Has anyone put the gap in the rail on the N scale Electrofrog turnout itself instead of in the joint or in the next piece of track? It leaves a very short piece of rail. Not sure if that would be a problem. Also do you ever really need the gap in the outer rails? Seems to me the inner rails are sufficient.
There’s no need to gap the outer rails at all, the short problem is with the frog rails.
As far as gapping those, just use insulated rail joiners to connect the frog rails to the adjoining piece of track. That way you don’t have to cut anything.
I use flex track (I use fixed radius if curved for the first piece if curved). Anyway, the flex doesn’t work well with the plastic joiners when curved. Wants to spring back. Besides, if I can figure out how to cut the gap on the switch, I can make up these turnouts all for use with no further modifications necessary. I will be relying on the points to power the frog, not sure how reliable THAT is. Right now I am using Insulfrogs and considering using Electrofrogs.
If I were you, I’d stay with the insulfrog turnouts. I assume the elecrtofrog turnouts are less expensive, but the insulfrogs are trouble free and very dependable. It’s very important not to linger too long with the iron while soldering the joints at the frog.
I used Micro Engineering turnouts on my layout, because I thought they looked better. My neighbor swears by the Peco insulfrogs. The only thing I don’t like about them is the need to trim the ties on the inner rails beyond the frog.
My Insulfrogs are pretty good. The advantage of Electrofrogs is powered rails all the way through the switch with NO dead spots. Insulfrogs have dead spot on the frog. Small steam and even some diesels will stall at slow speeds throught the turnout at slow speeds. Electro frogs dont let this happen. Peco has a spring on all their turnouts. No need for electric switch machines or manual throws. Nice turnouts, best there are…
No one, either HO or N, has ever tried to put the gap in the very end of the Peco turnout? Any help at all? I think it would work. The problem is you are going to end up with a pretty small piece of rail. I will be filling the gap with black plastic and CA glue. There will be one tie after the gap. Any hope of it working?
Pilot:
PECO turnouts ARE power-routed.It makes no difference. Just insulate the inner ‘frog’ rails
INSULFROGS have electrically dead frogs for DCC, that’s it.Jumpers carry the current around the frog. One must still insulate the two inner rails.
If you are using DC, ELECTROFROGS permit electrifying externally - that’s all.
I’ve personally installed over twenty Peco insulfrog turnouts and none has required insulating the frog rails.
Insulfrog turnouts route the power from the individual point rails across the frog to the diverging rails.
The electrofrog turnouts power the frog from the point rails and to both diverging rails, hence the need for insulation.
Yes only electrofrogs need inulators and only on the two inner rails.
I tried to cut a gap in a N scale Peco turnout. The rail wont hold with only one tie. Doesnt work. I guess the insulator is a viable option. Either that or cut gaps in the adjacent track piece.
I think you mentioned in an earlier post, your thought of using fixed radius snap track adjacent to the turnout. I think that’s a good idea. You can solder the outer rail and leave a gap on the inner. You can also file the end of the inner rail to open the gap and fill it with styrene as you mentioned previously.
I’d suggest that you remove the snap track ties at the joint(Atlas) and put a couple of ties for the flex track in their place(just my opnion).
The fixed radius track section would eliminate any pressure on the rail joint and prevent kinking.
Right you are.
Has anyone used Peco’s N scale fixed radius track? I used Atlas and though the mixed track seemed to work, I think it would be better to use the same mfg for turnouts, flex and fixed.
Are you using code 80 track and turnouts? If you are, there’s no problem at all mixing the Peco turnouts with Atlas flex or snap track.
If you’re using code 55, there is an issue. The Peco code 55 has taller rails set deerper into the ties and that may present a problem joining with Atlas track.
The only difference I’ve seen with the code 80 is the tie spacing. The Peco turnouts have ties spaced farther apart than the Atlas track, but it isn’t grossly obvious once the ballast has been put in place.
As I mentioned in a previous post, my only issue with the Peco turnouts is the need to trim ties on diverging track sections at the frog. If they’d just extend the frog rails alittle bit, that wouldn’d be necessary. It’s really just a minor annoyance.