Hello All,
Sorry if this got posted twice...
I'm confused as to whether I can use #5 and/or #6 turnouts with 22" radius track.
I want to run longer passenger cars. Will #5 provide a less drastic curve then #6.
Thanks.
If you have the room for the longer #6's, I would go with those.
#6's have a larger turnout curve than #5's, but the #5's will work well with 22" radius.
The NMRA's RP for HO turnouts is here http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp12_3.html
The radius lines 6 and 11 are the key ones here. 6 is the turnout as a whole and is always equal to or greater than 11 which is the sharpest turn in the turnout.
Line 11 affects how wheel bases negotiate the turnout - long wheelbases require larger radii. In practice usually only steam locomotives have a problem here for #5's and above.
Line 6 affects long equipment through the turnout.
For a #5 turnout 6 and 11 are 43" and 26" so it will work with 22" radius curves. One cautionary note is crossovers which have an inherent S curve. With long passenger cars you may want to use #6's for these.
Note that not all manufacturers follow these RPs so there may be differences for your particular brand. Buying a turnout or two and actually running trains through them might be advisable before committing totally.
Enjoy
Paul
Neither a #5 or a #6 is a drop in replacement for 22" radius curved track. The no. of a turnout is a measurement of the angle of the divergent track from the straight through route. The larger the number, the smaller the angle. On a true turnout the divergent route is not a constant curve through the route, but instead is straight as it diverges from the straight route.
You're thinking of a snap turnout which is design to replace a section of 18" radius track. That's something completely different than what a true #5, #6 or even #10 turnout is design to do.
jktrains
Thanks all.
I'm going to try the 6's first and see how that works out.
Good idea to just try one or two too see how things work out.
Howardr wrote: Hello All, I'm confused as to whether I can use #5 and/or #6 turnouts with 22" radius track.I want to run longer passenger cars. Will #5 provide a less drastic curve then #6?.
Hello All, I'm confused as to whether I can use #5 and/or #6 turnouts with 22" radius track.
I want to run longer passenger cars. Will #5 provide a less drastic curve then #6?.
Direct question to a direct question: NO. (The curves get more "drastic" with the lower numbers - and vice versa). So, #5's are sharper than #6's.
REAL RAILROADS USE 10o (about a #10) for V.slow speed, tight,) station 'throats'.Our toy 'replicas' are made to take a #6 and stay within a 4'X8' plywood's limitatioms.
What will 'stay on the track' vs. look REAL is up to your imagination.
85' Passenger cars are approximately 12" long. The NMRA recommends 3X (36"r) as a minimum. I find they need 48"r to look right - (that's MY appraisal).
After building a layout with 48" curves, I'm now on my 5th layout. Min. radius is 27"r. and #6's for Passenger yards and #4s or #5s to suit my freight equipment. I also share my basement as a 'family' room.
The 85' cars stay on the track, and look good on the 'straights. Only regret is an 8' passing siding is limited to 4 -5 cars (plus engines).
COMPROMISE can be an Art form.
I did some cursory research and determined what the substitution radius was for N. American turnout configurations so that I would know what the limits would be for operating large steamers in my yard. I feel that #5's would have been adequate, but "squeeky" for my 2-10-4, but the kicker for me was how sharp these turnouts would look with the locomotives traversing them. So, I elected to use Peco Streamline Code 83 Insulfrog #6's, and I have basically been quite happy with them. Certainly all my longer steam engines are happy.
If I could quibble about one thing with the Pecos, it would be their blade-type rails on the points. I think they spring too much. On the other hand, it could sometimes be just this quality that permits some of the iffy traffic, such as longer passenger cars, to go through them. It should not be an issue with a #6 frog, but who knows.
Don Gibson wrote:... Only regret is an 8' passing siding is limited to 4 -5 cars (plus engines)...
... Only regret is an 8' passing siding is limited to 4 -5 cars (plus engines)...
I though I was doing well with my 7' siding out on the main...especially since my first layout had no sidings at all. Like you, Don, I find that it is woefully inadequate for a train that should include the loco, a reefer, and perhaps 6-8 heavies. Not that I would use the siding for a passenger train, but even the Challenger can't pull more than 10 cars and a caboose on the siding when using it to hold.
Of course, one could always do a saw-by. They keep me involved.