25 Tips Dec08 GRM

[dwbeckett]

I Don't agree with tip #14 , Picture page 58, I use sectional track, I plan ahead and I only use reverse cruve's where they need to be. I only use large diamiter cruve track. my current RR use's 9,10 & 11.5 ft cruves on the main line. My ridge line use's 6.5ft dim. with a reverse cruve in for effect since it go's around a big rock then back along the wall. Remember tip #25.

Dave

[altterrain]

Yeah, I used sectional curves ( 9 and 10 ft D) and long straights for my layout. That was before the dual rail benders came out. I did belly bend a few of the straights to get the right curve and it worked well for me.

Now that the dual rail benders are out I would recommend only buying long straights except for the very newbies.

I thought it was funny Kevin used his Dad's layout (the Woodland Railway) as a frequent example of what not to do. I'm sure he appreciated that!

-Brian 

[Anonymous]

altterrain

 I did belly bend a few of the straights

-Brian 

Still like to see a picture of Marty or You belly bending.

Toad

[altterrain]

ToadFrog&WhiteLightn

Still like to see a picture of Marty or You belly bending.

Toad

 

I'll be sure to take one for you when I'm putting down track on the new 7/8's layout in the next couple of weeks.

-Brian 

[g. gage]

I’m somewhat miffed by Tip #14. I’ve used sectional track since changing to “G” gauge and have no regrets. The Tip #14 photo on page 58 is toy like because the S curves have no function or purpose and has nothing to do with sectional track. The toy like appearance could have been avoided by following Tip #7. However I live by Tip #25.

 

#25, Rob      

[vsmith]

But Dave, if sectional and flex are both about the same price per linear foot, why buy $8 a foot pre-curved ready-to-use track when you can buy unwieldy flex-track and a $200 trackblender so that it that takes twice as long to lay track with?

Yeah I thought that tip was a bit nutty, I swear they are assuming we all have a full acre of real estate to build on...

 

[ttrigg]

vsmith

But Dave, if sectional and flex are both about the same price per linear foot, why buy $8 a foot pre-curved ready-to-use track when you can buy unwieldy flex-track and a $200 track bender so that it that takes twice as long to lay track with?

Yeah I thought that tip was a bit nutty, I swear they are assuming we all have a full acre of real estate to build on...

Even though the vast majority of my track is "flex", sectional, both curved and straight, still have their place. Like Vic said, the cost per foot savings on "flex" has vaporized in the last couple of years, and so has the incentive for devotion to flex. The only advantage I see to flex (anymore) is fewer connections, both mechanical and electrical.

[kstrong]

Given the topic, perhaps I can shed some light on this.

On the surface, there's nothing wrong with using sectional track. As evidenced by the opinions stated here, plenty of railroads have been built using it, and they are everything their builders desire. One common mistake of doing so, however, is sections of track as illustrated in the photo. It's not hard to find railroads with those squiggly sections of track. But that's not the only reason that tip was included.

When I was a wee lad building my indoor HO railroad, the notion of even thinking about using sectional track was strictly verboten. None of the magazines wavered from that sentiment. Flex track was the way to build a railroad. I never even once considered using sectional track, though it was readily available. That sentiment translates very easily to the garden, and with the tools available today, it is just as easy to do as in the small scales.

I believe the beginner owes it to him or herself to (pardon the cliché) think outside the box of track. Yes, sectional track is a quick and easy way to build a railroad. However, as quick and easy as it is, it can also be equally limiting. Time and time again, I see threads on this and other forums asking about track templates, CAD systems, and things of that nature for laying out track. I find that process to be both tedious and completely unnecessary. Features which a builder might want to incorporate get tossed aside because the sections can't be made to fit.

Every garden railroad I've ever designed was laid out with a garden hose, tape measure, and sketchpad. This approach gives the builder an infinite amount of freedom when it comes to planning. Curves can follow the contour of the landscape or existing garden, yards and passing sidings can be built with gentle curves to better fit the available space. There's simply no need to even have to think about whether one can get track sections to fit. If you're brave enough to build your own switches, it's even more liberating. The broad, sweeping curves and switches that contribute so nicely to Marc's railroad could not have been built with sectional track.

Another reason to advise against staying focused on sectional track is that it inherently opens up the world of more scale appearing rail. (To date, there is no sectional code 250 track.) You can avail yourself of some very top-drawer switches, crossovers, and other components, and some fantastic-looking tie strips from a number of different manufacturers. Track aesthetics are every bit as important in the garden as the trains themselves. Here again, I believe it a service to the beginner to steer them towards looking at everything that's available in terms of track. As has been stated, track is expensive. You owe it to yourself to spend your money wisely on exactly what you want to achieve what you're after.

A third reason? Fewer rail joints. With track sections available in 5, 6, and 8' lengths, you cut the number of rail joints down significantly. That not only makes for better conductivity, but fewer joints makes for stronger track.

Lastly, as was joked about above, the advent of the 2-rail railbenders makes working with flex track an absolute breeze. You pull the straight section out of the box (or assemble it yourself), run the railbender over it to the curve you need, and you're done. When I reviewed Train-Li's railbender, I think I called it the greatest thing since sliced bread. I wasn't kidding. Expensive? Yes. Worth every penny? Most definitely. (Take the money you save in rail clamps and apply it to a good track bender. ;) )

Vic, to address your specific point about the need for acres of space, the exact opposite is true. Flex track is wonderfully suited to small spaces.

This is the "first" version of my Tuscarora Railroad; a rather temporary affair built in a 10' x 20' garden. The flex track allowed me to build my curves to a 9' diameter, the largest I could fit within the space. There was no need to worry about what may or may not have been available. This was the space, and the track could easily be made to fit. Incidentally, the track was salvaged from a similar small-space railroad project I worked on.

Obviously, I didn't intend to offend with any of the tips offered. For me, working with flex track is so second-nature that I felt the tip important to give the beginner that valuable tool that's served me so well over the years.

Later,

K

PS - Brian, dad made a point to razz me a bit about picking on his tunnels. :)

[Anonymous]

Thank you Kevin! Another well written thing I can chew and spit about. Two thumb's up in Da Swamp!

Toad

[dwbeckett]

Thank you Kevin for your responce, I too used alot of code100 flex track in my HO day's and plan on pico flex when i start on my indoor On30. with that said, Fewer joint's yes, $$ to spend NO, a 3ft section at a time is easyer then $'s for 5-6ft SECTION of flex, Yes flex would have helped when I built my main yard, But I had some leftover cut sections from my 7.5 foot long dubl crossover, that after installing on DNRR V7 I didn't like. Will I use Flex for my cruves doughtfull, I still have plenty of 9,10 & 11.5 diamitor sections left for my expanchion's. By the way I use Aristocraft Stainless and Yes I put in all those littel screw's. I do use Split jaws only at cut sections and at isolation gap's on the ends of switch's.

Dave, Not Grumpy today

[g. gage]

Kevin; I agree with your response 100%, in fact I would venture to say our model railroad lives have followed similar paths. However instructing an unseasoned person; “Avoid using sectional track” seems a bit harsh, especially when faced with money for a locomotive or couple of cars or a rail bender. Or in my case the club rail bender was always checked out, I’ve never seen it. My post is intended to show that satisfactory track work can be done with sectional track. I feel it’s not the tools that make good work; it’s the person operating them.

 

I enjoy reading your articles, Rob

 

 

[Takasaki Matt]

I too enjoyed the tips section .  Well thought out and great advice to beginners in the hobby.  I am, however, in favour of using set curves (sectional) and I think that used carefully it can add its own atmosphere to a railway.  If one has a narrow gauge line it is quite prototypical to have tight curves and, to a degree, bumpy track.  Go your own way - was another tip.  Research real railways - was another.  Where georgrphy allows, flat straight track is always wanted, though we are doing our thing in the space we have.  There are many examples of small railroads that wind in and out of the countryside in order to save money .  Cuttings and embankments are other examples of this thrifty perspective. 

Perhaps a better tip would have been - choose narrow gauge if space is limited and also limit the length of the train.  (Having said that train length was in one of the tips, I think)  'What looks right' is not always easy to pin down with a general comment.  There are many ways to reduce the 'toy train' effect - weathering comes to mind.  Though this area is probably not a beginners concern.

Ah, I feel better now.  Just an opinion.

Highlight of the mag. for me is the monorail, big cheer for the out-of-the-ordinary.

Thanks for that,

Matthew.