Hi everyone,
Well this sure has turned into a discussion. Just got back from my run to Yorkton with another Mc load delivered. Gave this some thought. Matt...good point regarding my indoor line. It is almost 48" off the floor...rather close to eye level. Sunset Valley does make nice switches. Most likely I will be using the AMS track. Here in Canada it works out to about 3 bucks a foot as opposed to almost 5 bucks a foot for LGB. Ordering from the US is frustrating due to being hit with both taxes when it crosses the border. Thanks again for all the input guys! Later eh...Brian.
Brian Just stick with 3 ft sections , up your pant legs when you walk across the boarder.
Switches duck tape to your back. be sure to shave first.
Is it REAL? or Just 1:29 scale?
Long live Outdoor Model Railroading.
It doesn't really matter which rail you use outside, nothing is in scale anyway when the backdrop is 12" to 1' and the track settles into the ballast and hides the ties. The perspective is always changing with different light at different times, as always in this hobby, it's a personal choice.
Kim
As Kevin said, stock flanges down to 197.
I've used Hughes Rail (no spikes) at 190, and no problems.
215 and 250, stock, huge, toy-like LGB flanges NEVER are a problem.
So, on 332 rail you're paying for .082" minimum in height that is unneeded, and on 215, .117" that is unneeded.
All the photos in the magazine I do for Bachmann reviews are on 250.
Take a look.
Would love to go smaller profile indoors, but I need R1 turnouts in order to make my compact layout work in the allocated tight space and I dont feel like building 17 hand made turnouts . So I'm stuck with 332 and LGB, of course I could always ballast it half burried in dirt, that would be pretty prototypical for some mining trams like mine
Brian if your up to laying all your track with the lower profile rail, go for it! If I could make it work on mine I might darn well consider it also and save the 332 for the outdoor layout.
Have fun with your trains
OK, like to see photo of different sizes side by side from the front on like, T ,t, smaller t and a above shot. Since I do not have other rail such as 332 and I only use 250 I was just woundering.
Can't find my side-by-side shot I took for a column a while back, but in reality it's not all that descriptive. It looks like ever-increasing sizes of rail. You've really got to see the track installed in the garden to get a good idea of the differences.
Fortunately, the next (February) issue of GR will give you plenty of fodder for comparison. In my GR Basics column, I talk about switches. Most switches shown are code 250, but the fancy ones are code 332. Many photos are taken from directly above, so that may give you some insight. Also, you can compare the rail shown in part 5 of my Tuscarora RR series with those of the feature railroad. The TRR is code 250, while the feature railroad is all code 332. Also, the photo in the banner of GR's home page was taken on my dad's railroad, which is all code 332 (The fancy switches are also from his RR--see the December '05 issue of GR.)
Unless you're going to be down on the ground shooting photos of your railroad, then I don't know that rail size is as "big" a deal as it's made out to be. Weathered code 332 rail will blend nicely into the landscape. Conversely, day-glo brass or aluminum code 250 sticks out like a sore thumb, and looks larger than it really is. I spend a great deal of time right next to the track with a camera, so the smaller rail is advantageous to me. I'm still waiting for it to weather naturally. If it doesn't soon, I'll be breaking out the brown paint.
Later,
K
Get the Garden Railways newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month