I picked up a copy of O Gague Railroading from my local hobby shop. There is a really nice layout in it by a guy named Mike Smith. He claims that his layout is only 3’ deep, including framing, but aren’t the minimum diameter of curves 31" with realtrax curves? I tried to model it out in the MTH rail software, and I had to make it a few inches bigger than 3’ to get it all on. How did he do it?
Thanks,
Wes
I don’t see the problem. The diameter of O31 tubular track is about 28 1/4 inches between the center rails. The Realtrax roadbed would have to be over 7 inches wide before it wouldn’t fit; and I don’t think it is nearly that wide.
Maybe I did something wrong. I’ll get back into the program when I get home and see what I did wrong.
Wes
Bob,
The last time I looked at Realtrax by MTH it had an overhang just like Lionel’s Fastrac, so that may be the concern here, not just center to center of the rails.
Lee F.
The board is over 7 inches wider than the diameter measured to the center rails. Therefore the roadbed would have to be at least 7 inches wide to reach the edge of the board.
I’ve got some 31" curves and not using them. Give me some time and I will snap them together and get a measurement for you. I went with 072 and it takes a big space. Back later this PM with answer.
I run 031 Realtrax on a 3 foot wide table.
Jim H
I measured from the outside of the roadbeds of a half circle, and it is 31,5 inches. I think I got it all to fit. There is a double loop, but it still fits. Thanks guys!
Wes
Wes, I used a carpenter’s rule and it was 32". You have room to add a short section at the top of the curve and that will give some “relief” to cars and engines.
I’m not sure what you mean? Does anyone have the magazine to see it? I really like the layout, and that’s about how much room I have to build a layout when the time comes. I would actually like to have one more rail making two complete loops to run two trains at one time, but that should only add just a couple more inches.
Thanks for all the effort. I appriciate it guys.
Wes
Wes, did you see this small layout that I designed recently on the topic “Small O27 Layout”? It is meant to fit under a twin bed.
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e249/fooldancing/LAY39X66.jpg
That is a great design. Two loops, and a figure 8. Some room left for modeling (not if it goes under a bed,though). It’s proof that you don’t have to have a ton of room for a fun layout. You could lengthen that and have two large areas to do buildings. I take it that those are 42" outer curves? There is a lot to be done with that. I should build it in railware and see how many parts I need.
Thanks again,
Wes
Built a 4X8 on rollers for my son years ago. Buildings and etc were too tall to slide under bed. Raised the bed on some 4X4 blocks with extended 1X4’s around the outside of the blocks to insure the bed posts did not slide off the blocks. Worked for years. He just had to jump to get into the bed. Dust ruffle hid the layout while it was stored.
Thanks, Wes. The outer curves are Marx O34, others are O27. The layout is 39 x 66 inches. There is a longer version with a 90-degree crossing. Check out the entire topic for more discussion:
I took your idea and played around with it in railware. Here is what I came up with. It fits on a 4ft x 11 ft layout. It’s deeper than I wanted, but I can go as wide as 16 feet on one wall.
http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/album/576460762377932354/photo/294928804160769276/45
It’s probably too busy. I modified the cross in the middle for these diagonal lines, so I can change direction of any train. My main requirement, besides size, is to have the ability to run two trains at one time, unsuprivised. It takes a lot of depth to do it. I might be able to get it to work with Lionel track since it’s smaller, but I have been told to stay away from their switches.
It’s a fun design though.
Wes