marklin-users.net community | Forum
»
General topics
»
General MRR
»
Märklin M-track turnouts with solenoids versus K & C track
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC) Posts: 14,875 Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
|
My son and I talked about solenoids in Märklin M-track turnouts and we came to the conclusion these solenoids were the best and reliable and over the years newer versions just haven't been up to the reliability as these have been. one never had to send them back to Märklin to get fixed but with later versions e.g. K-track (separate solenoid motor) and C-track solenoid motors. with other words in all these years we haven't seen an improvement.
John |
|
 4 users liked this useful post by river6109
|
|
|
Joined: 04/05/2015(UTC) Posts: 777 Location: England, London
|
Whilst I agree - just as good were the K track turnouts with built in solenoids such as 2261 etc - I find these indestructible. It amuses me that they have never found a solution for a three way turnout with separate motors so they still make and sell 2270.
|
 1 user liked this useful post by Rwill
|
|
|
Joined: 27/07/2009(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Leesburg,VA.USA
|
Absolutely, John. I still have M track turnouts working like new that were bought In 1964! Cheers, Peter.
|
 3 users liked this useful post by petestra
|
|
|
Joined: 27/12/2009(UTC) Posts: 106 Location: Fish Hoek, Cape Town
|
Same here..... And sent back a fistfull of new point motors to M for replacement.... And many fail AGAIN! Sad.....😡 Joe |
Medium digital C track layout with MS2: When I grow up I want to be a steam engine driver.... |
 1 user liked this useful post by Joe Meiring
|
|
|
Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC) Posts: 15,870 Location: Gibraltar, Europe
|
On the C track motors the weak spot is the end shut-off micro-switches. On the ones where I have bypassed the switches I have had no more problems. |
Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
|
 6 users liked this useful post by RayF
|
|
|
Joined: 01/05/2014(UTC) Posts: 66 Location: BRITTANY
|
I am so happy to rely on M track !
|
 2 users liked this useful post by Francois29
|
|
|
Joined: 08/04/2015(UTC) Posts: 303 Location: Vigo, Spain
|
Originally Posted by: RayF  On the C track motors the weak spot is the end shut-off micro-switches. On the ones where I have bypassed the switches I have had no more problems. Agree. But bypassing a new turnout fresh out of the box to work fine is not what you should expect from a manufacturer like Märklin. Regards Carlos |
|
 1 user liked this useful post by carlos.rivas.16752
|
|
|
Joined: 21/05/2004(UTC) Posts: 1,768 Location: Brisbane, Queensland
|
Originally Posted by: carlos.rivas.16752  Originally Posted by: RayF  On the C track motors the weak spot is the end shut-off micro-switches. On the ones where I have bypassed the switches I have had no more problems. Agree. But bypassing a new turnout fresh out of the box to work fine is not what you should expect from a manufacturer like Märklin. Regards Carlos But I think the point here is that the current solenoids are just as reliable as the M track ones, it's just that the installation of the shut off switches is the fail point - which the M track switches never had. |
modelling era IIIa (1951-1955) Germany |
|
|
|
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC) Posts: 14,875 Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
|
Originally Posted by: Rwill  Whilst I agree - just as good were the K track turnouts with built in solenoids such as 2261 etc - I find these indestructible. It amuses me that they have never found a solution for a three way turnout with separate motors so they still make and sell 2270. you're right with the attached solenoids earlier model k-track turnouts John |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC) Posts: 14,875 Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
|
Originally Posted by: RayF  On the C track motors the weak spot is the end shut-off micro-switches. On the ones where I have bypassed the switches I have had no more problems. Ray, these micro, some of them do and some of them don't work properly, a friend of mine has given me at least 30-40 to fix (mixture of old and new) I was able to fix most of the old type but with the micro switches some of them I couldn't fix (the switch itself). John |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC) Posts: 14,875 Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
|
Originally Posted by: applor  Originally Posted by: carlos.rivas.16752  Originally Posted by: RayF  On the C track motors the weak spot is the end shut-off micro-switches. On the ones where I have bypassed the switches I have had no more problems. Agree. But bypassing a new turnout fresh out of the box to work fine is not what you should expect from a manufacturer like Märklin. Regards Carlos But I think the point here is that the current solenoids are just as reliable as the M track ones, it's just that the installation of the shut off switches is the fail point - which the M track switches never had. But I think this is the vital point, Märklin m-track turnouts never failed and the ones which you have to attach to the turnouts have failed as you rightly pointed out. I think with today's model railway expectations the M-track turnouts could also be converted to shut off the power. My observation has been that since 1964 (Peter pointed out the year)) the old m-track turnouts had been solid and 100 % reliable and as technology has improved and gone forward Märklin has failed to come up with a better solution and in my opinion has actually gone backwards. Some designs by Märklin had been excellent (ICE or Senator) and an other failed design had been the K-track turnout it self, I feel a simple solution or design is far better than having x amount of parts to get a turnout tongue moving from left to right and the earlier design had also the heart section moving., ( I don't know whether that was prototypical) and this has been deleted in the newer versions. also the rails which formed the tongue had been spot welded and the little pin usually broke off (front or rear) to hold them down into place. I've noticed other manufacturers have a simple arm going sideways to shift the tongue left to right without all these thin plastic parts activating the movements and most modellers use a servo motor these days for reliability. My way of thinking has always been if it doesn't work try a different way of solving the problem and this has been a successful story with mounting ball bearings into the motor. John |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC) Posts: 9,593 Location: Australia
|
Bring back M-Track...That tizzy plastic stuff does not last...  |
Adrian Australia flag by abFlags.com |
 3 users liked this useful post by xxup
|
|
|
Joined: 08/01/2008(UTC) Posts: 279 Location: Naracoorte, South Austrlia
|
so if you have to make a bypass on the micro switch to fix the problem, why can't M do that in the factory? So that they are sold with that feature already done to make them more reliable. |
Tony Curiosity hasn't killed this cat yet. |
 2 users liked this useful post by SNAFU
|
|
|
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC) Posts: 8,475 Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
|
Originally Posted by: SNAFU  so if you have to make a bypass on the micro switch to fix the problem, why can't M do that in the factory? So that they are sold with that feature already done to make them more reliable. It is the reason for the microswitch that causes Marklin to fit it. The switch is there so that when run in analogue mode it is not possible to leave a loco on a sense switch or seperated rail so that the coil remains energised until it burns out and smokes, thereby wrecking the point motor. It is worth bypassing these microswitches when using digital control as the output from the m83 decoders is a pulse, so the motor will not burn out. And despite all the protestations above that M track point motors just don't fail- THEY WILL FAIL UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE MICROSWITCHES ARE DESIGNED TO PREVENT IN C TRACK POINTS. I have seen M track point motors where a train has stopped on a contact track leaving the motor buzzing away until the plastic former melted and jammed the moving iron piece solid inside the motor, along with the windings burning out.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC) Posts: 14,875 Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
|
Originally Posted by: kiwiAlan  Originally Posted by: SNAFU  so if you have to make a bypass on the micro switch to fix the problem, why can't M do that in the factory? So that they are sold with that feature already done to make them more reliable. It is the reason for the microswitch that causes Marklin to fit it. The switch is there so that when run in analogue mode it is not possible to leave a loco on a sense switch or seperated rail so that the coil remains energised until it burns out and smokes, thereby wrecking the point motor. It is worth bypassing these microswitches when using digital control as the output from the m83 decoders is a pulse, so the motor will not burn out. And despite all the protestations above that M track point motors just don't fail- THEY WILL FAIL UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE MICROSWITCHES ARE DESIGNED TO PREVENT IN C TRACK POINTS. I have seen M track point motors where a train has stopped on a contact track leaving the motor buzzing away until the plastic former melted and jammed the moving iron piece solid inside the motor, along with the windings burning out. with all respect my topic wasn't referred to contact or switching tracks, reed switches etc etc. just the point motor themselves. John |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC) Posts: 8,475 Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
|
Originally Posted by: river6109  Originally Posted by: kiwiAlan  Originally Posted by: SNAFU  so if you have to make a bypass on the micro switch to fix the problem, why can't M do that in the factory? So that they are sold with that feature already done to make them more reliable. It is the reason for the microswitch that causes Marklin to fit it. The switch is there so that when run in analogue mode it is not possible to leave a loco on a sense switch or seperated rail so that the coil remains energised until it burns out and smokes, thereby wrecking the point motor. It is worth bypassing these microswitches when using digital control as the output from the m83 decoders is a pulse, so the motor will not burn out. And despite all the protestations above that M track point motors just don't fail- THEY WILL FAIL UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE MICROSWITCHES ARE DESIGNED TO PREVENT IN C TRACK POINTS. I have seen M track point motors where a train has stopped on a contact track leaving the motor buzzing away until the plastic former melted and jammed the moving iron piece solid inside the motor, along with the windings burning out. with all respect my topic wasn't referred to contact or switching tracks, reed switches etc etc. just the point motor themselves. John Agreed - but this is why Marklin put the microswitches in the C track point motors.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/02/2004(UTC) Posts: 7,453 Location: Scotland
|
Not sure how many I have exactly but probably around 30. Only one failed and that was after many years. I make sure I can lift C track turnouts and give the motor etc a clean and a drop of wd40 once every 18 months or so. I like C track as the old M stuff is way out dated and looks it. K track is probably best but for me the ease of use with C track is good. Everybody has their own preferences but it does surprise me with the number who have turnout motor failures. The three way turnout is a different matter and I just don't use them as they do appear to cause problems. |
Take care I like Marklin and will defend the worlds greatest model rail manufacturer. |
 1 user liked this useful post by David Dewar
|
|
|
Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC) Posts: 15,870 Location: Gibraltar, Europe
|
Originally Posted by: David Dewar  Not sure how many I have exactly but probably around 30. Only one failed and that was after many years. I make sure I can lift C track turnouts and give the motor etc a clean and a drop of wd40 once every 18 months or so. I like C track as the old M stuff is way out dated and looks it. K track is probably best but for me the ease of use with C track is good. Everybody has their own preferences but it does surprise me with the number who have turnout motor failures. The three way turnout is a different matter and I just don't use them as they do appear to cause problems. Hi David, I have 14 turnout motors, of which 3 have failed in one direction. The three latest that I installed, including two in a three way point, have been modified before installation and work perfectly. I'm waiting for an opportunity to modify the three failed motors, which unfortunately involves ripping up track buried in ballast. As can be seen in the photos below it will be quite destructive and not for the faint hearted!   |
Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
|
 2 users liked this useful post by RayF
|
|
|
Joined: 01/02/2004(UTC) Posts: 7,453 Location: Scotland
|
Originally Posted by: RayF  Originally Posted by: David Dewar  Not sure how many I have exactly but probably around 30. Only one failed and that was after many years. I make sure I can lift C track turnouts and give the motor etc a clean and a drop of wd40 once every 18 months or so. I like C track as the old M stuff is way out dated and looks it. K track is probably best but for me the ease of use with C track is good. Everybody has their own preferences but it does surprise me with the number who have turnout motor failures. The three way turnout is a different matter and I just don't use them as they do appear to cause problems. Hi David, I have 14 turnout motors, of which 3 have failed in one direction. The three latest that I installed, including two in a three way point, have been modified before installation and work perfectly. I'm waiting for an opportunity to modify the three failed motors, which unfortunately involves ripping up track buried in ballast. As can be seen in the photos below it will be quite destructive and not for the faint hearted!   Hi Ray. Your track does look good compared to my C track but of course it does make it more difficult to get at motors etc. I have probably been lucky but I do keep them clean as I said in maybe that helps. I gave up my three way turnouts a while back as they did not always work although the motors and decoder were OK. and they don't look great. Hope Brexit will not make a lot of difference where you are when getting Marklin stuff. |
Take care I like Marklin and will defend the worlds greatest model rail manufacturer. |
|
|
|
Joined: 30/08/2016(UTC) Posts: 636 Location: Brussels
|
Originally Posted by: RayF  I'm waiting for an opportunity to modify the three failed motors, which unfortunately involves ripping up track buried in ballast. As can be seen in the photos below it will be quite destructive and not for the faint hearted!
I see what you mean, but congrats on the excellent C track ballasting. Jabez |
I heard that lonesome whistle blow. Hank Williams |
 1 user liked this useful post by Jabez
|
|
|
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC) Posts: 14,875 Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
|
Ray,
sorry to hear about your failed motors and trying to lift them after you've ballasted it. I've done the ballasting similar to you but left a -mm gap between ballast and track (it wasn't glued to the track) part from re-organizing the track work couple of years ago we've re-used the old K-track sleek turnouts and double switches but over the years I have been filing them down with a diamond sandpaper, it only takes off the top of the middle stud to regain proper contact and I have replaced most of the motors with ESU servo motors and they work fine. I have a small section made from C-track (former M-track) as I already had cork strips glued down onto the board and I didn't want to rip them all off as well, so I just removed the M-track and replaced it with C-track, most of it worked or fitted into the open spaces left over from the M-track. I had one motor that didn't work and it wasn't that hard to remove the sleek turnout as all tracks had been fitted between the cork strips and formed the ballast. the turnout itself one of the circuit board strips was broken (new) and I re-soldered it and it works fine since than.
another thing one could mention, with the K & C track turnouts lantern and lights this is an extra one has to purchase which adds to the price again.
John |
|
 1 user liked this useful post by river6109
|
|
|
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC) Posts: 3,594 Location: Spain
|
I havent yet had a single K-track solenoid fail me. (knock-on-wood!) I have several different older and newer models. I always solder over the end cut-off lines. I operate them with 24Vdc. The switch-pulse is limited in time to a few fractions of a second.
The few problems I have are actually with M-track; If the track gets damaged/bent, the mecanism can bind. And it´s not easy to take a apart on a permanent layout. Especially the R2 double scissors crossover fails a lot. I think the mecanism isnt strong enough to change the 4 tounges in the track. (I´ve stopped using them at all) |
|
 2 users liked this useful post by hxmiesa
|
|
|
marklin-users.net community | Forum
»
General topics
»
General MRR
»
Märklin M-track turnouts with solenoids versus K & C track
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.