Inglenook, PECO 55?

Hey guys, Brasko here, I just thought I would pick your brains. I love the shunting puzzles and have decided that I can commit to building the Inglenook in N scale.

While on SCARM I discovered the PECO 3 way switch and thought to myself, MARVELOUS, I can make a super simple beginner switching layout using just 5 pieces of track! So what do you guys think(?) a PECO code 55 3 way switch and 4 pieces of the PECO code 55 36" long flex track. I will be using Caboose Industries manual throws. I am hoping to use a DC power loco (SD70/SD80) and random cars that I pick up at Tom's Trains.

Is this completely feasible or is it too simple to be true? What do you guys think?

Also if the SD70/SD80 won't fit in a 5 foot length I can go to 6 or 7 feet. I don't really care how prototypical it is, I love the huge diesels and will be using one for switching my Inglenook.

As far as the theme...I am still unsure...I don't just want track on wood...but industries are still a mystery to me. It will definitely be all done up with trees and stuff.

 

Doesn't need to look right, just needs to be fun! I know they aren't switchers but they are my favorite locos and why can't I use my favorite loco even though I don't have 150 miles of track! Call it the future where there are even huger locomotives and the small dinky SD70/80/90MACs are left to die as industry switchers haha!

 

Wiring the Peco c55 3-way switch is fun.
I have been meaning to write it up as someone here asked ...

 

IC SD70 switching at Wausau

On the GE/Alco front you have Minnesota Commercial, Penn Northeastern (55 miles that runs mostly SD40-2's and C39-8's), Western New York and Pennsylvania, Deleware Lackawana.....

 

Hi Brasko,
Check your inbox for a PM.

Brian

 

Hmmm..something "not fun" about looking right (as the hackles on the back of my neck begin to rise)? Please do not imply that those of us who like our trains to "look right" are somehow not having fun okay???

Here's "fun" for me...handlaid turnouts and my handlaid, code 55 three-way at the Echo Coaling Station on my Echo LDE, powered by two NWSL Tortoises underneath....FUNNNNNN!!! Especially watching trains glide like silk through something I made with my very own two fat hands....



But, each to his/her own...it IS after all, all about "fun"...even for those of us who want it to "look right".

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

Exactly, to each our own. I am not attacking your fun simply defending what may be fun for me, you can hand lay your heart out, that 3 way looks amazing by the way! Remember I have no idea what I am doing and am simply trying to get my feet wet.

Now my plan has changed, originally I just wanted to build a standalone Inglenook. Now I want to incorporate it into my new plan which is based on Amtrak's Raleigh-Charlotte business line. How does one design something like this in a confined space? Do I need to forget the usual "beginner" oval of track and use an L shape point-point design? I am having difficulty finding examples of Amtrak being modelled on anything but an oval of track mindlessly doing laps at full speed.

I will still be using PECO 55 to accomplish whatever design becomes final, I just like how it is engineered and I really like all of the available track pieces (like the daunting 3 way!).

 

Brasko,
I think it is a good idea to first understand the physical constraints of the location of the layout. This starts with a diagram of the room and all obstructions (windows, doors, vents etc). In this way you can determine the maximum surface area and shape and from there start contemplating the track layout.

I am not familiar with SCARM, is it freeware? I use AnyRail after evaluating 5 or 6 products.

 

My thought here is to go for it and make it part of the layout.

The yard on my layout is an Inglenook. Furthermore in the middle of the track plan is Time Saver (no flaming please) that is used as part of an industrial district.

Yes SCRAM is a freeware. According to their website "SCARM means Simple Computer Aided Railway Modeller" It looks interesting based on a couple videos they have on the site.

I may have to give it a try, but I'm not the design mode anymore, but could use it to get a better drawing of my plan.

Gary

 

After some moving around I have found space, I have 72" x 116" rectangle. The 116" width is proportioned 40" x 36"(window) x 40". I don't care about the window as I have it blocked out anyway, but I guess for fire safety it will have to be a removable section. So essentially i'll have room for 2x 40" x 72" sections connected by a 36" section making a U shape "shelf" layout, but how deep should it be? I must be able to disassemble it in the event that I move.

 

Looks Good.

 

Brasko.
Looks to me like you will be doing an around the room style layout.
So the depth should be 30" or less or the reach to the back will be a major nuisance.
You can go with a end to end layout or you can bump the ends of the U out to 36 to 40" and have a loop.

If SCARM can export or print to a jpeg, you could post it.

 

Before I move any further in N scale, am I right in assuming that if I get turnouts with powered frogs I shouldn't have any problems running any type of locomotive? I am reading everywhere that many N scale locos (steam especially) have huge problems getting through turnouts. Is that because of the turnout itself or the locomotive? I must admit the more I look at N scale the more I am becoming discouraged. As a beginner I do not have the skills that you all do, how can I ensure that I pick the right equipment so that I am not wasting money,becoming supremely frustrated, and quitting. So far all I am hearing is KATO! KATO! KATO!/avoid Bachmann/Atlas is Chinese and unable to produce. Where is someone like me to turn...I am reading as much as I can and it's giving me a huge headache. There seem to be no clear answers anywhere, everything is "hit or miss" which to me means you'll have to buy 5 locomotives just to get one that works right. Which companies am I supposed to trust? They all have good and bad reviews, the good reviews only being so-so, and the bad reviews sound terrible.

 

Brasko,
I use Peco c55 electrofrog turnouts and have no issues. I provide power to the entry of the turnout and put insulated joiners on all 4 exit rails (to prevent possible shorts).

The most important aspect to remember is to be patient while laying track and feel free to ask for advice.

The only tricky turnout that I have is the Peco c55 3-way and that just took some time to analyze and define the best way to wire it up.

 

Alright so electrofrog is the way to go, I have been looking at steam engines lately just cause and was a bit worried. The PECO 55 Inglenook is still a go, just waiting for next Saturday to make a trip to Tom's Train Station! I have already laid out printed track on a piece of insulation board (thin white, only used for area reference) and will begin acquiring the pieces, in the mean time I have been playing Freddy's Train Puzzle, and filling my head with N scale. The only thing now is finding out the required length of track for the 5-3-3 using 40' cars (3.5" per car, right?), locomotive is still unknown. I won't be using the c55 3 way this time around, just sticking with PECO turnouts/flex track, and a pair of caboose industry manual throws. I am also still researching uncoupling magnets, and where they should be placed.

 

In my experience over the last 35 years or so, N-scale runs better than the other scales. When operating on various HO layouts, I notice that the big cars cars don't roll as well, the couplers don't couple as easily and come uncoupled quite often, and the track needs cleaning all the time.

When running in N-scale, the main problems are these. Running too big of cars and engines for the curves...which N-scalers are really prone to do... not soldering the rails at rail joiners, which eventually get out of alignment and cause derailments, the propensity of a lot of N-gaugers to make layouts out of sectional track, with each joint a potential problem from both an electrical and mechanical aspect... AND...the dreaded "slinky effect" which MTL couplers do, especially on switching layouts. There are a few ways to eliminate or at least minimize that visual problem, but it's not a reliability problem...it just looks really funky.

The trick to getting N-scale to run well is exactly the same as any other scale. The two things you MUST do are (1) be really careful when laying track so that all of your joints do not kink, and that all of your curves are smooth. Also, make sure you get both your subroadbed and roadbed sanded smooth, as sudden height changes can really cause problems. So, smooth is the word for today...and the very best way to make sure your trackwork is smooth is to sight down it using what is known as the "Mk1 Eyeball Method"...which will allow you to see all the little kinks in your trackwork. (2) I know this may sound extreme, but for ultimate electrical reliability, solder a feeder on every piece of rail. Do not rely on the track to carry voltage to the next piece by using just a railjoiner or a soldered railjoiner...nickel silver is a terrible electrical conductor, so solder the feeders in the middle of each piece of rail if possible, and use good soldering techniques and materials that do not have to be cleaned up. This means get the oxidation off the metals, and use a non-acid flux...and a hot iron of at least 135 watts with a wedge tip so you can apply heat fast and get out quickly. A low wattage iron will melt ties and cause you all sorts of headaches and frustrations. Oh..and keep the tip clean and shiny at all times by using tip-tinning solution and a wet sponge on your soldering station.

Get organized and write down your wiring colors and draw up a schematic of your wiring protocol, 'cause you WILL forget it when you have an electrical problem a couple of years down the line.

Make a simple track cleaning car with a Masonite wiper underneath it, and run it often to get rid of oxidation and grime on your trackage. You don't have to invest in a really expensive track cleaning car to do the job. If you use a Bright Boy to clean your railheads, get one that's slightly flexible because your engine's tires get their power mostly from the inside edges of the rails...not the tops, and a flexible Bright Boy will clean that area much better than a stiff one.

As for uncoupling magnets, although they can be fun, they can also be a big pain in the butt...the cause of all kinds of uncoupling problems...which the "slinky effect" amplifies. Consider using a toothpick or a Rix Uncoupling Pick instead of a magnet...which is much simpler and to my mind gets you more involved in the switching process. However, there are differing opinions about using magnets, but basically it's divided up into two schools of thought. Magnets yes, and magnets no...with some esoteric in-betweeners out there with electromagnets, magnetic picks, or mechanical magnet positioning.

On my layout, there are nearly a hundred hand-built turnouts, and each piece of rail has a feeder. It's also DCC, which is a much more simple wiring protocol than my rat's nest of DC wiring that was previously under the layout. Every turnout (except two) have powered frogs. The two that don't are #6's and are a test to see if any of my engines stall on them...after five years...no stalls. But, they're hand built so the frogs are prototypically short.

The last thing you MUST do if you want your engines to run as well as they can is to make sure their wheelsets are correctly gauged. I am flabbergasted by the model railroaders who never check the gauge on an engine before running it! My experience is that almost all of them have a gauge problem out of the box with at least one wheelset, which will make them "hop" on a turnouts frog at least, or catch a point if they're really out of spec.

That's probably good enough for now...have fun and enjoy yourself! As you can see, it doesn't take long to start caring about how things operate, how things look, and start developing your preferences. That's a big part of the fun!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

Alright so here we are burning the midnight oil again. I have sat down and hammered out a real plan trying to figure out exactly what I need. In the attached jpeg I have included the measurements for 5-3-3 using 50' cars and a locomotive of an undisclosed size. I have added colored blocks to show where I believe I must add power to the rail, add power to the frogs, and insulate inside rails exiting the turnout. Please look it over, unless somehow I added it wrong, and tell me if I am still not quite there yet or if I am ready to go!

A new question has arisen however, with the electrofrog turnouts...what do I power the frog with, (-) or (+) or both...? I am very confused, I really need to get a wiring book, but I just want to get started building and as I am on a budget a book will just get in the way! I guess I will just add finding a "how-to wire an electrofrog turnout guide for dummies" to my vast (ever-growing) list of research material to read.

Now why did I measure for 50' cars when I said I will be using 40' cars? I don't want to be limited, my favorite types of cars are oil tankers, and well...those can get pretty damn long. Besides I think it'll add to the fun if I throw in a 50' or even a 60' car into the mix just for some diversity! And as usual the locomotive size is still unknown to me so I have budgeted nearly 80' worth of diesel (SD90) even though I will be most likely using a GP. I like the little switchers, but since I am not really limited on size I will just use what I think is cooler.

One last thing. During my time of reading/planning/thinking about building my Inglenook I have realized something, this project may be an opportunity for me to rid myself of a rather deadly habit, cigarettes. If I spend all of my money on N scale shunting, I won't be able to afford cigarettes! The future holds many more expenses such as DCC/Sound(why not), hand-laying track, and the inevitable expansion of my Inglenook into the Timenook, and smoking sucks all the money away from those delightful things. I say it'll be damn worth a shot. For health! For trains!