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

Notification

Icon
Error

2 Pages<12
Share
Options
View
Go to last post in this topic Go to first unread post in this topic
Offline EB421  
#51 Posted : 08 December 2025 15:02:29(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
CLACKS550 R2 fork

Here's an example showing a CLACK550 module with a fork, with the new 15mm margin. Technically the straight is out of spec as it's 0.1mm short of flush. I'm optimistic it will work in practice as even the CLACK300 module has a longer overhang.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline EB421  
#52 Posted : 09 December 2025 12:34:36(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
My 24236+24064 have arrived for the first modules. No one has demurred so the ayes have it. Road cross-section is now 60*10, edge margin for both C-Track and road is now 15mm.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline EB421  
#53 Posted : 09 December 2025 14:12:16(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Side by side of the original concept CLACK300 and the final design.

And there - here's a side-by-side of the OG CLACK300 design and the final version. As I said, I'll be putting glue down now I have the "dual-mode" track here - so this will become the official standard for interconnects! :)
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline EB421  
#54 Posted : 16 December 2025 12:22:25(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
I put glue down! And my genius modular system... doesn't work.

The track connectors don't have enough flex in them to decouple without forcing the track off the boards - and I'm left very confused. I've been assuming this would work based on the existence of the C-TRAK standard which must be able to decouple in order to have existed for - but based on this, I have no idea how it could. What do the MSCD in the Netherlands know, which I don't?

Right now I'm somewhat frustrated, and I'm re-evaluating Unitrack for this; which is 2-rail only and has another annoying compromise on LACK boards (10mm -> 15mm -> 40mm) - but is designed from the start to be modular, and also meets the "readily available worldwide" clause. Mainly - it disconnects the same way it connects, so there's no issue with it pulling the track off the board.

Edit: The obvious question is. "Is anybody else seriously invested in this"?

If not, then just scrapping CLACK in favour of a 2-rail-only Unitrack based design (LUCK) would be the simplest option, and I can re-use all my 3-rail C-Track for playing with Tri-ang stock that doesn't work on TRIX/KATO Code 83.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by EB421
Offline Alsterstreek  
#55 Posted : 16 December 2025 19:37:07(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Germany   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,042
Location: Hybrid Home
Call me old-fashioned, but I would heed this 1956 advice regarding track connection.
Connect2025.jpg
Source: "101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders" by Linn H. Westcott
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline EB421  
#56 Posted : 16 December 2025 20:52:57(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Call me old-fashioned, but I would heed this 1956 advice regarding track connection.

Source: "101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders" by Linn H. Westcott


Sadly doesn't solve the problem, as now disconnecting the short-piece pulls the track up; instead of disconnecting the next board.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by EB421
Offline xxup  
#57 Posted : 16 December 2025 21:06:11(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
I am no expert on model railway modules, but it looks to me that the two rail guys cut their track where it crosses the edge of a module and electrically connect the tracks by connecting wires under the module. A Dremel would make short work of C-track - I used this approach on Nevw's layout for him many years ago.
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline EB421  
#58 Posted : 16 December 2025 21:47:16(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
I am no expert on model railway modules, but it looks to me that the two rail guys cut their track where it crosses the edge of a module and electrically connect the tracks by connecting wires under the module. A Dremel would make short work of C-track - I used this approach on Nevw's layout for him many years ago.


Again, that works - but if you're cutting the track and using traditional module joints - there's no value in C-Track. Just use Peco Code 83 and it'll be cheaper and prettier. Or; K-Track. Prettier; I don't know what K-Track pricing looks like. It also makes using IKEA shelves pointless - if you have to drill into the shelves and add alignment dowels and locking clamps - suddenly this is worse than just building a custom baseboard from laser cut parts!

The point of the idea was that it took no skill or effort, and no complexity to use. You just put it on a table, smoosh it together, and put trains on it.

I am really confused by the C-TRAK system being able to pull this off! Laugh I've emailed them to find out their secrets.

So far, no-one's claimed to be invested... can I take this as "EB421 is the only person who went out and bought shelves"? ;)
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by EB421
Offline kiwiAlan  
#59 Posted : 16 December 2025 22:41:39(UTC)
kiwiAlan

United Kingdom   
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 8,618
Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
Originally Posted by: EB421 Go to Quoted Post

...
It also makes using IKEA shelves pointless - if you have to drill into the shelves and add alignment dowels and locking clamps - suddenly this is worse than just building a custom baseboard from laser cut parts!


Believe me, if you are fixing the track down you will need to dowel between modules. The MRR club I go to uses ones like these between modules to ensure minimal misalignment.

The only way to not use dowels is to not fix the track down, but relay it each time you put the modules up.

thanks 3 users liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
Offline EB421  
#60 Posted : 16 December 2025 23:28:25(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: kiwiAlan Go to Quoted Post

Believe me, if you are fixing the track down you will need to dowel between modules.

The only way to not use dowels is to not fix the track down, but relay it each time you put the modules up.



T-TRAK Module

So T-TRAK doesn't do this. It uses the Kato bedding-track to hold everything in position, and relies on a solid table to make sure individual modules don't experience unnecessary tension. C-TRAK doesn't use dowels either.

CLACK came about because I tried to do Hex-TRAK in H0, decided it was too much work machining modules that large; and then looked at T-TRAK and tried to find an equivalent solution that I could reuse the Marklin track pieces I'd bought to test the H0x-TRAK concept; while not needing to build baseboards from scratch or spend $60 a pop on kits for them; which is what they cost in the UK.

I liked the idea of being mixed 2/3 rail, but I work solely in 2-rail so if the system doesn't work with Marklin track - so be it!

Edited by user 17 December 2025 04:09:28(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Offline Alsterstreek  
#61 Posted : 17 December 2025 12:24:17(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Germany   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,042
Location: Hybrid Home
Did you already declare CLACK to be dead in below forum post?

https://jnsforum.com/com...-is-dead-long-live-luck/

Clack=dead.png
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline xxup  
#62 Posted : 17 December 2025 12:30:57(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
I might continue to explore this option. I have a Dremel and I only run three rail. I have a large shed, but my space allocation (still being negotiated) for a model railway might mean that CLACK is the only option for me. Blushing

Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline EB421  
#63 Posted : 17 December 2025 13:50:40(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Did you already declare CLACK to be dead in below forum post?



Well, if you wanna quote things on JNSForum...

Quote:

I've posted in the discussion on MUF to see if anybody else is bothered with scrapping CLACK, based on the issue of separating the boards. If no-one really is, then I'll look at going forward with LUCK. If they are; I'll fall off that bridge when I come to it!


No-body showed any real interest on that site anyway; so it felt like a safer space to vent constructively since it's 99% N-Gauge 2-rail users. ;)

Plus - MUF was down so I couldn't post in here and I needed to raise a great big red flag about anyone building any modules to my specs which don't appear to work. (Edit: And were also wrong, since the "Standards" post hadn't been updated with the 15mm margin, the change in road width, the CLACK550 specs or the "If building a diorama without points, use 3-rail contact tracks" spec.)

That said, if the solution ends up being something that doesn't work for me (like cutting the track in half and using dowels) then there's no problem with other people pushing on with their own version. It's not like I trademarked it after all! It's not really a standard till somebody actually builds something anyway.

Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
I might continue to explore this option. I have a Dremel and I only run three rail. I have a large shed, but my space allocation (still being negotiated) for a model railway might mean that CLACK is the only option for me. Blushing


And xxup is the first person to actually explicitly affirm an interest!

For me the question is whether I'm missing something really obvious here. I sent this to c-trak.org last night:

Quote:

Hello!

I've been exploring modular railways based on C-Track recently, and I ran into what seems like an unsolvable problem. C-Track must be tilted to a V shape to separate. But to do this it would have to pass through the surface of the module. When I tested it the pressure from tilting the C-Track broke it free from the baseboard. How do you make this work on C-TRAK?


When in doubt - ask the experts.

As far as I can see there's two outcomes.


  1. MSCD get back to me and say "You're an idiot. You don't need to V-Shape the modules to separate them, just stick a screw right near the edge and you can pull them apart laterally - we've been doing this since 2017 and none of our connectors have broken yet." In which case I just need to stick a fixing screw on the outermost track pieces and CLACK continues as originally planned. I update JNSForum to change the title, remove all the strike-throughs (and patch the standard sheet with things like 15mm, LACK550, etc) and remove the LUCK conceptualising and we live happily ever after.
  2. The above doesn't happen - we schism into a more complex connection system for 3-rail, and a Unitrack system based on 2-rail and I update JNSForum to divert 3-rail users to this thread or wherever you put your standards. And we set up an annual competition between CLACK2 and LUCK to see whose system has prettier modules. Flapper


Alsterstreek are you happier with that take?
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#64 Posted : 17 December 2025 14:22:18(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
What I absolutely have loved about this idea is the "Plug-and-Play" aspect Drool . Well, okay...and the Casino 007 and/or Highclere/Downton Abbey Options Love or Both!?!Sneaky cf. pg 1 here...building on EB's suggestions! Kudos! ThumpUp ThumpUp Woot

Whisper Mode On IKEA stores in Florida are 2-4 hours drive time from where I live, although I suspect I could ...cough, cough...order on-line LOL Whisper Mode Off

Whisper Mode #2 On ...and the fact that I do not, as of this moment, have any C-Track (or K- for that matter) and with Xmas upon us...the FD was a bit Confused LOL Whisper Mode #2 Off
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline EB421  
#65 Posted : 17 December 2025 14:46:52(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: Jimmy Thompson Go to Quoted Post
What I absolutely have loved about this idea is the "Plug-and-Play" aspect Drool .


Yeah, the plug and play thing is critical for me. If I have to do wiring between modules, I'm out. If I have to do woodworking, I'm out. Cutting and soldering track? Out! Because then all the advantages of this idea except "cheap baseboard" are gone. LOL

So again, here's hoping I'm an idiot. Razz
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#66 Posted : 17 December 2025 16:52:22(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
Quote:
EB wrote: "...tried to find an equivalent solution that I could reuse the Marklin track pieces I'd bought to test the Hex-TRAK concept; while not needing to build baseboards from scratch or spend $60 a pop on kits for them"


Quote:
EB also wrote: "...wiring between modules, I'm out. If I have to do woodworking, I'm out. Cutting and soldering track? Out! "


Ditto, Ditto, Ditto, and Ditto...sorry but not my métier, forte, or skill-set...Others are fabulous at it and I laud their talent ThumpUp Their module set-ups are amazing...but more than I am ableBlushing

CLACK is such a great idea! It must work somehow! Love

Shall we become the CLACK-Idiots.com ?? LOL LOL
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline Alsterstreek  
#67 Posted : 17 December 2025 17:08:39(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Germany   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,042
Location: Hybrid Home
I am an avid user of C-track. Five years ago, I stopped fastening C-track segments with screws (or anything else) in all of my various projects, whether they were single-level, multi-level, or even room-filling layouts - all with minumum wiring. This has never caused any problems. Therefore, I would continue this practice on LACK boards (or tables) without hesitation. As you can see from my track designs, I am not a fan of strict C track geometry anyway, and I prefer diagonal lines to parallel ones.

Anyway, I am attracted to the LACK product line because it is offering inexpensive "carpentry-freedom" plus nice looks. Combined with C track anarchy (instead of strict module standards), it could allow me to live out my individualism.
thanks 5 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#68 Posted : 17 December 2025 17:16:47(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
Quote:
Alsterstreek wrote: "As you can see from my track designs, I am not a fan of strict C track geometry anyway, and I prefer diagonal lines to parallel ones."


Indeed RollEyes LOL Teamwork makes the Dreamwork! ThumpUp Woot
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline EB421  
#69 Posted : 17 December 2025 18:17:08(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
I am an avid user of C-track. Five years ago, I stopped fastening C-track segments with screws (or anything else) in all of my various projects, whether they were single-level, multi-level, or even room-filling layouts - all with minumum wiring. This has never caused any problems. Therefore, I would continue this practice on LACK boards (or tables) without hesitation. As you can see from my track designs, I am not a fan of strict C track geometry anyway, and I prefer diagonal lines to parallel ones.


Honestly same on both counts (screws and angles). If two screws on the board edges are a simple fix for CLACK? I don't see it as the end of the world - but I did glue-first. And I also prefer angled track to straight - but it's obviously difficult to achieve in a rectangular modular system unless your boards are big enough to A: tolerate the loss of scenic space and B: handle having an input curve and an output curve. Bonus, it allows you to make reversible modules - but it doesn't work with boards as small as 300x260 (and also, IKEA LACK shelves aren't really reversible!).

A concept for a LACK 1100mm board with (slightly too small) symmetrical track

Quote:

Anyway, I am attracted to the LACK product line because it is offering inexpensive "carpentry-freedom" plus nice looks. Combined with C track anarchy (instead of strict module standards), it could allow me to live out my individualism.


Again same. And I'm attracted to the C-Track line because it's a simple plug-and-play.

I'm very much reading from this that you're not interested in the original CLACK standard that's under re-evaluation - more the general concept of 'LACK as baseboard' that has been better demonstrated by people other than me! Is that right?

Of the "interest in CLACK modules" list we now have xxup and Jimmy T, both 3-rail?
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline Alsterstreek  
#70 Posted : 17 December 2025 20:40:18(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Germany   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,042
Location: Hybrid Home
Originally Posted by: EB421 Go to Quoted Post
I'm very much reading from this that you're not interested in the original CLACK standard that's under re-evaluation - more the general concept of 'LACK as baseboard' that has been better demonstrated by people other than me! Is that right?
That is right.Cool

thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#71 Posted : 17 December 2025 21:03:53(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Germany   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,042
Location: Hybrid Home
I would even be considering combining LACK products—e.g., 26 cm boards with the 90 x 55 cm table—to create a reversing loop and similar"heretic" features. RollEyes
C-Lack rev-mod1 art.jpeg
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline xxup  
#72 Posted : 17 December 2025 21:52:10(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
We might also consider MLACK. M-track pulls apart easily - just like two rail and it is way cheaper than C-track.
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline EB421  
#73 Posted : 18 December 2025 00:31:36(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
We might also consider MLACK. M-track pulls apart easily - just like two rail and it is way cheaper than C-track.


Disadvantage of course is that it hasn't been made in 25 years, but as you say it's not exactly hard to get and you only really need edge pieces on larger boards as it can be adapted to C-TTrack or K-Track trivially. Three 90's and a 33.8 cover the simple diorama quite nicely, too.

Funnily enough, this idea led me to this page: https://www.marklin-user...Marklin-M-Track-5106-1-1

Which led me to the 1956 catalog, where one can find a picture of my Marklin cranes! I wonder if the designer all those years ago ever imagined that I'd be running it on 2-rail track. Or; perhaps more confusingly, that the thing would have an onboard supercomputer (by 1956 standards) that would let it be a fully operable crane that could pick things up, move them somewhere else in a layout and drop them off again without a single touch of a human hand!

Looking at this again, the geometry of the points works out too - you should be able to fit a short side-track off a set of points on a 300mm. Not big, but enough to hold a SWB wagon.

Honestly no notes on the idea. It actually looks a lot better than CLACK for 3-rail. Though - can I propose "MACK" instead of MLACK? MACK is a cute androgynous name, and MLACK makes me worry about swallowing my tongue. :P
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#74 Posted : 18 December 2025 00:46:10(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
Quote:
EB wrote: "and MLACK makes me worry about swallowing my tongue."


LOL LOL that just tickled my fancy...

Whisper Mode On The only concern would be that it is more difficult to isolate the outer rails on M-Track for 2-rail ops (minor detail Wink Wink ) Whisper Mode Off

It would work better for moi as all I have is M-track...Drool
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline EB421  
#75 Posted : 18 December 2025 02:48:09(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: Jimmy Thompson Go to Quoted Post

Whisper Mode On The only concern would be that it is more difficult to isolate the outer rails on M-Track for 2-rail ops (minor detail Wink Wink ) Whisper Mode Off


I .......don't think you need to worry about that.

Quote:
It would work better for moi as all I have is M-track...Drool


And so begins the great schism! As with CLACK and LUCK, your margin from the wall edge must be calculated from the curve radius on the 550mm table.

Margin without adding straights for M-R2 is about 95.5mm so if you wanted to do a 'centre-of-board' design, that's an option (just add a couple mm for overhangs on the corners - 98mm from wall should be good). If you'd rather stick wall-side like me:

If you put a 90 in there your track will only be 5.5mm from the wall. Bit shallow. A 45mm gets you to 50mm, and a 33.8mm gets you to about 16mm. Call it 18mm and you have clear overhangs on the corner module. You can do the fine maths yourselves - but as example modules - MLACK300 is 180+90+33.8 and MLACK550 is 33.8+45+R2-30+R2-30+R2-30+45+33.8

There's no way to do 77.5mm in M-Track; so you can't do first radius M-Track on a corner module.

What do you think?
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Offline xxup  
#76 Posted : 18 December 2025 04:21:38(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
IKEA are having a sale down here. So, I will place an order for some laack boards. What would be your recommendation for a starter set with R2 as the biggest radius? I need a shopping list for the IKEA order.
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline Alsterstreek  
#77 Posted : 18 December 2025 10:31:34(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Germany   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 6,042
Location: Hybrid Home
C track R2 starter set sounds like an oval with few straight segments. Turnouts included? Do you aim at an oval or do you desire a narrow shelf (maybe with a corner)? Do you want to order LACK shelves or LACK four legged tables? Do you want to adhere to strict module standards or „freelance“?
—————
P.S.: I advocated earlier laying „loose“ C track without fastening it at all. Unlike C track I would not leave M track „unattended“ on a shelf.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#78 Posted : 18 December 2025 11:31:01(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
Quote:
Ak wrote: "Unlike C track I would not leave M track „unattended“ on a shelf."


"Slip Slidin' Away..." RollEyes BigGrin
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline xxup  
#79 Posted : 18 December 2025 11:38:21(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
Just order the shelves to start with. The table seems more complicated than I need at the moment. I have two turnouts and an r1 circle in C - track. I think that I have two curved turnouts somewhere too. I would like to knock up a layout and then put it away on a shelf until I am able to play again.

Specifically, I have the tracks from:
29792
24802
78792
29000

In m-track I have absolutely everything, but it is in storage until the shed is ready.
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline xxup  
#80 Posted : 18 December 2025 11:39:40(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
Originally Posted by: Jimmy Thompson Go to Quoted Post
Quote:
Ak wrote: "Unlike C track I would not leave M track „unattended“ on a shelf."


"Slip Slidin' Away..." RollEyes BigGrin



Nothing that a jumbo sized glue gun won't fix! Cool
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#81 Posted : 18 December 2025 12:13:06(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
LOL LOL LOL ThumpUp
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline Jimmy Thompson  
#82 Posted : 18 December 2025 12:20:42(UTC)
Jimmy Thompson

United States   
Joined: 26/03/2019(UTC)
Posts: 880
Location: Florida Classic but Successful Swampland City
Another thing I like about this idea is that, for those of us who do not run C-Track on a regular basis Wink Wink , we can join in the fun for minimal outlay of fundage - my choice ("Downton Abbey" cf. pg 1 herein) would be 1 point and about 10-12 sections - well, and Downton itself...or the Casino 007 Drool LOL . ThumpUp
Jimmy T
Analogue; M-track; KLVM; Wine Barrels; Primex
Dr Dirt's Rule #1 and
There is a Prototype For Everything
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jimmy Thompson
Offline xxup  
#83 Posted : 18 December 2025 12:32:01(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,743
Location: Australia
IKEA is more limited in Australia.

I can get:

190x26 shelf
110x26 shelf
30x 26 shelf

35x35 table
55x55 table

I assume that we cut the legs off the tables and mount the tops on a wall?

Here is the LACK series page in Australia - I don't know if IKEA geoblock.

https://www.ikea.com/au/.../?sort=PRICE_LOW_TO_HIGH
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline kiwiAlan  
#84 Posted : 18 December 2025 15:09:17(UTC)
kiwiAlan

United Kingdom   
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 8,618
Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post


Here is the LACK series page in Australia - I don't know if IKEA geoblock.

https://www.ikea.com/au/.../?sort=PRICE_LOW_TO_HIGH


Opens for me in the UK.

thanks 1 user liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
Offline EB421  
#85 Posted : 18 December 2025 15:56:17(UTC)
EB421

United Kingdom   
Joined: 10/04/2025(UTC)
Posts: 82
Location: UK
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
Just order the shelves to start with. The table seems more complicated than I need at the moment. I have two turnouts and an r1 circle in C - track. I think that I have two curved turnouts somewhere too. I would like to knock up a layout and then put it away on a shelf until I am able to play again.

Specifically, I have the tracks from:
29792
24802
78792
29000

In m-track I have absolutely everything, but it is in storage until the shed is ready.


If you just have track sets, I don't think you have the right stuff to make up any of the original C-TRACK modules.

CLACK300 171.7mm 64.3mm 64.3mm (Or, 236+64)
CLACK1100 236.1mm 236.1mm 229.3mm 229.3mm 171.7mm
CLACK1900 229.3mm 188.3mm 188.3mm 188.3mm 171.7mm 171.7mm 171.7mm 171.7mm 171.7mm 171.7mm 77.5mm

They all rely on pieces outside the standard binary of 188/171 that the sets come with. And given that I couldn't get CLACK to work and C-Trak.org haven't replied to me with their secrets yet... I don't think you should buy any C-Track to make up a board!

As far as what shelves to buy - I've only done the math to work out the 550mm square and 300mm diorama on M-Track (since I don't and will never use it!). If you can work out a size from 180, 90, 45, 22.5, 33.38 that fits with the 1100 and 1900 boards with an overhang of between say 1 and 5mm - then any of them will work fine.

The logic I came up with when I was first planning this was three kinds of board. The 300mm "Diorama", the 1100mm "Scene" and the 1900mm "Layout". In CLACK you can't even fit a set of points on a 300mm board, so it's just a straight through (on MLACK you have the short siding option I mentioned above). On 1100mm you can fit a max-size 11-wagon Inglenook if you're minimal with scenery, and a 1900mm board is big enough to have a full end to end layout with short sidings on both sides. (For example a tank engine and a few wagons).

I figured any CLACK layout would have a bunch of 300mm boards, a couple 1100mm boards and MAYBE a 1900mm board but usually not. 300mm boards are obviously the cheapest, and aren't a huge commitment in terms of modelling time. 1900mm boards are difficult to transport without a van or yute, so are impractical as part of a modular system. 1100mm gives a good balance of modelling space, track freedom, and is still transportable in your average Kei Car.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by EB421
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Similar Topics
"Clickety-Clack" - Adjustable? (H0-scale)
by soren36 14/08/2006 17:45:23(UTC)
2 Pages<12
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 © 2003-2025, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.420 seconds.