just was curious which is easier to deal with and not going to get over my head money wise for the under the table switches… Atlas or Tortise?
thanks
Mike
i plan on using atalas cause with my budget tortoise is is out of it. And i already have some motors from previous layouts im just going to have to find and or invent a way to hide them under the layout .
If you don’t mind a little surgery, here’s something I did with my Atlas turnouts. First, snip off the throwbar extension (the chunk of plastic with the two holes where the switch machine connects). Next, turn the turnout over and glue this extension to the bottom of the throwbar. Then, glue the switch machine upside down to the bottom of the turnout with the lever arm engaged in the extension. Lastly, cut a slot in your roadbed and intall the turnout like normal. Viola! Cheap hidden switch machine. It works pretty well and if you don’t use a lot of glue, you can pull the turnout up and replace the switch machine if necessary (In over 10 years I never had any trouble with mine).
- Jeff
I have about 30 of the atlas under table switch motors installed. They work great and I havent had any trouble with them. They are a bit loud when they snap over, but i hardly notice it anymore. I used them because they are cheap, i paid about $5 each but i did buy a whole case of them. Mine are just powered by an old power pack and controlled by control panels with momentary SPDT switches. Dont use the atlas slide switches though, buy good ones.
One question to ask yourself - What kind of layout base are you using?
The Atlas machines which are designed for under-table use have a connecting bar which is only about an inch long. It’s perfect for a layout constructed with cork or foam roadbed over 3/4-inch plywood. However, if you’re using 2-inch foam, you’re kind of out of luck.
I’ve mounted one turnout with an Atlas machine glued to the bottom of the turnout as suggested above. So far, so good, but it’s only been in place for a month.
Another question - Are you planning to use turnout position LEDs or signals wired to the turnout motors? Tortoises come with the relay contacts necessary to do this. Atlas and Peco machines do not.
For either the Atlas or Peco machines, which are both twin-coil, I would strongly recommend buying, or better yet, building a capacitive discharge circuit. The Snapper is a commercial product for about $30, but you can build your own with about $5 worth of overpriced parts from Radio Shack. Google for a schematic - it’s no more than a couple of resistors and capacitors. The CD circuit provides a stronger “kick” to throw the machines over, which I’ve found is really necessary for Peco machines. It also provides protection to the machines in the event that a control button “sticks” and power is applied to the turnout for a long time, which can fry the turnout motor.
Overall, though, hiding the switch machines is the right thing to do. I made the mistake of using Atlas above-board units, and now I’ve got to go back and hide them under scenery, or rip up the track and replace them.
Jeff:
That’s an intriguing idea. My previous layout had some Atlas switch machines but I had such a time getting them installed properly that I ended up using them only where I absolutely had to and the remaining locations I just pushed the switch points with (gasp!) my fingers.
I’m using cork on plywood for my new under-construction layout. Aren’t the Atlas switch machines too thick to totally enclose in the roadbed? The cork is only about 3/16" thick.
I use foam roadbed and a pink foam base. Yes, I did have to dig into the pink foam, not just the roadbed, to mount the Atlas machines in the glued-to-the-bottom-of-the-turnout position.
(126) Tortoise installed and (7) Atlas #66 Installed. The Tortoise is more expensive but easier to hook up and to run signals and frogs. The Atlas #66 was Harder to install due to the lack of adjustment in the throw arm. The #66 has most of the bells and whistles of the Toritoise but just harder to align.
Cost Tortoise $15.95 (on sale) #66 $9.50 (on sale)
Both need switches or DCC to sctivate so that is a break even on cost.
IF you are going DCC I would not go with the #66 just my $.02.
Mononguy63,
The Atlas switch machine is pretty thin but I think too thick for just one layer of cork. I had used 1/2" thick Homesote and that gave plenty of clearance. Nothing says you can’t cut a slot in the plywood, too.
- Jeff
I can’t get the quote thing to work, but another way around the Peco problem, when using a Tortoise, is to just remove the over-center springs. The Tortoise will hold the points. Also, you may not need the Tortoise relays for signals, depending on how you do them. Check out Tony’s tips at: http://tonystrains.com/technews/tortoise/index.htm On the other hand, if you need power routing, the Tortoise relays are perfect.
How so ? If your foam is deeper than the connecting bar, just bury the machine in the foam.
The Atlas Deluxe undertable switch machines do have contacts that can be used to power LEDs.
The Atlas Deluxe machines have 2" wire connecting bars, so can be “burried” deeper.
Wow! That’s a great idea! I’ve seen modified Atlas switch machines but they were still partially visible beside the turnout. I wish I had heard of this before I sold my free above table machines and bought under-table ones!
If you’re worried about money, go with the Atlas switch machines. If you want quieter, easier, more prototypical operation for more $$, get the tortoise
I have always used the Atlas under-table switch machines without any problems. I would use SPDT momentary toggle switches instead of the Atlas switch control boxes to control them. They look better, there’s less chance of the switch sticking and frying the motor, and they cost a lot less ($1.50 vs. $4.00)!
I’m going through the same thought processes now. I just switched to DCC but have all the junk from DC operation and plan to re-use what/where I can. Limitations I’ve been told about with the DC-type Atlas switches vs. Tortises are in ease of operation. With DCC and Tortises, you can control the turnout positions via the handset, something you’ll not be able to do with the Atlas components. Pros and cons either way you go…basically ease of operation vs. $$$!
Another issue I’ve spotted through everybody’s replies to this is mounting Atlas’ undertable machines when using plywood with foam over top. I’ve gone with the method of routing out a hole in the wood to expose the foam directly under the turnout and mount the unit as instructed. As for the annoying click-and-buzz when the switch is thrown, encapsulate the void where the switch machine is mounted by attaching a piece accoustic ceiling tile over the opening. Drill an angled hole at one corner of your cutout (before your rout the opening) to allow wires to pass through so you can have the tile seal the hole as much as possible and deaden the sound. So far, I’ve yet to have any problems. Plus, the underside looks more finished should any ‘severely vertically challenged’ folks come to see my layout.
Not true, a DS52 or DS54 from Digitrax will allow the same thing with the Atlas. YOU CAN NOT control ANY switch motor from the hand unit UNLESS you have a Stationery Decoder in stalled to give an ADDRESS to the turnout.
Minimum is a DS54. the DS52 has NO loconet feedback, the DS44 is just to fire Tortoise. These are all Digitrax because that is what we use.
One other point on the plus side for Tortoise. The continuous motor holds the points against the rail where the Atlas machine leaves no (or very little) tension on the points. (I use Atlas turnouts, so this one wouldn’t apply if your turnouts have springs for the tension.)
Think outside the box time:
How many turnouts are you talking about? If it’s a small number, you should consider Peco instead of Atlas. The turnouts themselves are superior in quality, and the Peco twin-coil machines mount directly to the underside of the turnout, so you don’t have to worry about layout base thickness. Peco turnouts have a spring which is part of the turnout, and the spring holds the points against the rails. In contrast, Atlas turnouts depend on the switch motor to provide the spring tension. Peco makes an add-on unit to provide contact closures for frogs or signals. It’s an add-on to the existing twin-coil, so you don’t have to put them on right away. (It may be difficult to retro-fit, though, if you’ve already got them mounted under the tracks.) The Atlas “deluxe” unit which provides contact closures is self-contained, so if you decide to put in contacts at a later time, you’ll have to remove the old motor and buy a new one. (Atlas also makes a self-contained contact-closure unit that is not part of the switch machine, and could be wired in parallel with the switch motor to provide contacts, but then you’re buying both a switch machine and a contact closure machine.)
A word of warning, though. If you buy Peco machines and add on the contact unit, you will be approaching Tortoise price. The same can be said of buying Atlas turnouts with the deluxe under-table machines.
Here’s a follow-up question.
Background- First of all, as stated on a couple of previous posts, I’ve made MRng my retirement hobby(did have a layout growing up). The forums have been of great help.
Have been reading the post(s) about mounting switch machines. Have foam roadbed,2" foam base on 3/8" plywood. Plan to use Peco turnouts and machines. Have the turnouts and bought one machine to check out the installation method. Carved out the roadbed and foam base and mounted the machine to the turnout and located it in position(no gluing). So far so good.
?- Now I’ve got an open space in the roadbed under the turnout and am thinking about the time when I’ll be adding ballast to the roadbed after the trackage is complete. Don’t know if they sell(or you can make) covers for the open space. Don’t want to add anything that will jam the mechanism and interfere with the turnout operation. Maybe I should leave it as is. Any suggestions? Thanks in advance for your help.
Jean-
Suncook Valley Railroad
Hello, my first time replying here. I see everyone talks about peco, atlas and tortuse switches. Has anyone tried the "switch tender " switch from micromark? I have 2 of them installed on my DC layout and want to change to DCC. Can anyone tell me if they will be ok in DCC? I am very new at this, thanks for any help.
That may be true; but the Peco and Atlas machines offer a shallower profile than the Tortoise (with Atlas being the shallowest). This may be of some importance for persons with multi-deck layouts where a Tortoise would be visible under the fascia.
Hello,
I developed a sub base for the old Kemtron double coil switch machines. These can be quite reasonable.You can still find them at flea markets for pennies on the dollar. They have contacts for lights, frogs or what ever else you may want to power. I have designed the new base with three mounting holes for the switch, 12 tapped holes(4-40) for the connections and three holes to mount the unit to the underside of the table. There is also one hole for a brass tube that extends through the table for the prebent wire that activates the switch. A fixture located by the switch gives the precise location for drilling the tube hole in the table. A 1/8 piece of square brass connects the switch machine to the wire switch throw. When I had the dimensions finalized I wrote the program for my CNC mill and machined the sub bases. This can also be done by hand on a drill press.
I purchased #4 ring connectors from Demar Electronics (advertised in MR). All the soldering is done othe bench. I now have 12 wire connections facing down and all connections are made by screw terminals.
One hole must be drilled in the switch throw rod.
I hope this helps.
Jerry