I am trying to figure out curves for my layout. I eventually will be running a few 85 foot cars in my layout. The layout is in ho gauge. What is a good turning radius? Layout will be 4x9 foot.
Thanks.
Sean, the unknown train travler,
Hi!
Well, here is the scoop................. The biggest circular radius you can get on your 4 ft wide layout is 23 inches, and if you are doing sectional track, 22 inches is what is available that will fit.
Typically, 85 ft passenger cars need 26 inches at a minimum. However, with truck mounted couplers and no interference and some clever adjustments, many 85 footers can do 22 inch radius.
My opinion is, 85 ft passenger cars look really toylike going around small radius curves. They are just too big for a 4x9 layout. That being said, Athearn makes "shorty" passenger cars (check Ebay) that look a lot better on the 22 inch radius.
Obviously its your RR and you can do whatever you wish, but if there is any way to get a wider space, I would do what it takes to do so.
ENJOY!
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Traintravler,
You are going to have a hard time running 85' cars on a layout of that size. The maximum radius you will be able to have is 22". While some 85' cars may actually work on this tight a curve, not many will and those that do will look very odd. I recommend you stick with four axle diesels or small steam and limit your car length to 50" mas, preferably 40' or even shorter.
Good luck!
Very few 85 foot cars will even make it around 22" radius curves while coupled to other cars. The overhang is just too great. And they will look absolutely silly. To get 85' cars to pass on parallel curves (double track), I needed to open things out so one curve was 30" radius and the outer one was 32" radius, plus an offset. That's how big 85' cars are.
The good news is, perhaps, if you have room for a 4x9 island, you can go MUCH bigger aroudn the walls, and leave the inside open. Not only will you be able to use much larger radius cuves, you will also get a lot more railroad for covering up the same square footage of floor space.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
If you have exhausted all ideas to build the longest radius curves into your space, and have to live with whatever figure that is, you should then consult any literature published by the distributors/sellers/makers of the type of rolling stock you contemplate buying. Failing finding that information, you should then resort to mocking up curves with temporary track and running similar equipment, maybe borrowed (?) to see if it will work. Trials, that is. They are the best way to ensure what YOU are going to do will work for you and your equipment.
Used to be 18" curves was almost a norm, and certainly widely used as a minimum for HO. Nowadays, it seems people are drifting toward longer rail cars, modern double-stacks, and larger locomotives such as longer steamers that could only be had in brass not so long ago...costly brass. So, the minimum these days is probably closer to 24-26" when considering heavyweight passenger cars around WW II, autoracks in modern times, and long X-10-Y steamers and articulated ones. What that means is that the shorter passenger cars of 1960 layouts that looked somewhat unrealistic on typical layouts back then had the very same problems as their more modern counterparts. That is, while the minimums may change a bit over time due to changes in the hobby, their associated problems don't change.
Crandell
I run 85 foot passenger cars on my 32" radius curves. They handle the curves nicely without any derailments, but there is still some overhang, even on the 32" radius curves.
If I had my druthers, I would want to run the 85 foot cars on nothing less than 40" radius curves. But, that would require a 7-foot space to make curves that broad.
Rich
Alton Junction
traintravler I am trying to figure out curves for my layout. I eventually will be running a few 85 foot cars in my layout. The layout is in ho gauge. What is a good turning radius? Layout will be 4x9 foot.
You might seriously want to reconsider runing 85 footers. They don't do well on short radius curves.
You might look into the Con-Cor 65 foot passenger "branchline-commuter Suburban" cars that may serve you well on the 4x8. They are desinged to run on 18 in Radius cruves easily. {that still doesn't meant they look good doing it}.
The info is here:
http://www.con-cor.com/HO-1920-1950-Heavyweight-Passenger-Cars.html
Let it adjust automatically to the page.
Most are sold out now, with a re-run in the fall, probably because they were so successful. I preordered mine and they came in just like the time they said they would. I bought the B&O They are nice cars.
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
I have a number of 85' passenger cars, including AHM, Rivarossi, and some wood body card side based on the old Strombecker kits. I have run them down to 22" radius, and even for a bit on 18" radius. All have extra weight, and all have truck mounted couplers. I don't think I ever exceeded maybe 50 smph with them.
I have to admit, on 22", they look a lot like Lionel O-27 cars on the notoriously sharp 27" radius.
EM-1 I have a number of 85' passenger cars, including AHM, Rivarossi, and some wood body card side based on the old Strombecker kits. I have run them down to 22" radius, and even for a bit on 18" radius. All have extra weight, and all have truck mounted couplers. I don't think I ever exceeded maybe 50 smph with them. I have to admit, on 22", they look a lot like Lionel O-27 cars on the notoriously sharp 27" radius.
Just fwiw, the Lionel 0-27 is a 27" diameter, not radius. The radius would be 13.5".
- Harry
Glad you solved your problem. 32" sounds good. Now you may be able to super elevate too.
Richard
Train Modeler Glad you solved your problem. 32" sounds good. Now you may be able to super elevate too. Richard
Don't forget to include easements into those turns as well. Longer equipment can spiral into a turn far better when they "ease" into the turn.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
Try shopping around for a set of the Rivarossi 60' passenger car sets. They're still out there; I bought a set last year, and they'll look better going around 22" curves than the 85 footers.
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
Hey, Harry, Can I claim a senior moment on that O-27 Radius/Diameter? Or maybe that my only O-27 train was a 1950 Marx Commodore Vanderbilt?
Anyway, I stand corrected - and actually know better. Thanks.
If the OP is going to use easements, he might consider dropping back to 31R or even 30R (save some of the space lost to the easement (e.g., a 22 radius curve with easements takes up about the same space as a normal 24R curve - I'm assuming a 90 degree corner).
Co-owner of the proposed CT River Valley RR (HO scale) http://home.comcast.net/~docinct/CTRiverValleyRR/
hi,
talking about easements you'd better find more precise information.
In John Armstrong's Track Planning For Realistic Operation, you'll find a table for "suggested dimensions for average conditions":
In HO for sharp curves (R=18") the extra length needed is about 6" with an offset of 3/8"
In HO for medium curves (R=24") the extra length needed is about 8" with a 7/16" offset.
As rule of thumb: extra length = one third of the radius; since the radius could be about 3 times the length of your longest piece of equipment, the extra length needed for an easement is about the same as the length of your longest car.
Quite different from the 2" extra length suggested by Doc.
But, any length dedicated to an easement is better then no easement at all.
Paul
.
It would also seem ConCor is getting ready to run a set of 72' passenger cars. I've seen pictures for NP pine tree and Amtrak Phase 1.