While looking at the stack of Atlas code 83 rerailers I plan to liberally spread around my hidden track I began to wonder what a “I don’t care what it looks like 99.999% effective rerailer” specifically for hidden track would look like.
Does one exist?
If not, how hard it would be to make. I’m thinking it would have high gutters on the sides and a peak just under axle level in the middle that would funnel the wheels back onto the track. Would it need to be car length, or would truck length work just as well?
Sounds like a possible application for one of those 3D printers folks were discussing the last several days.
Not a great web page, but these work well for me. What you are describing sounds like it could cause more trouble with cars that are slightly out of spec.
Have you found the Atlas re-railers to be defficient? I find they work very well. I have several strategically plaqced around my layout–in tunnels and other hard to reach places and one or two on each staging/storage track.
The biggest problem you might face building one yourself will be increasing the height of the moulded in raised areas without interferring with the rolling stock. For instance, if you were to have the center section be just below the axels, how would the coupler trip pins clear? (Maybe a groove in the center where the trip pins hang down.) On the outer sides of the rails you would need to allow for rollomg stock ladders and steamers side rods.
My wish is for a 30" radius curved re-railer. I may wind up trying to build one myself but pattered very closely to the Atlas design with the raised portions level with the rail heads.
Just a thought! Rather than a rerailer in your curve, think of one guard rail next to your inside rail of your curve, like you see on bridge track. I have seen them on some prototype’s, seems to me it would work.
Interesting question. I’m assuming (maybe unfairly) that they work no better than the old ones I have experience with that were about 75% effective. But since you mentioned it, on closer examination these don’t look the same as the old ones. Maybe I need to do some testing before I start another science project.
Have you tried these? They look pretty cool. Do they work with code 83 track?
Cars “slightly out of spec” are not allowed on the layout. [:)] Maybe a side benefit would be this gadget serving dual duty as both a rerailer AND an out of spec car rejector.
I found that it was not difficult to build a curved rerailer. I just traced the curve on scratch paper to make a pattern. I use code 100 flex track, so I laminated two pieces of .040 styrene plastic together. Once the pattern was transfered to the styrene plastic and cut out, a bit of filing left an insert that matched the curve and fits nicely between the ties and the railheads. Flat black paint keeps it from being obvious. Extra ballast along the inside of the problem curve guides any truck that climbs off the track back to where it belongs.
From what I can see, the Jiffy Railer at $7.95 each (3 pack) looks very similar to the Atlas code 83 @$8.50 each (3 pack). The Atlas pieces include a piece of track. The Jiffy Railer says it is for code 100. If someone says it works for code 83, that is a plus.
The big advantage I see for the J-F is that it can be installed over an existing piece of straight track.
As far as price goes, I always look at what it would cost me in time to re-invent a new wheel or a different wheel. Even if you paid list for the Atlas pieces, they come to $2.83 each. I don’t think I could invent something for $2.83 each, even if I needed a thousand of them.
Concentrate on good trackwork and properly mounted trucks and couplers. To be safe, don’t put turnouts in hidden spaces. Use metal wheelsets to reduce rolling friction and lower stresses in your trains.
If you need rerailers, there is something wrong already. Sooner or later, persistent derailments will create a mess that rerailers can’t handle.
I agree good trackwork will virtually eliminate derailments. I concentrate on good driving but I also have insurance. There are a couple of places on my layout that are very hard to reach. I have never had a derailment there but, as insurance, I put rerailers on either end of both places.
They are also handy in the staging area for placing rolling stick on the rails to make up a train.
I totally concur with your thinking, Roger, as I have used rerailers for the same purposes for many years. Even with excellent track work, sometimes cars and trucks do odd things. Trains that travel through a 60" tunnel-a homage to the rail tunnels through the Cascade Mountains (yes, the backside has mostly unfettered access)-can make operators nervous, so a rerailer helps a great deal.
In the sixties, in my basement, I had a two level mountain in one corner, that could change the layout level, very similar to a helix, but not quite, anyway! I could access the inside cause it was open. Well I learned the hard way, along with a rerailer, also include, at least a 3’’ high guard on the perimeter of the trackwork. I had a brass Balboa 2-8-2 take a nose dive onto the concrete floor, it damaged it so bad, that it is, was beyond repair. I still have it, whenever I get my butt in gear, I will use it on a side track, next to my roundhouse.[:'(]
I find rerailers usefull for puting rolling stock on the track. When I started the layout Atlas was the only one I saw. It works well but is bulky and very visible.
I have since switched to the Jiffy Rerailer. As has been said it fits inbetween the rails and doesn’t standout as much. With that said it takes a little more effort to get the cars on the rails with the Jiffy than the Atlas, but of course I’m rerailing both trucks at once. As I said I only use the rerailers to put my cars on the track. Normal rerailing a car should work easier that what I’m doing.
They make a kit for Code 83. I have a couple. They work fairly well but the coupler air hoses must be high enough to clear. Haven’t decided to build more until I settle on locations.
Dante
P.S. Oops! I just looked at their web site. It appears that they have dropped the Code 83 kit. But I agree that it would be a good project for a 3D printer.
Thanks again for suggesting a guard rail. I put one in ans it seems to work great. No problems caused by the rail itself and no derailments, although they were not frequent before. I have since discovered another site that is going to get one.
I bought Code 83 Jiffy-railers last year. Try calling or emailing the guy/co. I think a search would likely come up with a few online, still. I’m surprised that the Code 83s “seem” to be discontinued… most HO modelers use Code 83 these days for mainline track. I use them inside dead end short stub tunnel mouths where one can see “in there”. They hide much better than the Atlas versions which I use in staging and hidden trackage. I find the ends to sometimes stick up a bit so a tiny drop of white glue or tacky glue can help if yours is slightly bowed.
I often have wondered why atlas never manufactured curved turnouts for larger radii. (30" and up). That would be a great product.
I agree that no matter how “perfect” and “bullet proof” one lays their track, there are just too many variables with rolling stock or inexperienced engineers to prevent ALL derailments. A rerailer sure beats crawling under the benchwork or removing panels for access if they’ll prevent that most of the time. I don’t like 'em where I can see 'em though.