Tom Bryant_MR(Thank you Crossthedog on Shinohara. Note, your input does not allow a reply?)
-Matt
Returning to model railroading after 40 years and taking unconscionable liberties with the SP&S, Northern Pacific and Great Northern roads in the '40s and '50s.
wrench567Shinoharra was mostly code 100 or code 70. I don't recall them having a code 83 line.
That would explain why I got such a good deal on them.
richhotrain I have always been torn between Atlas Custom Line and Peco Insulfrog. I used to use Atlas turnouts exclusively, mostly the #6. But, at 12" in length, the Atlas turnout takes up a lot of space, and you need some way to power it either electrically (Tortoise) or manually (Caboose Industries ground throw. The Peco #6 Insulfrog is only 9 1/4" long, saving valuable space in yards and on crossovers. The other advantage of Peco is that the points are spring loaded, so I only need a flick of the finger to throw the points, a tremendous savings without Tortoises or ground throws. Pricewise, Atlas is a lot cheaper than Peco. What I need is a shorter Atlas turnout that is spring loaded or a less expensive Peco turnout. The Walthers turnout offers no conceivable advantage over Atlas or Peco. Rich
I have always been torn between Atlas Custom Line and Peco Insulfrog.
I used to use Atlas turnouts exclusively, mostly the #6. But, at 12" in length, the Atlas turnout takes up a lot of space, and you need some way to power it either electrically (Tortoise) or manually (Caboose Industries ground throw.
The Peco #6 Insulfrog is only 9 1/4" long, saving valuable space in yards and on crossovers. The other advantage of Peco is that the points are spring loaded, so I only need a flick of the finger to throw the points, a tremendous savings without Tortoises or ground throws.
Pricewise, Atlas is a lot cheaper than Peco. What I need is a shorter Atlas turnout that is spring loaded or a less expensive Peco turnout.
The Walthers turnout offers no conceivable advantage over Atlas or Peco.
Rich
I agree with you on the advantages of Peco but the extra length of Atlas is a minor issue because it's not difficult to cut length off either of the diverging tracks.
Last night I posted and admittedly long winded explanation of replacing a problematic Atlas #8 with a Peco #7 curved turnout. Surprisingly, the Peco has wider radii on both curves of the turnout and early testing seems to show it is going to perform much better at handling my full length passenger cars.
One has to remember that the Peco code 100 is HO/OO that's really built to OO standards. The code 83 line is HO standard. The OP is probably wanting code 100 due to Shinoharra was mostly code 100 or code 70. I don't recall them having a code 83 line.
Pete.
Doughless The PECO point rails diverge from tangent at a steeper angle than Atlas.
the diverging rails are typically straight (see Catskill Archive)
richhotraingreg, on the Peco #6 Insulfrog, the frog is set back from the divergent end by 3/4". On the Atlas Custom Line #6, the frog is set back from the divergent end by 2 3/4". Using a metal tape measure, the Peco frog is 7/8" long, whereas the Atlas frog is 1 1/4" long. The length of the turnout is 12" for Atlas and 9 1/4" for Peco. When the two turnouts are placed over one another, the divergent sides match exactly.
the extra track in front of the points and after the frog can be cut off if needed. it's the lead-length and frog #/angle the matter. the short the lead-length the tighter the closure rail radius
441
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
richhotrain Doughless The PECO point rails diverge from tangent at a steeper angle than Atlas. I won't challenge that statement without a third trip downstairs, but at the moment, I disagree with that statement, subject to being corrected. Rich
The PECO point rails diverge from tangent at a steeper angle than Atlas.
I won't challenge that statement without a third trip downstairs, but at the moment, I disagree with that statement, subject to being corrected.
You have to make sure the tips of the points are compared perfectly, there is more track between the tips and the end of the track on the Atlas than the Peco. I see my Peco starting its diverging path slightly sooner than the Atlas....about half the thickness of the rail.
If the frog angles are the same (assuming not a fraction different), and the radius of the diverging track is the same, then the difference is that Atlas has a slight easement when transitioning from tangent to diverging....making the beginning of the diverging route slightly longer and pushing the frog up the length of the track..... and that is what I see when longer cars roll through the Atlas compared to peco, where its more abrupt.
Also, the solid portion of the inner diverging track...the hinge...is farther away from the outside tangent rail on the Peco than the Atlas. Forces the angle of the points to be slightly more severe.
Basically, the Atlas has a gentler departure from tangent than the Peco, with the remainder of the geometry the same, and that accounts for the slightly longer length of the Atlas from points to frog.
- Douglas
Alton Junction
Doughless The difference in lengths between Peco and Atlas is in the distance between the points and the frog. The PECO point rails diverge from tangent at a steeper angle than Atlas. Its noticeable to me when comparing how trains move through the points on both turnouts. The diverging route in Atlas has a bit of an easement built in which gives it more length but ends up with the same frog angle. The Atlas #6 has the best geometry, especially for longer cars, than any other #6, IMO.
The difference in lengths between Peco and Atlas is in the distance between the points and the frog. The PECO point rails diverge from tangent at a steeper angle than Atlas. Its noticeable to me when comparing how trains move through the points on both turnouts. The diverging route in Atlas has a bit of an easement built in which gives it more length but ends up with the same frog angle.
The Atlas #6 has the best geometry, especially for longer cars, than any other #6, IMO.
gregc richhotrain The Peco #6 Insulfrog is only 9 1/4" long, what makes the Atlas turnouts longer, the length of the non-diverging track? what's the difference in lead-length, the distance between the points and the frog? Rich, any chance you could send me a PM with your email?
richhotrain The Peco #6 Insulfrog is only 9 1/4" long,
what makes the Atlas turnouts longer, the length of the non-diverging track?
what's the difference in lead-length, the distance between the points and the frog?
Rich, any chance you could send me a PM with your email?
Let me check if I can send you a PM.
Edit Note: I was in the midst of writing this reply when Douglas posted his reply.
Thanks Rich. The info on Peco is good. Before I went to Fast Tracks I was using Shinohara.
(Thank you Crossthedog on Shinohara. Note, your input does not allow a reply?)
I did a cost work up on Fast Tracts. After the initial investment ~ $380 for tooling, $160 in materials for 15 switches drops cost per switch (#5) to ~ $11.
How long to recoup the $380 will depend on # switches one builds. That's just the cost side.
Quality/satisfaction is subjective ☺️
Thanks again. Will check out Peco as size/space is a factor also.
Tom
richhotrainThe Peco #6 Insulfrog is only 9 1/4" long,
I love the clickety-clack, but I don't love my caboose coming off the rails with a fire in the stove . Bad for everyone!
I'm sure others will chime in here with much more experience with various turnouts.
And I wasn't dreaming about the Shinohara being available, or at least I was not dreaming that someone TOLD me they were available. This from Bob at ScaleLink in an email to me last year:
"When I heard that Mr Shinohara was about to retire, I invested several thousand pounds in stock as I believe the products are brilliant... A new owner is now producing the ranges with the assistance of some former Shinohara employees..."
Thanks Matt. It's been a while since I built one. I do remember how smooth the trucks glided thru the points and frog. No clickity-clack
Thanks D. Good idea!
Hi Tom,
Walthers is now making their own turnouts and I like them fine. The sprung points are nice to flip with my finger but when I want to automate them, it's a pain to have to take the turnout out of the layout and remove the spring. The thing I don't love about Walthers and Shinohara is the shallow ties that don't match the rest of my track, which is Atlas flex. And if you want Shinohara, I think you can still get them. Someone correct me, but didn't someone buy the tooling and they're selling Shinohara turnouts under a name like IMON? Maybe I dreamed it.
I only bought a few Walthers turnouts, and they're fine. Mostly when I buy new turnouts I buy Atlas. The price is right and they give me almost no trouble -- had to file down one of the points on a long curved turnout because it was tripping up my caboose. I've also bought old Shinoharas used at fairly good prices, too. I have never tried Peco.
If you have the patience and skill to build your own turnouts, though, and you can get ahold of Fast Tracks jigs, why would you ever settle for "storebought" turnouts again? Especially if you love them. I'd say follow the love.
All FT over a decade ago. No regrets at all. After completing my layout I ended up loaning my jigs to a couple other fellows in the area. I recommend polling your local community for interest in sharing a communal set of FT jigs.
D
I was using Shinohara turnouts years ago. I eventually moved to Fast Tracks. Loved them.
I see Shinohara is out of business. So, I would need to purchase all of the Fast Track jigs again.
I would welcome others experience with other turnouts in the market.
Thanks Tom