I am planning on using 2 #7 and 2 #7 1/2 Shinohara code 83 curved switches off a couple of mainline curves for access to a roundhouse area and a siding (HO scale). I am adding them to a pretty bulletproof track plan using code 83 Micro Engineering flex track and switches and want to make sure I’m not asking for any problems with this modification. I don’t have any experience with these as this is my first layout so I would appreciate any comments you could share.
Thanks, Bob
The 7.5’s, of which I used several on my last layout, were good mechanically, but there were some shorts at the frog on locomotives with flangless tires that swept outward on the through route and made contact with both electrified points rails immediately beyond the black insulating spacers. I routinely used a cut-off disk to slice a gap into one of the rails, usually the diverging point, about two ties beyond the spacers. That solved the shorts.
The other problem could be more serious, and that is that the diverging/inner route is about 2-3 inches shorter in radius than advertised. It isn’t so bad to the frog, but beyond the frog the curvature seems tighter. I would cut the webbing between the ties and also nip out tiny chunks from the webbing on the related points rails so that I would physically widen the curve a bit without popping the rails out of the tiny plastic ‘spike’ heads. That helped. In at least one case I also severed the metal jumpers near the frog to accomplish the widening even better. If all exits of the turnouts are fed current, it is inconsequential.
Crandell
I have one of the larger Walthers-Shinohara curved turnouts. I drive it with a Tortoise, and I’m very happy with it. I use Atlas code 83 flex track. Like all curved track joints, it’s important to be careful and maintain a constant radius through the joint, avoiding kinks, but that’s just a generic track-laying rule and isn’t specific to curved turnouts.
I’m in the process of wiring all the frogs for power through the Tortoise contacts for my WS turnouts. This is an easier thing to do if you plan for it while installing the turnout. My curved turnout is one of the longer turnouts on my layout, with a correspondingly long frog, so this is probably a good idea.
I also have a few Peco curved turnouts. These, two, work very well. I drive them with Peco twin-coil machines.
The Code 83 curved turnouts are the Walthers Shinohara brand as opposed to the older Shinohara brand which are Code 100 turnouts.
I have used the #7.0, #7.5, and #8.0 curved turnouts from Walthers Shinohara. They work fine, but the key is to provide a stable base because these turnouts are exceptionally flexible. You need to guard against uneven rails caused by an unstable base.
The actual radii of these curved turnouts have been disputed, but the advertised radius of each curve is:
#7.0 - Inner Curve 24" - Outer Curve 28"
#7.5 - Inner Curve 28" - Outer Curve 32"
#8.0 - Inner Curve 32" - Outer Curve 36"
Rich
At the risk of changing the subject slightly, I have used the Peco brand large radius curved turnouts on my layout to create a crossover and thus far I have had no derailment problems. The nominal 60" radius of the larger curve is larger than the 42" radius curve it is part of (so it actually doubles as a crude version of an easement curve).
Having said that I have not tried my old brass Pennsy 2-10-2 on the crossover, and most of my engines are four axle GPs or switchers. In my prototype, the six axle mainline engines would rarely, if ever, had to use the crossover.
What is interesting is that that curved turnout really saved space for me, as I had very limited length of a tangent in that area, and I could begin the crossover significantly earlier than if it had had to be on a tangent.
I had an old Shinohara curved turnout that I had acquired with that thought in mind, and I agree about its flexibility. Sound tracklaying technique is a must for that brand of turnout, including the step many guys neglect, and that is sanding down the cork roadbed to a smooth even surface.
Dave Nelson.
The problem with laying a Walthers Shinohara curved turnout on an unstable surface is directly related to the size and shape of the curved turnout. It is easily “warped” if I can use that term. What goes wrong is that the rails become vertically uneven, one rail higher or lower than the other rail. This situation would be problematic enough on a straight section of track, but it is fatal on a curved section of track, making derailments all but inevitable.
Rich
Sometimes I’ve had to add a .010" or so shim to the wing rails to avoid picking at the frog and shorts. Just keeping everything to NMRA specs helps a lot.
Curved turnouts perform better with a very solid and level (in plane if with superelevated, etc trackwork) roadbed. I use 3/16ths basswood several inches leading up to, under and for a several inches after the turnout. BTW, the basswood is formed before ballasting.
Richard
I have one of the Walthers/Shinohara large radius turnouts and it works pretty good, but I have replaced another and a Peco as well with Fast Tracks turnouts. I buy them thru Ebay and the guy who makes them does a great job. His tournouts are absolutely flawless in operation and I may go and replace the remaining W/S one. I have paid about $37 each which isn’t much different than the W/S or Peco brands. He prewires the frog and drills the throwbar to whatever you request.
-Bob
The actual inner radius is 2+" less than advertised, as others have noted, depending on how one measures.
The other challenge is that these are physically pretty long and thus harder to fit into tight spots.
The PECO Code 83 curved turnouts are more compact and work well – worth consideration.
Another problem with the Walthers/Shinohara curved turnouts is how badly out of gauge they can be at the points. The gauge on the last one I installed was so wide that code 88 wheelsets could easily fall off in between the rails. The issue can be corrected with some re-spiking, but is somewhat annoying to have to fix something like this.
my experiences have all been with shinohara code 100 number 8 curved switches. i have 3 of them on my layout… i was pretty proud of my trackwork and had a zero tolerance attitude about derailments. things went pretty smoothly for several years when i was running mostly diesel power and a few chinese plastic steamers. trouble started when i dug out some long wheelbase, 8 and 10 drivered brass engines i had stashed years ago.
i had to rework all those switches with files, dental scapers. sandpaper etc. even with the wheels in gauge, operation of that early brass is still an iffy proposition. i still have an occasional derailment or bind up in those curved switches.
bottom line is it depends on what kind of equipment your are going to try to operate.
a short test track with one of those switches included might be in order.
charlie
I believe it was discussed at least once here, maybe five years ago now, and someone observed that the frogs are incorrect for those turnouts. The geometry is wrong. If you look at a regular turnout, and then at how a curved one should work, you would expect the frog point rails to also fall into the general curvature geometry. They do not on the W/S curved turnouts. When one of my steamers stumbles on my longest, a #8, it is at the frog…every time. Usually a high-drivered Northern will catch its second or third driver axle.and one of the flanges seems to pick the frog point.
I guess you could argue that the guard opposite isn’t doing its job, but when I gauge the curved #8 with the flange gauge, it looks pretty close to spec between the guard and the stock rail.
Crandell
The only problem I’ve ever had with them, as noted above, is a loco brushing against the idle switch point. I did not want to put shims or nail polish on it , even though I do not depend on the point for powering the sliding point, as I was seeking a permanent solution. I run old light steam brass locos that tend to wander side to side a bit in the moguls and smaller wheel arrangements.
I have found two solutions the the Shinohara curved turnouts;
Be sure the sliding point rail is standing 90 degrees to the ties from the ties. Sometimes they are laying out toward the stock rail which closes the space available for the flanges.
I have had on one turnout to unsolder the metal connector plate between the sliding rails and narrow it about .030" and then resolder, thus opening the space to the stock rail. Make sure your turnout machine takes the new slack out.
see ya
Bob
I have several W/S curved turnouts of all sizes and find:
• The diverging radius is consistently exactly 2" less than advertised. I have checked that a couple of ways, including using Ribbonrail gauges.
• The rails through the frogs are curved (ever so slightly, of course, but definitely a continuation of the curve of the stock rails).
• So far, no problem with too great a width through the points.
I agree that they should be on a firm, level roadbed or base. Mine are spiked on Homabed and Homasote (where there is no raised roadbed).
Dante
Ironically, I got a #8 turnout for a transition, and I felt 32" would fit close enough to my 30" radius curve. As has been alluded to on this thread, the inner portion actually fits perfectly on a 30" curve. And I mean exactly!
I guess that’s why…