How do you make bad track that dosen’t derail your train and at the same time gives the impresion of old rail and rotting ties.
These video shows the kind of track I am talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSUXSRsXsI8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2SDYMwINuQ&list=PLpoNw68hMk5JCKJUHx3ny51c0PzhZO7Y2&index=3
Thanks.
I remember a thread a couple years ago on the topic, but I can’t find it. To me the rocking of real trains doesn’t scale down to model trains that shake and wobble at to high a frequency.
The second video description says the guy had lays the track and bends the rail vertically every scale 40’
Here is your second video
You can make shims out of thin styrene (like .0.010" thick x 1/8" wide) with one stacked set under the outside edge of the ties, then alternating back and forth with the other side. Start with a long piece and add one or two more shorter ones, making a ramp. This should give you the rock and roll you are looking for. Experiment with how many stacks of shim will do the job while still keeping things on the track. I remember an article about this many years ago.
My recollection is that a modeler named Davis (Dave Davis?) had a layout called the Davis Junction (not the same as the famous Davis Junction a few miles north of Rochelle IL) that featured the 39’ rail lengths with prototypical slight depressions at the rail joints so that a train would rock a bit as it went down the track at slow speeds. Of course you cannot capture the full “rock and roll” but it shouldn’t take much to get something of the look - just remembering that it isn’t a “jolt” but a “sway.”
I no longer recall if Davis’s layout was in Great Model Railroads or Model Railroad Planning, but it does go back several years.
On that general topic, some prototype railroads left the rail joint between ties. Others put a tie directly under the joint, presumably to minimize the problem since the joint (particularly in the days of two bolts per rail rather than current 3 bolts per rail end) is usually the weak point.
Dave Nelson
Technically that should be 39’ - that was the old standard length of rail (to fit in 40’ gondolas and flatcars).
Start with flex track and cut out ties but leave enough for keeping them in gauge. Lay the track and add ties back in at angles. If you want really beat up ties, start by distresing the ties you are going to keep before removing the other ties (less likely to damage them and if you screw up you can just keep the next tie over. That is the easy way, you could also hand lay. If you want the up and down motion, this is much harder because each engine will behave differently to the indulations. Shims are best for this as you can test before you install.
Also keep in mind when you off set the heights a joints, the smaller the code of track you use, the more the visual off set. As an example, lets say you can get by with 25 (not saying you can get by with that much), on code 100 it would be 1/4% of height but in code 70 it wold be 36% visual difference, on code 55 it would be almost 50% but all would have the same drop.
I did the same thing yars ago but,I used a jewelers hammer to dent the track.
The biggest issue is that weight does not scale down.
Therefore, the rocking and rolling motions don’t scale down well either.
For “bad track” I would be more tempted to have the “look” by having it have little to no ballast, overgrown with grass and weeds, have skewed ties here and there, be heavily weathered, and have a “slow order” in place.
I would skip the rocking and rolling, as it will not have the same “sway” motion, and reliability will suffer, as our models are not designed to do this, so they have a bigger tendency to derail when our track is bad.
Rick,That is very true for hotrodders that likes to switch cars at slot car speeds.
For those of us that understands railroading we will operate over bad track like the Gentleman did in the video s-l-o-w-l-y just like the prototype would.
As far as the sway I thought the sway in the video looked pretty good at his slow speed. If one wants more sway then place springs between the bolster and the truck frame on opporsite sides on the car.Personally I would not go that far.
Contrary to popular belief put forth by the so called “experts” our equipment is very forgiving unless operated at slot car speeds.
Logging Tracks
It would seem to me there ought to be quite a few good examples of ‘crazy track’ in layouts that have spent extra efforts to model logging tracks.
I will eventually hope to look up some of these.
Any good videos?
The video BigDaddy posted shows probably the best representation of bad track that I have seen. Having said that, its obvious that our models do not scale down weight, since the movements are still too quick and jolty, IMO. The trackwork looks the part, but I think he has too many dips for operation. I think fewer dips, and gentler, would work better.
Bad Track!
Bad Track!
ROAR
While I don’t “hot-rod” my trains, I do like smooth, reliable ops. If something jumps the track, ops stop until it’s fixed. Track work needs to be bulletproof on my layout, or I’m not a happy camper. Adding in track work issues that could cause a derailment if everything is not perfectly executed is not something I would attempt.
Getting track like the example shows is not that easy, and is very involved time wise.
The first time something derailed on it, I would be ripping it right back out, thereby wasting time and money, something I would not like doing on my layout
And, while the video is indeed the best representation I’ve seen, they appear, to me, too quick, more of a jolt, rather then a fluid sway like the 1:1 scale railcars do.
At least for me, that ruins the illusion of a full-size train just in miniature form.
The look of the track is indeed spot on, but the quick jolt instead of gentle fluid sway because of mass (really lack thereof) is a deal breaker for me.
I’m not trying to dissuade others, just saying that it will be appearance only, via scenic ellements only, not actually dipping and dislevelling of track, on my layout.
Yes, watching the video again I definately agree. This is one of those places were the modeler needs to decide if they want to be prototypical or have good operations. Such track is likely going to hinder ops on such a railroad, even if it does add some realism.
Also I bet the owner of the layout in the video really needs to work on his rolling stock so it has ZERO body wobble. Even the slightest symptoms of body wobble in a car will be set off by that track, creating a very unrealisticly wobbling car. I say a better way to add a heavier coat of weathering and more weeds around the track, and perhaps mixing dirt in with the balast. If you want to have bumpy track perhaps a little used siding or an abandoned spur or crossing would be a nice experament, but not the entire railroad, at least if your an operator.
At least that’s just my [2c]…
Rick,You may recall how I hate derailments and strive for derailment free operation.
However.
I don’t want industrial track looking like a main line since I seen industrial track up closed and personal…
With that in mind I strive for realistic industrial track to include taking a jewelers hammer and tapping the track to get dips…Ballast? No real ballast just a mixture of Woodland Scenics dirt,dark gray ballast and small weeds.
The key is when to quit with the hammer.
With that combination I can maintain my trouble free operation.
Hotrodders would not like my ISL for several reasons.
I experimented once with sprung trucks for this, worked great but the cars had to be very over weighted to work.
Do you mean the bad track? If so,something is amiss because for decades I never added weight to my cars and had no derailments over that bad track. If you mean the swaying there is other way to get cars to rock over that bad track and extra weight is not one of the ways.
Thanks. I think that i would try what ricktrains4824 suggested, using dirt and little ballast maybe weathering the track.
Well,to each their own but,you should try the bad track method its not as bad as some claim. You could test it at one industry and see for yourself…