I’ve read two recommendations. Frog points (not the moveable switching points) should be as sharp-pointy as possible as they come from the factory or
(2.) they should be slightly rounded off on the top of the tips to help prevent “picking” the frog. What’s the “true” story? Will rounding them decrease their life substantially over the years? Is it better to round them or not?
After reading that they should be rounded slightly I did that, but before I ballast, I figured it was a good idea to check and see what you guys do. My turnouts are Shinoharas. They’re all soldered in place and the buss drop wires are also soldered in so I’m thinking I’ll just cut 'em out some day if need be, at this point they work just fine.
please don’t think i am being a smart ass but it really shouldn’t matter. if your wheels and trackwork are properly gauged then, the guard rails should keep the wheels from “picking” the frog point.
i had a batch of peco code 100 switches that needed .010" shims applied to the guard rails. once that was done, no more problems so long as the wheels were properly spaced on the axles.
Yes, it depends on the proper gauging of both the axles taking the turnout and the points and guards. If they are properly specked (is that a word?), and it would also help if the car meets NMRA weight guidelines, you should have no trouble either way.
Having made a few turnouts using the Fast Tracks’ method, I know that getting the right frog point angles and set-backs from tight to the wing guards so that the flanges have a clear line-o’-sight path through the wings and the frog point gaps, is necessary for trouble-free running. So, if you can manage to get the clearances through the frog, the shape of its nose should be largely inconsequential.
However…
In order to round the point, you must by default set the frog closer to the gap between the wings unless you are willing to accept a sightly larger gap at the frog point. You are now encroaching on the gauge. So, I would stick with a sharpened point and the gaps all meeting spec.
Very true. The difference in how far the frog point extends into the throat only affects wheel drop in the frog. If your wheel widths are at least twice the flangeway dimension, there should be no wheel drop (or suspension in air by the rigid truck sideframe), as the wing rail will provide proper support. If your frog flangeway is wider than spec or you are using semi-scale wheels, then wheel drop (or suspension in air) is more likely. If the frog point is cut back far enough, this has the same effect as making the frog flangeway excessively wide.
Just as important would be the slot that the points rest in. I’ve had more problems with flanges catching sharp edges of the pocket than anything else.
FWIW. As a matter of practice, I slightly round any rail end in the track area to accomplish 2 things:
For running-rails, it is to reduce the stubbing of wheel treads and flanges on a sharp rail end, particularly on curves, and especially in a room where the “climate” varies in temperature.
For guards, wing-rails or any other ends in the track, including the frog point, it is to reduce the snagging and wear on track cleaning pads. It’s amazing where that fuzz goes!
I also agree. Sometimes I glue in a thin strip of plastic to the inside of the guardrail to make sure the wheel going through the frog is pulled over so as not to pick the frog. Other times I trim the frog point down so the wheels won’t pick it. But the main thing is to maintain the gauge and clearance according to the NMRA gauge.
About gluing a 10-thou strip on the bearing surface of the frog guardrail…
So far, I’ve only seen this as necessary on the Peco Code 100- & 75 switches. They are rated for HO and OO sizes. I haven’t seen it on their C-83 switches, which are not OO rated.
Yup I am amazed at the amout of effort spent fixing issues that don’t really exist.
Personally when I had lay turnouts I make the frog as pointy as possible. I make the gap between the point and the end of closure rails as small as possible.
Aside from reading that I should “kiss them with a file”, I also thought they felt too high when I ran my palm or finger over them. They caught “on me” more than any other thing on the layout.
I think the comment about cleaning rags and cleaning car fluff had some good points. I hadn’t thought about that at the time. Well, at least it sounds like I won’t regret rounding them a bit or have to pull 'em up before their time.
You can’t use the palm or finger since flesh will push over the edge. since skin is soft it will grab everything sharp. Not a good test IMO. Use a straight edge to judge or an actual car.
Yes, you have a good point there, but the frog tips were (in my view) abnormally high with a straight edge and using the edge of an NMRA gauge. I do think a track cleaning car might have had an “issue” with them but I don’t own one yet.
That’s when I started poking around to read up on whether or not it was ok to dress them with a file. At that time I was too much of a newbie (still am) to know if it would make any difference.
THEN I got all paranoid that they might cause problems later and maybe I should rip them out and replace before ballasting because I did round them some.
So far everything from a Big Boy to 60’ passenger cars have gone through them without issue.
Didn’t really want to buy more expensive turnouts if I didn’t need them and everything is soldered together drops to buss wires included. The “paranoia” began when a friend came by and told me that he’d just read that the frogs should be as pointy as possible.
I think any filing should be done in moderation. If you get too carried away with the filing (and I’m assuming you mean filing on the sides of the frog, not rounding over the vertical leading edge) you can actually get the point so sharp that you’ll weaken that area. On the other hand, if you look at the frog and see some sort of booger along side the frog, you’ll want to remove that.
The latest (August) issue of MR has an article on turnouts. Look at the picture of the frog on the bottom left side of page 36. If you look close you’ll see that the frog actually has that slightly rounded tip that I think you’re speaking of.
In the picture you’ll see that the tip sort of has a round nose on it, but this is in the horizontal plane. If you are talking about a rounded edge on the top of the frog, that’s a different story. My personal opinion on that is if you check across the turnout with a straight edge as others have mentioned, and that tip does not snag the straight edge, you should be good to go.
Most of the track cleaning cars that incorporate a sliding type block of some sort have the forward edges tapered somewhat so that they will slide over slight vertical track imperfections. I don’t think the rolling type track cleaners care one way or the other.
The CMX cars, which have a sliding fabric covered pad, may be another story. They are made with the taper on the leading edge of the metal pad, but the fabric covering can occasionally snag on sharp vertical imperfections. Typically that might be something like the vertical wire up through the throw bar from an under mounted switch machine. If it snags on any track work, then some judicious filing would be in order.