Are Wide Radius Turn Outs more reliable? Share  Email this topic  LinkBack Topic URL  Retweet this Topic  Share Topic on Google+  Like this Topic  Share on Facebook  Digg this Topic  Reddit this Topic  Share on Tumblr Options  Watch this topic  Print this topic View » Normal Threaded

Previous Topic Next Topic

cazart		#1 Posted : 13 April 2005 02:17:52(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 09/12/2004(UTC) Posts: 158 Location: Menlo Park, CALIFORNIA		I understand that Turn Outs are where trains might be more likely to de-rail or have running problems. First, I would be interested in your experience with this? Second, I will work with C-Track; and I would like to know if the Wide Radius (R= 1,115.6mm) Turn-Outs (part 24711 or part 24712) are more operationally reliable than the 'standard' Radius (R=437.7mm) Turn-Outs (part 24611 or part 24612). By 'operationally reliable', I mean are the trains less likely to de-rail or have running problems on the Wide-Radius Turn-Out versus the standard Radius Turn-Out? Thanks
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

	Wish to join the discussion?! Login to your marklin-users.net community | Forum accountor Register a new forum account. Or Connect via Facebook

rugauger		#2 Posted : 13 April 2005 03:45:35(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 19/12/2003(UTC) Posts: 1,205 Location: Swindon, Wiltshire		I would say that one of the most common causes of derailments on turnouts is the sudden change in direction from straight to left/right. This is obviously exacerbated by increases in speed. I can run pretty much anything at full speed across a wide radius K-track turnout, so I would answer "Yes" to your question. In fact, I came across a site once where someone had used wide radius turnouts for their hidden yard (shadow station) for that very reason.
		Richard
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

frankv		#3 Posted : 13 April 2005 03:55:07(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 04/01/2005(UTC) Posts: 137 Location: , Florida		I have never really had any problems with the Standard Radius C track turnouts on most of my rolling stock. The only time I have any issues with derailment is with extra long cars, and this is infrequent. That’s the great thing about C track. Regards,
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Lars Westerlind		#4 Posted : 13 April 2005 10:30:10(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 19/10/2001(UTC) Posts: 2,379 Location: Lindome, Sweden		As a matter of fact, I share one negative experience with some others: One Roco locomotive has difficulties with one of my wide radius turnouts; it's reported to be caused by Roco silent slider with the long distance between the pukos at the rail crossing. But I've had no problems with Märklin rolling stock, and no problems with the sharper radii either. IT IS a good idea to avoid S-curves however; and this is hard to do with connections between two parallell tracks, unless wide turnouts are used. /lw
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

hmsfix		#5 Posted : 13 April 2005 12:07:56(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 06/02/2005(UTC) Posts: 1,383 Location: Darmstadt,		I am mostly using K-tracks, but I have never seen any difference between turnouts with small and large radii as far as derailment is concerned. Some time ago I had a problem with the derailment of long, short-coupled passenger cars and steamer tenders on some turnouts, but this was caused by the underground not being perfectly flat, and the cars collided at their front sides. Hans Martin
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

jorge_vilarrubi		#6 Posted : 13 April 2005 15:07:47(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 15/12/2003(UTC) Posts: 655 Location: Buenos Aires,		I use large radii in the main track and some small radii in the yard. Loks of all brands pass across large radii without any problems. Some Rocos, Fleischmanns and Liliputs do not negotiate small radii. Cars of all brands can negotiate small radii but no curved turnouts can be used when 2-rail cars are used. Generally speaking, all Märklin Loks and Cars will operate well with small radii, despite the fact they are not prototypical at all. The most beautiful C-track curve I have seen has been made with R9 track, the 1,115m one used to compensate large turnouts.
		Jorge Vilarrubí Buenos Aires ARGENTINA
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

foumaro		#7 Posted : 13 April 2005 20:40:12(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 08/12/2004(UTC) Posts: 4,431 Location: Attiki Athens Greece		I have problems only with long cars.If the geometry and the declivity of your layout is correct,everything is fine.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

cazart		#8 Posted : 13 April 2005 21:36:38(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 09/12/2004(UTC) Posts: 158 Location: Menlo Park, CALIFORNIA		Quote: [size=1" face="Verdana" id="quote]quote: foumaro Posted - 2005/04/13 : 18:40:12 I have problems only with long cars.If the geometry and the declivity of your layout is correct,everything is fine. I think I know what you mean by correct Geometry; however, can you explain what you mean by correct 'declivity'? Thanks
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

HueyCE		#9 Posted : 15 April 2005 08:04:02(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 12/01/2003(UTC) Posts: 2,528 Location: Groton, Connecticut		cazart- Main Entry: de·cliv·i·ty Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -ties Etymology: Latin declivitat-, declivitas, from declivis sloping down, from de- + clivus slope, hill; akin to Latin clinare 1 : downward inclination 2 : a descending slope As to the original question. I have run my trains on both types of C-track turn-outs and have not had any problems with derailment. Ira
		Building German Era I-II layout(Mk IIIc).
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

David Dewar		#10 Posted : 15 April 2005 14:18:39(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 01/02/2004(UTC) Posts: 7,467 Location: Scotland		or as we say in Scotland...its a wee hill David
		Take care I like Marklin and will defend the worlds greatest model rail manufacturer.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

john black		#11 Posted : 15 April 2005 21:13:48(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 22/04/2004(UTC) Posts: 12,139 Location: New York, NY		Yeah - dooooown we go ... John
		I hope no one visits a poor Southener's layout in Brooklyn. Intruders beware of Gators. AT&SF, D&RGW, T&P, SP, WP, UP, BN, NYC, ARR, epI-III - analog & digital Marklin Classics only. CU#6021 FX-MOTOROLA DIGITAL SYSTEM. Fast as lightning and no trouble. What else ... Outlaw Member of BIG JUHAN's OUTSIDER CLUB. With the most members, worldwide
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

cazart		#12 Posted : 16 April 2005 19:09:13(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 09/12/2004(UTC) Posts: 158 Location: Menlo Park, CALIFORNIA		guys, I did understand the dictionary definition of declivity, but how does that apply to reliable running of model trains on turn-outs? I understood there should be NO slope on turn-outs - is that correct? Anyway, I am not meaning to be obtuse, I am just making sure that I understand the proper meaning for my question - and it may also help others... Thanks everyone for your comments, it helps very much.
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

rschaffr		#13 Posted : 16 April 2005 21:17:00(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 03/01/2003(UTC) Posts: 5,193 Location: Southern New Jersey, USA		No change of slope, certainly. I do have a case in my EraIII layout where I have one branch of a C-switch going up and one going down. I was very concerned about it but space constraints made me try it. It seems to work ok, but it still worries me.
		-Ron Digital, Epoch IV-V(K-track/CS3/6021Connect/60216051), Epoch III(C-track/6021/6036/6051) http://www.sem-co.com/~rschaffr/trains/trains.html
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

jerdenberg		#14 Posted : 26 February 2006 18:38:09(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 10/01/2005(UTC) Posts: 1,025 Location: Den Helder, Noord-Holland		Hi all, I am posting in this thread because I have a more or less related question and did not want to open a new thread: My 3060 Santa Fe F7, converted to digital with a Tams decoder, caused the MS to emergency stop when it encountered a long turn-out on its first test run. A V200 converted with a U75200 did the same. Both did not cause trouble when running over a "normal" K-track turn-out, so I think the long sliders on these old locos are the culprits (they are way longer than the sliders of, e.g. the 37610 PA-1's). I seem to remember someone mentioning this issue before, but I cannot find that post. Anybody here had the same problem? Is there a shorter slider for these old models? Jeroen
		Figomima division, UP; mostly figment of my imagination yet.
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

rschaffr		#15 Posted : 26 February 2006 19:39:28(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 03/01/2003(UTC) Posts: 5,193 Location: Southern New Jersey, USA		Jeroen: Could have been me. My Lux track cleaning car was terrible with shorting out on turnouts. I determined that it was the length of the slider, so I replaced it with a shorter Marklin one nad have had no problems since.
		-Ron Digital, Epoch IV-V(K-track/CS3/6021Connect/60216051), Epoch III(C-track/6021/6036/6051) http://www.sem-co.com/~rschaffr/trains/trains.html
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

jerdenberg		#16 Posted : 26 February 2006 21:59:13(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 10/01/2005(UTC) Posts: 1,025 Location: Den Helder, Noord-Holland		Hi Ron, Thanks for the confirmation! Do you have a part number by chance? Jeroen
		Figomima division, UP; mostly figment of my imagination yet.
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Alberto Pedrini		#17 Posted : 26 February 2006 21:59:50(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 02/07/2004(UTC) Posts: 1,448 Location: Italy		I had this problem with some not Marklin loco, solved tightening the contact points showed in picture.
		Alberto Marklinfan Club Italia www.marklinfan.net
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

jerdenberg		#18 Posted : 26 February 2006 22:16:41(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 10/01/2005(UTC) Posts: 1,025 Location: Den Helder, Noord-Holland		Hi Alberto, I wonder whether our problems were the same. As to my old locos, I suspect the length of the "old" slider causes it to be "more horizontal than it should be" when its front reaches the crossing track and thus touches that, while the shorter "new" slider is on the incline in its entirety at that point, is at a larger angle and thus free from the crossing track. I am interested to know in what way your loco caused the short, and how that is now prevented by your technique? Jeroen
		Figomima division, UP; mostly figment of my imagination yet.
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Alberto Pedrini		#19 Posted : 27 February 2006 01:18:42(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 02/07/2004(UTC) Posts: 1,448 Location: Italy		Look at the pic: the gap between the right rail and the right contact point is very small, about 2 mm. If the contact point isn't upright the gap can decrease to 1,5 mm. The trucks of some loco have a action that allow the contact of the internal face of one wheel and the short track has done. This happen on both the rails, depending from the position of the turnout and the direction of train. Never happen with Marklin locos, but frequent with Hag and Roco. For example: the beautiful HAG Ae4/7 cannot absolutely run on this turnouts because it has the drive gear on the internal face of the wheels very large.
		Alberto Marklinfan Club Italia www.marklinfan.net
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

rschaffr		#20 Posted : 27 February 2006 01:22:11(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 03/01/2003(UTC) Posts: 5,193 Location: Southern New Jersey, USA		Jeroen. I can't remember offhand which slider I used. I just took one out of my spare parts drawer.
		-Ron Digital, Epoch IV-V(K-track/CS3/6021Connect/60216051), Epoch III(C-track/6021/6036/6051) http://www.sem-co.com/~rschaffr/trains/trains.html
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Trainingtime		#21 Posted : 27 February 2006 15:13:35(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 09/12/2005(UTC) Posts: 315 Location: Ohio, USA		I have all C Track turnouts and have no problems at all with a variety of Marklin cars and loks. I do not have any "large" locs the size of the Big Boys. Are the "large" locs more troublesome on the smaller radius turnouts?
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

jerdenberg		#22 Posted : 27 February 2006 22:13:08(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 10/01/2005(UTC) Posts: 1,025 Location: Den Helder, Noord-Holland		As long as there are no small-radius S-curves the Big Boys do manage the smaller-radius turn-outs at slow speed, but I think they look either ridiculous or pathetic doing it, so I am restricting my layout to radius 4 and above. Ron, interesting spare parts drawer! Strangely, even my antique 3029 has the same huge slider as the F7 and the V200. I will have to pay my local shop a visit then; they are quite well sorted. Jeroen
		Figomima division, UP; mostly figment of my imagination yet.
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

rschaffr		#23 Posted : 27 February 2006 22:56:37(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 03/01/2003(UTC) Posts: 5,193 Location: Southern New Jersey, USA		I tend to accumulate spare parts. For instance, when I decided to start equipping my older loks and cars with NEM pockets for CC couplers, I went through the exploded parts diagrams on Marklin.de and ordered two of every coupler pocket that looked like NEM. I have plenty of light bulbs, brushes, sliders, tires, every type of pantograph, etc. Enough to go into the repair business, I guess. I just don't like to have to wait to do a repair.
		-Ron Digital, Epoch IV-V(K-track/CS3/6021Connect/60216051), Epoch III(C-track/6021/6036/6051) http://www.sem-co.com/~rschaffr/trains/trains.html
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

jerdenberg		#24 Posted : 04 March 2006 13:23:55(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 10/01/2005(UTC) Posts: 1,025 Location: Den Helder, Noord-Holland		Alberto, Your description fitted my problem after all: the distances between the wheel flanges of my F7 varied from 13.8mm (slightly too narrow) to 13.6mm (guaranteed to cause trouble on the long turn-outs). This seems to be a well-known problem with old models: I found several references to it on German forums. I have increased the gaps to 13.9--14mm and all seems well now. Jeroen
		Figomima division, UP; mostly figment of my imagination yet.
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Alberto Pedrini		#25 Posted : 04 March 2006 14:32:08(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 02/07/2004(UTC) Posts: 1,448 Location: Italy
		Alberto Marklinfan Club Italia www.marklinfan.net
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

perz		#26 Posted : 04 March 2006 22:03:21(UTC) Retweet
Joined: 12/01/2002(UTC) Posts: 2,578 Location: Sweden		Quote: [size=1" face="Verdana" id="quote]quote:This seems to be a well-known problem with old models: Yes, I have observed that too. The two wheels on an axle tend to move closer together with time, at least on models from the 60's. I adjusted all wheels on my old rolling stock a few years ago, and went from frequent derailings to almost none.
		WWW
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Users browsing this topic

Guest