have read many articles on power routing Peco 'electrofrog' turnouts for DCC, but for my situation, I don't beleive it is necessary. Situation; 1. All turnouts will be Peco code 55 electrofrog, 2. The spring will be left in using servos for a 'motor' (I don't care about slow motion or the 'snap' sound), 3. No reverse loops or 'wyes', 4. Layout will be DC for now, but wired for DCC (insulated joiners both rails and all four exit rails on each turnout insulated), 5. I plan on using NoOx to get a handle on track cleaning after reading many articles on it's benefits, 6. No steam, all diesels (if that matters). I'm concerned about long term contact problems with oxidation between the points and the stock rails. Mostly for the curved point since the straight point has considerably more contact area. Also, the 'hinge' area between the points and the closure rails. I know it is recommended to cut the closure rails, but I don't want to do this as long as there won't be a contact problem with the points down the road (no pun intended). See the attachments. I have read up on this NoOx which has been out for decades and it appears to be the 'cats meow' for oxidation problems and keeping the rail clean better than any track cleaner car etc. Will NoOx help solve the problem?
Have used c55 Peco in DCC system extensively and never paid any attention to the business of cutting & re-wiring them. The Peco technique of powering the rails through the moving rails and polarity of frogs through internal wiring works. Some cleaning is required now and then. The geometry of the moving rail can also be distorted but is easily reformed when needed. I am not gentle with these pieces and have often put in/pulled out, etc. Used No-OX also; not sure if its really useful. Carefully applied the tiniest amount to relevant parts of the mechanisms. Biggest issue, I think, is using ballast, but maybe most other makes would have same issues. Have a smallish layout that accomodates my practices. Can't comment on leaving the snap springs in when remotes used. Can't comment on largish installations that need absolute integrity (museum quality installations.) For a beginner, Peco was a great choice. Might do hand laids now if chance to start over. Looks & cost count.
Ahhhh, but there will be! and it can be a bugger to keep clean. That's why, for DC or DCC, it is advisable to jumper the closure and point rails to the adjacent stock rail, isolate the frog and feed it via switch machine contacts or a frog juicer. Consider how easy it is to make the mods before installation, compared to the disruption and maintenance headaches down the road if you rely on point rail to stock rail contact.
But that ads considerable expense to every turnout. I am aware of this also. I really want to avoid both. Rob Paul to pay Peter.
Every Peco switch I have had, experiences some sort of power failure because of oxidation eventually. I used to use Railzip but that only works for the short term. I also started jumping the hinge points to fix some on-layout problems. After a while, I just got tired of unreliable contacts and went in and tore the switches out, jumped the hinges and the stock rails and completely isolated the frogs. To avoid too much expense, I devised a manual switch throw using a subminature DPDT slide switch. The handle is cut way down and shaped using a motor-tool to look like a switchstand base and then I add a rod and a target. I haven't done full operational tests yet but my multimeter says that I have complete circuits now instead of nothing. In some locations, switch removal is not practical so I throughly cleaned the contact areas, added hinge jumpers and I also plan to add drops of DeOxit in all of the contact points to be safe. So far that seems to work as well. Peter
I've used Peco C-55 Electrofrogs for about 20 years with DC and have had no problems. My current layout has no blocks because I gapped and power fed using the turnout points to route power. Once every 3-4 months I notice that power beyond a given set of points gets a little weak, so I slide a small piece of folded 600 grit paper once back and forth between the point and stock rail while pressing the point against the paper and stock rail, then that circuit is good for another 3-4 months. I've found that Peco turnouts are virtually bullet-proof if you don't fuss with them continuously. BTW, I don't use any chemicals on the track and turnouts because that just adds one more variable into the mix. I found that the various chemicals start interacting with each other and I ended up with a mess that I was continuously trying to correct.
Can't talk about Peco C55, but I have been using C80 for over a year now relying just on the point rail to stock rail contact for 10 out of 12 of them in a city like calcutta, where dust, smog and humidity can kill you! But unlike many other user, and as I have been reading on many articles for years, powering the frogs never made a difference for me - I actually did power the frogs for two of the turnouts and thought of doing the rest later - but now I have decided not to take the trouble of doing it at all. I am using peco solinoid point motors with a CDU - the solid throw of these motors and the strong spring of the turnout gives pretty reliable contact. I clean the contacts every 2 months using just a thin, clean piece of cloth, placing it over the rail, use a tweezer to press tightly agaisnt the rail and make a couple of smooth, tight swipe. It cleans really well. As for the problem with electrical connection, I think more than the point rail/stock rail connection, I would worry about the old peco rail-joiner type connection between the movable point rails to the fixed frog rails - they tend to create some problem - but nothing very difficult to manage with a little patience (But they solved the problem by introducing pivot type joins with better electrical connection and ease of point movement. Though I don't consider myself to be an expert in this area, IMHO the peco power routing elctrofrogs are actually pretty good just of the shelf, at least C80. Or I have just been lucky!
Interesting, some do and some don't have problems. I wonder what the design changes have been in the past couple of years.
This is exactly what I have done for many of the switches that I didn't take out and it works well. I also would adjust the point rails so better more fuller contact would be made. However, some switches didn't respond too well to this method and were a bit too touchy so these were the ones that I did frog isolation on. In rebuilding a yard with new switches, I just bit the bullet and did the mods now so I won't have the same problems in the future. I know of others who have torn out every switch and done the same thing and I know of others who have never had a problem. it either comes down to some expense or work up front or do periodic maintenance. Peter
So I then wonder what/where are the differences between the installations? The individual, the layout, the room itself, ballast/scenery, full moon? Question, would a drop of very light oil or something else other than NoOx on the points and on the hinges help prevent this oxidation/loss on contact over time, or would that create other problems such as attracting dirt? Does Atlas have the same problem with their non isolated frogs? (Forgot what they call them.)
Can I assume those trucks (name) are the stock trucks Atlas supplies for their rolling stock now? (The last time I bought rolling stock was 15 years ago.)
One installation that the switches were modified was a in-store layout so very little dirt issues. My original installations were inside the house that had eventual problems and the latest layout is in the garage which is dirtier. However, some switches give me no problems but some always do. Most of it is hinge issues and stock rail contact (which can happen on any brand of switch). I wouldn't use anything but NoOx/DeOxit or Railzip - oil would probably attract more dirt. As far as I can recall Atlas switches don't have this kind of problem, but they usually suffer from mechanical/quality issues such as gauge problems, uneven rails, poor point rail alignment. The C55 switch problems are well documented on most internet boards and new switches continue to give problems. If you go this way then be prepared to fine tune these before installing. It is much easier to damage these switches and a manual throw or switch machine is required as they don't have a spring. Any switch is a tradeoff - Atlas looks nicer but is not as durable as Peco; Atlas is less expensive but requires a way to throw them and suffer from more defects than Peco, etc. With any layout the less switches the better if you want to minimize maintenance. Peter
Agreed about the oil, I was thinking only the slightest amount, maybe silicon. What's the difference between the three materials? I wasn't aware of any problems. Not happy here at all. Confused here. Peco does have a spring. Are you referring to removing those springs? I plan on leaving them in as I also plan on using servos for the motors. That sounds like the prototype.
I think NoOx and DeOxit are similar and are marketed as oxidant removers while Railzip is marketed more as a conductive improver - probably the same thing but I think the other two are supposed to be better than Railzip (which I hope so.) NoOx has been around for almost 100 years in proven industrial uses ( a can would probably last for you 100 years too). Some of the Atlas C55 switches are better than others but with some work they can be a good performer if you want the most realistic look. Peco is more durable and it looks ok painted and ballasted (differences are obvoius if you mix the two)and you can work around the wiring issues. The Atlas switches don't have springs. I was looking at my Tam Valley Singlet instructions for my one hidden remote switch and you need to be able to center the points intially to set the servo up so it can automatically find the endpoints. I will have to take the spring out for this to happen. Not sure if it would work with them left in. If you plan to use servos then you can use a SPDT microswitch (much cheaper than other methods at a dollar or less per switch) activated by the servo horn to change the frog polarity. Peter
There is a manual method for the Siglet if you can figure out how to do it since the instructions border on useless. By continuously pressing one or the other button on the supplied remote board (two buttons & two bi-colored LED's), each press moves the servo the tiniest amount. Very slow & tedious, but you don't have to remove the spring. When you stated no springs, you were referring to Atlas not Peco, correct?
