I was doing some routine checking of the rail spacing through some turnouts I've had derailment problems in. I used the NMRA gauge. I found one where the point rails were too tight. This was on an Atlas code 55 (N gauge) curved left turnout. The point rails are only fixed at two points, and seemed to be pre-curved at the factory. The tight area is about midway through the curve. I tried gently bending the rail with a small screwdriver and then a pliers, but they seem to snap back to their original position. How do you guys get the rails to deform enough to bring them within gauge? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Is this a typical issue with the Atlas curved turnouts? I hope not. I was thinking of using them in my plans.
I would also like to use Atlas C55 turnouts as they look better to me than Peco, but all I read is that they are problematic. Is that really true, even with the low profile wheels?
I don't think so. This is the only one I have where I've noticed this problem. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I have a few on my layout. 4 I think. I've had to replace one because I was getting derailments, then through my own stupidity I ruined the points trying to press them down where they join together. They were raised up from the mainline rails. Then I have this other one mentioned above, that seems to be out of gauge on the point rails. They do look nice though. I have atlas code 55 everywhere else and I wanted these turnouts to match. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Here comes Mr. Wet Blanket. Atlas switches have always been problematic. I would encourage using other brands. However, the Code 55 in N scale I have some experience with and I can't believe I'm going to say this but they work better then any other Atlas switch produced. You can file the rail down until it comes into gauge. Not that difficult to do.
RickH, What was the other brand you were referring to? I laid some Code 80 Peco track as a test (just a single medium turnout and some track before and after it) and I don't like the way it looks nor do I like the way it works. Most cars dip inside the frog, and also get a nice shake on the switch-point rails. That last one is puzzling to me because I do not understand the "wisdom" behind PECO's decision to add a kink half-way between the closure rails and point blades. (here's a random image I found on the web) Are there any other choices beside Atlas and PECO for N, it does not matter how exotic, as long as there's variety of geometries available (wyes, 3-ways, crosses, double-slips, etc)?
Yes! On the choices and Kato is a superb option. I don't recommend number 4's in any scale or from any manufacturer. Now, I'm confused as the Image you shared doesn't appear to be a Peco switch. It doesn't look like those on my layout. It's been soldered at the juncture of the moveable points to the non moveable points and that can't be a good thing. If it is a Peco, someone has seriously worked it over. Ruining it. I would agree the Peco switches aren't the best lookers but are far better performers. Here in Big Bear Valley, in both N scale and HO we prefer Peco switches. There is one that uses N scale, Atlas Code 55 but he hardly ever runs trains enough to know which ones out perform the others. Now go down to the local train scene and watch the cars as they bounce through the switches. Realism comes in some interesting packages. Getting back to Code 55. You can file off the head of the rail to bring it into gauge. The other thing is the NMRA gauge can sometime turn on you and if you haven't picked up on it the track will appear to be out of gauge. I find myself filing down the points on my switches irregardless of the brand. Doing so cautiously. Watch the wheels as they move through the switch, if they lift up and out of the switch you can rest assured the rails are to close to each other or to tight. I can only hope this helps.
Actually, that "kink" is normal for the tiny rails we are dealing with. It's the point in the tongue rail at which it transitions from a blade to a load-bearing rail. 1:1 railroad turnout doesn't require this "step" because steel rail is so strong. But tiny thin rail, as in N Scale, requires more support at the transition between stock rail and tonge rail. At the same time, to avoid 'point picking', the point of the tongue rail is lower than the main rail (unlike 1:1 track). It then rises about half-way between the point and the frog to give the wheels something more than a blade edge to ride on. And thus you have your 'kink' or step. You can see it here in Kato track below. Some track manufacturers do this transitions poorly and actually have the tongue rail designed to wrap over the top of the Main rail thus creating a bump or actual step for wheels to climb as they make the transition from main rail to tongue rail. I think Kato track does a good job here. Points rarely pick, and the tongue rail doesn't overlap the main rail causing a step.
So, based on the limited discussion on the Atlas curved turnouts I should avoid or be ready to modify if used.
Thanks, yes, glennac's photos are better showing the kink. Mine was just something I quickly found on the web that was allegedly PECO. This means any N turnout I go for will have this kink? Kinda bummer then, regardless of how close it might come to the prototype as the weight of the prototype cars also makes for a different experience, as opposed to the light N scale ones that bounce off the track. Bottom line I'm getting from this whole discussion is then to avoid Atlas Code 55 turnouts (regardless whether straight or curved) if I want a reliable operation and, go with PECO all the way, or perhaps look into Kato?
