Hello all,
I’m working in N Scale and want to build a stub-end freight yard where space is a premium. I see Peco makes some #4 insulfrog turnouts – would it be safe to use those in this yard instead of #6’s?
Peco site has information on their products including nominal radius of turnouts.
pdf templates of turnouts that can be printed out full size
You kinda need live frogs in a switching situation likew this
Turnout frog number is determined more by the length of the cars to be switched than by the size of the yard.
I was just looking at a 1915 photo of the Brooklyn waterfront. The team tracks could only hold about four box cars each, but the one turnout on a curve probably had a frog measured in double digits - on a very tight curve in a very confined space.
If you have a short, wide space, consider a compound ladder.
The best way to find out what your rolling stock will tolerate is to lay out the track plan on paper (I use card stock) in 1:1 scale, then bend flex track over the routes. Use accurate turnout templates so you get the right geometry. Then push cars through under 0-5-0 power and see if they are actively unhappy. That simple test will trump hours of semi-informed opinions.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - short cars, #5 or larger frog numbers)
Hi RR Telg,
I’d use Peco Medium Rad Electro- frog points as they will be able to handle any length car and the smaller 0-4-0 locos. Insul-frog’s can be a pain in the butt and frog point does wear down.
Be in touch.
Pick.
PS. If you are using code 55’s I’d back-feed from past the frog to the point blade as the rail contact surface is that small all it needs is a bit of dust to cause problems. Me I’d use code 83 for a storage yard.
The PECO “Medium” Insulfrog turnout in Code 80 is a #4 frog with a diverging leg radius of 18". You might find that the frog is a little tight when shoving longer cars (or a mix of car lengths), as would often be the case in a stub-end freight yard. If you are using a typical yard ladder, the s-curve into the first body track is possibly going to be too tight for a lot of equipment, especially since most off-the-shelf N-scale cars have truck-mounted couplers (which exacerbate problems in shoving). [Note that there are different ways of laying out the yard ladder to avoid an s-curve.]
I have had good results in freight yards with the PECO Code 55 “Medium”, which is a #6 frog with an 18" diverging radius. These are only available in Electrofrog, but the wiring is not too difficult. As a bonus, the powered frogs really help with shorter engines. And the turnouts are still pretty compact.
Best of luck.
Alright, thanks all. I plan on using diesel power for switching, rather than small steam, but I may go with electrofrog turnouts anyway, just to be safe. Hopefully #6 turnouts won’t be prohibitively large, but I guess if they are, then maybe I just shouldn’t be trying to squeeze in the yard in this location. Unfortunately, I’m currently not in the same town as my layout, so I can’t post a photo.
I would use Peco medium switches that should give you trouble free operation even with long wheel base cars which is not really a problem since N Scale still uses truck mounted couplers and if you’re using body mounted couplers just be sure the couplers is free to move side to side since this helps guide the car.
I work in HO scale, not N scale, but I feel your pain.
If your space is limited, you may have no choice but to use #4 turnouts, but the use of #4 turnouts limits the size of rolling stock that can negotiate these tight radii. I recently pulled out my last remaining #4 turnout and replaced it with a #6 turnout because I couldn’t get 6-axle diesels to negotiate the #4 turnouts. Anything longer than 60’ rolling stock seems to present problems as well. If you can, use #6 turnouts exclusively.
Rich
Try again.A old dog just found some issues with the new forum.
Here’s a N Scale ladder using Atlas switches.There shouldn’t be any issues with any length of car.
Ok.Part 2.
I know we are discussing N but,I feel this should fit in to clarify some points.
Here’s a HO ladder using Atlas #4 switches.I could easily back 89’ autoracks through these switches and on to any yard track.
Easily???
How about very slowwwwwwwly?
Rich
Rich,If you notice there isn’t much of a turn on either lader in fact the HO ladder is almost a straight shot with a slight turn to the right.
Remember coupler and truck swing will help the long car to ease through these switches-that should have been learned in basic MR 101.
I’m not buying it Larry.
If 85’ cars could easily negotiate #4 turnouts, we wouldn’t bother with #6 and #8 turnouts.
Rich
Well to bad about that and its your lost.
My experience with small shelf layouts has taught me the lessons I mention not from books or teaching of “experts” who usually complicates the simple while overstating the obvious but,from old fashion hands on experimentation…
Now a sharper “snap switch” all bets are off.
As I am sure that you know, Larry, Atlas “#4” turnouts are actually #4 1/2 frogs. The PECO Code 80 “Medium” #4 is a true #4, so sharper than Atlas. The PECO Code 55 “Medium” is a #6 frog with an 18" radius curved diverging leg, so it will easily handle pretty much everything.
Also, given that the Original Poster is in N scale, the truck-mounted couplers of most freight cars make things a little worse for backing cuts into yard tracks, especially of longer or mixed-length strings of cars.
But I’m sure that you know that, too.
My [2c] I have never seen any yard moves at over 20 mph, now on a main line, that is a totally different animal, with speeds of 40 to 70 and above, hence the use of longer turnouts. Yard Limit 15mph, industries I believe are absolute rule.
Cheers, [D]
Frank
Agreed but,not impossible…I have had several N Scale switching layouts and 3 small loop layouts that involved lots of switching.
The MT coupler and the Accumate seems to improve the backing performance on 20 car cuts–never really tested backing more then that since that was my maximum train length on my N Scale loop layouts and all my lead could hold including switch engine.
That isn’t the point. I’ve built a number of N scale switching layouts, including some using the PECO C80 Mediums (#4 frogs). Like this N scale switching layout
The issue with truck-mounted couplers, whether MT, Accumate, or even Rapidos, is that they cause the truck to skew when shoving. I’ve observed that it is worse with longer cars, longer strings of cars, or widely varied lengths of cars.
Have you personally built and operated an N scale switching layout with PECO Code 80 Mediums?
Yes, the Original Poster’s yard with PECO C80 Mediums could work … but for a very small additional bit of space, he can use the Code 55 Mediums and be assured that it will work. Just trying to give someone the benefit of lessons I have learned from actual experience with that specific track component.
I have used Peco C80 mediums twice on ISLs and had no issues never used C55 of any brand.
I still have never had issues with reverse moves with truck mounted couplers other then that plug nasty Rapidos but,did manage to switch small cut of cars without much hassle.
I supposed my life long devotion to ISLs doesn’t matter so,you believe as you will and be happy.
I know the facts from experience and am quite happy with the knowledge I gained over the years…