I am ready to purchase Shinohara track, primarily their turnouts. Before I do, I would like to know of anyone’s experiences with Shinohara. It looks impressive, but that may not always be the best indicator. And I am not just interested in the turnouts, but all.
Thanks
PRR1,
I have,Atlas,flex-track,Atlas-turnouts and Shinohara curved turnouts on my layout and I’m highly satisfied…
Cheers,
Frank
I have about forty turnouts and 330’ of track and couldn’t be happier. When I returned to the hobby, several years back I went to the train store and they had every brand on a board so you could compare them to one another. I really liked how the Shinohara looked and the fact it stays bent when you bend it really appealed to me.
I have about 20 Walthers Shinohara code 83 DCC friendly turnouts, numbers 5, 6, 8 and 7-1/2 curved. I used Atlas brown-tied flex track and a few Atlas 90-degree crossings. I selected the W-S turnouts partly because of the wide selection available, which gave me lots of flexibility on my fairly tight 5+ x 9+ ft layout; e.g., many curved turnout options for crossovers on curves. One turnout had a failed jumper, which I could have discovered before installing if I had checked them first (recommended), but easily fixed with an additional feeder connected to the unconnected rail. And the 3-way turnout I recently added has a teeny track piece where locos can easily bridge and cause a short, but it’s again easily fixed by a bit of nail polish or unjumpering the almost unnecessary power to that piece (an obscure issue unique to this turnout that someone pointed out in a thread). Operationally they have done ok for me; tortoise setup went ok, minimal “picking of points”, etc. On some, one loco (a BLI SD-40) had wheel treads can more easily bridge the gap and cause a short, not sure if the fault of the turnout design or the wheel flanges (or both), but easily corrected with nail polish, etc. I disliked the Atlas crossings as the they required modification as they were too tight at the guard rails; I’d use Shinohara there if doing again. That’s all the issues I’ve had.
I think you will discover many Peco turnout fans here, citing perhaps a quality edge. And quite a few Atlas users who can also comment. On flextack, Atlas tends to be most inexpensive and appearance is adequate. Shinohara might be pricier, a bit better looking(?), Peco fairly detailed and Micro-Engineering very nice. In my case I decided the Atlas in combo with W-S turnouts would be fine, as I would be painting the track (would tend to mask the differences) before ballasting and the detail differences in brands were
I’ve gotten to where I just don’t recommend Shinohara turnouts. The code 70 #6 turnouts are consistently wide in gauge through the frog, and wheelsets can bounce across the guard rails and/or frog wing rails. The gauge itself isn’r readily cured, but the problem can be somewhat alleviated by filing. The same turnouts have a poorly designed contact strip arrangement between the point and frog rails. This flimsy material is deformed easily even in normal use and sometimes has to be removed to allow the points and stock rails to seat properly. Shinohara’s code 70 turnouts aren’t “DCC friendly” out of the package, as they still use a “live frog” design.
The above issues can be worked around, and won’t necessarily cause serious operational trouble, but I’d rather avoid dealing with them and use a product that works consistently better out of the package.
Their flextrack is fine. It looks and works much the same as Micro Engineering.
The Walthers code 83 products are also made by Shinohara. These turnouts are DCC friendly, and have fewer gauge issues, although the very end of every route through a Walthers code 83 turnout can be wide in gauge and require re-spiking. The curved turnouts, especially #8, are typically very wide in gauge at the points, which can cause “semi scale” code 88 wheelsets to fall off the track when negotiating the diverging route. Again, proper installation and tuneup can address all these issues. Walthers code 83 flex track is pretty much the same to work with as Shinohara code 70.
Unless you’re really set on Shinohara, I could suggest looking seriously at Micro Engineering. I like their turnouts better for both performance and appearance, their product is made in USA, and is usually available for much less cost, especial
Eh? LION had some problems with Shinohara turnouts, but those were purchased in the 1960s. LION finds nothing wrong with the new ones (other than the price).
ROAR
Hi, PRR
I have put down quite a bit of code 83 Walthers Shinohara track and I am very satisfied with its performance. I’ve learned a few tricks along the way.
I pre-drill any spike holes with a #60 or slighty smaller drill in a pin vice. The spike holes are near the tie ends and the tie will break off if you don’t enlarge the hole. I use Atlas 5/8 round head spikes. Always use a fine mill file to taper slightly the rail base so you can push on the joiner. I’ve used all brands of joiners. The Atlas 83/100 are big but easy to push on so you can use them where appearance isn’t a problem. The Shinoharas have pressed in bolt patterns but to me don’t hold well. The M-E code 83 joiners are very good and that’s what I primarily use and I have used N scale Atlas but there’s a method I’ve developed for installing them.
I have a modified Exacto #11 blade that I ground off the sharp edge and formed the point to about the width of the rail base. I predd the joiner onto this blade to slightly widen it, then turn the joiner around and while still on the blade, it makes like an application tool for pushing the joiner onto the rail base.
Later I use scrap ties to fill in the gaps under the joiners and apply a little heat from a soldering iron to melt the joiner down into the tie.
The Shinohara track has little nubs from the molding process that have to be trimmed off on some of the ties.
Some of the switch frogs have to have a “knife edge” jeweler’s file passed over them to smooth out some plastic that has oozed over the rail.
That’s about it… overall, I’m very satisfied with the quality and performance plus the huge selection of the turnouts available make it a winner for me!
Take care, ED
You don’t mention what particular code - 100, 83, 70 - you are intending to purchase. I have used Shinohara code 100 turnouts and Atlas flextrack for years and have never had a serious problem. I say ‘serious problem’ because lately there have been supply issues with both products so my advice is to spend the money now, buy what you need and maybe stockpile a little. As to cost, shop around especially online. i consistently find cheaper pricing at online retailers and even with the added shipping cost, it still beats my LHS.
I am planning on using code 100. I have some Atlas turnouts right now. I am doing a dry run on track placement and have used a hopper car just to make sure that the layout is how I want. Sometimes the turnouts create rough going. I have to switch it twice for the hopper car to go through smoothly. I still need track to complete the whole layout. That is why I was asking about Shinohara.
Thanks
PRR,
Having installed and operated both Shinohara and MEC turnouts, my preference for any future purchases is definitely MEC. Exactly what causes all the occurrences of derailing of mainly leading and trailing steam locomotive wheels is unclear to me, but it is very much an issue with the Shinoharas, both straight and curved. Additionally, the MEC turnouts have that spring-loaded feature that makes them remain where they are set when switching. I have no experience with Shinohara flextrack, but have used both Atlas and MEC with success. The Atlas is much easier to manipulate into the desired track form, but of course needs to be caulked, glued, pinned or nailed down to hold it there. The MEC stays in the shape you give it , but is very rigid, which takes some getting used to (but those slight variations in an otherwise straight track section when shaping it do look very prototypical). All my experience has been with the code 83 products. You are wise to do thorough research as the many products available behave differently. Be patient and have fun.
Wilton.
This may be an indication of other factors at work. Are you using some kind of throw mechanism to hold the points in place? Operation through turnouts can be problematic unless you use a ground throw or switch machine.
In addition, have you checked the gauge on the track with an NMRA gauge and corrected everything that’s too wide or narrow in gauge?
Have you tuned up the turnout to eliminate casting flash around the frog, filed down a misaligned frog casting, ensured the points line up with the stock rails, and other basic turnout tune up?
Do all your rail joints line up as they should, ensuring smooth transitions that won’t affect operation of equipment? A misaligned rail joint can get a car ready to derail as it reaches a turnout, and it can derail moving through the turnout itself. Thus a derailment problem that appears to be the turnout may be something else.
Are you using good quality wheelsets on your test car, are they in gauge, and are the trucks swiveling and rocking properly? A problem with any of these could be creating trouble that has nothing to do with your track.
If you do plan on mixing track components, check for compatibility. The main issues are height of ties, which you should match or it will be a big PITA to correct, and railjoiners, which depend on the rail cross-section.
I’ve got 100+ Shinohara and Walthers Shinohara turnouts, HO, HOn3 and dual-gauge. They look good, are fairly robust, and provide reliable operation.
The only “issue” I’ve noted are the flangeways/frogs on the Shinohara dual-gauge turnouts are a bit sloppy, so the narrowgauge rolling stock passing through has a slight lurch as it crosses through. Works fine, but does catch your eye. The only way around this is to buy custom-made or build them yourself. If I had it to do over, I might go with FastTracks to build these myself, but that wasn’t an option when these were laid.
For the new club layout, we decided on Walther’s/ Shinohara code 83 track and turnouts. We have thousands of ft of track and hundreds of turnouts. They have worked out quite satisfactory w/ only a few minor problems. Kind of a good “Test Track” for the product. We still will handlay and use Fast trax for some specialty areas. I realize the excellent quality of the ME, but Walther’s had far better avail at the time of our decision.
All turnouts are powered w/ Tortoise, The double slips can be a bit tricky but still work decent
We have a few members w/ some finicky steam and old brass. derailments are rare and usually due to equipment or operator error.
Shinohara turnouts have no more problems than the others unless you go Proto, in that case building your own is the only way to go. Shinohara turnouts are easy to repair and modify without falling apart. I have repaired many broken turnouts (most bought broken or something happened while in storage). They can be made DCC friendly in a few different ways. I have arround 50 turnouts and over 200 feet of track, proubly way more.
I used the Walthers/Shinohara Code 83 flex and turnouts exclusively. The principal reason for selection was that W/S has an extensive selection of curved turnouts which my plan required; also, the track looks good. The only significant problems I have had have been with some of the older non-DCC turnouts bought used on E-Bay (point to stock rail contacts sometimes unreliable).
If you use the W/S spikes, there is no need to enlarge the spike holes. Also, I have found the W/S Code 83 joiners provide a very snug fit, much tighter than Atlas.
I have a double-slip turnout and a 3-way, both of which work smoothly. I have experienced what another poster described with the 3-way: a short piece of isolated rail that can short a loco wheel. In my case, it only happens with one of several locos and only occasionally after I applied the nail polish solution. I may try adding polish to the side of the rail head as well.
In short, I am well-pleased with the W/S Code 83 product.
Dante
P.S. I agree with the suggestion to slightly taper the ends of the bases of the rails before joining. Also, taper the inside end of the rail head slightly to minimize picking by the wheels.
Have Shinohara and love them
The Shinohara turnouts do look great and I have a few code 100 and 83 myself. However, after converting to DCC they became a real nightmare with electrical shorts all over the layout. If you want the Shinohara note that Only the new Walthers code 83 are DCC friendly assuming you will be using DCC of course. Watch out for the older Shinohara / Walthers code 83 as they are NOT DCC friendly. So unless you plan on spending a lot of time cutting gaps in your turnouts to isolate the power to the frogs and wire jumpers and reverse polarity circuits I would stay clear of all turnouts with electified (all metal) frogs. I have chosen the Peco insulfrog turnouts on my new layout and modified a couple of my existing fancy Shinoharas switchs not available from Peco.
I found your response most interesting for several reasons. I have in use both the M/E and the Shinohara code 70 turnouts on my layout, as well both companies’ flex track. My experiences have been that the M/E is both harder to find at the stores and even in some on line sellers and they are more expensive than the Shinohara. I agree the built in spring on the M/E is a good deal, I have have no more operational problems with one type of turnout than with the other. Actually, both operate very well for me and I am pleased with both. As for the flex track, the Shinohara is easier to flex but the M/E (particullary the weathered) looks better to me. It appears that you could put me in the “undecided” column.
Old Fat Robert
I have a few of the old Walthers/Shinohara turnouts along with those that are DCC-friendly. Except for a couple of locations where I wanted to use the power-routing characteristic of the old turnouts to serve stub sidings that I sometimes want to be without power, I simply gapped the 2 rails forming the frogs where they met other track. I used insulating joiners. No cut gaps, no jumpers or reverse polarity circuits and no problems so far. Just make sure that you have power feeds somewhere on each side of the turnout (and I don’t mean necessarily on the turnout itself).
Dante