Kato, Peco and Shinohara all make a double crossover for N-Scale, although Shinohara seems to be not readily available. Anyone have a suggestion on which one to choose? Anyone have an unused one for sale? Thanks Al
I use Peco code 55. Most of my Peco turnouts have to have the frog shimmed. Not hard to do, but something extra. The Peco nine? degree crossing has a known defect. I would not think that Kato has these problems. Also, Kato might be easier to wire, considering Peco electro frog vs non-electrofrog. There is also the issue of mixing Kato and nonKato track. I do not have double crossovers on my layout. I have enough space so I use two single crossovers instead. It is much easier to wire and to maintain. I would recommend not using double crossovers unless you need the extra space. Real RRs did that, too. (Colonel can probably comment as he buys real RR turnouts from time to time. Sydney City Rail has a slew of multiple crossover tracks.) The summary would be to lay the track correctly with no defects and guage all your wheels. This will improve all track operation and certainly a double crossover.
I use the peco double crossover with peco code 80 track and have no problems. If you have dcc you will need an auto-reverser with it. Jeff
I have two Kato Unitrack double crossovers on the JJJ&E. They work flawlessly with DCC. There's no additional wiring with the Kato Unitrack double crossovers. Kato makes a universal conversion track that you could use. Stay cool and run steam......
Please excuse my ignorance but what is the defect in the Peco crossing and is that in code 55 or 80? Also, what do you mean by a "crossing" Are you referring to a "diamond" where one set of rails cross another with no turnout involved?
I've ordered the Kato double crossover. I wish to get the wiring prepared before it arrives. Can someone please tell me what voltage and current the switch machines require if I wish to activate two machines at the same time? Thanks Al
Please excuse my ignorance but what is the defect in the Peco crossing and is that in code 55 or 80? Also, what do you mean by a "crossing" Are you referring to a "diamond" where one set of rails cross another with no turnout involved? </font>[/QUOTE]I am referring to a diamond. I had the problem in code 55, but it may also occur in code 80. The Northern Virginia NTrak club identified the problem to me about 3-4 years ago. http://www.nvntrak.org/ You might ask the question there. It involves a short caused by the wheels on one track touching the opposite polarity on the crossing track. There is not enough width/plastic insulation in the diamond to prevent touching. It is a minor problem, to me. I have wired a system that causes one track to be unpowered when the other track is powered. This system also requires throwing a switch any time an engine is crossing the diamond in a different direction.
I have my Kato crossover installed and it seems to work fine except it doesn't like Atlas wheel sets. A bigger question: Kato, Shinohara and Peco(I think) double crossovers use 33mm center to center track spacing. When I built my layout I used Flint Model Supply N Gauge Scale steel ruler and it has 28mm track spacing for yards and 38 mm spacing for the main lines. Naturally my 38mm c/c spaced track doesn't line up with the Kato 33mm spaced crossover. Anyone have a layout tool that gives 33mm and does anyone know the prototype minimum? Thanks Al
allhoop: I have two Kato double crossovers and they both work fine with the Atlas wheelsets. I have Atlas 33" metal wheelsets for MT trucks on all my rolling stock. Stay cool and run steam.....
alhoop: I have always heard and IMHO, the prototype track spacing in the yard is 13 feet. That is one inch in N scale and that is 25.4 mm. It is very close and it is what railroads did to keep the real estate small and the taxes down. Wider spacing is fine and you should do what you like. I do not know what mainline spacing should be, but I use 1.5 inches. in N scale. That is 36.8 mm. I use 1.5 inches because that is what N Trak uses.
