Are these turnouts compatable with Atlas #6 turnouts and Atlas rail joiners? I am looking at building a large yard for passenger equipment and modern rolling stock - are these suitable?
Also do they easily accept groundthrows? I do not use under the table switch machines.
If Shinohara is still using their old rail supplier, their rail has a narrower head and a wider base than Atlas, so there might be some rail joiner compatability problems - snug fit on Atlas side, REALLY TIGHT fit on the Shinohara side. Also, you will probably need to bevel the top inside of the Atlas railhead a bit - it will be a thousandth of an inch or so out of alignment with the narrower Cactus Brass rail.
The turnout geometry is close enough, and the code 100 rail is the same height as Atlas’, so there shouldn’t be any problem using the two brands together. If the Shinohara turnouts have live frogs, that will require a slightly different approach to wiring.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Thank you!
I added one of their curved code 100 turnouts to an Atlas layout I had about 15 years ago. I don’t recall having any problems getting it to mate up to the Atlas track.
Check the availability of what you need before you start. Some of their turnouts can be hard to get sometimes.
In a word, YES. code 100 is code 100 and is compatible - but -
RAIL is extruded metal and can (and does) vary slightly in dimensional thickness end to end, as well as brand to brand.
RAIL JOINERS are just ‘U’ shaped metal pieces bent to fit the makers track. One can mix rail easily when code heights match, but using different rail joiners can be either too snug or too loose - depending.
For best results, I USE Shinohara code 100 joiners on Shinohara track, Walthers joiners on Walthers’ track, and Atlas Joiners for Atlas track. It minimizes problems. Mixing codes is not recommended for 'plug and play types (Derailments).
Metal joiners’ chief job is to hold track in alignment - whatever the code or brand - ‘snug’ fits are desirable. They hold the track better, and (for Newbies) - pass electricity better.
MR recommends not re-using ANY, as they ‘size’ with the initial install.
Shouldn’t be a problem, but why not just stick with Atlas?
It is easy to make different track brands and yes, even code rail fit. I did it on my last layout mixing code 100 and 83 Atlas, and Micro Engineering code 70 and 3 brands of turnouts. Its really no big deal as long as you get the surface of the rail head to match and the inside edge of the rail to match.
In a word yes. I use Atlas flex and Shinohara TOs in code 100 on my main line with no problems. Code 83 requires that you shim up the Walthers TOs a bit (the ties are thinner). In any case, bevel the rail ends and inside edge slightly with a jewelers file. Solder joints where practical (not everythere though - you need expansion joints). The footprint is slightly different so you might not be able to remove an old one and drop in a replacement of the other brand.
Ground throws will work but might require some minor engineering. a short piece of piano wire with both ends bent upward works quite well.
I use Atlas mark III TOs in hidden areas. I find that that they look less realistic than the Shinoharas and are not quite as smooth but do work fine with a bit of tweaking.
Karl