Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

#4 turnouts

4866 views
52 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Nebraska
  • 68 posts
Posted by gilligan on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:33 PM

When I was ordering my Fast-Tracks jig i had this same delima; a #4 is what i wanted in my yards, but seemed to small for my mainline.  I ended up calling the place and the guy i talked to told me to stay away from the #4 because the diverging route radius was actually a 15" radius on their #4 turnout.  Which is awfully tight. 

I ended up getting a # 4.5 turnout which gives me a 22" radius diverging route.  This i figured gave me what i needed for my yards, yet wouldn't look as ridiculous on my main, if i chose to use it there.  I most likely will too, for the fact that i can't justify owning a second jig just yet, and i will never settle for a commercial turnout again.

  • Member since
    January 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,268 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:17 PM
Brakie -- yes, there would be an S-curve if you used two #4's (or #6's, #8's, whatever) to connect two parallel tracks. Actually, from the looks of things, an S-curve gets created any time you make two tracks parallel.

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:00 PM
 markpierce wrote:

Whatever you do, DO NOT use no. 4s at crossovers connecting two close parallel tracks or similar situations such as may happen at the beginning of a yard ladder.  These situations create nasty "S" curves which will play havoc with your operations.  The NMRA recommended practices http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-11.html don't take this into account.  Use something bigger like 6s at these situations.  I also recommend you check out the Layout Design special interest group site at http://ldsig.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page for helpful ideas and advice.

Mark

 

Mark,There is NO "S" curves using a custom line #4 switch..Even if there was there would still be no problems at slow switching speeds.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, October 15, 2007 7:41 PM

I don't run mainline trains over them, (except in staging) for those I use #6s.

Dave; how about an SDP35?Smile,Wink, & Grin [swg]

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • From: Piedmont, VA USA
  • 706 posts
Posted by shawnee on Monday, October 15, 2007 5:26 PM

#4s...ain't no big deal.  Don't use them on the main if you can avoid, but they're fine for yards, branchline and industrial spurs.  Personally, the number 4s look fine and appropriate to me in those locations.  I use cars a little over 60' and six axle engines and they're OK on those 4s, never derail.   I think the bugaboo about No 4 turnouts is a lot of fuss about nothing, if you use them in the right spots.  And after all, you're probably not going to be running your trains like race cars. 

 

Shawnee
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Martinez, CA
  • 5,440 posts
Posted by markpierce on Monday, October 15, 2007 5:13 PM
 Don Gibson wrote:

Everyone is right on this one.

#4's became the 'ideal' switch for Yards and 'compressed' layouts back (prewar)  when most cars and equipment were 50-60 feet, and 'shortened' Passenger cars were being offered.

TODAYS modern equipment have longer cars, trains, and bigger engines to pull them. 

PROBLEM for Newbies is buying the loonger post-war equipment (which they see), and try to run it on 'simpler' 60 year old pre-war designed trackage.

WHY? Because it's cheaper and looks the same. (TOY Manufacturers RULE #1: always make what $ELL$).

UNION PACIFIC is currently replacing ESPEE mainline switches in Oregon with an #24 equivalent, to run rheir modern 80'-85' equipment - while 'modelers' struggle with #4 and #6 decisions.

Railroads RULE #1: Use what WORKS.

Yeah, the S.P.'s "standard" turnout frog for passing sidings was a no. 10 seventy-five years ago, and nos. 12 and 14 sixty years ago in CTC territory.  Poor thing.

Mark

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Martinez, CA
  • 5,440 posts
Posted by markpierce on Monday, October 15, 2007 5:02 PM

Whatever you do, DO NOT use no. 4s at crossovers connecting two close parallel tracks or similar situations such as may happen at the beginning of a yard ladder.  These situations create nasty "S" curves which will play havoc with your operations.  The NMRA recommended practices http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-11.html don't take this into account.  Use something bigger like 6s at these situations.  I also recommend you check out the Layout Design special interest group site at http://ldsig.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page for helpful ideas and advice.

Mark

  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 3,864 posts
Posted by Don Gibson on Monday, October 15, 2007 3:58 PM

Everyone is right on this one.

#4's became the 'ideal' switch for Yards and 'compressed' layouts back (prewar)  when most cars and equipment were 50-60 feet, and 'shortened' Passenger cars were being offered.

TODAYS modern equipment have longer cars, trains, and bigger engines to pull them. 

PROBLEM for Newbies is buying the loonger post-war equipment (which they see), and try to run it on 'simpler' 60 year old pre-war designed trackage.

WHY? Because it's cheaper and looks the same. (TOY Manufacturers RULE #1: always make what $ELL$).

UNION PACIFIC is currently replacing ESPEE mainline switches in Oregon with an #24 equivalent, to run rheir modern 80'-85' equipment - while 'modelers' struggle with #4 and #6 decisions.

Railroads RULE #1: Use what WORKS.

Don Gibson .............. ________ _______ I I__()____||__| ||||| I / I ((|__|----------| | |||||||||| I ______ I // o--O O O O-----o o OO-------OO ###########################
  • Member since
    January 2004
  • 790 posts
Posted by Tilden on Monday, October 15, 2007 3:39 PM

OK, to tell the whole truth....I also run a DD40AX through #4 turnouts.  It tolerates them....doesn't love'm but does run through them.

 Tilden

  • Member since
    September 2006
  • From: Ogden UT
  • 1,055 posts
Posted by PA&ERR on Monday, October 15, 2007 1:48 PM

I use #4s (two of them) on the approach to my carferry slip simply because space was at a premium there. Elsewhere on the layout I use #6.

George

"And the sons of Pullman porters and the sons of engineers ride their father's magic carpet made of steel..."

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 2,299 posts
Posted by Dave-the-Train on Monday, October 15, 2007 1:11 PM

The specific downside of #4 turnouts is appearance.

Technically they are a switch in which the diverging road departs from the straight road at a sharper angle ... in common parlance they are a sharper radius.  This means that you can have the benefit of more of them fitting into a given space... BUT they can look plain wrong.

This "look" thing means that you can get away with them in a really cramped city switching environment (where they would be used in the real thing), they will be less good in a more open world and silly in wide open desert.

The wrong look shows up most if you are using long locos or cars... if you aren't doing this there will be less (or no) problem.

From an appearance point of view you can get away with longer cars more eawsily than longer locos.  Things like the huge woodchip hoppers/gondolas do get squeezed into city streets... but they are switched by 4 axle locos not the big beasties... as a rule.  (Bet soemone will prove me wrong with a pic of a Dash 8 or something Laugh [(-D])

Part of the solution is placement.  I can't think of a way to define this for you.

We generally get away with a lot of selective compression in MRR.  This can look better or worse depending on (some sort of) artistic achievement.  Again i can't think of a way to define this for you.

Maybe someone can come up with some ideas or references?

As several people have posted #4 switches can generally take long locos and cars provided the speed is slow... I would be surprised if you could go fast on a small layout.  You will find that some stock absolutely will not accept the sharper "radius".  Sometimes you can modify stock to persuade it to work... if you really must have that stock.  As mentioned long wheelbased 4 wheel stock will cause you more problems than any 8 wheel stock.

You will tend to find more issues when propelling stock than when draging it.  This can relate to how the couplers move.  In fact, with the longer 8 wheel stock, you are much more likely to get issues with the couplers not swinging wide enough (or not returning fast enough) when pushing them than you are likely to get issues with the trucks.

You have an advantage that models have largely been developed from the commercial toy train market... because of this the makers design them to go round curves that wouldn't exist in the real thing.  this will help you a lot.

With the extreme curves of #4s you would be wise to avoid reverse curves completely but (seeing as you will almost certainly have to have some) do make certain that you introduce a short straight between the curved elements... this will look better and really help your stock.

Cool [8D]

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Pa.
  • 3,361 posts
Posted by DigitalGriffin on Monday, October 15, 2007 12:54 PM
 venckman wrote:

Can someone explain to me the downside to using #4 turnouts, if there is any?  I read a lot of articles and they always act like you should avoid using #4's.  Plus, I highly doubt that I'll be running trains of longer then 5 or 6 cars of 50 ft or shorter rolling stock. 

You should do okay with 40'-50' cars because the distance between the axels makes negotiating S-curves easier.  Anything longer than that and you will need to start looking at #5, #6 for yard ladders and such.

Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions

Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Georgia, USA
  • 583 posts
Posted by rayw46 on Monday, October 15, 2007 12:39 PM

I use #4 code 83 Atlas turnouts and have no problem with my SD60, C40-8 or rolling stock as long as Centerbeam Flats and long mill gondolas (of course they don't always look prototypical).  The only problem that I have had was when I purchased a front-runner (The two axel intermodal car).  Even though it has a fairly short wheel base, because the axels are fixed, there is not way it would go through my #4 turnouts and it barely made it around 22" radius curves.  I'm glad my LHS has a return policy.

Ray

Shoot for the stars; so you miss, you are only lost in space.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, October 15, 2007 12:18 PM

I use #4s except for mainline crossovers; I have no problems with long cars (even autoracks!) except for an Athearn Gen. 60 foot box; which likes to derail in some spots. I can run 6 axle units, including a C40-8, but it looks rather odd.

I woud be careful about code 83 #4s though, the rail size is smaller, which may lesson leeway. 

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Monday, October 15, 2007 11:34 AM
You can use 5 #4s as my picture shows a 3 switch ladder off the lead switch which was connect to a #4 crossover....

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, October 15, 2007 11:03 AM
Well, newbie response then, if I'm planning a five track freight yard alongside an industry, would I use 5 #4 turnouts to build the yard ladder, or would I need to use custom flextrack?  I'm trying to keep the 5 tracks to a total width of about 24 inches? 
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, October 15, 2007 10:14 AM
I use all #6 turnouts on the mainline, and passenger leads, and coach yard tracks. I use a lot of #4s in the freight yard to save space.
  • Member since
    January 2004
  • 790 posts
Posted by Tilden on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:56 AM

My experience is similiar to Brakie's.  I have custom llne #4's in yards and such and haven't had problems with the longer cars.  Yard speeds are limited however.

Generally speaking, anything on the main is best kept as large as possible.

Tilden

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:51 AM

I have use Atlas c83 Custom Line #4s on my past switching layouts with no problems while using 57 foot reefers,60 foot boxcars and 72 foot centerbeams..However the Standard line #4 may give you problems because of the sharper leg..

Here a picture on my old yard that is long gone.

 

 

 

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: Orig: Tyler Texas. Lived in seven countries, now live in Sundown, Louisiana
  • 25,640 posts
Posted by jeffrey-wimberly on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:19 AM
I use #4's on my HO layout because I'm pressed for space and N scale is not an option. I use 9 #4's for 3 spurs, a  side track and 2 crossovers. I also have 3 #5's in places where #4's wouldn't work well.

Running Bear, Sundown, Louisiana
          Joined June, 2004

Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running Bear
Space Mouse for president!
15 year veteran fire fighter
Collector of Apple //e's
Running Bear Enterprises
History Channel Club life member.
beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam


  • Member since
    January 2004
  • From: Crosby, Texas
  • 3,660 posts
Posted by cwclark on Monday, October 15, 2007 9:00 AM
As stated above ,# 4's work well for shorter equipment. You can also use them for 6 axle diesels if you go thru the turnout slowly.  My layout has a lot of # 4 turnouts and they don't cause any trouble just as long as I roll thru them slowly. The problem comes if you have very long equipment like a big boy or challenger locomotive or those real long 70' tankcars. the curve radius from the turnout is too sharp for the longer equipment. If you plan on running long equipment then go with the #6 or larger turnouts....chuck 

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Monday, October 15, 2007 8:59 AM
I'm using #4s on my switching layout but went with #5's on my basement layout even though I'm using small steam. I agree with what Lothar is saying though. I am limited in size though because of the 1885 era. If you do anything after about 1970 or so, you might wish you had a little more elbow room and even switching from #4 to #5 can be significant.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: Amish country Tenn.
  • 10,027 posts
Posted by loathar on Monday, October 15, 2007 8:51 AM
You just limit yourself to 40'-50' cars and shorter 4 axle locos and smaller steam. As long as you realize the limitations, they work OK.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
#4 turnouts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, October 15, 2007 8:47 AM

Can someone explain to me the downside to using #4 turnouts, if there is any?  I read a lot of articles and they always act like you should avoid using #4's.  I'm building a layout in a not very large space, so I'd like to keep my curves and turnouts to as tight as I can have them in some cases.  Plus, I highly doubt that I'll be running trains of longer then 5 or 6 cars of 50 ft or shorter rolling stock. 

 

Thanks,

Mike 

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!