I’m in the process of updating my mainline after I get my water feature completed. The largest engines I’m running are the Bachmann 3-Truck Shay, Consolidation, and a 2-Truck Shay. At any one time they will be pulling my 3 AMS Jackson Sharp in 1:20. What size switches would any of you recommend? I’ve been looking at the newer Piko brand.
Thanks,
Richard
Richard:
I just went through this for my pike and ended up with Llagas Creek, 250 gauge aluminum. I have mostly #4, a couple of #3, and 1 #5. I have a Bachmann 3 truck shay and a Bachmann Climax. No Consolidation or 2 truck Shay (though maybe the Climax is similar).
So far I have absolutely no problems running through the switches, including the #3’s. I haven’t tried any passenger cars (I have log cars, and a couple of scratch built cars, all fairly short).
Have fun!
I suggest nothing sharper than an Aristo Wide Radius switch…or if you have the space, a switch with no less than a #5 frog angle.
The Aristo WR is supposedly a “5 foot radius switch”…
Your equipment “Might” negotiate a sharper radius, but would look like hell…
The basic rule for all curvature, is to use the widest radius possible, bearing in mind that some equipment may get by on tighter curves, but generally looks like hell doing it, and often performs poorly. The passenger cars you mention, deserve those wider curves, and switches.
Too often people purchase rolling stock, to use on track, where the owner has limited space, and has no room for curves that will readily accept the rolling stock purchased.
Yes, your Shays will get around rather tight radius curves, but still the wider the better, for good performance. The true “1:20.3” passenger cars will not work well on the tight curves the Shay can get around, especially with good looking body mounted couplers. The Consolidated, 2-8-0 locomotive does not like anything less than a 5 foot radius switch, or curve.
Fred Mills
The frog in the WR is closest to a #4 just for the record.
Greg
As wide a radius as will fit.
So, probably a dumb question…if the switch is labeled an R4, R5, R7, the number is the size of the frog?
I will ask, are these LGB switches ( i.e. Turnout)? If LGB the number refers to the radius of the curved rails. I am unable to find my LGB Book which lists all that kind of info, maybe some one has one that they can locate. Their curved track uses the same numbering system. R1 is the tightest and R4 is like 44 inch radius, if I remember correctly.
Paul
Richard Mynderup said:
So, probably a dumb question…if the switch is labeled an R4, R5, R7, the number is the size of the frog?
Not dump, but tricky.
Manufacturers make switches that match their curved track geometry. So an R4 switch will have a curved piece that replaces an R4 curved track part. OK so far?
Here’s the tricky bit. Real switches aren’t all curves. There is a curve where the point rails diverge, but through the frog the rails are straight. A “proper” switch (i.e a true model of the prototype) can therefore be designated by the angle of the frog (the angle between the two diverging rails at the frog.
Sunset Valley has a nice table on this page: https://www.sunsetvalleyrailroad.com/switches.html
The smaller the frog/switch number, the wider the frog angle. A #4 corresponds to about a 3’ radius curve, and a #6 is about 9’ radius. If you look at the SVRR table, and you know the radius of your track, you can figure out which switch frog # will work best. [P.S. LGB and Train-Li have different nomenclature. An R4 to Train-Li is 4’ radius, I believe. LGB measures in meters and their R3 is 3’ 11". So you have to do your homework, or stick to one manufacturer.]
I have about 20 LGB 16000 series switches on my RR and they have an approx a 8’ diameter curve off and my 3 truck shay goes right through them without a problem in forward and reverse.
These switches work well and can be found in the used market for a fraction of the price that new ones go for. I also have 4 Aristocraft wide radius ones about 10’ and they are good but not as good as the LGB. I have 2 curved Piko switches that I bought used and one has gauge issues. that could be why I got a deal on them.
I also have a few of the LGB 12000 series deep in yards on tracks that are seldom used. These are tight switches but they work in a pinch.
Switches are like curves, go as wide as you can for the best operations.
R3, R4 is normally the curvature of a piece of track…
Toy train switches often have the diverging route and the rails past the frog curved to match an existing curved track, makes sectional track plans easier and more compact.
The frog number is a separate measurement, and you normally have to measure them when buying toy train switches, like some of the Aristo and USAT, all the Piko, LGB, etc.
This page shows you the different “R” numbers between manufacturers (NO they are NOT all the same!!), translated into real measurements of feet and inches. https://elmassian.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=719&Itemid=1105
This page will show you about the parts of a turnout and frog number: https://elmassian.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=266&Itemid=298
This page will give you frog numbers of various LGB turnouts: https://elmassian.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=328&Itemid=366
I have not yet done one to include PIKO and USAT switches.
Greg
Richard Mynderup said:
So, probably a dumb question…if the switch is labeled an R4, R5, R7, the number is the size of the frog?
Just for the sake of conversation, what code rail are we talking about? Not all switches are available in all codes.
One thing to remember… A twenty foot diameter (10 ft radius) curve in 1:20.3, when sized to 1:1, is an extremely tight curve, and even a Shay balks at it.
Go with the biggest frog that you can fit in.
Steve Featherkile said:
Go with the biggest frog that you can fit in.
That’s why I’m happy the area I’m modeling used all #9 frogs, and only two locations got #11. A #9 turnout is a lot bigger than most modelers use anyway, but I’m going for it. Even so those are tiny compared to say a #22 frog… I’d love to see someone build a #22 frog and turnout.
Yes, Craig, but that would take you whole yard for the one switch! However a # 8 or # 10 frog would make running smoother. The next layout, if there is one I plan on all # 8’s on the main line for the longer wheel base Loco’s. For those who are using LGB or equal look for a book by LGB which covers the whole track thing. I have one but it is in a box somewhere in my basement office. Check maybe Piko who bought LGB might be publishing it now?
Paul
Rick Marty said:
Just for the sake of conversation, what code rail are we talking about? Not all switches are available in all codes.
Well, in a theoretical conversation about frog sizes/angles and radii, the rail code doesn’t matter. A #6 frog is the same in any size rail. In practical terms, I’m sure the original poster was thinking of code 332 (LGB, Piko, etc.)
A #9 turnout is a lot bigger than most modelers use anyway, but I’m going for it.
It certainly is unusually big, but go for it, Craig!
And by big, note that an Aristo large radius switch (close to a #6) is almost 3’ long.
My late friend Dirk was building a #14 when life got in the way, took me a bit to find but here are some pics… code 250 aluminum, milled brass frog.
The guard rails are as he found on the UP’s mainline tracks behind his home.
Thanks to Greg E for hosting my friends pictures.
Dirk included a lot of information as well, here is a link to his work;
John,
If I remember correctly Dirk was planning on even bigger turnouts on the “main”.
I have a #9 already constructed. Its pretty big.
Interesting choice of frog numbers, most people pick 6, 8, 10, etc. Why 9 and 11? Just curious (and envious!)
Greg
p.s. I miss Dirk, had a lot of fun brainstorming conversations with him.
Greg;
In my contribution to this thread, I intentionally used lower numbered frog angles, and LR switches as suggestions. The reasoning was that few people, if any, in Large Scale, have the required space to use the larger switches.
A #6 switch takes up considerable space, and few people can use such a switch as their minimum size.
To go larger seems so simple, when just looking at increasing the number up one or two points…but in reality the switches start taking up great areas of space, which few people have for their railroad.
If only a true #5 frog angle switch was brought out as a standard switch, by Aristo, or LGB…even Charlie Ro…but no…they went from that lowly 2 foot radius (Round the Christmas tree size) right up to a #6…even a #6 wye… with Aristo producing the “Wide Radius” switch which was better but not great. LGB produced the good old 4 foot radius (1600 series) then the slightly larger 1800 ones…all produced as “Radius” sized switches…just for their “Snap Track” method of selling track.
Yes there are/were other manufacturers of switches and track. All of them were much more expensive in their pricing. Piko is now in the market, but perpetuating the snap track ideas.
I won’t get into the debate about the pros and cons of code 332 vs code 250… that’s another subject in itself.
Fred Mills
Greg Elmassian said:
Interesting choice of frog numbers, most people pick 6, 8, 10, etc. Why 9 and 11? Just curious (and envious!)
Greg
p.s. I miss Dirk, had a lot of fun brainstorming conversations with him.
The short answer is because that’s what the prototype uses. Most railroads use the following sizes, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 20, 22, 24, 26.
A 7 is really sharp and only reserved for those really tight places, but 9’s are pretty common on branch lines and other slow speed applications.
I’ve never understood how modelers can to use even numbered frogs, while the prototype has mostly odd numbered frogs.