I have no Peco turnouts. There have been many threads about insulfrog, electrofrog and unifrog, but if you have never used any, it's like a guy from Kansas reading about Sushi, who hasn't been paying attention.
What I think I know: is they can short on the diverging side of the frog, they are power routing, one needs insulated joiners on the frog rails.
I came across a store that sells used trains and they have a bunch at $2.50 each!
They are used, some have soldering or removal damage that I don't want to deal with, but some seem like new.
What modifications would I need or what downside would there be if I go with these for a DCC layout?
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
You'll be wanting some wasabi and soy sauce.
And a plentiful supply of good cold sake.
Ed
BigDaddy I have no Peco turnouts. There have been many threads about insulfrog, electrofrog and unifrog, but if you have never used any, it's like a guy from Kansas reading about Sushi, who hasn't been paying attention. What I think I know: is they can short on the diverging side of the frog, they are power routing, one needs insulated joiners on the frog rails. I came across a store that sells used trains and they have a bunch at $2.50 each! They are used, some have soldering or removal damage that I don't want to deal with, but some seem like new. What modifications would I need or what downside would there be if I go with these for a DCC layout?
Code 83?
I would pass because I don't like the wiring system or the little throwbar springs, but many people love them.
Code 100?
Pass for sure, they are curved thru the frog, unrealistic for North America, and have the same wiring/frog issues.
Sheldon
BigDaddy I have no Peco turnouts. What I think I know: is they can short on the diverging side of the frog, they are power routing, one needs insulated joiners on the frog rails. What modifications would I need or what downside would there be if I go with these for a DCC layout?
I have no Peco turnouts.
There are no modifications that you need to make to a Peco Insulfrog to use it on a DCC layout. If you plan to power your turnouts with switching devices (e.g., Tortoise), you can easily remove the throwbar spring. I leave mine in place and manually throw the points with a flick of the finger.
The title of your thread is Insulfrog, but in your question you mention the Electrofrog. The Electrofrog is also power routing and has a live frog, so you do need to gap the inside frog rails.
At $2.50 per turnout, I would snap them up.
Rich
Alton Junction
If they have enough of them, buy them, you could always use them in a yard if nothing else but they are fine turnouts in general.
BigDaddyWhat I think I know: is they can short on the diverging side of the frog, they are power routing, one needs insulated joiners on the frog rails.
BigDaddyI came across a store that sells used trains and they have a bunch at $2.50 each!
Seriously, unless there is something about them that would be a non-starter for you (sprung points, curved through the frog (code 100)), I would buy them up in a heartbeat. For what it's worth, I have somewhere around 50 Peco code 100 insulfrogs on my layout. They work flawlessly. I like the sprung points. Power routing doesn't bother me as I power all sides anyway. The curve through the diverging route doesn't bother me a bit. Don't even notice it honestly. Even if it bothers you, at 2.50 each use them in a staging yard.
Mike
I have Peco 83 Insulfrog on my layout exclusively. No shorting issues, I use normal joiners exclusively, and I add a feeder to the mid point of a runaround siding or spur to defeat the power routing only because I want to. Never saw the point of electrofrog anyway.
The design of the Peco code 83 may preclude you from doing some special niche things, but for average layout construction, they operate as well or better than others.
And the design of others preclude you from doing some other special niche things the Pecos don't.
The code 100 Pecos curved through the frog, so it might make for a wierd crossover if you use two together or one with another brand. For industrial spurs, in many ways, this design is better.
- Douglas
Doughless Never saw the point of electrofrog anyway.
Never saw the point of electrofrog anyway.
richhotrain Doughless Never saw the point of electrofrog anyway. I don't have any Electrofrogs on my layout because I don't need live frogs. But, the Electrofrog is very useful if you need or want a live frog. As long as the inner frog rails are gapped, the Electrofrog works just fine. Rich
I don't have any Electrofrogs on my layout because I don't need live frogs. But, the Electrofrog is very useful if you need or want a live frog. As long as the inner frog rails are gapped, the Electrofrog works just fine.
I meant the point of needing live frogs. Other than helping short steam locos with bad pickup systems, I never understood the advantage.
Not wanting to make a discussion here, just trying to stay in the swim lanes of the OP who seems to favor simplicity in this situation.
Making sure the used turnouts are Insulfrogs would seem wise.
Henry, if you can use them, I would snap them up.
If I found a source of used Walthers/Shinohara turnouts like I use at $2.50 each, I would buy them all. If only 1 out of 6 pass inspection for re-use, that is still quite a bargain.
I do not use Peco turnouts, but I know many who do, and they generally do not have any more complaints than anyone else.
Oh, I did use Peco turnouts on several N scale layouts with great results.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Doughless richhotrain Doughless Never saw the point of electrofrog anyway. I don't have any Electrofrogs on my layout because I don't need live frogs. But, the Electrofrog is very useful if you need or want a live frog. As long as the inner frog rails are gapped, the Electrofrog works just fine. Rich I meant the point of needing live frogs. Other than helping short steam locos with bad pickup systems, I never understood the advantage. Not wanting to make a discussion here, just trying to stay in the swim lanes of the OP who seems to favor simplicity in this situation. Making sure the used turnouts are Insulfrogs would seem wise.
I had several Peco insulfrogs on the Code 100 part of my layout, including a few double-curved ones. I also had one electrofog. I used Peco machines so I could keep the springs. I found that nothing ever picked the points on Peco turnouts. For that reason, I used them in situations where the main line followed the divergent curved path. Whereas Atlas turnouts sometimes allowed picked-point derailments, I could rely on the Pecos for flawless performance.
I have had shorting issues. This comes from the closeness of the frog rails, which are metal over a plastic frog. However, when a wide wheel tread would cross the frog, particularly on the curved path, it would short as it momentarily bridged the narrow gap. The solution was simple - paint the rails right at the gap with nail polish. The polish never wore off, and I never had shorts afterwards either.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Thanks everyone, they turned out to be Code 100 and I use 83. I did pick up a couple Atlas turnouts for the same price.
They are at Shenandoah Heritage Market, for anyone in the area.
Also, Peco is no longer making the insulfrog as they are committed to their newer design, the unifrog.
The only rub is the unifrog have the same flaw as the insulfrog. Shorts can occur. Peco has even admitted this to be true and have stated they plan to revise the Unifrogs to mitigate this issue. Here is the email I received from Peco:
Thank you for your email raising concerns about short circuits on the Unifrog #6 turnouts. It is standard railway engineering practice to put a 3° taper on wheels, which normally means they only contact the rail they are sat upon and the overhanging outer edge of the wheel should pass over the top of the opposing frog rail without contact. This is what we are used to, and it works that was on our OO and N scale products. However, NMRA RP-25 only recommends a taper, and having spoken to a former colleague who is deeply into American HO scale we now realise there are ready to run models being produced without the taper on the wheels, which would of course cause the short circuiting problems as you describe and what you saw in the YouTube video. We are now looking at how we can modify the tooling to provide a longer Unifrog tip and greater gap between the frog rails. This will also be implemented on the code 70 #6 turnouts and all future HO scale Unifrog products. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
BigDaddy Thanks everyone, they turned out to be Code 100 and I use 83. I did pick up a couple Atlas turnouts for the same price. They are at Shenandoah Heritage Market, for anyone in the area.
That looks like a good 2 hours from where I live. I do use code 100 Peco in staging but it is all built.
Peco Insulfrog do have the potential to short out but if that happens you can paint the rails near the frog with finger nail polish.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
basementdwellerI too use Peco insulfrogs code 100 on my DCC layout. I will only add one additional comment, the point rails pick up their power by using a tab that contacts the stock rail when the turnout is thrown. I have found that those tabs can loose contact creating a dead turnout. All my Peco’s now get a feeder wire installed underneath connecting each stock rail to the point rail before installation. I just use decoder wire. I know this does not need to be done but over the years I have had one or two turnouts go dead due to the tab loosing contact. To the OP I would snag them up and play around building some test track and see what you think, you won’t have any trouble moving them on if you don’t like them.
I have had similar undercarriage issues with both Atlas and Walthers turnouts that lost power months to years after installation. Either slight warping and ensuing up and down flexing, or stray ballast glue schmutz flowing its way into the understrips/rivets.
While it does not help to power the closure rails on the Peco, I default to powering all three legs of a turnout when building the layout, sometimes several feet away down the spur, to help thwart any future problems caused by the turnout or my slopiness.
Doughless While it does not help to power the closure rails on the Peco, I default to powering all three legs of a turnout when building the layout, sometimes several feet away down the spur, to help thwart any future problems caused by the turnout or my slopiness.
Doughless basementdweller I too use Peco insulfrogs code 100 on my DCC layout. I will only add one additional comment, the point rails pick up their power by using a tab that contacts the stock rail when the turnout is thrown. I have found that those tabs can loose contact creating a dead turnout. All my Peco’s now get a feeder wire installed underneath connecting each stock rail to the point rail before installation. I just use decoder wire. I know this does not need to be done but over the years I have had one or two turnouts go dead due to the tab loosing contact. To the OP I would snag them up and play around building some test track and see what you think, you won’t have any trouble moving them on if you don’t like them. I have had similar undercarriage issues with both Atlas and Walthers turnouts that lost power months to years after installation. Either slight warping and ensuing up and down flexing, or stray ballast glue schmutz flowing its way into the understrips/rivets. While it does not help to power the closure rails on the Peco, I default to powering all three legs of a turnout when building the layout, sometimes several feet away down the spur, to help thwart any future problems caused by the turnout or my slopiness.
basementdweller I too use Peco insulfrogs code 100 on my DCC layout. I will only add one additional comment, the point rails pick up their power by using a tab that contacts the stock rail when the turnout is thrown. I have found that those tabs can loose contact creating a dead turnout. All my Peco’s now get a feeder wire installed underneath connecting each stock rail to the point rail before installation. I just use decoder wire. I know this does not need to be done but over the years I have had one or two turnouts go dead due to the tab loosing contact. To the OP I would snag them up and play around building some test track and see what you think, you won’t have any trouble moving them on if you don’t like them.
I have never had these types of failures, but my track laying approach is likely different.
I glue my track down with adhesive caulk, but I do not glue turnouts down. Turnouts are nailed down with a minimum number of track nails, 3-4 typically.
And since my roadbed is always wood or homasote, also mounted on a base that will not flex, they hold well and prevent any movement, especally combined with the connected track being glued down.
Because of the nature of my control system, most turnouts are only fed from one direction because turnouts part of interlockings and interlockings are the boundries between the primary control and signal blocks.
The turnouts were warped. Caulked down at each extreme end, but the middle still rose up and down a bit. These were in yard/industrial areas with no roadbed. Then ballasted them in the middle to hold them down and glue likely got under them. It was during the time when a lot of the Atlas turnouts I bought also had the tangent track not exactly tangent, seemed to bow out.
Doughless The turnouts were warped. Caulked down at each extreme end, but the middle still rose up and down a bit. These were in yard/industrial areas with no roadbed. Then ballasted them in the middle to hold them down and glue likely got under them. It was during the time when a lot of the Atlas turnouts I bought also had the tangent track not exactly tangent, seemed to bow out.
Understand, again I use a few track nails, no problems. But, again, no foam or cork here, when I nail down a turnout, its not moving.
ATLANTIC CENTRALUnderstand, again I use a few track nails, no problems. But, again, no foam or cork here, when I nail down a turnout, its not moving.
I only use nails to hold track in place until the ballast is applied.
Once ballast is glued down, no track is moving.
SeeYou190 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Understand, again I use a few track nails, no problems. But, again, no foam or cork here, when I nail down a turnout, its not moving. I only use nails to hold track in place until the ballast is applied. Once ballast is glued down, no track is moving. -Kevin
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Understand, again I use a few track nails, no problems. But, again, no foam or cork here, when I nail down a turnout, its not moving.
The issue I was reporting was that the liquid glue from ballasting got into the tabs and tension contacts. I don't normally caulk turnouts in the middle or glue down ballasted turnouts, but the warped nature of several prompted me to do it.
DoughlessThe issue I was reporting was that the liquid glue from ballasting got into the tabs and tension contacts.
That sounds like a real problem.
Keeping glue out of moving parts is always a challenge, at least for me.
Lastspikemike richhotrain SeeYou190 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Understand, again I use a few track nails, no problems. But, again, no foam or cork here, when I nail down a turnout, its not moving. I only use nails to hold track in place until the ballast is applied. Once ballast is glued down, no track is moving. -Kevin Amen. Rich Doesn't work on foam.
richhotrain SeeYou190 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Understand, again I use a few track nails, no problems. But, again, no foam or cork here, when I nail down a turnout, its not moving. I only use nails to hold track in place until the ballast is applied. Once ballast is glued down, no track is moving. -Kevin Amen. Rich
Amen.
Doesn't work on foam.
Looks like the Unifrog turnouts have the single blade point rails, not joints. Like the new Walthers turnouts. No joints looks nice.
DoughlessNo joints looks nice.
Yes they do.
Lastspikemike The Unifrog is also all live except for that tiny frog point. Restoring power routing and treating the turnout like an electrofrog could solve that issue.
The Unifrog is also all live except for that tiny frog point. Restoring power routing and treating the turnout like an electrofrog could solve that issue.
Isn't a dead frog a feature of the Unifrog?
The entire frog is dead, just like the Insulfrog. You can see the Unifrog wiring here. The difference is you can power the frog, or not. Plus you don't have to do it immediately, and you can decide how to control it.
betamax The entire frog is dead, just like the Insulfrog. You can see the Unifrog wiring here. The difference is you can power the frog, or not. Plus you don't have to do it immediately, and you can decide how to control it.
As Peco points out, "The wiring of these new turnouts is a development of both the Insulfrog and Electrofrog designs. For current users of the Electrofrog or Insulfrog versions of our turnouts the new Unifrog gives modellers the best of both worlds. As supplied, the turnout is wired completely “live”, except for the frog tip and wing rails, and can be used straight out of the packet without any further modification (and so behaves like an Insulfrog)".