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 skeeterbuck  
#1 Posted : 05 February 2018 17:34:25(UTC)
skeeterbuck

United States   
Joined: 15/12/2015(UTC)
Posts: 523
Location: Maryland, Baltimore
On my current Marklin track plan, I am using C track for the majority of the layout. On the bridges only, I will be using K track as I don't want ballast on the bridges. I can sub 5 pieces of K straight track sections ( 3- 2200, 1- 2209 and 1- 2201) to cover the area that will be on the bridges. My other choice is to use one piece of K flex track to cover the entire area and cut it to fit. When I compare the prices for the 5 sections vs. the single piece of flex track the price is close enough to not be an issue.

What do you all recommend or does it really make any difference?

Thanks for the advice.
Chuck
Online PMPeter  
#2 Posted : 05 February 2018 18:20:35(UTC)
PMPeter

Canada   
Joined: 04/04/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,138
Location: Port Moody, BC
It depends on whether you are dealing with straight or curved bridges. In your case where you are specifying straight track it doesn't really matter except you have more track joints if you go with the sectional pieces. Therefore, from an appearance point of view I would go with the flex track.

If on the other hand you were dealing with curved bridges I would definitely go with the flex track. It gives you a little more leeway when it comes to adjustments for long passenger cars that may rub on handrails.

Peter
Offline Minok  
#3 Posted : 05 February 2018 20:36:01(UTC)
Minok

United States   
Joined: 15/10/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,235
Location: Washington, Pacific Northwest
I'd opt for the flex track as it will allow you to fit a bit that is exactly the right length; though you dont mention how your joining the C-K (Marklin transition pieces or straight joins?
Toys of tin and wood rule!
---
My Layout Thread on marklin-users.net: InterCity 1-3-4
My YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Minok1217/
Offline mike c  
#4 Posted : 05 February 2018 21:24:58(UTC)
mike c

Canada   
Joined: 28/11/2007(UTC)
Posts: 7,337
Location: Montreal, QC
You wouldn't be subbing 5 sections of K-track, but either 5 sections of K-Track and 2 adapter tracks or 3 sections of K-Track and 2 adapter tracks.
The height difference between M or C and K requires a certain length to drop the track from the ballasted level to the ground.
It would be nice if Maerklin made a C to M adapter that was only 90mm long, as this would make the transition more feasible in a lot of cases.
It would also be nice if the current C to M adapter section did not switch from C profile to K profile as the C profile is much closer to the M rails.

Regards

Mike C
Offline applor  
#5 Posted : 06 February 2018 00:29:23(UTC)
applor

Australia   
Joined: 21/05/2004(UTC)
Posts: 1,515
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Originally Posted by: mike c Go to Quoted Post
The height difference between M or C and K requires a certain length to drop the track from the ballasted level to the ground.
Regards

Mike C


In this case you have the bridge at the height of the K track (that is, 5mm higher than the C track level), so there would be no incline section.

Originally Posted by: skeeterbuck Go to Quoted Post

What do you all recommend or does it really make any difference?

Thanks for the advice.
Chuck



I would go fixed K track pieces and not use the flex (speaking from experience).
The fixed K track pieces will hold straight and have connectors, while the flex will have a bit of a flop to it and would require cutting and attaching connectors (which also means buying a connector kit)

If there is no curvature required, you should always use straight track pieces.
modelling 1954 Germany (era IIIa)
Online PMPeter  
#6 Posted : 06 February 2018 02:49:29(UTC)
PMPeter

Canada   
Joined: 04/04/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,138
Location: Port Moody, BC
Originally Posted by: applor Go to Quoted Post

If there is no curvature required, you should always use straight track pieces.


I don't necessarily agree with that. If we were discussing C track I would agree. However, we are discussing K track which I use extensively. I certainly get a much straighter appearing track when I use flex track rather than 5 sections of straight track. The K track connectors do not always align evenly and even when you solder the joints it takes a greater effort to create a straight section appearance. For that reason I use flex track across all of my bridges, straight or curved.

Peter

Offline mike c  
#7 Posted : 06 February 2018 06:09:25(UTC)
mike c

Canada   
Joined: 28/11/2007(UTC)
Posts: 7,337
Location: Montreal, QC
Originally Posted by: applor Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: mike c Go to Quoted Post
The height difference between M or C and K requires a certain length to drop the track from the ballasted level to the ground.
Regards

Mike C


In this case you have the bridge at the height of the K track (that is, 5mm higher than the C track level), so there would be no incline section.


I was referring to the fact that it would not technically be possible to design a C to K adapter track with a length of 90mm due to the need to drop from C-Track ballasted height to K Track's Ties only level.

Regards

Mike C
Offline hxmiesa  
#8 Posted : 06 February 2018 14:38:09(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,324
Location: Spain
The flexible K-track bends very badly even to R5. It´s extremely rigid!
Should only be used for special cases and soft curves. You bridge is problably neither.

I would use sectional -K-track and K-track type bridges (if you are using Märklin briudges anyway). I would also "adapt" the track ends to meet with the C-track. (=basically cutting off connection toungues), and carefully file the high K-track profile down to the same height as the C-track. (Or in some other way assure that the upper level of the track is alligned)

Actually, You could also opt for not using K-track at all, but get your hands on some 2-rail track with the same profile as M´s C-track. (is it Code 83?). -and then lay a home-made center cunductor in the middle... I suppose this method would only be suitable for straight track bridges...
Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
Offline skeeterbuck  
#9 Posted : 06 February 2018 17:57:03(UTC)
skeeterbuck

United States   
Joined: 15/12/2015(UTC)
Posts: 523
Location: Maryland, Baltimore
Just to clarify some points, I'm using the C to K track adapter sections. The height differences between the roadbed on the C track vs just the ties on the K track won't be a problem because this will be a permanent layout and I can adjust the scenery foam to compensate for the difference and just ballast underneath the K track to blend one type of track into the other.

I was more concerned with the possibility of current loss between the sections of K track connectors vs a single piece of flex track. I was also contemplating the idea of soldering the sections of K track together, but I'm aware that soldering the K track can present its own set of issues.

Chuck
Offline cookee_nz  
#10 Posted : 06 February 2018 18:22:37(UTC)
cookee_nz

New Zealand   
Joined: 31/12/2010(UTC)
Posts: 3,696
Location: Paremata, Wellington
Originally Posted by: skeeterbuck Go to Quoted Post
Just to clarify some points, I'm using the C to K track adapter sections. The height differences between the roadbed on the C track vs just the ties on the K track won't be a problem because this will be a permanent layout and I can adjust the scenery foam to compensate for the difference and just ballast underneath the K track to blend one type of track into the other.

I was more concerned with the possibility of current loss between the sections of K track connectors vs a single piece of flex track. I was also contemplating the idea of soldering the sections of K track together, but I'm aware that soldering the K track can present its own set of issues.

Chuck


I was wondering this myself through the previous replies. 5 sections vs 1, each join is a potential resistance, perhaps not so much when newly assembled, but several months or even years on quite possibly.

If you are able to use flex sections without any cutting (with the factory connectors remaining attached), that's what I'd go for, at least four times more reliable, electrically speaking Smile

Cheers.
Cookee
Wellington
NZ image
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by cookee_nz
Online PMPeter  
#11 Posted : 06 February 2018 18:30:09(UTC)
PMPeter

Canada   
Joined: 04/04/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,138
Location: Port Moody, BC
Originally Posted by: skeeterbuck Go to Quoted Post
Just to clarify some points, I'm using the C to K track adapter sections. The height differences between the roadbed on the C track vs just the ties on the K track won't be a problem because this will be a permanent layout and I can adjust the scenery foam to compensate for the difference and just ballast underneath the K track to blend one type of track into the other.

I was more concerned with the possibility of current loss between the sections of K track connectors vs a single piece of flex track. I was also contemplating the idea of soldering the sections of K track together, but I'm aware that soldering the K track can present its own set of issues.

Chuck


Soldering the K track connections is not a problem. You do not need a flux and you only have to solder the centre rail connector tongues. You do not need to solder the tie plates. If you have to cut the flex track length and add a 7595 connector at the cut end, then there is a little bit more modification and soldering, but it really is not a big issue. In my opinion well worth it.
Offline hxmiesa  
#12 Posted : 07 February 2018 14:16:31(UTC)
hxmiesa

Spain   
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,324
Location: Spain
Yeah, what PMPeter says; I solder all my K-tracks together. No issues there. Usually en sections of 2 meteres length, with its own power-cable attached.
It is only the center-conductor that I solder. Additional "ground" can be soldered to one of the track-shoes.

As the O.P. states he is using adapter-tracks (yikes...) and the layout is permanent, there are really no concerns about conductivity, unless the bridges are of several meters of length.
I would just use standard sectional K-track. THEORETICALLY the flexible track has a higher resistence, as the center-conductor is zig-zagged underneath the sleepers!
Best regards
Henrik Hoexbroe ("The Dane In Spain")
http://hoexbroe.tripod.com
Offline skeeterbuck  
#13 Posted : 09 February 2018 13:23:27(UTC)
skeeterbuck

United States   
Joined: 15/12/2015(UTC)
Posts: 523
Location: Maryland, Baltimore
I think I'll try the sectional track and solder them all together before laying them on the bridges. I plan on weathering them anyway and I think it will be easier if I'm working with just one long piece of track.

Thanks for the thoughtful input.

Chuck
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 © 2003-2022, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.524 seconds.