I am new to the joy of model railroading and have a bunch of questions. This forum, and MR magazine in particular, has been a great source of inromation.
My question is in reference to the various types of benchwork, e.g. L-girder, open, etc. Is there a resource or comparison where I can read up on the types of benchwork and their pro’s and con’s?
Thanks, folks. I look forward to being part of this community!
Our host (Kalmbach/MR) has published some good books on layout construction and specifically benchwork.
Basic Model Railroad Benchwork
Although it came out many years ago, former MR editor Linn Wescott’s book is still a great reference point for learning benchwork. I don’t think it’s still in print (??) but it was in print for maybe 30 years so should be easy to find at a LHS, online shop, or RR flea market.
Thanks for the fast response!
BTW, what is “LHS”?
LHS stands for local hobby shop.
Craig
I tried something new than the usual methods. I built mine like an old fashioned bed with slats with 2" foam on top. Seems to be working well and it was easy to build. One advantage is you can move the slats for wiring etc. as needed though at the moment I only have EZ track roadbed on it for grandkids… Just another alternative to consider.
My only issue with this method is the difficulty in locating and keeping straight “bed slats”. Most 1x lumber used for bed slats warps or sags over time - especially when used on a typical model railroad 4ft width.
My cure for this problem is to use mini-L girders made from two pieces of 1x2 for bed slats.
The broad face of the mini-L is on top to support the 1/4" plywood and 2" foam (not installed in this picture). The vertical 1x2 prevents sagging and warping. The vertical piece is notched to the bottom ledge of the outer frame.
The vertical piece also gives a place to mount the legs well inside the outer frame, as shown in the photo. This prevents kicking and hitting the legs when standing next to the layout.
And you can drill holes (I use 1/4") in the vertical piece for stringing wires.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Content removed due to a completely fucked up and incompetent Kalmbach customer service.
Svein
I totally agree on 2x4s. At best, they are inconvenient to fasten to - unless one is fastening from the top down, which is a no-no for me with my desire to change things on a regular basis. Add to that, the propensity for 2x4s to warp in the dry and thin mountain air, the need for bigger and more powerful saws - 2x4s are not a part of model railroad benchwork for me.
I hesitate on nay-saying 3/4" plywood because of the long term experiences of friends with 1/2" plywood. They have had sagging issues with 1/2" ply, even on joists every 16" over decades. And given the atrocious quality of what passes for 1/2" plywood at a big box store, I will not be using it. The voids are too many and too large, and the plies are too few (now 3 or 4 instead of the 5 I was accustomed to) for 1/2" plywood to have the structural integrity needed for cookie cutter subroadbed on my layout.
The 1/4" luaun plywood laminated to extruded foam is a lightweight replacement for 3/4" plywood - but has its own disadvantages. It costs more. The foam thickness controls the “bendability” for cookie cutter grades. And the overall thickness of the subroadbed - on the order of 2" - makes vertical separation between stacked tracks even more onerous.
Certainly, the waffle benchwork is probably the most rigid, lightest construction going. But it ain’t cheap, and it takes time to build. It also requires considerably more precision in cutting than traditional L girder. Some have the ability to do precise benchwork, others of us do not.
My bottom line is that the type of benchwork should be suited to the type of layout I am building. If I am b
[quote user=“fwright”]
Svein:
Space constraints required some different thinking for me. Personally I believe benchwork built with 2 by 4 and 3/4" plywood are a total overkill, unless you plan on using it as a ballroom floor…
Svein
Svein
I totally agree on 2x4s. At best, they are inconvenient to fasten to - unless one is fastening from the top down, which is a no-no for me with my desire to change things on a regular basis. Add to that, the propensity for 2x4s to warp in the dry and thin mountain air, the need for bigger and more powerful saws - 2x4s are not a part of model railroad benchwork for me.
I hesitate on nay-saying 3/4" plywood because of the long term experiences of friends with 1/2" plywood. They have had sagging issues with 1/2" ply, even on joists every 16" over decades. And given the atrocious quality of what passes for 1/2" plywood at a big box store, I will not be using it. The voids are too many and too large, and the plies are too few (now 3 or 4 instead of the 5 I was accustomed to) for 1/2" plywood to have the structural integrity needed for cookie cutter subroadbed on my layout.
The 1/4" luaun plywood laminated to extruded foam is a lightweight replacement for 3/4" plywood - but has its own disadvantages. It costs more. The foam thickness controls the “bendability” for cookie cutter grades. And the overall thickness of the subroadbed - on the order of 2" - makes vertical separation between stacked tracks even more onerous.
Certainly, the waffle benchwork is probably the most rigid, lightest construction going. But it ain’t cheap, and it takes time to build. It also requires considerably more precision in cutting than traditional L girder. Some have the ability to do precise benchwork,
“DOH!!!”
Thanks to all for the great input! I appreciate the discussions and you’ve given me some good food for thought.