ATLANTIC CENTRAL So Brian, hopefully you now understand that the diverging route of a turnout is not generally a fixed radius, so they should not be defined that way. Generally, the points are straight and the frog is straight and they are connected by a curve. Sheldon
So Brian, hopefully you now understand that the diverging route of a turnout is not generally a fixed radius, so they should not be defined that way.
Generally, the points are straight and the frog is straight and they are connected by a curve.
Sheldon
Yes Sheldon, pretty nice explaintion there. Since it was a 2008 presentation I was wondering if there was a more recent presentation by the same fellow?...
..or perhaps another good presentation by some other gentleman. I find with age I need to reread some text over several times for it to fully 'penetrate'....ha...ha
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
I really don't understand why you have to rewire an electrofrog switch of any make. For electrfrog switches, the only thing you need to do is insulate the diverging route track from the diverging route on the switch. Insulated rail joiners work fine for this. I just installed 12 Peco electrofrog switches on my layout and thats all I did. They work fine right out of the box. Why would you want to screw with the wiring on a new switch? Even my 20 year old Shinohara code 100 switches work fine out of the box when installed this way.
When I converted to DCC, I didn't rewire anything. The electrofrog switches work fine. No expensive frog energizers or switch machines necessary.
SouthPenn insulate the diverging route track from the diverging route on the switch
insulate the diverging route track from the diverging route on the switch
Please define this 'diverging route track' ?.... aren't there two tracks on a diverging route ??
railandsail Please define this 'diverging route track' ?.... aren't there two tracks on a diverging route ??
In model railroad parlance, as expressed by DCC Wiki for one, a turnout consists of the main route and the diverging route which curves away from the main route.
The link that you previously provided defines a conventional turnout on page 2 as follows, "the diverging route curves away from a tangent (straight) track".
Rich
Alton Junction
...from this sitehttp://www.barstowrick.com/category/dcc-friendly-switches-parts-2-4/
The Extreme: By now you’ve seen some examples on how to make your Peco, switches friendly to DCC. All the gap cutting, soldering of wires and DPDT’s to reverse the current in the frog….is going to an extreme. It isn’t necessary and puts a bad light on Peco switches. Best advice of the day is don’t and leave them alone. Install them as is, on your layout. They are a fine switch and will give you hours of trouble free performance right out of the box. To be said of the others you can find on the market. Peco recommends you simply put in isolation gaps on the rails leading away from the frog. Once they are in you are good to go and Friendly or Safe for DCC applications. Take my word for it, there is no reason to conduct an autopsy or a pre-post mortem exam on any switch mechanism. Would you expect a retired mortician to say that? I said with a grin! Bottom line it isn’t necessary. We interrupt this train of thought for the following announcement. News Update: 5-9-2016: The newest run of Peco Switches. You are going to like what you’ll discover about them. Absolutely! *A good friend and fellow model railroader Russ G., is installing the newest run of Peco switches on his layout with, get this, no need to cut in any isolation gaps, no shorts and you can throw the switch at anytime on the layout and everything runs without those afore mentioned…. dreaded shorts. If you are just getting started in the hobby this can be an extremely confusing time. There is more bad advice out there then there is good. If you are like a friend of mine, he visited every You Tube on the subject of laying track or track construction. His comment to me, “I’m confused”……”Do I really need to do all this stuff?” My answer was and still is… NO! Then he asked me, do I need to hard wire in all my switches? Again, the answer is NO!
The Extreme: By now you’ve seen some examples on how to make your Peco, switches friendly to DCC. All the gap cutting, soldering of wires and DPDT’s to reverse the current in the frog….is going to an extreme. It isn’t necessary and puts a bad light on Peco switches. Best advice of the day is don’t and leave them alone. Install them as is, on your layout. They are a fine switch and will give you hours of trouble free performance right out of the box. To be said of the others you can find on the market.
Peco recommends you simply put in isolation gaps on the rails leading away from the frog. Once they are in you are good to go and Friendly or Safe for DCC applications.
We interrupt this train of thought for the following announcement.
*A good friend and fellow model railroader Russ G., is installing the newest run of Peco switches on his layout with, get this, no need to cut in any isolation gaps, no shorts and you can throw the switch at anytime on the layout and everything runs without those afore mentioned…. dreaded shorts.
Rich, you didn't answer the second part of my question,....aren't there 2 tracks on the diverging route??????
...(so are we expected to insulate both tracks....I don't think so)
railandsail Rich, you didn't answer the second part of my question,....aren't there 2 tracks on the diverging route?????? ...(so are we expected to insulate both tracks....I don't think so)
Let me ask you a question. How would you envision a conventional turnout in which there are two divergent tracks? The divergent route on a conventional turnout is a single track.
There is only one 'track' on any one route. Tracks comprise two rails, not two routes.
In order to improve safety and stability going through turnouts, railroads preferentially make the 'main', which has higher speeds and loads than your typical smaller local demands, the 'through route', or the straight route through the points. That would be tangent track. Diverging brings risks, so trains must slow to a designated speed when diverging from a through route on the main. This might be crossovers or interchanges, or it might just be the access point to a spur or switching facility.
As previously pointed out, diverging means moving away from a fixed direction of travel. The switch part of a turnout, the moving points and throwing apparatus, allows the train to diverge. Any train must use two rails at once in order to move, so a diverging route, just like its through counterpart on a turnout, must afford the wheels two rails at once.
Now we can introduce multiply-divergent turnouts such as single slip, double slips, and 'wye' turnouts, or what are commonly called 'three-way' turnouts. You can google those, but note that in theory, each route diverges from the other(s) on a turnout. Yet, even the complicated three-way, of which I have one, really has only two diverging routes and a central through route.
No matter how many routes we have on a turnout, each of them has only two rails, or one 'track'.
railandsail ...(so are we expected to insulate both tracks....I don't think so)
Perhaps you have a specific situation, or track plan, in mind.
Where you gap rails to "insulate" a track or section of track depends upon the type of turnout and the design of the layout or section of track in question.
SouthPenn I really don't understand why you have to rewire an electrofrog switch of any make. For electrfrog switches, the only thing you need to do is insulate the diverging route track from the diverging route on the switch. Insulated rail joiners work fine for this. I just installed 12 Peco electrofrog switches on my layout and thats all I did. They work fine right out of the box. Why would you want to screw with the wiring on a new switch? Even my 20 year old Shinohara code 100 switches work fine out of the box when installed this way. When I converted to DCC, I didn't rewire anything. The electrofrog switches work fine. No expensive frog energizers or switch machines necessary.
Sorry I mixed up the words 'track' and 'rail'.I understood the diverging route/track all along. What I didn't understand was insulating the 'diverging route track'?Seems as though the solution is to insulate only one rail from the diverging route track,...the 'inner rail' connected to the frog. (Actually it is instructed to insulate both rails that exit the frog).
railandsailWhat I didn't understand was insulating the 'diverging route track'? Seems as though the solution is to insulate only one rail from the diverging route track,...the 'inner rail' connected to the frog. (Actually it is instructed to insulate both rails that exit the frog).
I'm having flashbacks to Lost in Translation. But you are correct there is a lot of misinformation out there.
The two rails that exit the frog, the frog rails are the inner most rails of the turnout complex. The outer rails are stock rails. If you look at the second diagram on this page, you will see that in a Peco electrofrog turnout, the frog and the frog rails are powered together
http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches_peco.htm
or here http://www.dccwiki.com/PECO_Electrofrog
As far as I can tell from the directions provided for code 83 on the Peco website, this is true. https://www.peco-uk.com/imageselector/Files/Instruction%20sheets/Code%2083%20Electrofrog%20A4%20Eng.pdf
I did find a youtube video by Scale Model Trains & Colorado Joint Line that claims the frog rails are not electrically connected.
The diagram on the Peco website instructions for code 100 turnouts show that stock and frog rail of the mainline should be isolated. I don't understand that at all and don't believe it.
https://www.peco-uk.com/imageselector/Files/Instruction%20sheets/HO-OO%20Electrofrog%20Turnouts.pdf
PS you can't attach a pdf in this forum of if you find a page that has a link to a pdf, you can right click that link, click on copy link location and paste it as a link in this forum
and if you edit your post to add a link, the old links become unclickable grrrrr
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
railandsail SouthPenn I really don't understand why you have to rewire an electrofrog switch of any make. For electrfrog switches, the only thing you need to do is insulate the diverging route track from the diverging route on the switch. Insulated rail joiners work fine for this. I just installed 12 Peco electrofrog switches on my layout and thats all I did. They work fine right out of the box. Why would you want to screw with the wiring on a new switch? Even my 20 year old Shinohara code 100 switches work fine out of the box when installed this way. When I converted to DCC, I didn't rewire anything. The electrofrog switches work fine. No expensive frog energizers or switch machines necessary. Sorry I mixed up the words 'track' and 'rail'.I understood the diverging route/track all along. What I didn't understand was insulating the 'diverging route track'?Seems as though the solution is to insulate only one rail from the diverging route track,...the 'inner rail' connected to the frog. (Actually it is instructed to insulate both rails that exit the frog).
You are correct; only the rail that is connected to the frog needs to be insulated. I usually do both.
Thanks for those multiple references BigDaddy. I made a hard copy of each one so I can reference them over and over.
I need to look for info as to how to 'inspect' these turnouts electrically, as I understand it creates problems trying to trouble shoot DCC items with ordinary DC meters?
railandsailI need to look for info as to how to 'inspect' these turnouts electrically, as I understand it creates problems trying to trouble shoot DCC items with ordinary DC meters?
Randy has posted many times that a cheap Harbor Freight meter on AC is adequate for HO-DCC. Before you wire anything up, a continuity check will confirm the power routing nature of these, or any other turnouts.
And they read DCC voltage close enough as well - many expensive "RMS" meters actually can;t since they are calibrated for sine wave AC and not square waves or any other wave shape. Even the ones with "True RMS" that can do any wave shape often don't go up high enough in frequency for DCC.
Frankly, it's not that critical. No matter what meter you use, at a nominal 15V for DCC track power, it won;t be off by more than a volt or two either way. So if you stick the meter on and see only 5V, or 30V, you have a problem. If it reads 14, or 16V, it's fine. They key is consistency if you have multiple boosters - each section of the layout should have the same reading. If a given meter reads, say, 1/2V too low, it's ALWAYS going to read 1/2V too low, so as you test around the layout, the reading should always be the same. Any variation you get is a variation of the source power, NOT the meter.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
I agree completely with South Penn. I use Peco Electrofrog code 83 turnouts exclusively, and no special wiring is needed. The electrical contact via the switch points is dead on reliable, and the springing in the points helps with it. The points make solid contact against the stock rail. All my wheels are metal, standard width, and I have not had any shorting issues because Peco makes the flangeway thru the points wide enought to avoid shorts. The only special work needed is to insulate all four rail joints beyond the frog and add feeders beyond. And that's not even necessary if the turnout leads to a spur that can lose power when the switch is thrown against it. If a short were to occur in the points area, my digital circuit breakers will knock off the power instantly, with no harm done. sometimes the simplest solution is the best and most elegant.
Good afternoon Andy;
Insul and electro are certain indications that your purchase was from Peco. Shinohara simply calls them (as do the rest of the manufacturers) insulated or power routing frogs. As recently as 15 years ago (maybe more) better turnout manufacturers used what you purchased, insulfrogs. For good, bad or indifferent, DCC changed that, and insulated frogs started to become more desireable.
I suspect that 95% of model railroaders that have insulated frogs 1) don't have any problems with operation and 2) don't operate short wheelbase locomotives or slow speed locomotives like Shays, Heislers or Climax's. These will stop when trying to cross over insulfrogs. The electrofrog is a power routing turnout and is much easier to wire in. Over years of continous operation, the electrofrog, being all metal (nickel silver rail) wont wear out. Of course nether will the Atlas "custom line", but turnouts with insulated frogs that are built with plastic will wear down in just a few short years. I chose to go with Shinohara code 83 track which of course all turnouts are insulated to apease the problems that can occur with DCC operation. As a result, I have to power my frogs with ether Tortoise or sub miniature slide switches. I'm not complaining, it was my choice. It is only my opinion, but given my druthers, I would always go with an electro frog (power routing) turnout or diamond any day.
Bruce
Frankly, DCC has nothing to do with insulated frog or powered frog. The wiring is exactly the same as for DC.
The difference in what is commonly called "dcc friendly" has to do with the point rails. Turnouts that are not DCC friendly can have insulated frogs. For example, the older Shinohara turnouts have the two moving point rails connected with a conductive metal tie rod. So both point rails always have the same polarity. Unless the open side is significantly out of scale, it is very easy for the back of an out of scale (even the code 88 wheels are only semi-scale in HO) wheel to touch the open point rail. With fast acting DCC circuit breakers, this can cause an instant power cut, stalling the train, where DC typically takes longer to react to a short, allowing the train to get past the momentary touch easier.
A properly wires Electrofrog or other all-rail turnout has the two point rails insulated from one another, and the open one is either dead or matches the polarity of the adjacent stock rail. Then, if the back of a wheel happens to brush the open point rail, it's no longer a short and nothing will happen. Add frog power and these are the absolutely most reliable type of turnout you can have.
rrinker N way, Electrofrogs are most definitely superior, especially when running at slow speeds. Insulfrogs can have a problem where if a wheel si slightly wider than spec, it will short at the point of the frog. The common solution is to make the insualted part longer with nail polish or similar, but that will wear off and need to be replaced periodically. Electrofrogs have no such problem, especially when modified per the instructions shown on Wiring for DCC. But, they can be used straight out of the package if the frogs are powered via an electronic reverser like the Frog Juicers from Tam Valley. I'm still modifying all mine, BEFORE installing them. Randy
N way, Electrofrogs are most definitely superior, especially when running at slow speeds. Insulfrogs can have a problem where if a wheel si slightly wider than spec, it will short at the point of the frog. The common solution is to make the insualted part longer with nail polish or similar, but that will wear off and need to be replaced periodically. Electrofrogs have no such problem, especially when modified per the instructions shown on Wiring for DCC. But, they can be used straight out of the package if the frogs are powered via an electronic reverser like the Frog Juicers from Tam Valley. I'm still modifying all mine, BEFORE installing them.
Randy
I'm thinking I should use all Electrofrog turnouts in my staging area, and being a little difficult to reach in by hand they should be remotely operated.
But I am not really wanting Tortoise machines, nor Frog Juicers etc. Actually I like the old capacitive discharge idea with twin coil machines? Had them on my old layout and they worked reliable. One CD unit could operate at lease 4 turnouts at a time. I had a double pole toggle switch I could set to my chosen turnout's direction(s), then push one button to 'snap' the turnouts connected to it.
cuyama The difference is in the diverging leg, which is curved in the PECO Code 75 and 100 and straight in the Atlas Customline. “Small” curves at about a 24” radius, “Medium” at about a 36” radius, and “Large” at about a 60” radius. This diverging leg makes the PECO C75/100 very space-efficient and makes them appear shaper. Byron
The difference is in the diverging leg, which is curved in the PECO Code 75 and 100 and straight in the Atlas Customline. “Small” curves at about a 24” radius, “Medium” at about a 36” radius, and “Large” at about a 60” radius. This diverging leg makes the PECO C75/100 very space-efficient and makes them appear shaper.
Byron
For quite awhile i was operating under this assumtion that the Peco's 100's had curved diverging routes, but upon closer inspection mosi of mine appear to have straight diverging routes??
Am I just wrong in the way I am viewing them?
railandsail cuyama The difference is in the diverging leg, which is curved in the PECO Code 75 and 100 and straight in the Atlas Customline. “Small” curves at about a 24” radius, “Medium” at about a 36” radius, and “Large” at about a 60” radius. This diverging leg makes the PECO C75/100 very space-efficient and makes them appear shaper. Byron For quite awhile i was operating under this assumtion that the Peco's 100's had curved diverging routes, but upon closer inspection mosi of mine appear to have straight diverging routes?? Am I just wrong in the way I am viewing them? Brian
Brian, PECO code 100 turnouts are curved thru the frog. Look at the outer diverging route rail, it is a smooth curve all the way, no "straight" segment parallel to the frog or beyond.
Then look at an Atlas, or PECO code 83, they straighten out before the frog, and they stay straight thru the frog and out to the end of the turnout.
What happens after that us up to the track arrangement.
Personally the only place I will use curved frog turnouts is "in street" or similar industrial trackage.
railandsailWhat is a real quick and/or simple way to determine if they are Electrofrog, or Insulfrog?
Mike
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Brian, PECO code 100 turnouts are curved thru the frog. Look at the outer diverging route rail, it is a smooth curve all the way, no "straight" segment parallel to the frog or beyond.
What is the equivelent you would use in code 100, and why is it you don't like the curved frog turnout? Is it just for looks? If so, for hidden staging, shouldn't be an issue?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
riogrande5761 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Brian, PECO code 100 turnouts are curved thru the frog. Look at the outer diverging route rail, it is a smooth curve all the way, no "straight" segment parallel to the frog or beyond. What is the equivelent you would use in code 100, and why is it you don't like the curved frog turnout? Is it just for looks? If so, for hidden staging, shouldn't be an issue?
OK, first, I'm a little bit of a neurotic perfectionist, so I don't like the idea of randomly using different brands of track/turnouts without very specific reason.
Next neurosis, I would not bother to change rail sizes just because track is hidden.
BUT, Atlas code 100 turnouts work fine.
Why no curved frogs? Why are they straight on the prototype?
Because of the rail/wheel relationship theory that says under ideal conditions, the flange does not touch the rail.
If a given wheelset is "in a curve", it is pushed toward the outside of the curve, even if the flange is not making contact. The wheel taper makes the outer wheel "larger" and the inner wheel "smaller", steering the wheel around the curve.
Which side is the frog gap on? The outside.
OK the guard rail will pull it over and prevent problems - BUT, it does that at greater friction in a curve than in a straight.
Turnout theory says the wheel is rolling the down the straight track, centered by gravity and the wheel taper. If the points are set to the diverging route, the "outside" wheel passes onto the closed point rail which is effectively a straight piece of rail that diverges at a very small angle.
As the wheel tries to continue straight the wheel tapper "climbs" the rail. Gravity and increasing wheel diameter steer the wheel into the new route, a very small change in direction.
The wheel continues straight again on the new path to the end of the moveable point rail, at which point it will enter the curve of the diverging closure rail, and turn for the known reasons, gravity and changing diameter as it tries to climb the rail.
NOW, at the end of the closure rail curve, right before the frog, the wheel now resumes straight track operation, gravity and the tapered wheel act once again to center the wheelset between the rails. This allows the wheelset to pass over the frog gap without the flange touching the side of the rail as it passes over the frog gap.
And, possibly allows the inner wheel flange to pass between the running rail and the guard rail without the added friction of the back of the wheel flange interacting with the guard rail.
All of this improves the chances that the outer wheel will pass over the frog gap smoothly and be well supported the whole time with no flange contact to risk interference.
So, how much does all this actually come into play with our models? I'm not really sure.
But there you have it, the engineering theory that allows a 70 ton freight car to change direction and move from one track to another.
Do the PECO code 100 turnouts work? Sure they do. Will I use them? No.
BUT, I never bought them in years past, I have no left over stock of them, I have no economic "dog" in this fight.
And Atlas code 83 turnouts are relatively in-expensive......
ATLANTIC CENTRALI'm a little bit of a neurotic perfectionist, so I don't like the idea of randomly using different brands of track/turnouts without very specific reason. Next neurosis, I would not bother to change rail sizes just because track is hidden. BUT, Atlas code 100 turnouts work fine
Next neurosis, I would not bother to change rail sizes just because track is hidden. BUT, Atlas code 100 turnouts work fine
Neurotic is ok. I am somewhat of a perfectionsist with track laying myself. That said, I've mixed differing brands of track on my past two layouts for specific reasons, mainly that Atlas didn't offer #8 turnouts at the time, or large radius curved, or other specialty turnouts. I purchased mostly Walthers (made by Shinohara) code 83 turnouts to fill those needs. Since then Atlas has offered a #8, of which I bought one, but still have the Walthers for where they may be required.
As for hidden staging, I already have a good deal of code 100 track. In general code 100 is cheaper and more durable and if appearance is not important, then all the these combined reasons are for me compelling to continue to use code 100 in hidden staging on my next layout. Even if I didn't have a bunch of code 100 already, I'd probably go with it anyway because it would save on cost and being raised by depression era parents and not bleeding money, I like to keep costs down where ever possible.
I've used the Atlas code 100 turnouts for many years but really don't care for them and the large pothole at the frog; maybe thats just me but I'm ready to retire them on my next layout and substitute something else for the staging yard. You've made your point about Atlas turnouts well enough so no need to belabor it any longer on my behalf. You know what they say about repeating something over and over and expecting a different result - heading in to insanity territory. Maybe I'm getting there too on some topics.
As for curved frog, thanks for the theory discussion. I've tried to read up on turnouts over the past 10 years and so far there really doesn't seem to be a consensus that the curved frog is an issue in HO and that modelers have found no experiencial issues in that regard. I do like to consider all arguments as much as possible before making decisions on track to use.
A few more thoughts:
Again agreed, I have no idea if rail/wheel theory really has any measureable effect on our model turnouts.
And, it depends on the application. Building a yard ladder, PECO curved frogs likely don't have any negetive effects.
But it really bugs me to use them to build a crossover - it's like the idea of putting two pieces of snap track back to back as an S curve, going right from one curve to the other direction curve with no striaght in the middle.
And then for me there is the PECO springs that have to be removed and the extra wiring to make them work the way I want.
Having build my own turnouts, I now much prefer the feed thru wiring and the seperate live frog. This type of wiring scheme works best with my Advanced Cab Control system. So Atlas is ready to use out of the box.
Is the Atlas code 100 a little "clunky"? Yes, agreed.
One thought on cost. As a construction professional I always look at time as well as materials when measuring cost. I know we are not paying anyone to build our layouts, but time is time, the faster, easier tasks go, the more we get done.
But more different materials, more detailed purchase lists, more steps in preping materials are all time factors which seem to eat up small savings very quickly - we see it all the time in our work. Not saying this is true about your choices, but there is that saying - penny wise and dollar (or pound) foolish.
Water Level Route railandsail What is a real quick and/or simple way to determine if they are Electrofrog, or Insulfrog? Look at the tip of the frog where the rails come together. If there is a small piece of black plastic, then they are insulfrogs. If metal, then electrofrog.
railandsail What is a real quick and/or simple way to determine if they are Electrofrog, or Insulfrog?
Look at the tip of the frog where the rails come together. If there is a small piece of black plastic, then they are insulfrogs. If metal, then electrofrog.
short excerpt from long explaination...
SheldonBecause of the rail/wheel relationship theory that says under ideal conditions, the flange does not touch the rail.
Very good explaination.And I guess I was just looking at those Peco turnouts with a distorted eye. I was orinally understanding that those were curved diverging routes, but as I viewed them while mocking up my staging tracks I began to think that the very end of the diverging tracks were actually more straight than curved,....my error.
One advantage of these Peco turnouts is they occupy less linear length than many others (more compact).
rrinker Reliable turnout wiring is the same for DCC Older Walthers/Shinohara turnouts, the ones NOT marked "DCC Friendly" have the same problem in DC as they do in DCC, if you use a Tortoise machine to control the frog polarity, you better have it pretty darn near dead on centered, because of the contacts change before the points have moved off the stock rails, you get a short. The gap in the Tortoise contacts is very small - this issue spawned a number of "how to modify a Tortoise" articles on cutting some of the copper off the board to make the gap bigger.
Reliable turnout wiring is the same for DCC
Older Walthers/Shinohara turnouts, the ones NOT marked "DCC Friendly" have the same problem in DC as they do in DCC, if you use a Tortoise machine to control the frog polarity, you better have it pretty darn near dead on centered, because of the contacts change before the points have moved off the stock rails, you get a short. The gap in the Tortoise contacts is very small - this issue spawned a number of "how to modify a Tortoise" articles on cutting some of the copper off the board to make the gap bigger.
Randy - I totally agree with the first line.
IMHO the easier solution to the shorting issue in the second paragraph is to gap the frog and isolate it. This is easier to do before installation and does require soldering a feeder to the newly isolated frog, but I find it easier and more reliable than trying to modify tortoises. This does leave the points powered by contact to the stock rail (or by tabs - depending on the age of the TO).
As for the curved turnout discussion, I do agree that it is frustrating to try and plan trackwork without the actual switch in hand. I took a radius tool with me to buy my Shinohara/ Walthers curved TOS and checked the turnouts before buying, to avoid going below my minimum radius - they are notorious for overstating the radi....
In another instance, I had to scratchbuild a curved turnout for the top of my helix when none of the commercial products would fit - I discovered they wouldn't fit after purchasing several of them and trying them in the space. An expensive miss.....
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
Guy and Other Fine People: I am not going to comment on whether or not one should or should not use insulated frogs. That is for others to comment on. However, I want do want to comment on the question of Shinohara power routing TOs and Tortoise switch machines and the "shorting" issue. I use (almost exclusively) Shinohara (not Walthers Shinohara!) code 70 track and TOs and have done so for many years and I have been using Tortoise switch machines for better than twenty years. I cannot ever recall a "short" happening from this arrangement. Never. I am not even sure how it would happen, but assuming the wire actuator rod (only way I can think of this happening) touched the rivet on the throwbar/tie and caused a short the easiest and quickest way I can see to fix would be to to slip some insulation over the actuator rod. Just my couple of shillings.
Old Fat Robert