i have some atlas snap turnouts (switches) that have been passed along from layout to layout. i have a problem with derailments as the wheels go through the point of the frog. examination shows that the “arrowhead” tip is worn and not too sharp. does anyone have a way to repair these, or should i just chuck them and buy new turnouts.
thanks. kangaroosox
If it were me, I’d chuck them and get Peco or some other, better brand.
Welcome to the forums.
You could take a small file and see if you can touch up the “arrowhead” a bit.
Snap switches probably have the poorest reputation of the Atlas line. While you are going over them, check the track guage, I’ve heard it is often a little off. Might be the cause of the excessive wear too.
Good luck,
Richard
Also, if you do discard them, ( although I would keep them for future use, like abandoned areas or something)… Please, remove the snappers! they plug into the side & bottoms of the ties, you will not need them until a unusual project comes up that you never thought about before… (Yeah, I ripped the house apart about 3 weeks ago looking for two of them… Geez)…
I agree that it’s not worth spending a lot of time and effort trying to salvage a snap switch. The only problem is that they’re pretty compact little gadgets, and you’re likely to have to do a lot of rework to fit a different brand in (although for this reason, other brands are less prone to derailments).
If you must have at them, a needle file is the tool to use.
Take a small piece of metal and shape it to match the frog point. Make it slightly shorter so it doesn’t touch the rails. Cut down the plastic frog point enough so the metal sits flush with the rails, but with a thin strip of plastic between it and the rails. Super glue in place.
If the point is worn down more than the thickness of the metal, build it up first with epoxy. Get the kind that is kneaded together from two sticks as opposed to the more liquid kind.
I believe that this was described once years ago in MR, although they were doing it so you could power the Atlas frog which is normally dead.
Good luck
Paul
LION has many Atlas switches, as a matter of fact the layout is mostly Atlas #4 and $6. There are four snap switches hiding in the back, because I was too cheap to buy new ones. Many of my switches have been patched together with the model equivalent of bailing wire. Some are in really bad condition, and have been on more than five layouts.
roar
Actually the wheels shouldn’t be touching the frog points (the arrow head) at all. The guide or guard rails opposite the frog should be guiding the wheels around and through the frog without actually touching the frog points. The solution is to cut a strip of .005" or .010" the length of the guard rail and glue it to the inside of the guard rail with CA and when dry trim it even with top of the rail. This will keep the wheels rolling toward the outside of the track, thus avoiding the point of the frog (arrow) altogether. If you find the .010" is too thick to let the wheels roll smoothly through the guard rail, take a piece of fine sand paper, folded in half and just run between the guard rail and stock rail a few times, testing with a car until the clearance is just right.
A few thoughts, for the OP and others:
An Atlas “Snap Switch” is a very sharp turnout - equal to 18" radius curve. It is not straight throught the frog like other Atlas turnouts.
Actually, if we convert the frog angle of an Atlas Snap switch to that number system we use for other turnouts, a Snap Switch is a number 3-1/2 - very sharp.
The Custom Line turnout Atlas labels as a number 4, is actually a 4-1/2, so the Snap switch is much sharper.
A close examination of a new Snap Switch will show it never had a sharp point at the frog - not desirable.
Checking wheel sets and checking and adjusting flangeways as suggested by another poster isa good start. But in the end, this sharp turnout will not handle a lot of equipment that has longer wheelbase trucks or long frame steam locos - its that simple.
As to the suggestion that one buy “better” turnouts, good luck with that. None of those better brands make a turnout to fit where a Snap Switch fits, and while some of those others may have better detail, I have yet to see in 40 years where any of them work any better than properly installed Atlas products.
I know lots of modelers here in the Mid Atlantic, land of big basements and big model railroads, that have hundreds of Atlas Custom Line turnouts that work flawlessly - my self included - no need to spend more in my view.
Simple fact is if you are trying to run large modern six and eight wheel diesels, long cars or steam with mo
I would just replace them. Things have a way of wearing out. ANd one thing you don’t want worn out is track work.
I don’t think they are worth the effort. AS others mentioned if you want to use them in an “abandoned area” for looks that is fine.
New ones, whether the more expensive lines or new Atlas snap switches will probably serve you better. If you can, maybe use a larger # turnout. Buit not all spaces and layouts can use the larger # turnouts.
Jsut my thought and opinion.
[8-|]
While I have used many snap switches over the years on small switching layouts I recommend replacing the snap switches with Atlas #4 switch in either C100 or Code 83 track…If layout track space permits the #6 switch will be the better choice…
thanks to everyone for their responses. i was afraid that replacing them was the answer, but a couple replies, particularly adding some shim to the guard seems worth a try before i give up.
thanks again, kangaroosox
How much have these turnouts been used? I would be wary of any that had been glued down and taken up. The removal process would put a lot of stress on the plastic parts that hold these together, knocking them out of proper alignment.
I have a lot of snap-switches on my layout. I have some problems with a few of them, but only with “finicky” engines and rolling stock. Generally, careful trackwork without kinks will allow snap-switches to work very reliably and free of derailments.
Like others, I find that snap-switches have their place. They fit in tight places where other turnouts would not work, allowing me to squeeze in more railroad in a small space.
I have noticed the frog on even the Atlas #6 custom line turnouts in code 100 that I’ve used is rather blunt and the gap that the wheels have to “jump” across is large. There is a “pot hole” effect when wheels travel through the frog where they drop down and back up again.
Anyhow, commercial turnouts can be made more reliable by getting some small files and filling the points so that they don’t have a blunt edge for wheels to pick, file a bevel into them from the top and the side. I’ve done this with my commecial Atlas code 100 #6 turnouts. They can operate reliably.
What kind of wheels are you using? NMRA standard wheels do not drop going through my Atlas Custom Line turnouts. Now code 88 wheels, that’s a different story…
That’s why I won’t use them.
Sheldon
I get the same “pot hole” effect on my Atlas code 83 #6 turnouts as well.
Sheldon, what do you mean by “NMRA standard” or “code 88”?
My proto metal wheel sets of 33 and 36 inch diameter and locomotives do the pot hole thing through the turnouts. I only run Proto and Atlas diesels with their factory wheels, so I’m assuming everything I’ve mentioned is NMRA standard and not code 88.
I’ve especially had the problem with the code 83 twelve (and a half?) degree crossing. I added bits of styrene to the “gap” and it eliminated much of the wheel drop.
This was a garage layout I built and later sold in Indiana using all Atlas code 100 flex track and custom line #6 turnouts. The wheels at the time were all NMRA gauged stock plastic wheels that came with the Athearn, Details West, Walthers and MDC freight cars I ran on the layout. So it appears that my NMRA gauged wheels did indeed drop down in the gap in my turnouts. This seemed to be due to the distance of the gap since the frog was rather blunt compared say to more expensive turnouts like my Shinohara turnouts. I closely watched the rail cars as they slowly went through the turnouts and you could see each wheel drop down in that gap, and then back up again. It wasn’t really a problem nor did it cause derailments. I just concluded it was a minor symptom of the turnouts I was using. Heck, I’ve felt what seemed like a similar analog when I road Amtrak’s California Zephyr and the Superliner cars were passing through turnouts and/or complicated yard trackage, you could literally feel the passenger car drop down and back up again. It reminded me of riding in a car in rough roads with pot holes.
Doughless,
These two videos will explain:
http://www.handlaidtrack.com/videos-a/144.htm?video=JBdWvMHEN8s&title=NMRA%20Standards%20Part%201
riogrande,
Much older, as in 20 plus years ago and several product versions ago Atlas code 100 turnouts were a little less than perfect in the area you discribe.
Too many people assume they have not changed. That would be like assuming a specific brand of auto has not kept up with industry advancements just because you have not bought one.
Recent versions of both code 100 and code 83 Atlas turnouts work fine with wheels that are .110" wide. They do have a lot of a bump with wheels .088", commonly known as “semi scale”.
Personally, for this and other reasons, I have no use for semi scale wheels or couplers.
ALL wheels will have a very slight bump because the wheels are tapered, so the portion supported by the wing rail is smaller in diameter than the the part about to ride on the frog tip.
But the semi scale .088" wheels allow a big noticable bump - as explained in the videos.
I prefer and use mostly metal sprung/equalized trucks as the track better under all conditions.
The science shown in the videos is the same science of the prototype.
Sheldon
Sheldon.All the years I been in the hobby I have never had a problem with Atlas switches using the standard .110" wheel(the so called RP25 wheel)…I have never found it necessary to use my NMRA gauge on a Atlas switch.
Maybe a lot of folk is following the advice of “experts” and end up doing more damage then good while fixing something that isn’t broken? I dunno.
How can unknown thousands of modelers( including newbies) have zero problems with switches straight from the package while others slip,trip and stumble and have problems with the same brand of switch??
Brakie
Over the decades of production, the Atlas turnouts and especially the Snap Switches have changed slightly. Production was originally in the US in code 100 only. Production was moved to several different manufacturers in China, and the code 83 line was introduced. There have been many subtle design changes - just look at the point hinges as an example. The '60s and '70s code 100 Custom Line used grommets for the point hinge.
In general, the code 83 line tightened some tolerances (flangeways in the Snap Switches in particular) compared to the code 100, but even within the code 83 line there have been numerous subtle design and production changes.
As a result, I’m not surprised when I see conflicting reports. Some reports say Atlas turnouts have raised frogs - frogs that are higher than the stock rails. I’ve never seen them personally on the turnouts, but I have seen flatness problems on Atlas crossings. I’m sure the guys who said the frogs were raised weren’t lying. Others have reported guard rails too far from the stock rails. I didn’t check mine unless there was a derailment, but on those that did have derailments, sure enough, the guard rail was too far from the stock rail. Older versions of Atlas turnouts with the plastic frog points have had the point worn down. When combined with a slightly wide guard rail spacing, derailments start happening.
Another difference is that acceptance of a “sloppy” ride of a ride of a wheel set through a turnout varies from modeler to modeler. At one extreme, any wheel drop of any kind is unacceptable performance. At the other extreme, wheel drop or other "r