For my early 1900s layout (HO scale) I’m planning to use cork roadbed. I’ve read several places that using N scale roadbed gives a lower (more realistic) profile. However, since it is too narrow, it seems like it would be a hassle to line it up with a gap in the middle and then fill the gap. Would it be practical to use HO cork roadbed and then bring the adjoining scenery (plaster) up a bit instead? What do you do?
Thanks in advance.
I think Jim Kelly (retired from Model Railroader) used the N roadbed with gap filler for an HO project layout. Sorry can’t recall the layout or the issue but maybe the index would help if you look under Kelly
Another possibility for lower profile roadbed is the black foam from Woodland Scenics. They sell it in HO and N but they also sell large sheets of both thicknesses. Now that I think of it those sheets would also be a good source for the narrow strips that you could use to widen the N scale roadbed a la Kelly
What I plan on doing is use regular HO cork for my circa 1965 mainline, and some kind of lower profile for adjoining side tracks and spurs.
Dave Nelson
I cut my own roadbed from rolled cork sheets that are used for making bulletin boards. It’s low profile and easy to cut with a sharp box cutter knife. Michaels, Hobby Lobby, and Wal-Mart have the rolled sheets in 12"x24" and 24"x48" sizes. Wal-Mart, by far, is the cheapest at approx. $8 for the 24"x48". Michaels was approx. $15 for the same.
Bobby
I used N-scale cork roadbed on my last HO layout (cork on homasote on L-girders). The gap was not a problem for me - I just used a little extra ballast. I suppose you could use sand or something cheaper to fill the gap.
I’m now using the WS foam roadbed on an N-scale layout (pink insulation foam on shelf brackets). I prefer the WS to cork and the WS does come in sheets for yards.
FWIW.
Try and find Model Power or Lifelike roadbed. I bought one of these (can’t remember which) a few years back at Toys R Us. It was about half the thickness of Midwest roadbed. Since I was using it for S scale, it was too thin for me and I had to double it.
Enjoy
Paul
That’s one of the places I saw this idea (the Turtle Creek Central in 2003). It looks workable, but what I’m asking is whether leaving the gap (1/8" on each side of the track centerline) and then filling it is worth the effort. One of the advantages of using cork (it seems) is that once you’ve got the track centers carefully drawn on the subroadbed, you can follow them exactly with the (split) cork and even have them visible when laying the track. Using N scale cork and spacing it out from the centerline and then filling the gap seems to remove this advantage and make for more work overall. A high price to pay for a low profile?
I think Bill Darnby on his Maumee Route used n scale roadbed, but did not split it, laid it with straight edges on trackside, then used a little acryllic sealer to creat bevel, then ballasted. You could do this, and even use sifted sand as an edge then ballast. N scale roadbed gives a nicer lower profile.I don’t think it’s to high a price for good looking track.
I went to Lowes home improvement store and got some 1/4 inch thick blue insulation board. It comes in a rectangular cube thats folded up and for $30.00 it’s more foam then I’ll ever use. I can cut it to any shape I want.
Mike is correct. Bill Darnby, and a few others don’t bother to split the cork down the middle. A small bead of caulk down each side and ballast to create the sloping profile.
Nick
If you don’t split the cork down the center then remember that you forgo the use of the line between the two pieces as your center line as it is when you split the pieces in two and use the beveled edges.
Dave Nelson
Look at the prototype
The 1917 Pennsylvania Standard Plans show 2’-1" to 2’-3" from the base of the ballest to the top of tie. The top of the tie is even with the top of the ballast. The ballast is sitting on a 12" base of cinders so the top of the tie is actually more than 3’ above the ground.
The Union Pacific Common Standard adopted Jan 1927 has approximately 1’-5" of ballast. The top of the tie is 2" above the top of the ballast. The ballast sits on a 6" subballast base. Ground to top of tie approximately 2’-1".
THe HO cork I have scales, as close as I can measure it 1’-6". From its base to the top of a piese of flex track tie scales just under 2’. — It appears to me that the depth of HO cork is reasonably close for modeling the prototype. To be prototypical the side slope could be flatted a bit by shaping the scenic ballast material placed over it. The slope on the UP profile is 3:1. The slope on the Penn profile not quite as steep as the cork, but close.
In N scale I generally use HO cork (1/2 width) for main lines, N cork for some siding and secondary lines and spurs, and no roadbed for others. The depth of the track profile, if to deep, can be decreased by building up thr ground around it.
Same here. Got 2’ x 8’ x 3/32" thick from Hob Lob for $14. Great for laying large areas such as yards.
With ballasting and some scenery.
