Interesting problem. I put a #6 Code 83 Atlas Snap track turnout on my layout. Whenever I get a section built I hand roll a 40' boxcar along the section to make sure the rails align and there are no surprises. Well, I found one.
When going from the point rails towards the frog the car continues along the straight section and doesn't go onto the turnout section. Holding the throwbar actuator tightly makes no difference. The car does NOT derail.
So, is the problem because
1) The car is too light? I need to add 1.5 oz to meet RP20.1;
2) Is the track out of gauge?
3) does it need an electric throw enging to hold the critter in place?
Thank you.
If the car does not take the diverging route when the points are thrown for the diverging route the problem almost is certainly with the turnout. This must be especially true if you are using the same forty foot boxcar for all your tests.
.
The fact is does not derail has me a bit confused. The points must be so far off that it does not pick the flange for route direction, and the outer wheels do not end up in between the point and stock rails on the diverging side.
Weird, to say the least.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
RealGomer3) does it need an electric throw enging to hold the critter in place?
Atlas turnouts are not like Pecos. They do need either a powered switch machine or at least a manual ground throw to hold the points against the stock rails.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
If you can see that the points are in the correct position and held there firmly, then the top of the point is not flush with the top of the stock rail and the flange can't 'feel' it. The throw bar may be thin or low, or it could actually be that the point doesn't stay in position as the weight of the rolling stock runs over it and it flops over or deflects a bit.
I experienced a similar point rail problem with all seven of my not-all-that-old Atlas Snap Switch code 83 turnouts. After about only five years of light usage, all my locos began to derail and continuted doing so - but only when entering the divering route. The rolling stock never did because it never got to that point! However, exiting the diverging route was never a problem.
After measuring and re-measuring everything that could be measured, checking and re-checking all guages, eye balling the turnouts and the locos' wheels (which bumped upward at precisely the same two locations on the point rails) at table top level, assuring flat surfaces, visiting with the local hobby shop, etc., etc., I finally called M.B. Klein, where I had purchaed most of the turnouts.
The store (and presumably its cutomsers too) had also experienced the same problem with an entire batch of Atlas Snap Switch turnouts, to the extent that it returned a whole bundle. The diagnosed cause - with which I agree - is that the point rails are so thin and flimsy (Chinese made these days, of course) that they gradually - and ultimately - bend outward when the locos and rolling stock cross them, leading to derailment nearly 100% of the time. You can easily see the difference between the sturdy build of the Peco and Shinohara point rails when compared to those of Atlas. No contest.
I wonder if the low-quality build and materials of your turnouts are somehow creating this problem for you. Or, it could be you simply got a bad batch. Klein can probably help you out here.
My solution: I went with Walthers Shinohara turnouts (yet to be installed).
Kerry
Pictures would help.
Not to be too picky here, but an Atlas #6 is not a "snap switch", it is a "Custom Line" turnout.
A "snap switch" is a turnout that matches an 18" or 22" radius curve and has an all plastic frog.
It is possible for the points on an Atlas turnout to not be correctly seated in the throw bar. Again, pictures would help.
Considering the large number of people successfully using Atlas turnouts, this problem is most likely a rare defect, or damage to the turnout.
But as noted above, an Atlas turnout generally requires a switch machine or ground throw to hold the points correctly against the stock rails.
Sheldon
HOmainline The diagnosed cause - with which I agree - is that the point rails are so thin and flimsy (Chinese made these days, of course) that they gradually - and ultimately - bend outward when the locos and rolling stock cross them, leading to derailment nearly 100% of the time.
I noticed that, too. There was a discussion recently in HOn3 Critter's (Dave) thread about building a club layout. Dave was having problems with the bunch of Atlas turnouts the club had purchased. I had pointed out that the points were a plated, zinc alloy and very flimsy. They would flop (roll) and not press tightly against the stock rail.
Sure enough one broke on him while he was trying to adjust it. I believe they sent all them back, too.
HOmainlineMy solution: I went with Walthers Shinohara turnouts (yet to be installed).
My Shinohara/Walthers turnouts are going on 25 years old and are functioning very well, thank you.
Be extremely careful if you try to make any adjustments to the point. Yes, as Sheldon mentions, sometimes it is the throwbar not engaged fully in the eye on the turnout.
Good Luck, Ed
ATLANTIC CENTRALIt is possible for the points on an Atlas turnout to not be correctly seated in the throw bar. Again, pictures would help.
Sheldon makes a very good point. My club recently purchased about 60 Atlas Code 83 Customline #6 turnouts, and it was my job to tune them up. I found several where the point rails were not sitting properly on the throw bar. If you turn the turnout over so you can see the bottom of the throwbar you can see that there are tabs on the point rails with holes in them and these are supposed to sit on the fairly short pins on the throwbar. The tabs are easily displaced from the pins. That will allow the point rail to move out of position which can cause the problem that you are experiencing.
FYI, the pins are designed to allow the point rails to be disengaged from the throwbar fairly easily in order for the throwbar to be reversed. It's kind of a flimsy arrangement but apparently not too many people have problems with it.
While you are working on the turnouts, you might want to do a bit of a tuneup. On about half the turnouts I was working on, the tip of the point rails did not fit tightly against the stock rails. I had to bend the tips ever so slightly to close the gap. If the point rail tips do not fit tightly into the stock rails the wheels will 'pick' the point rails. In other words, they will catch on the tips of the point rails which may knock them off the rails. This is especially true of the leading trucks on steam engines.
While you are at it, check the tops of the point rails. I had a couple that had a tiny bit of flash that stuck up above the stock rails. Just another cause for derailments.
Another thing to check is the height of the frog. In almost all of the turnouts that I worked on the frog was higher than the frog rails (frog rails are the rails that lead up to the frog from the main and diverging routes). The difference in height will cause the wheels to bounce over the frog which, again, might cause derailments. Filing the frog down is simple, but be aware that the frog is easily dislodged from the turnout. Before starting to file the frog, make sure that there is absolutely no gap between the bottom of the frog and the turnout (use a magnifying glass). If there is any gap use some liquid CA (not gel) and clamp the frog tightly to the turnout while the CA sets.
Also, if you are going to solder a wire to the frog, be aware that excess heat can cause the frog to come loose. You must remove the colouring from the frog before attempting to solder anything to it. A better solution is to tap the hole in the frog for a brass 2-56 x 1/8" screw or bolt and then solder the frog feeder to the screw. I was able to solder the brass screws in place but the Atlas frogs really don't like to accept solder.
There is also a method of making sure that the point rails will never lose power due to oxidization or dirt fowling the contacts. It involves adding jumpers between the point rails and the closure rails, and between the closure rails and the stock rails. I won't go into the details here, but if you are planning on running two axle switchers or older locomotives where not all wheels pick up power, you may want to read this:
http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches.htm
After all that you may wonder if the Atlas turnouts are faulty right out of the box. They are not. They will probably work fine without doing anything to them, but they can be made to work better with a little tuning.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
gmpullmanI noticed that, too. There was a discussion recently in HOn3 Critter's (Dave) thread about building a club layout. Dave was having problems with the bunch of Atlas turnouts the club had purchased. I had pointed out that the points were a plated, zinc alloy and very flimsy. They would flop (roll) and not press tightly against the stock rail. Sure enough one broke on him while he was trying to adjust it. I believe they sent all them back, too.
Hi Real Gomer and Ed:
Please let me clarify this discussion a bit:
The turnout with the point rail tab that broke was an Atlas Customline Code 83 #8, not a #6. The difference is important because the two turnouts are not made the same way. The #8 turnout had cast point rails whereas the #6 had stamped point rails. I'm not sure which of the two turnouts is the more recent design, or even if Atlas has changed the designs, but the important point is that the cast point rails on the #8 were very fragile whereas the stamped point rails on the #6 were not easily broken. (Edit: I just signed up for the Atlas forums. My membership application is still pending acceptance. Once I get onto the Atlas forum I will ask which turnout designs are the current ones). I can't speak as to whether or not the #6 point rails are too flimsy for reliable operation because we don't have the layout running yet, but I will say that, to me, the Atlas stamped point rails are as sturdy as Peco point rails. I can't see there being a problem with them. Fortunately we only bought one #8 turnout for test purposes. One of the point rails on that turnout was noticably out of alignment, hence the attempt to straighten it out which led to the point rail tab breaking off. We are using the Atlas #6 turnouts.
FWIW, I gave the damaged #8 turnout to another club member who thought he could repair it easily by replacing the throw bar with a copper clad circuit board tie. Unfortunately he discovered that the cast point rails do not accept solder so the turnout is a write-off unless he can get a replacement point rail from Atlas.
Just to clarify, the code 83 #4 and #6 points have always been stamped, and the #8 points have always been cast.
I suspect Atlas felt the cast points were necessary on the #8 due to longer length.
And, I know lots of modelers, most with large layouts, who have decades of pretty heavy use on thse turnouts with no problems, despite their "cheap" design.
I have nearly 100 of them myself.
This has happened to one or two of my #6s as well. As others have mentioned, sometimes the point rails aren't totally seated in the throw bar tabs correctly, either because of assembly QC or a bit of flash. Try popping them out and reseating them.
- Douglas
MisterBeasley Atlas turnouts are not like Pecos. They do need either a powered switch machine or at least a manual ground throw to hold the points against the stock rails.
I doubt that the Atlas turnout is bad. Those point rails really need to be snug up against the stock rails. I sometimes use a track nail to hold the throwbar in a fixed position while testing.
Rich
Alton Junction
I even glued (with CA) those flimsy point rails in the throwbars once they began coming loose each time the turnout was engaged. Didn't do any good in eliminating derailments.
RealGomerSo, is the problem because 1) The car is too light? I need to add 1.5 oz to meet RP20.1; 2) Is the track out of gauge? 3) does it need an electric throw enging to hold the critter in place?
It seems to me there is more troubleshooting one could do when faced with an irritating problem such as this. For example, does using the same car but pointed in the other direction produce the same result? Using different cars? Using a bunch of cars coupled together? Is there gunk build up on the wheel treats? Are the wheels Code 88?
When you say you hand roll the car - are you pushing it and letting go so it rolls on its own through the turnout? Or if you keep your finger on top of the car could you be subtly pushing it away from the diverging route?
Sometimes there are strange interactions between particular cars and particular turnouts, and I try not to draw hasty conclusions from testing with one car.
He says the car is too light. So - does lightly putting your finger on top of the car take care of the problem or change the results?
He asks if the track is out of gauge. You're the one with the track - and presunmably an NMRA standards gauge to check it with. Could be. Or maybe the wheels on the car could be. Or both.
Is the track on the level? This can also affect how flanges follow the points.
This is to be a sure an odd problem even given the nature of Atlas turnouts. Short of all of us going to RealGomer's house we're shooting in the dark.
Dave Nelson
HOmainline I even glued (with CA) those flimsy point rails in the throwbars once they began coming loose each time the turnout was engaged. Didn't do any good in eliminating derailments.
Really? I could have told you in advance that would turn out badly.
The points need to pivot as the throw bar moves.
Defects do happen, and sometimes they happen to whole batch of product.
But I have operated hundreds of hours on numerious layouts built with hundreds of ATLAS Custom Line code 83 turnouts without any of these failures described here.
One guy I know, in total defiance to even my own comments above, has operated his layout without switch machines or ground throws on his ATLAS #6 turnouts for nearly 20 years now.
OK, 20 years ago was a different production run, maybe a different factory in China, but they work fine......
Well, Choo-choo Charlies, i hooked two cars together (2.6 oz & 2.7 oz although both should be closer to 4 oz) and pushed then pulled them through. The outside diverter rail definitely moved away from the outside rail. Interestingly, when throwing the switch for straight thru traffic there's definite click as the throw locks in place. When moving it to the bypass position, no click or locking. I bought the switch with a gift card so I'm not out any real money. All curves are 22".
Here's the link on Atlas site of the switch in question:
https://shop.atlasrr.com/p-81-ho-code-83-manual-snap-switch-right.aspx
RealGomer Well, Choo-choo Charlies, i hooked two cars together (2.6 oz & 2.7 oz although both should be closer to 4 oz) and pushed then pulled them through. The outside diverter rail definitely moved away from the outside rail. Interestingly, when throwing the switch for straight thru traffic there's definite click as the throw locks in place. When moving it to the bypass position, no click or locking. I bought the switch with a gift card so I'm not out any real money. All curves are 22". Here's the link on Atlas site of the switch in question: https://shop.atlasrr.com/p-81-ho-code-83-manual-snap-switch-right.aspx
Well now we know the problem, that is a "Snap Switch", which is NOT a #6.
Snap Switches are not sized by number, they are sized by radius, 22" or 18".
And your further description of the problem explains it. That little gismo on the side with the slide button, that is a the manual switch machine or "ground throw" people here have been refering to.
Your switch is fine, but the manual switch machine is broken inside. It clips on, look at the bottom of the switch. Get a new one, all will be well.
Additional note to the other posters following this.
I have about 100 Atlas custom line #6 turnouts in my train room. Some still installed on sections of the old layout, some never installed but old stock, 15-20 years, some salvaged from sections of the old layout already dismantled, and a few brand new ones just purchased a few months ago.
I took a few minutes to run some quick tests and to compare the old and new production turnouts.
Guess what? No trouble found, on old or new, several different fgreight cars rolled through turnouts without switchmachines without issue, thru either route, simply by positioning the points and not touching anthing while rolling the car thru.
BUT, I did notice one dramatic difference between the old and new turnouts. The brand new #6's, about a dozen of them, do not have the raised frog problem common on my older ones that needed correction by filing them down.
Otherwise, except a slight difference in the color of the ties, old and new are made exactly the same, with of course the improvement of no raised frog on the newer ones.
I'm going to get in trouble here, but here goes. Are we that brainwashed? Shinohara, PECO? If it has a "foreign name" and/or costs more it must be "better" than the product with the long standing American company name?
Don't get me wrong, those other companies make great products, I have used them in the past, and still use Shinohara (Walthers) turnouts for slip switches.
But for regular turnouts, Atlas works fine for me, have for 20 pus years.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI'm going to get in trouble here, but here goes. Are we that brainwashed? Shinohara, PECO? If it has a "foreign name" and/or costs more it must be "better" than the product with the long standing American company name?
The name of the company has nothing to do with it.
ATLANTIC CENTRALwith of course the improvement of no raised frog on the newer ones.
This ^ is likely the cause of some of the not using Atlas brand, plus the issues stated by others.
I have no experience with Atlas turnouts. Ive used PECO, Micro Engineering and Shinohara only. Until recently those three were the only source of certain numbered turnouts. Atlas has caught up.
That having been said, Im not buying any more commercial turnouts. I can watch a video on the internet and copy what I see.
BMMECNYC ATLANTIC CENTRAL I'm going to get in trouble here, but here goes. Are we that brainwashed? Shinohara, PECO? If it has a "foreign name" and/or costs more it must be "better" than the product with the long standing American company name? The name of the company has nothing to do with it. ATLANTIC CENTRAL with of course the improvement of no raised frog on the newer ones. This ^ is likely the cause of some of the not using Atlas brand, plus the issues stated by others. I have no experience with Atlas turnouts. Ive used PECO, Micro Engineering and Shinohara only. Until recently those three were the only source of certain numbered turnouts. Atlas has caught up. That having been said, Im not buying any more commercial turnouts. I can watch a video on the internet and copy what I see.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I'm going to get in trouble here, but here goes. Are we that brainwashed? Shinohara, PECO? If it has a "foreign name" and/or costs more it must be "better" than the product with the long standing American company name?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL with of course the improvement of no raised frog on the newer ones.
Well, that's fine. I went the other direction.
In 1974 I was building my own from scratch. Before that I assembled TruScale turnouts from kits and hand layed TruScale self gauging roadbed.
But once Atlas improved their product and introduced their code 83 line, no more scratch built track (except when needed) for me.
I have even learned how to take the Atlas turnout and modify it into a large radius curved turnout, since no one makes curved turnouts for the radius of curves common on my layout, 36" and above.
If you are building a layout with 10 or 20 turnouts, building your own is not so bad. But with well over 100, and thru staging yards for about 30 trains, I don't have the time, or the desire.
But as it turns out, the OP does not have a turnout you or I are likely to use anyway (except I have used them in industrial street trackage), and from his description it is clearly broken. Maybe defective, maybe broken after delivery, how can we know?
So we have more rants about "cheap" Atlas turnouts, while tens of thousands of them work just fine for modelers all over the country.
If 100 people buy something and one or two have trouble, it may be the bad luck of a defect, or it may be the user, but it is unlikely to be a core design failure/flaw or sub-standard materials.
Happy to pay $14 rather than $26......
Happy to not have to trim diverging routes to make crossovers and yard ladders.
Happy to not have little snap springs on throw bars.
And so on......
Understand, I have every respect for those who set higher standards for their modeling, hand layed track, sergent couplers, fine scale wheels, etc - I came from that kind of modeling to a large degree. I just reached a point where it was no fun - 50 car trains are more fun.......and 30 of them are even more fun
BMMECNYCThe name of the company has nothing to do with it. [snip] ...Ive used PECO, Micro Engineering and Shinohara only.
I didn't care what the name was, either.
One of the well-known model railroad suppliers in my area had a layout with all Shinohara code 83 track and I was impressed with how it looked and as BMMECNYC says, back in 1995 Shinohara had a comparatively huge selection of turnouts. Tie spacing and spike heads on their flex track was excellent as well.
Then they added code 83 #10 turnouts to their product line. Those make for some pretty nice looking main-line crossovers .
I'm not even sure Atlas offered code 83 in 1995? So at that time, for me, there was only one logical choice.
I do have about two dozen Atlas #8s in my passenger coach yard and only had a point problem on one of them.
Thank You, Ed
ATLANTIC CENTRAL HOmainline I even glued (with CA) those flimsy point rails in the throwbars once they began coming loose each time the turnout was engaged. Didn't do any good in eliminating derailments. Really? I could have told you in advance that would turn out badly. The points need to pivot as the throw bar moves. Sheldon
HOmainline
I even glued (with CA) those flimsy point rails in the throwbars once they began coming loose each time the turnout was engaged. Didn't do any good in eliminating derailments. Really? I could have told you in advance that would turn out badly.
Pivot? As pop out entirely?!
gmpullman BMMECNYC The name of the company has nothing to do with it. [snip] ...Ive used PECO, Micro Engineering and Shinohara only. I didn't care what the name was, either. One of the well-known model railroad suppliers in my area had a layout with all Shinohara code 83 track and I was impressed with how it looked and as BMMECNYC says, back in 1995 Shinohara had a comparatively huge selection of turnouts. Tie spacing and spike heads on their flex track was excellent as well. Then they added code 83 #10 turnouts to their product line. Those make for some pretty nice looking main-line crossovers . I'm not even sure Atlas offered code 83 in 1995? So at that time, for me, there was only one logical choice. I do have about two dozen Atlas #8s in my passenger coach yard and only had a point problem on one of them. Thank You, Ed
BMMECNYC The name of the company has nothing to do with it. [snip] ...Ive used PECO, Micro Engineering and Shinohara only.
Again, Shinohara makes great track, I worked in a hobby shop and sold lots of it.
In 1995, Atlas was just starting there code 83 line, and yes Shinohara has always had a big selection, even when they only offered code 70 and code 100.
Point remains I have operated hundreds of hours on a dozen or more layouts, totaling hundreds of Atlas Custom Line code 83 turnouts. Not one of those layout owners had all these "problems".
ATLANTIC CENTRALJust to clarify, the code 83 #4 and #6 points have always been stamped, and the #8 points have always been cast.
Thanks for clarifying that Sheldon.
Its sometimes amazing how complicated we can make a simple problem.
To keep the Atlas points against the stock rails, stopping them from sliding away, wedge a piece of thin styrene under the throw bar. The tension keeps things held in place.
Paint it brown. Replace it in a few years if it loosens up. Paint the next one brown.
Here is a quote from the original post which started off this 3 ring circus:
Holding the throwbar actuator tightly makes no difference. The car does NOT derail.
Everyone seems to keep saying the issue is the throw bar isn't tighly holding the points over to one side. But the OP states explicitly that they are being held tightly, but the car goes in a different direction that the points are thrown and doesn't derail.
Was that conundrum ever answered?
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Yes, later he posts this, his problem is clearly a broken manual swtich machine on a snap switch, not a #6.
He has not been back since I responded to that post....
riogrande5761 Here is a quote from the original post which started off this 3 ring circus: Holding the throwbar actuator tightly makes no difference. The car does NOT derail. Everyone seems to keep saying the issue is the throw bar isn't tighly holding the points over to one side. But the OP states explicitly that they are being held tightly, but the car goes in a different direction that the points are thrown and doesn't derail. Was that conundrum ever answered?
Nevermind