Let me begin by saying that I mean neither to step on any toes nor offend any forum contributors' sensibilities, but I'm often amused at the amount of construction overkill some have said is necessary in order to ensure a well-running layout. Take, for instance, the bomb shelter-like benchwork (3/4" birch plywood on L-girders spaced at 12", etc) that's been described that just makes my jaw drop. But I digress...
There have been forum members saying it's important to install feeder lines on every section of track (which gives about a 3 foot interval between feeders), lest we run the risk of poor running. I have begun laying track on my new layout - I presently have a touch over 20 feet of the mainline laid. The track joints are soldered on curves but otherwise simply butted with rail joiners along straight or gently curving areas. Last night I rigged up my old MRC Throttlepack (the one with the gold casing, that I've owned for about 30 years) with a couple of wires at one far end of the track and test ran some engines. My Protos ran the full length of the completed line flawlessly. Ditto my Genesis 2-8-2.
So, as an experiment, I got out Old Grandaddy - a 30-year-old Athearn SD9 that's been sitting in a box for the last four years and hasn't received a lick of maintenance of any sort in probably 10 years. I set it on the line and cracked open the throttle. It ran at a virtual crawl the full length of the line multiple times without stalling even once.
So to summarize, I ran an old beater of a locomotive at low speed off of an ancient power pack jerry-rigged to the rails and there was no perceptible loss of performance in the engine when it was 20 feet away from the feeders. And to boot, I'm certainly no expert at tracklaying. So what's the necessity of powering the rails every few feet?
"I am lapidary but not eristic when I use big words." - William F. Buckley
I haven't been sleeping. I'm afraid I'll dream I'm in a coma and then wake up unconscious. -Stephen Wright
And I don't want to be obtuse either, but why don't you put that straight stretch of track in a box for ten years. After corrosion and wood movement from humidity have done their thing, come back and tell us how everything is running.
Good luck to you.
Lynda
Now to really test your theory.
Paint the rails and weather the track.
Inatall ballast and glue per normal procedures.
Clean track per normal procedures.
Run trains for 5 years.
Then see if your butt joints and rail joiners still provide the same level of conductivity as trackage that only relies on soldered feeder connections.
The point of the feeders is to provide long term reliability on the layout.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
There's nothing wrong with dialogue; I'm a writer, I love dialogue!
The thread below adds excellent issues to the mix; per ballasting, weathering, etc. I don't think the question is whether your "unleadered" track sections work today, but if they'll continue functioning efficiently in five or ten years. That you've used old track is probably a moot issue. When you rejoined the sections, or even jostled them, you created enough friction to refresh the contact areas between rail and joiner. The fact is, you may have good contact for some time, but through corrosion, sans well-soldered contacts of some nature, resistance will build. It'll happen slowly, and you may not even notice it until electrical current is sufficiently interrupted. Think of the line of current flowing from powerpack to locomotive as a continuous link. All along the circuit, you've got many opportunities for electrical inefficiency. Doesn't it seem prudent to minimize all potential failures under your control? Now, if you enjoy digging out ballast, adding leader wires later, and reballasting, that's okay too.
You're absolutely right: it's not technically necessary. My first layout, an old Triang-Hornby set, had a clip that connected the power pack to the track. It fed a big figure-eight layout with a few sidings and the locomotives only needed the occasional push. As a kid, I didn't care.
Fast-forward a few decades, and now I'm feeding a larger, more complex layout not just track power but operating instructions as well. And for some unknown but clearly age-related reason, having to push a stalled locomotive now irritates me. Yes, it's more trouble adding feeders to every section, but it pays dividends in trouble-free operation. Do you want your trouble now or later?
Mononguy63
Yes you can run a layout with 2 wires and nothing soldered. Just about everyone does that with their under the Christmas tree layout.
Now as the others have said – down the road – if and when you go DCC you will find out that DCC is much more critical with good electrical connections.
Many have found this out after the fact as they built their layout and tested it with DC and then decided to go to DCC. Nothing worked. Engines stalled all of the time, sound engines had scratchy sounds, unexplained shorts or runaways.
And they tried to blame the manufacturer of the DCC system! The DCC mfg were producing junk!
I helped one club figure out why their layout (which had been working ok for 10 years with DC and was working barely with DCC for a year or two) needed rewired. They had wire sizes for the buss wires from #20 to #14 and the drop wires were few and far between. They were connected to the buss wires with Wire nuts Scotch locks and some were just twisted together.
They kept telling me that it worked for years this way, why wouldn’t it now. I had to explain to them that while the wire could carry the current needed to run the trains, it was the signal that was getting lost in the noise generated by the engines running, resistance of the wire and the poor wire connections caused from years of corrosion. Several members stated that the layout had not really operated all that well with DC.
Well once they decided to rewire the layout properly (which was a lot of work) they could not believe how everything smoothed out!
I decided yearly on that I did not want a maintenance nightmare with my new layout. I have been a member of a club for 23 years and we had the same problems. Everyone wanted to take shortcuts with the wiring.
My home layout is as big or bigger as some club layouts (25 x 75ft – with almost 3000 ft of track). I run # 12 stranded wire. I put drops every 3 feet and on all 3 ends of every turnouts. And all of my track joints are soldered. I do not have any electrical problems PERIOD! I am now into my 7th year with the layout. We have 12 hour Ops sessions, several times a year, with 40 operators running the layout. The sound engines never miss a beat. And I haven’t had to clean the track in 3 1/2 years! The use of metal polish corrected that problem! Before I used the metal polish I was cleaning the track before every one of my twice-monthly Ops sessions. That was getting old real quick.
Now I do feel that a lot of modelers get carried away with the bench work but the vast majority do not build the bench work strong enough to begin with and run into warped roadbed which causes way too many track derailments. And they absolutely refuse to do any thing about it just complain how junk the engines or cars are that they won’t stay on the track.
BOB H – Clarion, PA
When you add DCC to the equation, with its high frequency square wave AC signal, the rules change. Inadequate feeder wires, rail resistance, and corrosion within the rail joiners can cause a loss of control and either runaway trains or dead spots.
I'd rather go to the trouble of installing what some consider to be "overkill" feeder wires now than having to go back in a few years and try to add them after buildings and scenery are in the way.
mononguy63 wrote:Lynda, that adds another degree of difficuly to the dive. The track I was using was salvaged from my old layout. It's easily 10 years old and is anything but clean. So we have all of these factors saying this shouldn't be performing well, yet it's working. I'm just trying to start a dialogue here.
I have just started wiring and laying my track and have placed feeder wires on each segment of a staging yard, however, they are spaced a bit farther than every 3 feet. I understand both sides of the feeder wire spaced every 3 feet debate, and have come to the conclusion that it is better to err on the side of more is better, than the less is more theory.
The feeder wire every 3 feet camp works to overcome the failed track joiner connections issue by incorporating electrical connections to every piece of track. This theory also helps to prevent the need to re-wire track down the road when scenery is in place. I understand the reasoning behind this technique, it makes sense to me, while it may be overkill, and it does reduce or eliminate the possibility of dropped electrical connections on sections of track.
Now what I have learned from the sage advice of the "been there and done that" and "learn from others mistakes" group, and Alan Gartner's Wiring for DCC it is suggested that a feeder be placed about every 10 feet or so for Code 100 track and every 6 feet for Code 83 and lower sized track. And for weathered rail the suggestion is to solder or wire every section of track. Again this is a suggestion. Now the recommendation is a basic rule of thumb, that every piece of track should be soldered to something, either another piece of track or preferably a feeder. Makes sense to me that to ensure constant electrical connectivity a combination of soldered joiners and feeders will maintain a higher level of performance over the long haul. These suggestions and recommendations will also reduce the number of possible "points of failure" resulting from poor electrical contacts.
See Wiring For DCC
Ryan BoudreauxThe Piedmont Division Modeling The Southern Railway, Norfolk & Western & Norfolk Southern in HO during the merger eraCajun Chef Ryan
Just one other thing to think about on this issue. I work in industrial maintenance in an auto manufacturing plant. On any wiring we do, we use a very simple method for planning ahead. Let's say for example that whatever it is we are wiring in needs #18 wire according to the codes and specs (Ugly's book or other source). When we run the wire, we will go one gauge larger to leave room for the future. In this example we would wire using #16. It costs very little more at the "front end", but in the future you will have capacity for better/more usage and upgrades. Over the Christmas shutdown we added some equipment at one end of a major line in our shop. While we did have to add some wiring, we were able to reuse most of the existing because it was capable of handling the requirements of more and newer equipment.
I do the same thing when working on a house, go a little bigger than you "need" and you won't have to worry about it in the future. Most of my house wiring is #12, specs call for #14. The rest is all larger stuff like the well pump, the water heater, etc. I have never had a wiring related problem and don't have to worry if I decide to add an outlet (or maybe a siding to put into train terms) to an existing circuit. I would always tell anyone to spend the money on the structural and electrical stuff early and prevent future hassles. While you may not "need" it, it sure is nice to know that you are covered on the important stuff.
Good Luck, Morpar
I agree. Add paint, ballast, weathering, and DCC, and now you're really tempting fate unless every ection of rail has a direct connection to a feeder. One way to reduce the number of feeder drops is to solder 2 or more lengths of rail together and run one set of feeders to that section. For example, I may solder a set of terminal joiners between two 30" lengths of flextrack. But, my track never goes more than 5-6 feet without feeders, and depending on the distribution of turnouts, sometimes feeders are less than a foot apart.
Think of it as insurance. At soem point one or more of your mechanical connections (and probably even a soldered one) will fail.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Soldering a drop to every track joint is wasteful overkill, electrically. You accomplish the same thing by soldering a drop to every other rail joint such that the rail on either side of the drop is hardwired. The price of doing this is reliance on a single solder joint for direct electrical feed, but...it becomes immediately obvious where the problem is should one ever develop.
The upside is an expansion joint every six feet.
If, on the other hand, multiple feeds to a section of track are unnecessary, then there should be no objection to twisted wire connections under the table, taped and unsoldered. If this idea makes you shudder, and it should, then you can't advocate electrical feeds that depend on mechanical joiner connections to power the whole layout.
The key is balance.
Over the years I have also notice a lot of block wiring overkill as well as other wiring overkill.
As far as DCC Digi Traxx suggest a feeder wire every 6-8 foot which sounds reasonable to me.
Now,You can operate a 4X8 foot layout with 2 wires-from the power pack to the track-just ask any 10 year old kid or adult with their first 4x8 loop layout. Heck most use snap track and runs their trains for hours trouble free.Even I have built small industrial switching layouts using snap track and as I recall one early 4 x 8 foot layout.
As far as soldering the rail joints the only time I have done that is on curves made from flex track.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Installing feeders in every section of track is certainly necessary for a trouble-free electrical system if you don't know how to install rail joiners properly. If you do know how to install rail joiners properly, then I think the claims of probable future problems are rather overstated by most folks.
Parts of my layout were constructed over seven years ago (progress is very slow!). Those sections spent some time in a non-climate controlled storage room (very cold and dry to very hot and humid), plus a couple of years in the basement before I controlled the humidity there. Prior to climate-controlling the basement I had some problems with trackwork kinking due to benchwork expansion / contraction from humidity swings. I average a set of feeders every 15 feet or so - every four to five sections of track. I've never had a problem with electrical continuity in the rails.
I'm not saying no one has ever had problems if they properly install the rail joiners - that would be every bit as arrogant as flatly claiming one WILL have problems if one doesn't attach feeders to every separate piece of rail on the layout. Whatever may be - my method has worked very well for me, now and on previous layouts.
Here's how I install joiners to ensurecontinuing good electrical transmission: 1. Clean the rail ends on the top and bottom of the rail base (inside and outside the web on the top of the base) using a cutoff wheel running at low speed in a variable-speed Dremel. At the same time, put very small bevels on the ends of the rail base. 2. Install never-before used rail joiners on one section of track, then align the mating section both horizontally and vertically, and slide it into place against the first piece. Re-using a rail joiner practically guarantees a looser grip on the rails, where paint, dust and debris can collect and slowly inhibit electrical flow. Wiggling the rail joiner around excessively to start it on the rail does the same thing. I wiggle the joiner side to side just the slightest bit, if need be, and right at the end of the joiner to start it onto the rail. Once started, I slide the joiner straight onto the rail without further wiggling. If the joiner slides on easily, I remove and discard it and install one that resists installation somewhat - it's gripping the rail and actually scoring it a bit as it's installed.
Feeders every section is one of the "electron counters'" (to coin a phrase) favorite "rules," so I expect disagreement. But I speak from direct experience, and that can't be so easily debunked.
Bottom line - good electrical conductivity is an absolute requirement, but there are options to the solder-every-joint or drop-feeders-every-section approaches. Choose the approach with which you're most comfortable, and go for it!
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
Having been involved in building layouts in everything from dessicated desert to tropical beachfront venues, here's the system I have come to prefer:
Install insulated joiners wherever your control system, signaling plan or good sense indicates.
Use uninsulated rail joiners to assure rail-end alignment.
Solder one feeder to the rail somewhere between each pair of insulated rail joiners.
Solder a jumper (a little omega-shaped bit of wire) around each uninsulated rail joiner. Don't solder the joiners themselves.
Installed this way my electrical distribution has always been bulletproof, and I use a lot less wire than the 'direct wire every piece of track' folks. (In case you haven't priced any lately, wire isn't cheap.)
Just my . Feel free to disagree.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - MZL, analog DC)
I have never been sorry where I overbuilt, wish I could say the same for where I hadn't.
Enjoy
Paul
IRONROOSTER wrote: I have never been sorry where I overbuilt, wish I could say the same for where I hadn't.EnjoyPaul
Over-engineering is the way to go. :)
Dave Loman
My site: The Rusty Spike
"It's a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your 2 cents in.... hey, someone's making a penny!"
After all of these contributions, it appears to me that the joiners are the weak link. My experience is that joiners should...should...do a good job of maintaining contact with each rail, even when they are weathered. The fact is, they don't. They don't because they get stressed upon installation, or stressed when they are subjected to the rigours of 16 oz locomotives passing overhead. No matter how well one creates the tracks' roadbed, the various easements and supervelevations that we insist are necessary at scale mean torsion and differential support for the rails across from one another.
My name is Crandell, and I don't lay rail very well. But, I'm getting better. Until I am highly skilled, I will continue to rely on soldered feeders to cover pairs of 3' sections of flextrack. One feeder every 6' is eminently sensible, and saves a lot of time in cutting wire, stripping, drilling tiny holes, etc. In the meantime, one feeder/joiner pair is the way to go for me. Keeps it all manageable.
Myth? Yes and no.
Case 1: My temorary simply 4x8 oval. Used bachmann EZ-Track. 22" radius curves at each end plus however many straights I could fit in the 4x8 space. Two sets of feeders, equally spaced around the loop. DC and DCC, locos slowed when they were the furthest from the feeders. ANd this was new EZ Track, it hadn't been used over and over again, which usually results in loose joiners.
Case 2: my permanent layout. 8x12, double tracked loop plus sidings and a yard. As soon as I completed the track for the first loop, I attached ONE pair of feeders to my Zephyr to test run it and had NO problems with locos slowing even all the way around the other side of the layout. Track was Atlas Code 83 flex and Atlas Code 83 turnouts.
Result: inconclusive. Track type and quality plays a big part in the whole thing, obviously.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
There have been some excellent points made by the responders to this thread. What it all breaks down to in my mind is this:
I have a layout that we set up every Christmas of a large village, on 6 tables of 4'X4' each. They are made of 3/4" plywood with 2x3 supports at each end to join sections of 4x4 tables. I have to get up on these tables to set the tracks up first before the wife sets her buildings on the tables. So to answer one of the originator of this thread's questions, because it needs to hold my 185 pounds! That's the constructions side.
Now for the electrical side of the question. I have been setting up this layout for 20 years. It uses EZ Track, about 75 linear feet up grades, around curves, over the river and through the woods to grandmothers house. I have ONE feeder to the tracks (DC). The system gets stored in cardboards boxes in the basement level of the house for 11 months through humidity of summer, and winter dryness. The train runs perfect (HO) every year. I have had ONE problem in all these years, a bad connector. For DC this works. This would not be a good way electrically dor DCC. This should answewr the electrical question for DC only!!
My layout will be DCC, HO guage, and will have track feeders every section. Why? Because I know how to solder, I don't mind soldering, I don't want to fool around crawling all over my around the room layout for an electrical issue that I can prevent from the onset. Also, with POSI loks to connect the feeders underneith the tables, it is so easy to connect each section of track. DCC is not 60 cycle (Hz) frequency, it is in the 900Mz band, wiring gauge, connections, resistance, capacitance and inductance, all play a role in good performance, some to a greater degree, some to a lesser degree. For instance, I will twist my buss wires at least 3 turns per foot. Why? To prevent any possibility of RF interference. Ist absolutely needed? Maybe, maybe not, each circumstance/location to interference is varied. I will also use a POWER LINE regulator for the electronics, such as APC 1500. Why? Because power line voltage spikes up and down all day, and their is all sorts of noise on each cycle of the power line sine wave. This is really bad news for delicate electronic equipment. The cost for prevention makes this a no brainer for a one time purchase of a Power Line Conditioner.
rrinker wrote: Myth? Yes and no. Case 1: My temorary simply 4x8 oval. Used bachmann EZ-Track. 22" radius curves at each end plus however many straights I could fit in the 4x8 space. Two sets of feeders, equally spaced around the loop. DC and DCC, locos slowed when they were the furthest from the feeders. ANd this was new EZ Track, it hadn't been used over and over again, which usually results in loose joiners. Case 2: my permanent layout. 8x12, double tracked loop plus sidings and a yard. As soon as I completed the track for the first loop, I attached ONE pair of feeders to my Zephyr to test run it and had NO problems with locos slowing even all the way around the other side of the layout. Track was Atlas Code 83 flex and Atlas Code 83 turnouts. Result: inconclusive. Track type and quality plays a big part in the whole thing, obviously. --Randy
Is the EZ Track steel (black roadbed) or nickel silver (grey)? You'll get a much greater voltage drop with steel, which is the poorer conductor.
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
To start off with, there is nothing wrong with over engineering. Up until recently the phone system in the U.S.A. was over engineered to handle everything except for Mother's Day. That is why one could always get a dial tone. This same thing is true for Model Railroads. The more over engineered things are the less likely problems will occur in the future.
As an opposite example, for Christmas I ran the trains around the tree and the room(sort of a infolded figure 8), so the outside track loop was probably 25x16. Fn3 scale on mostly LBG track. Cheepo Bachmann 4-6-0 and Kalamazoo 4-4-0 locomotives. DCC powered connected to the track with standard 22 gauge solid bell wire. I didn't even "connect" the wire to the track. I just shoved the wires into a railjoiner and pressed the track together. It ran just fine, almost constantly, for the three holiday weeks. The only issue was children and dogs knocking the cars off and bumping the track where it crossed the entrance to the room. Would I ever wire a permanent layout this way - no. Does this bust an overengineering myth, no. What it does show is that what will work in this one specific case vs. what we actually do to attempt to account for generic cases.
Feeders at every joint is definitely overkill. I do every other joint which means every section of rail is fed directly from a feeder and the loco is never more than 3 feet from the nearest feeder. Even this much wiring might be more than necessary for reliable running but it doesn't hurt and requires a small investment of time and money to be on the safe side. During initial construction and testing, I hadn't soldered all the feeder wires yet my test runs ran with few problems. Every once in a while I encountered a railjoiner that was less than snug and I would occasionally get a stall. With every other joint now wired, I don't have to worry if a rail joiner works its way loose.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
What I could never understand is why modelers always want to shortcut the 3 most important things when building a layout.
Benchwork
Trackwork
Electrical wiring
I was always told these are the foundation of the model railroad.
I have been in model railroading for over 40 years now and have visited hundreds of layouts. It is amazing how many of those layouts have problems with one or more of those three.
Benchwork while it does not have to built like house it still has to hold the track work level without buckling and causing track problems.
I have seen track laid on ¼” plywood and the risers were 3 feet apart. When the engine crossed over that part the roadbed would actually move. And then others used the sticky tar based roadbed and the track kept coming loose, causing all sorts of kinks.
And the Trackwork, is it so hard to actually get down and site the rail jointers to see if there might be a kink both vertical and horizontal. Apparently it is as almost 90% of the layouts have kinks in the Trackwork. And this includes those that have been in the model magazines. Now I know my layout has a few but as I find them I spend the time getting them straightened out.
You know there is a problem when the owner of the layout waits for the train to pass a certain place so he can reach out and rerail the engine as it goes by or a car derails at the exact same place time after time but not to worry as it jumps back on just down the track, go figure!
And the electrical, this is where most of the arguments are. If the train makes it around the layout even though it slows down a little once in a while, then I guess it is OK!
We had a problem at our club with the Lionel layout that way. We used Gargraves 3ft track sections and everyone had #12 drop wires on them. The Buss wires were #10. Now why would we need to go this heavy? Well in a club environment we didn’t want to have to work on the wiring ever again and when the paying public are there the trains had better be running or they won’t be back!
About this time the 3M scotch locks were all the rage as everyone said that the were the best thing since sliced bread. So we used them. They went together great and the speed of assemble sure cut down on the layout building time. Everything worked well for 7 years. But then we started having problems. At first we thought that the transformers were giving problems as the trains would slow down a little on some sections of track and then the next time everything worked great. Now this display would run for 12 hours a day weeks at a time. As the years moved on the problems kept getting worse. We would try and do voltage drop tests and would check out the connections or change out the transformers. Everything would go back to normal for a month or two, but then it would come back again. One thing I have to say is that the Club Layouts were located in an old basement in the downtown area.
We finally had to run the layout using 2 transformers and set the block switches so that we could jack up the voltage on certain sections of the track loops just to keep the trains from slowing down, during the show, and then we would go back to trouble shooting the problem afterwards.
We finally traced it down to the Scotchlocks! There was corrosion forming where they blade contacted the wires. As we would be testing the wiring we would be moving the wires and it would make good contact again. But weeks after word another bunch of the Scotchlocks would begin acting up. We finally tore the layout down and began rebuilding a new one. This time we soldered every connection. We also used the crimp on wire ends and they all get crimped and SOLDERED !
When we built the Club’s HO layout we soldered every connection and all of the track has drop wires. After it was all said and done it has been in operation for over 15 years now and there are no problems, if we just could keep the members from tearing up the track to make changes! The layout started out as with Dc control. We built tit with #12 buss wires way back in 1992. We never figured on having any other type of control system on it. We just built it bulletproof from the beginning.
Then we learned about the Keller Onboard analogue command control and decided to go that route. Keller’s instructions suggested that we should be using heavy wire which we had. We just disconnected the DC units and replaced them with the New system. No problems from day one. Then DCC finally got itself sorted out and the Club made a decision to go that route. Guess what? The wiring recommendations were the same #12. Gee, what luck the layout was already wired that way. Nothing more than removing the Keller system and in went the Digitrax system. And again no problems!
So when I built my latest layout I figured that using the same techniques, which are probably over kill to most modelers, would keep me from having any maintenance problems down the road. And so far I don’t. With 2200 square feet of layout I don’t want any problems as I am not getting any younger!
While other club member’s home layouts are starting to age their maintenance is starting to take up more time than they are getting to run the layout. This is certainly what I had worried about when I started designing current layout. But after having seen how long the club layouts have been operating without a problem I figured that I would use the same methods. And so far I am glad I did.
Now while these techniques are not for everyone, as most modelers teardown their layouts in only a few years, I plan on having this layout until I no longer breathe any air. This is my retirement project. Just about 2 years to go and then I can spend a lot more time working on the layout. Now that I have the major work (Benchwork, Trackwork and electrical) out of the way I can get into the fun stuff, Operations. Yes the scenery and building will come in time it is Ops that keeps me going!
While everyone is free to build their layout the way they want, I just have to smile when everyone asks how I am able to keep such a large layout running with so little maintenance!
Feeders and more feeders.
Enough is enough at some point. Im planning a feeder every other section so all track gets power multipule ways.
Rail joiners are never enough.
In the Hobby Shop we just finished each switch with up to 6 additional wires running off the Torquises so that each frog will be live etc.... We ran a train that was rather "Picky" and after following with a file and removing bad sections of rail, it ran flawlessly forwards and backwards. It would be years before we have electrical problems on that line.
I find it interesting that Modulars dont get thier fair share of feeders. There is ALOT of bus and feeders going on in EACH section.
If a day ever arrives that we set up track, attach two rails and all the joints weld into one leaving no gaps unless needed at specific spots then that will be a day copper prices will fall.
Until then, the availible wire stock is growing in advance of construction.
Safety Valve,See this old yard layout? No blocks,no feeders,no soldered joints just 2 wires from the power pack powering the whole thing.The thing to remember with rail joiners is be sure they are tight on the rail..This may require squeezing the joiner with pliers.
The main point from everyone seems to be that their way is the best way. Maybe a little indication also that you need more feeders for DCC, but I know that's impossible because DCC is vastly superior in every way.
I think I will just keep on doing what works for me too.