Has anyone had experience with Fleischmann Profi-track turnouts?
I have quite a number of them that I acquired sometime ago, and I plan on using them, along with a good number of Peco turnouts, on my new layout. They appear to be quite well made.
Just wondering if anyone cares to elaborate on their experiences using them??
Had this reply on another forum,…
[QUOTE]The Fleischmann standard turnouts are designed according to NEM standards. The gap between frog and closure rail is quite large. European wheels run on their flanges through this gap. The flange height of these wheels is up to 0.05’’ compared to RP25 with 0.025’'.
RP25 wheels can drop into this gap. The angle between straight and diverging track is 18°, the radius 25.5’'.
Than there is the high speed turnout. It has a movable frog that closes the gap between closure rail and frog. Angle and radius a with the standard turnout.
I have used both on a switching layout with RP25 wheels. At slow speed the standard turnout let the cars stagger but not derail. The high speed turnout work good even at higher speeds.
You should test the standard turnout with RP25 wheels and see if you can live with the staggering and if you get derailments at higher speeds.
Regards, Volker [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
The offered etched metal inlays to make their turnouts RP25 compatible.
https://www.ebay.at/itm/Roco-Spur-H0-98019-Atzbogen-RP25-Herzstuckeinsat…
These Roco parts show that it can be done. They wouldn’t fit Fleischmann turnouts because of different geometries.
I know of only two European track systems that are RP25 code 110 compatible: Peco Streamline code 75, 83, and 100; and Tilli
In this modern computer age I wonder how difficult it would be to develop some of those for the Fleischmann profi-track turnouts?
Who exactly owns Fleischmann now? Wonder if I might contact them and ask?
So we have 2 candidate materials suggested thus far to use in shimming up the height of those ‘canyons’ between the rails preceding the frog points,…styrene and metal:
Metal,…I think would present too many arcing and shorting problems, particularly with DCC operation
Styrene,…perhaps too soft to resist excess wear by those sometimes too-sharp wheel flanges
Alternatives?
Acetal/“engineering plastic” - has an additional advantage, perhaps, if output by a 3D printer in net shape. Can be difficult to adhere if unprimed (see recent threads on cement and adhesives) but I think it is what I’d try first.
That could be a problem with those little pieces in that tight confine.
Were it Me…I would not even mess with them. Get some that You don’t have to fiddle with. Free or not…not worth the time to get them reliable, in My book.
Your Call…[:D]
Frank
Yes, you can fix the problem, no, you don’t want to unless you want to make fixing switches your hobby. Did this before just to see if I could with another brand and a different set of problems, I could but the time put in was not worth it.
I never even saw what these looked like, but after seeing the post in the other forum - I’d not bother. The issue isn’t even the depth of the frog area and wheels dropping in. It appears to me they need shims both in the frog flangeway to keep wheels from dropping down AND shims on the guard rails to keep the wheels pulled over to the proper side of the frog point. A good bit of fiddling to hopefully end up with a turnout that won’t frustrate you as every other car that rolls through derails.
–Randy
Brian,
I almost forgot I had this…I had bought some HON30 cog rail from them for a project that I worked on. After browsing through the forums…it’s quite possible You may have the older switches…newer ones are somewhat improved…but the bottom line IS…they Do Not play well with the RP25 contour wheels. If You would like to get in touch with them to ask for any fix or read and join the forums for help, here is the link. They did help Me in the past…but can’t guarantee Your help.
https://www.reynaulds.com/contact-us.aspx
I personally would go with another brand though…
Take Care! [:D]
Frank
I am still using very similar ROCO switches in the staging yard. ROCO offered at that time brass parts to be put (glued) in the frogs. That works very well. Derails happened frequent without that small brass parts.
This an example how the ROCO part looks like (from German eBay)
Thanks for that Reinhard. I also saw this reference,…
but I don’t read German, and I’ve forgotten how to get a translation of the page.
I’ve heard that Roco bought out Fleischmann, so I am wondering if those Roco ‘shims’ would work on my Fleischmann turnouts??
You could have found all that out if You used the Reynaulds link I posted…
Take Care! [:D]
Frank
First, the ebay page you linked is Italian. It shows a etched parts by an aftermarket supplier. Reinhard’s link shows the original parts formely offered by Roco.
Second, Roco offered the inserts for their 10° turnouts and crossings only IIRC.
As the inserts are for 10° turnouts they won’t fit for 18° Fleischmann turnout.
Regards, Volker
This past Sunday I did an inventory of my turnout inventory. As it turns out it appears as thought I have plenty of Peco turnouts to build my new pike with,…maybe supplemented with a few nice Roco and Atlas customline.
So I will likely sell off these nice Fleischmann ones, rather than try to modify them.
In most of my reading and research it appears as though the depth of the flangeways in turnouts is NOT a big controlling factor of derailments. It is more of a question of the widths (excessive) of the flangeways that causes problems. And these wide flangeways would be even more problematic with those thin scale wheels that I have NO intention of utilizing
RP25 wheels might not derail because of the smaller flanges compared to NEM but they will wobble. You can try it easily.
Fleischmann and Roco have this problem, Peco not IIRC.
Regards, Volker
Just to clarify,…
When I inspected my Fleischmann, and Roco, and Peco turnouts beside each other, I detected:
they all appear to have deeper flangeways than the ‘normal’ (RP25?) wheels that come on most of our stock USA HO model locomotives and freight cars these days?
as I seem to understand it these RP25 wheels are wide enough that for the most part they are supported thru the frog area WITHOUT depending on shallow flangeways?
the exception being the Fleischmann turouts that have VERY WIDE flangeways in the flog areas?
my Roco and Peco turnouts seem to have similar characteristics of deep flangeways and moderately wide guide (safety) rail gaps,…that might be assisted by added shims to their guide rails,…to limit some of that wobble they might incur??