

 

I'm thinking the main level will look something like this:

[Old King Coal]

Frank53 ... Many thanks for the links to your photos and many thought provoking ideas.  A couple of weeks ago, I decided to remove my upper tier of G-Scale track, and dedicate this area to a third (& possibly fourth) line of O-Gauge on this top tier above the door.  Your ideas and photos give me inspiration for the winter project.  Thanks for sharing !

Best regards in trains from Canada .... Dave

[krapug1]

Another track option will be the track that Atlas is including with their Industrial Rail Starter Sets.

It say that this track will be compatible with their own Atlas O track, and "other manufacturers".

Has nyone seen it?

Ken

[Wes Whitmore]

Frank,

Do you have any track diagrams?  I know that you pretty much build off of feel, but it woud be great to see that second level and how you keep your trains from hitting each other.

Wes

[Frank53]

well thanks King. As for additional photos, between this thread:

http://www.modeltrainjournal.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1954&start=0

this photo hosting album:

http://lionellines.lenzus.com/cgi/site?22348661

and my website:

www.lionellines.net

there are probably only a couple of thousand photos . . .

hope you enjoy them.

[Old King Coal]

Hey Frank53 .... Your tiered effect and Lionel O-Tubular with ballast looks  awesome.  Do you have any more pictures of your layout you can share with us ?

[Frank53]

I've got to agree with Frank53

whoa - can I quote you on that?

wait, I think I just did.

While the appearance doesn't do anything for me

jeez - you started off so well.

[krapug1]

Again, and as mentioned there are many reasons to consider one type of track over the other.

One thing that I have found is tubular track, or tubular type track does have some advantages.
I use 036 Fastrack on the main level of my layout, and I have an upper level track of Marx 034 (this is the wider radius track that Marx made, and it has the same profile as 027 track).

I do run some Marx products and for whatever reason they run far better on tubular track than "T" rail shaped track. As an example RealTrax, is "T" shaped, as are some others.

One key advantage of old school tubular track, is it is plentiful, and very easy to cut to fit.

For a non-permanent layout, Fastrack, or K-Line's Supersnap are recomended.

Ken

[ChiefEagles]

Frank 53 and Bob Keller are right about tublar.  Once down, no problem.  If you want road bed built in, Fastrack.  I've got Realtrax and it can be a pain.  Once down and connceted good, no problem.  I soldered my copper connectors together and long sections.  I have had problems with their switches.  Fastrack makes some impressive switches and raod crossing with signals.  Fastrack is nosier but toy trains [and real ones] are suppsoe to be noisey. 

[jimhaleyscomet]

Re: 3 RAIL TRACK WHAT BRAND SHOULD I USE?

If you are a newby and have lots of money use Fastrack or Realtrax.  If you have a ton of tubular and a permanent layout stick with tubular.  I run fastrack, realtrax, tubular and K-line snaptrack.  I like them all and even use them on the same layout.  It is a toy isn't it?

Jim H 

[Bob Keller]

I've got to agree with Frank53 regarding traditional tubular track. While the appearance doesn't do anything for me, I never had any issues over electrical continuity. And while I replaced it on my layout some time back, I've had to come to accept the "out of the blue' deadspots that materialize once or twice a year. Never had that with tubular.

If you don't like the number of ties on Lionel-style track, I'd strongly recommend GarGraves or Ross.

[Anonymous]

For ease of installation I recommend Lionel Fastrack. If you want authentic looking track and are up to ballasting the whole layout I recommend Gargraves.

[Frank53]

Perhaps the most venerable, time-proven and widely used track system of all time - Authentic Lionel Tubular Track:

accept no substitutes

[Anonymous]

I currently use K Line super snap track. It looks great with individual ties and works great with the old Lionel tubular. I can also use it with Gargraves and it fits right in with the look. I think I'll go with gargraves later when I can have a full train room.

[whistlemike]

I am faced with the same dilemma!  I am on my 3rd layout.  My first was simple but fairly large: 12 x 24 above a pool table suspended from the ceiling.  My second was equal in size but detailed, with an inner and outer loop and a few reversing loops, sidings and a switch yard.  Both used 0-27, 0-42 curves and 0-42 switches.  The switches worked fine (Lionel sent me the instructions to make them operate on constant volatage) but, like others say here, long engines and passenger cars hit on the switch boxes.  I removed the red/green tops, made foam covers to make them blend in -- and all was well -- the beauty of the hobby is you can fudge things to make them work/look good. 

As I do more research and talk to several hobby shops across the Midwest, however (I am a traveling sales guy), I've come to a few conclusions.  Economy-wise, raw flexibility-wise, creativity-wise and sheer keeping things "classic"-wise, tubular is the way to go:  It's cheap; you can cut track with a Dremel tool easily; you can insulate as many sections whenever and wherever you want -- which is a key to crossing signals and block signals-- which are key to a great layout; you can make your layout truly unique with your own road bed and ballast; and it upholds the tradition of Lionel going back to the early part of the last century.

My biggest beef, however, is that tubular track simply is not as reliable as the modern systems like Realtrax or Fasttrack.  They operate better, period.  All one needs to do is buy a beginner set from MTH or Lionel, hook up the track, run it around a Halloween display or Christmas display and you'll be amazed at the smooth performance and reliability.  On a larger layout this is magnified.  There is nothing worse than having visitors drooling over your layout and your new MTH $500 Metra engine dies because it hit a low spot or a dead spot on a curve or turn out and the show is over.  You look like a second rate engineer!

I think you can accomplish this reliability, though, with tubular if you're careful and very attentive to details in laying track.  But there is a cost of time.  The cutting and transforming and insulating of the tubular track out of the the box -- it's strengths -- limits it's reliablity once the layout is built -- it's weakness -- because it ends up having kinks and low spots and improper conduction between tracks. The other negative is it's other strength:  I love to ballast and make road bed with tubular;  but with tubular, you HAVE to make ballast and road bed because it doesn't come with it!  And that is time-consuming and costly, too.  A Gentleman below said it is a wash in terms of cost difference and I'm thinking he hit a key point, BIG TIME.  Currently, I'm playing with the idea of a homasote roadbed and a sprayed on rock paint -- an idea I got from the last CTT issue.  I used homasote road bed on my last layout and it does reduce the noise.

Six of one, a half dozen of the other, as another well-informed train guy said below.  My dilemma is I need more track for my new layout and I can't decide whether to invest in the old (tubular) or take the plunge to the new.  As the old Chuck Berry song says, "Meanwhile... I'm STILL thinking..." 

 

[Frank53]

And last but not least....there is tubular. Lionel 031  " 0 " guage and the old PW 022 switches. Goes together ok, conducts power good, and looks like old fashioned  Toy Train track. It's a thought...................

and a My-T-Fine thought at that!