Basically, I’m working on a HO layout, and I want to “future proof” it for the bigger equipment that I don’t currently own, but would like to have in the future. The layout is a folded dogbone wrapped into a “G” shape in a 20’x20’ area. To get that idea to work I need to go to a 36" minimum radius curves (the two loops on the ends are 40"). I’ve read the recommended practices, so now my question is one of looks. Specifically the looks for the big steam locomotives (Challenger, Big Boy, GS-4, 2-10-2, size), full length passenger equipment, big modern diesels, and any other huge stuff that might be a concern that I’ve forgotten to mention.
I’m pretty sure despite being slightly under the NMRA guidelines that the equipment will work (and according to just about every manufacturer that assumption of mine is correct)…but does anyone have a similar situation (the mentioned rolling stock and 36" curves) on their layout and pictures that they’re willing to share?
I may not be getting all the oxygen I could use, but I am not quite sure of what you are asking. If you merely want photos with others’ ways of modeling curves for the inclusion of larger locomotives, here is one of a 2-10-4 crossing a curved-deck trestle. The camera angle is shallow (low), so the curvature seems substantial, but it is in excess of 33" at the close side of the trestle.
This high end-shot is taken from the end of my folded loop where the trestle is found. The bridge is out of view at the bottom. However, on the far side of the layout, what you see if essentially a mirror image, and those curves are in excess of 46" in radius.
I have run a Lionel HO Challenger on Bachmann EZ-Track #5 turnouts on an earlier layout with absolutely no problems. The 2-10-4 was happy with that turnout, but not the 22" curves on the rest of that first layout. It would take the curves, but only at a walking speed.
The locomotive that will give you the biggest headaches for problem track is a 4-4-4-4 Duplex in my experience, followed by a 4-8-4.
Yeah essentially I’m having a hard time finding, and wanting to see, larger equipment on 36’-ish curves. Since I know the short stuff I have now looks fine, but I want to get the longer equipment, and I want to be sure my layout will look allright. I’m a visual person if I see similar stuff and similar radius on other people’s layouts, then if I decide that it won’t work for me by viewing that, I can go back to the drawing board.
Car Length * 3 = minimum radius for “good” tracking around curves
so a 40’ Boxcar (6" long) needs 18" curves min for reliable tracking
an 85’ Passenger car (just shy of 12") needs 36" curves to track well- Car Length * 4 = cars look better going around the curve
same 40’ boxcar looks way better on 24" curves
same 85’ car looks great on a 48" curve
Car Length * 5 = Cars can couple relatively well on the curve
you can couple 40’ boxcars all day on a 30" curve (well, in theory)
If you can fit 60" curves on your layout - when’s the next open-house??
Car length is overall length of the car measured from coupler to coupler. This also assumes body-mount coupler pockets instead of talgo trucks.
ANd like every ‘rule of thumb’ that’s what these are, as are the NMRA specs. I have 32" radius curves and while I don’t own any, I have run full length 85’ passenger cars with diaphragms and body-mounted couplers through them, even at near warp speeds, forwards and backwards (pulled by a locomotive or pushed in reverse) with no derailments or tracking issues. My biggest loco is a 4-8-4, it too runs fine - heck it even traverses crossovers made with #6 turnouts at full throttle, as do the (shock!) 85’ passenger cars, although on #6 crossovers the ‘look’ portion comes into play, they do swing a bit wildly for good appearance, but they DO stay on the track. My usual equipment is 40 and 50’ freight cars and 60’ passenger cars, the 85’ stuff was just a test really. A pair of trains passing each other on the two tracks also doesn’t look bad from a near eye-level view.
With 36" and 40" curves there should not ever be a problem running any equipment The whole notion that you ‘need’ 48" radius curves to run anything more than a 2-8-0 probably turns off more people than it helps. Yes, the bigger the curve the better things look, because even 36" radius curves scaled up are very tight by prototypical standards, but you don’t NEED curves that large everywhere. Even the 85’ cars will track reliable through smaller than 30" curves if the wheels and couplers are properly adjusted. They don’t look good doing it, but I have run the 85’ cars into the approximately 24" radius of my yard lead - even coupled them together on the curve. The overhang is not pretty to see from overhead, but they DO run through these curves. Disguise or control the viewing angle and you can safely use cures below the 48" or 40" recommended for best viewing and not fear that your train will wind up on the floor each time it passes the tighter section.
There’s a difference between what looks good and what will work!!
Athearn Superliners look best on 36" R or bigger curves, but mine work fine on 28" radius. I doubt there is any HO locomotive, car or anything else that won’t run on 28"-30"R curves, and aside from passenger cars with body mounted trucks, most everything should run down to 22"R - my SD70 and C-44-9W go thru 22"R curves just fine, as does my Spectrum 2-6-6-2. My BLI 2-10-4 will do 22"R but with a little complaining, 24"R or more is recommended by BLI and probably correct.
If you can’t get the large radius curve you want or the curve will not fit, then what is Plan B?
The reason I pose this question is that no matter what, only a curve with a radius of “X” will fit in your space, period, and still allow a satisfactory plan. In reality you are not going to make a single loop that has a radius of 10’ just to run a Big Boy? At some point something has to give… the radii, the particular engine in mind… or both.
Perhaps there is a more desirable alternative you could model? If not, and what you really want is a Big Boy and current NMRA conventions say it will work, then just model it anyways. It sounds like from your post that you are having doubts and are perhaps “pushing” your layout too far?
My advice is to not rely on others in this particular case but go with your gut… implement plan A or implement a plan B. I f you go with your gut feeling you will be the most “right”, more than anyone can convince you.
10" radius will not run a big boy unless I go to N scale and even there it might barely work. Unacceptable.
36" radius should run every thing except the most MONSTER Brass with prototype construction fortunately those are way way way out of our price range. I believe there are engines out there that require 48" and greater radius to run.
O scalers routinely exceed 54" radius.
I myself have a list on the workbench for temporary track curves and it will either be the Kato 34" radius or the Bachmann 35" radius curves. I refuse to consider anything less for my full length heavyweights and PRR T1 duplex.
Yea I can force a PRR J1 around a 24" radius curve… heck Give me an hour or so to dig up a video of it trying to do just that with unacceptable performance. The poor engine’s wheelbase was so long it consumed just about all of it’s capacity squealing around that little 24"
The fact that I need broad curves was one of the ideas towards my purchase of a BLI ABBA set so I can use that power on much smaller curves and still get the train over the road.
I may seem uncompromising and have cheated a time or two with my PCM T1 4-8-4 Reading having it go through 23" radius and down a 4% on a friend’s railroad it worked well. But it will not go through that day in=day out on my future line.
My worst experience was watching a Bachmann standard 4-8-4 back in the 80’s that I foolishly bought trying to go around 18" sectional track. To add insult to injury was the lack of pull; followed shortly by the lack of quality on that POS pancake motor. Maybe a shrink will label me over compensation or something but:
Big radius is good. Small radius is bad.
Now if you only run small stuff and that is not all bad then 24" or so is quite acceptable.
You can use different radius for different jobs. I might have a situation where a NW switcher has to deal with a 18" radius
Good eyes! Yup, there sure was. It’s gone now. It was the Duplex’s fault. Everything else was happy with the arrangement there, but the Duplex kept derailing. I had to jack up the outside rail a tad, and that threw everything out of kilter for the next 10" . When I took that photo, I had not gotten all the kink out. Gad, what a job!!! [:(!]
I grabbed a 3 foot length of flextrack, trammeled a ink mark on a peice of cardboard for a rough curve of more or less 36"
Slapped a Walthers B&O 70’ Heavyweight Baggage car and dug out the camera. I know the picture is rough due to the camcorder, a better camera is not yet in the budget.
When you put a heavyweight car, or any longish car, on two curves, one 24", the other 30", there is almost no appreciable difference in terms of overhang and overall looks. I have said at times that you need almost a full 8" or more to see how the wider curve really improves the looks. At the railtops, though…well, that is another story, and at the couplers, too. It is just so much easier on everything if the curves are as wide as can be, but the difference in handling between 22" and 24" can be startling.
Plan B in this case is a duck under oval in the same 20’ x 20’ space. It would allow me to go up to 48" or so with the curves if I desired. The reason I’d rather go with plan A, a folded dogbone with a walk-in, is that I won’t put a duckunder below 5’ (60") and that’s a bad height for most of the friends and family. I’ve been weighing pros and cons and this thread was just another step along the way, and since I couldn’t get the answer I wanted with equipment on hand, and why invest in equipment I wouldn’t want to run it was worth a shot. Thank you to those that have posted photos and offered comments so far, especially Safety Valve taking the time to tack down track and snap photos for my benefit.
Not so much a question of what I want to model, but trying and saving myself starting over from square
My home does not allow anything but a temporary set up for a loop for now, but 36" radius requires something like 6 feet and a half (Allowing for 2-3 inches around the edge) across for a turnback curve.
Now I can go with a round the wall design or something very similar to Selector’s road and obtain satisfactory running of the big stuff in my roster. Part of me remembers what it is like to try and run small stuff on 18" radius and number 4’s and it was a very frusterating experience. One or both of the clubs in my area are modular in nature and I think they exceed 40" in places.
Im glad that you are engaging into this project with clear thoughts towards the future.
I grabbed a 3 foot length of flextrack, trammeled a ink mark on a peice of cardboard for a rough curve of more or less 36"