Welcome to the forum   
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Share
Options
View
Go to last post in this topic Go to first unread post in this topic
Offline michelvr  
#1 Posted : 25 April 2019 16:15:15(UTC)
michelvr


Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,219
Good morning,

After two years of planning for my new layout, collecting all the track pieces and finally creating my new Märklin C track HO scale layout. I can say, I’m nearing the end of my journey! It's been a real breath of fresh air using the Märklin C track program with all of the set pieces. I would like to encourage others out there who like me had doubts about the benefits of this innovative track that you need to try it and let me be the first to say, “Try it you'll really like it!”

I can honestly state that this was the most enjoyable project l've ever had in creating and building a HO scale model train layout. Having everything fit and follow a defined geometry takes the track laying phase to the next level where everything fits into the track plan! The track plan is the map that shows you where everything goes from your concept, ideas and wants to making your layout work. Without a track plan you'll only run into trouble! I would recommend that you purchase some sort of track planning software. I used ANYRAIL software which worked well for me and l'm quite sure the other software programs work as well. Using software you have the templates for the track pieces and all you have to do is make a layout plan that suits your needs. The tracks fit into place on the screen of your computer. Once completed print your plan and start laying your track pieces following the your track plan. No calculations, no measuring and no cutting of track needed, everything fits into place and then your done! Your Märkin C track dream layout is made just the way is should be, right on track!

Michel

Edited by user 26 April 2019 01:47:45(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

thanks 5 users liked this useful post by michelvr
Offline morsing  
#2 Posted : 25 April 2019 17:02:26(UTC)
morsing

United Kingdom   
Joined: 16/08/2014(UTC)
Posts: 586
Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire

I couldn't agree more. And I always stop listening when people moan about it being unrealistic, it's realistic enough, and the convenience by far outweighs the un-noticable third studs...
-----
Modelling west Denmark era IV - possibly with some out-of-place elements!
Marklin C-track + CS3+
12m2 layout to be controlled by RocRail
thanks 6 users liked this useful post by morsing
Offline hxmiesa  
#3 Posted : 25 April 2019 17:28:00(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,286
Location: Spain
What a nice celebration of that product. I´m very happy for you, that you are satisfied with it!

Personally I dont like it at all. (I would prefer the RocoLine track with the correctly angled trackbed!)
-And I certainly HATE the slim-switch geometry! (I´ve made lots of advanced track-plans using those switches, and they are HUGE space-wasters!)
Add to that the lack of both flex-track and slim DKW, and I´m running away as fast as I can! ;-)
Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by hxmiesa
Offline JohnjeanB  
#4 Posted : 25 April 2019 20:13:15(UTC)
JohnjeanB

France   
Joined: 04/02/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,731
Location: Paris, France
Hi

Bravo Michel for your new project.
For my layout I have used Wintrack. Alas it is not free but very good to create your layout (of courseBigGrin ) but also calculate the slopes and start thinking about your landscaping.
Here is what it gave to me during the preliminary design phase
UserPostedImage
Also don't forget you may change / adapt the geometry to your needs.
This is not so hard to do.
Here is an example of a change on the 24630 triple point on my layout (sorry I paste a part of another topic of mine):

Because I was not happy with a portion of my layout where the track was making a "S" curve cause by the geometry of the Märklin 24630 triple point:
I did some surgery on the triple point to correct this:
UserPostedImage
The problem was that the portion of rail to be grafted was just where one of the triple point's motors is.
So the soltion was to cut the plastic bed at a different location of the rails cutting.
Here is what it looks like (before trimming):
UserPostedImage

Here is the finished "surgery"BigGrin :
UserPostedImage
Bottom looks like this
UserPostedImage
A bit of cyanolit glue on the rails (from under the plastic bed and a bit of hot melt.
Surgery was made with my diamond disk and hand drill
It is far from perfect but the track layout problem is corrected
Cheers

Jean
My layout videos
latest vid
hump yard
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by JohnjeanB
Offline DaleSchultz  
#5 Posted : 25 April 2019 20:33:11(UTC)
DaleSchultz

United States   
Joined: 10/02/2006(UTC)
Posts: 3,858
LOL. A post about adapting a turnout to get rid of an s-bend in a thread about how good the geometry is... and michelvr did not even want to get rid of s-bends when the geometry even allowed it...
Glad you like it.
Dale
Intellibox + own software, K-Track
My current layout: https://cabin-layout.mixmox.com
Arrival and Departure signs: https://remotesign.mixmox.com
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by DaleSchultz
Offline David Dewar  
#6 Posted : 25 April 2019 20:38:16(UTC)
David Dewar

Scotland   
Joined: 01/02/2004(UTC)
Posts: 7,000
Location: Scotland
C track gives great running and with wiring and decoders going underneath the track etc that is a bonus. I think Ray uses it and also ballast between the tracks (sorry if I have that wrong) and it looks great.
Rivet counters wont like it and it may not be perfect without a flex part available but it does make a great layout.
Take care I like Marklin and will defend the worlds greatest model rail manufacturer.
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by David Dewar
Offline michelvr  
#7 Posted : 25 April 2019 21:48:29(UTC)
michelvr


Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
What a nice celebration of that product. I´m very happy for you, that you are satisfied with it!

Personally I dont like it at all. (I would prefer the RocoLine track with the correctly angled trackbed!)
-And I certainly HATE the slim-switch geometry! (I´ve made lots of advanced track-plans using those switches, and they are HUGE space-wasters!)
Add to that the lack of both flex-track and slim DKW, and I´m running away as fast as I can! ;-)


Hello Henrik,

I'm glad your happy for me but I can't let your post hide my true feelings because you're absolutely right and I totally agree with you, I actually don't like it at all! Yes you're reading this right, I don't like Märklin's C track!

This is a bold statement because I was courageous in accepting everything I hated about this track and still proceeded against my better judgment with making a large layout with Märklin C track. And yes it really took me a long time to convince myself that this was the right track to buy. To be honest I have gradually learned to accept it the way it is because it works so well. So well in fact that I have invested a large sum of my money into the Märklin C track program.

I'm one of those that always look's for opportunities that will make a difference in my life. Since my hobby with model trains has taken me to different scales, manufacturers and brands and has been with me for such a long time. I took the chance to take make it different for the betterment of my happiness and with Märklin's C track it's working wonders with my happiness and that's what only counts!

Now if only I could get my hands on the H0-ELITE track of TILLIG Modellbahnen GmbH...........
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
Offline Thewolf  
#8 Posted : 25 April 2019 22:35:48(UTC)
Thewolf

Canada   
Joined: 08/09/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,925
Location: Saint Mathias dur Richelieu-Canada
Hi Michel Cool

I would like to understand: you write at first that you love track C and now you write the opposite.

Is that Ontario humour? The Doug Ford effect? Is your basement flooded?Flapper Tongue RollEyes

In any case, it got me out of my den. But I'm going back there right now.BigGrin

Thewolf
Project The Richelieu Valley Railway-CS2-Track C- Itrain-Digital
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Thewolf
Offline lewistrain  
#9 Posted : 25 April 2019 22:48:34(UTC)
lewistrain

Australia   
Joined: 08/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 73
Location: New South Wales, Sydney
The only track planing software i use is vodka, i find it allows for very easy track designs and particulary loose tolerances.
But really, Michael is right, C track is a great product, especially for those of us that dont have the space for a permanent layout, and besides, you can use c track on the lawn its a lot of fun as well.
While i think the flexi k track would be awesome for a large layout for the mainline, while using c track for the yards etc.
Anyway, good on you Michael, enjoy your track.
LOLOLOL they are just toys, grow up and play with them.
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by lewistrain
Offline michelvr  
#10 Posted : 25 April 2019 23:42:00(UTC)
michelvr


Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by: Thewolf Go to Quoted Post
Hi Michel Cool

I would like to understand: you write at first that you love track C and now you write the opposite.

Is that Ontario humour? The Doug Ford effect? Is your basement flooded?Flapper Tongue RollEyes

In any case, it got me out of my den. But I'm going back there right now.BigGrin

Thewolf


Hello Serge,

This is really an arranged marriage by Märklin!

I never loved her but in the end I had to marry her!

Problem is she's still pretty ugly with all those puko's but as you know love is blind!

When you can't beat them you join them!

Cheers!
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by michelvr
Offline MaerklinLife  
#11 Posted : 26 April 2019 05:53:38(UTC)
MaerklinLife


Joined: 03/02/2016(UTC)
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by: michelvr Go to Quoted Post
I actually don't like it at all! Yes you're reading this right, I don't like Märklin's C track!

You sure had me fooled.

Originally Posted by: michelvr Go to Quoted Post
Now if only I could get my hands on the H0-ELITE track of TILLIG Modellbahnen GmbH...........

If that is your true wish, you really picked the wrong model railroad system.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by MaerklinLife
Offline hxmiesa  
#12 Posted : 26 April 2019 07:49:48(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,286
Location: Spain
Originally Posted by: michelvr Go to Quoted Post

This is really an arranged marriage by Märklin!
I never loved her but in the end I had to marry her!
Problem is she's still pretty ugly with all those puko's but as you know love is blind!
When you can't beat them you join them!

Ha. Very funny... BigGrin
I admit that my message could be understood as more negative than intended.
I certainly recognize the usefulness of the C-track system; It´s an improvement over M-track in looks, durability and connectivity. (although not in geometry in my opinion)
It´s excellent for teppich-bahning and children-friendly.
It certainly looks better than Rocos and Pikos bettungs-tracks. (Although I have seen mentioned that the old Roco-Line bettung will be back again)

The pukos?! -Well, yeah; I too have learned to accept them. Same thing goes for external switch-motors on my K-tracks. We all get to choose where we want to compromise. But especially the geometry is one of the things that I dont like much about C-track, compared to K-track.
Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
Offline morsing  
#13 Posted : 26 April 2019 09:42:04(UTC)
morsing

United Kingdom   
Joined: 16/08/2014(UTC)
Posts: 586
Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post

-And I certainly HATE the slim-switch geometry! (I´ve made lots of advanced track-plans using those switches, and they are HUGE space-wasters!)


Because they're realistic?

I like the slim switch geometry, but I'm missing pieces like 24724 and 24730. What I do find annoying about C-track is how difficult is is to have both slim- and non-slim geometry and to move from 77mm spacing to 64mm spacing.

Other than that I can't say I have any problems...
-----
Modelling west Denmark era IV - possibly with some out-of-place elements!
Marklin C-track + CS3+
12m2 layout to be controlled by RocRail
Offline MaerklinLife  
#14 Posted : 26 April 2019 11:04:07(UTC)
MaerklinLife


Joined: 03/02/2016(UTC)
Posts: 490
I know a lot of people wish for a "flex c-track" and there is no question that such a product would be useful. I just do not see how it can be done in a way that everybody will be able to find it useful.

- Flex tracks need to be cut into shape. Anyone who have tried to cut C-track will know how difficult it is to get a precise cut. This is much easier on "non track bed" track.
- One way to design it could be like the LEGO flex track where you click sections off to get to a length near that length you want. This would make the track look weird with all sorts of gaps in the track bed. Not very realistic.
- Make it like Roco with the track bed made of rubber, and attaching end pieces. But the nature of the C-track with the connector spades underneath the track bed would make this fiddly. Again: It is difficult to cut into a precise length.
- When cutting the track you will need to take the size of the end piece into consideration, making cutting more difficult.
- The price: I would expect such a track to be hugely expensive.

All in all: I cannot see how such a track can be realized in a way that would make sense.

I suggest creating larger radius curves and make them work with a 360 degree circle. E.g. a 24915 (R9, 15 degree) and 24815 (R8, 15 degree). That would allow for a parallel curve with R9 and an R8. Perhaps even an R10.

Combining more larger radius curves would allow for a more natural flow. All without the flex track. I am sure it would work for most people.
Offline JohnjeanB  
#15 Posted : 26 April 2019 12:39:13(UTC)
JohnjeanB

France   
Joined: 04/02/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,731
Location: Paris, France
Hi

This is a very interesting discussion. Thank you all.

The C Track is not "hugly" but yes the "pukos" are not improving its looks.
On the other hand the pukos bring so much possibilities in train detection (3rd rail) and in track layout possibilities (triangles, return loop, etc) that the advantages far outweight the pukos sight IMO.

The C Track brings a perfect alignment through a very solid locking system. I used to have M rails and trains were jigging while with C track you have a very smooth / prototypical train movement even on points.
I have to disagree with "MaerklinLife": cutting C track is very feasible.
Because I started very early with C Track I ended up with a quantity of very brittle C rails (problem was fixed in the early 2000's) that I tried cutting on damaged rails just to learn.

With a Dremel-like mini-drill (I use a Proxxon) and a diamond disk, it goes OK and could be very precise.
So there are ways for Märklin to produce a flex track to be cut and end pieces to make the junction with a regular C track. They could even include in their catalog a diamond cutting device (like Faller did for their Car System). Anyways, using K-track flexible track proved to be a pain in the neck: oversized rails and pukos, contact problems, etc
I observe that Märklin is having an advert campaign to promote C Track and will come soon with small angle DKWs (double crossing points) Lets wait and see.
Cheers

Jean
My layout videos
latest vid
hump yard
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by JohnjeanB
Offline Jabez  
#16 Posted : 26 April 2019 15:27:00(UTC)
Jabez

Belgium   
Joined: 30/08/2016(UTC)
Posts: 636
Location: Brussels
If you have a place or places on a C track layout where flexible track would be the solution, could you not, from the C track, just lead into and out of a K flex track section using C/K adapter tracks?
Perhaps practical drawbacks of such a mixed track 'solution' are what lies behind Jean's above comment that using K-track flexible track proved to be a pain in the neck: oversized rails and pukos, contact problems, etc
Jabez
I heard that lonesome whistle blow. Hank Williams
Offline dickinsonj  
#17 Posted : 26 April 2019 16:02:54(UTC)
dickinsonj

United States   
Joined: 05/12/2008(UTC)
Posts: 1,444
Location: United States
Originally Posted by: morsing Go to Quoted Post

I couldn't agree more. And I always stop listening when people moan about it being unrealistic, it's realistic enough, and the convenience by far outweighs the un-noticable third studs...


I often see pictures of real railroad tracks where the ballast looks exactly like the C track base - so I don't agree with it being unrealistic either. And people complaining about the appearance of the pukos is actually pretty crazy IMO, since in the overall scheme of things I hardly ever notice them.

I ran M track for years and the first time I laid out some C track and ran a train on it I was convinced. I have also backed up my belief in C track by replacing all of my old and brittle plastic with the new formulation. That was not cheap but it was worth it for me since my trains operate so well on C track and I don't plan on using anything else in the future.
Regards,
Jim

I have almost all Märklin and mostly HO, although I do have a small number of Z gauge trains!
I have models from Era I to Era VI, but I try to focus on Eras I & III. Whoops, that one got away from me. Let's just say I focus on cool trains, regardless of the particulars :-)
So many trains and so little time.
thanks 5 users liked this useful post by dickinsonj
Offline michelvr  
#18 Posted : 26 April 2019 19:46:02(UTC)
michelvr


Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,219
Originally Posted by: michelvr Go to Quoted Post
I actually don't like it at all! Yes you're reading this right, I don't like Märklin's C track!

Originally Posted by: MaerklinLife Go to Quoted Post
You sure had me fooled.

Hello MaerklinLife, I was not trying to fool anyone as I never liked Märklin C or K track.
Wub But I do LOVE Märklin model trains!Wub

Since there was no other alternatives I had to try both. My first layout with Märklin K track was okay but not planned out well and so I lost interest in it and then decided to try again with Märklin C track. So far it is perfect for my application on this layout.

Originally Posted by: michelvr Go to Quoted Post
Now if only I could get my hands on the H0-ELITE track of TILLIG Modellbahnen GmbH...........

Originally Posted by: MaerklinLife Go to Quoted Post
that is your true wish, you really picked the wrong model railroad system.

From what I have seen on the internet this looks like the most realistic track in HO scale!

Too bad I haven't found a dealer in Canada who's prices I can afford. (Found one but at $60.00 a turnout buying these is not going to happen!!)


One thing I can't deny is that I’m alway open to rebuilding my layouts and if I want to make a change, I do!

You know what I say to my wife and friends when I tear down the layouts and then start with a new one? “Happiness is building a new layout!”

Cheers.
Offline Jabez  
#19 Posted : 26 April 2019 22:16:24(UTC)
Jabez

Belgium   
Joined: 30/08/2016(UTC)
Posts: 636
Location: Brussels
One thing is sure, despite the common jibe from some K-trackers, C track is not just for carpet-bahns and kids. A look at some of the superb C track layouts on the Net is all that is needed to dismiss this contention.
The truth is that both K and C have their individual possibilities and constraints, and skilfull modellers working within these parameters can create extraordinarily realistic layouts and dioramas with either system.
If you wanted to create the highest fidelity of realism, museum quality say, then you would use neither system but employ scratch built tracks but that is not the audience that this forum is aimed at.
Jabez
I heard that lonesome whistle blow. Hank Williams
thanks 8 users liked this useful post by Jabez
Offline JohnjeanB  
#20 Posted : 27 April 2019 18:40:59(UTC)
JohnjeanB

France   
Joined: 04/02/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,731
Location: Paris, France
Hi

Just to illustrate how tracks can vary, here is a picture from SNCF track near Paris with a third rails and provision for a 4th one all on concrete sleepers for a suburban track.
UserPostedImage
Seriously I believe C track is probably one of the very best and can integrate wonderfully in your landscape (This is not my strong pointBigGrin )

Cheers

Jean
My layout videos
latest vid
hump yard
Offline hxmiesa  
#21 Posted : 29 April 2019 11:14:41(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,286
Location: Spain
Originally Posted by: morsing Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post

-And I certainly HATE the slim-switch geometry! (I´ve made lots of advanced track-plans using those switches, and they are HUGE space-wasters!)

Because they're realistic?
I like the slim switch geometry, but I'm missing pieces like 24724 and 24730. What I do find annoying about C-track is how difficult is is to have both slim- and non-slim geometry and to move from 77mm spacing to 64mm spacing.
Other than that I can't say I have any problems...

They are not too realistic regarding track-spacing. 64mm is still quite a lot. ((66mm is the standard spacing for K-track)
Around 52mm woud be the "realistic" spacing, I think. (Slim K-track spacing is 56mm)

But what I am talking about are the 071 track pieces with the removable trackbed. They eat up too much space, especially if you want to install several switches one after another. After just 3 switches, you are already using up more space than what 4 switches without the 071 pieces would requiere. Maybe the removable trackbed pieces should have been an integral part of the switch, and NOT a separate track piece adding more USELESS length to the track?!?!
(Remember that even the early Magazine layouts for C-track "forgot" these trackpieces, thus making plans look much more viable than they really were!)


PS: I´ve never mentioned "looks" as an argument in my posts, because -in general- most sectional track systems with track-bed looks strange anyway.
-And for the Märklin system we even have the lovely pukos in the center.
For track systems without bedding, the looks depends solely of what the modeller is able to do. Often than not this results in trackage even worse looking than old Märklin M-track! lol
My arguments runs solely on geometry and avaiable pieces.
(My own layout still runs mostly un-ballasted tracks, all with pukos, and most switch-motors visible)

New-years promise since more than 10 years ago; "I WILL ballast all of my tracks!"

Edited by user 29 April 2019 14:46:04(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
Offline Alsterstreek  
#22 Posted : 29 April 2019 11:56:48(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 5,171
Location: Southwesternmost
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post

Maybe the removable trackbed pieces should have been an integral part of the switch, and NOT a separate track piece adding more USELESS length to the track?!?!

This feature is needed for crossovers involving two “opposite” turnouts, where only three 24071 are needed for connecting two 2741x turnouts.

Offline hxmiesa  
#23 Posted : 29 April 2019 13:37:36(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,286
Location: Spain
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post

Maybe the removable trackbed pieces should have been an integral part of the switch, and NOT a separate track piece adding more USELESS length to the track?!?!

This feature is needed for crossovers involving two “opposite” turnouts, where only three 24071 are needed for connecting two 2741x turnouts.

Are we talking about the same thing? -The 071 pieces are needed everytime you use the slim switches (or the slim crossover).
When you install two switches opposite of each other, you "save" one of the four 071 pieces. But for consecutive switches (opening in the same direction) you loose 71mm per switch.

Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
Offline Alsterstreek  
#24 Posted : 29 April 2019 15:42:00(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 5,171
Location: Southwesternmost
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
Are we talking about the same thing?
Yes, we do.

Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
When you install two switches opposite of each other, you "save" one of the four 071 pieces.
That is exactly what I stated.

However, you initially suggested:
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
Maybe the removable trackbed pieces should have been an integral part of the switch, and NOT a separate track piece adding more USELESS length to the track?!?!
So, how could one of the four 24071 pieces be "saved", when it was an integral part of the turnout?
Offline Alsterstreek  
#25 Posted : 29 April 2019 16:59:01(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 5,171
Location: Southwesternmost
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
But for consecutive switches (opening in the same direction) you loose 71mm per switch.
Now you lost me.

Offline hxmiesa  
#26 Posted : 29 April 2019 17:46:52(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,286
Location: Spain
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post

However, you initially suggested:
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
Maybe the removable trackbed pieces should have been an integral part of the switch, and NOT a separate track piece adding more USELESS length to the track?!?!
So, how could one of the four 24071 pieces be "saved", when it was an integral part of the turnout?

-Are you trolling me¿? LOL
I was saying that the removable TRACKBED could be part of the switch; In the cases where several consecutive switches are to be mounted, 71mm might be saved if a small (71mm long!) triangular piece of trackbed could be removed at each side of all of its 3 track connections.
At the end of each group of switches, the 071 track-piece with removable trackbed would still be necessary, of course, in order to allow the "normal" sectional trackpieces with complete trackbed to be connected.

Of course you cant read the pictures I have in my mind, so I suppose a drawing here would help a lot. I dont think I can explain it much better. I thought it wasnt so complicated to imagine... Blushing

PS: No drawing necessarry; Here is a photo of somebody thinking the same (More or less);
http://666kb.com/i/b9vz9ii5hz85uaq1l.jpg
Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by hxmiesa
Offline MaerklinLife  
#27 Posted : 29 April 2019 20:56:39(UTC)
MaerklinLife


Joined: 03/02/2016(UTC)
Posts: 490
Would that not cause some problems with the "control area" the little box on the side. As it looks, that would be in the way if you want to do something on the other side. They could of course move it, but too far away from the point is also a bit strange looking.

I bet they did as they did for a reason. Nothing is perfect. Personally I find the 071 with the removeable trackbed the main reason for going C-track compared to other track systems where you have to cut the track and destroy it. Have you ever seen a Rocoline turnout with everything cut? You can't get new track bed to replace the ones you cut up.

Example:
https://www.ebay.de/itm/...p;_trksid=p2047675.l2557
(scroll a down to the picture)

Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
They are not too realistic regarding track-spacing. 64mm is still quite a lot.

Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Go to Quoted Post
(I would prefer the RocoLine track with the correctly angled trackbed!)

Rocoline (with or without trackbed) has a 62 mm spacing. So not much more "realism" there. I bet you can't see the difference. Smile
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by MaerklinLife
Offline Alsterstreek  
#28 Posted : 29 April 2019 21:27:03(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 5,171
Location: Southwesternmost
I don’t allow too much track spacing in my MRR empire.
5AC4B0E7-D953-406D-A0DA-527D33F085B0-a.jpg
And I am achieving this without a saw, too.

:o)
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#29 Posted : 29 April 2019 21:30:43(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 5,171
Location: Southwesternmost
For people not afraid of saws, post # 101 in this thread might be inspiring:

https://www.marklin-user...d-innovations#post573115

While the standard 24611/24612 turnout branch angle is 24.3 degrees (12.1 degrees for slim turnouts 24711/24712), it measures only 16 degrees at the frog (10 degrees for slim turnouts).

Cutting the curved section of a 24611/24612 turnout after 164 mm results in a poor man‘s slim turnout, matching the 64.3 mm track distance of the slim turnout geometry.

Cutting the curved section already after 151 mm results in a 52 mm track distance.
Offline dgmm92  
#30 Posted : 21 August 2021 15:10:43(UTC)
dgmm92

United Arab Emirates   
Joined: 16/08/2021(UTC)
Posts: 1
Location: Ash Shariqah, Sharjah
Dear Michelvr

thank you for your advice, I am trying to begin my journey with "C" track and take a lot of inspiration from your post. Do you know of any other track plan software for Marklin available on-line....

Thanks
Users browsing this topic
OceanSpiders 2.0
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.

| Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2021, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.110 seconds.