don't open the internals...the fix is easy and has been posted more than a few times. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
After some careful work massaging the points, I was finally able to close the gap between the point and the straight route stock rail on my No. 4. Now I can proceed with the common modification of notching the stock rail on the diverging route side. I anyone wishes to see the internals of a Kato No. 4 Turnout, I took this photo. I'm impressed its precision and quality. Typical Kato engineering.
Continuing my testing of Kato's 282mm/11 Inch radius curves, I next moved to the ridiculous extreme of a DL-109 pulling 86' cars and jumbo tankers just to see what would happen. The result was flawless. Forwards, backwards and with purposeful bad train handling, I couldn't create a derailment. The car overhang is excessive, but the two 11" curves will be hidden from view on my new layout. I also tested with my Kato Mikado here and all is well with it too. I'll never run a train like this on my new layout, but I now have a high level of confidence that I won't have any trouble with the 40' and 50' equipment I normally run. The 315mm/12-3/8 Inch radius curve segment to the right is to test the passing clearance I'll need at one spot.
Glad you're discovering this for yourself... We've been running 'ridiculous' equipment length trains on these curves for years now; Kato Unitrack is proprietary to T-TRAK, and the 'standard' corner and endcap radius for T-TRAK (although broader curved modules can be substituted as long as there are similarly built modules to 'balance' a layout built with them) are pieces built with these 11-ish" Kato curves... I agree; I do NOT like the way equipment looks on these curves-my only real issue with T-TRAK-but we have, routinely, run Athearn Big Boys, and Bachmann Centennials, side by side, on these curves with no issues and no sideswiping. In fact, a small T-TRAK layout, assembled from a few of my modules, were featured at Kato's manufacturer booth at the NTS this past August in Orlando, featuring the new Olympian Hiawatha, as well as the different passenger equipment that Kato chose to display... as long as the Unitrack is secure to a flat surface, and is mated correctly, to minimize gaps and rail height anomalies (yes, one can even have these with Kato Unitrack), you should have no issue with derailments on these 11-ish" radius curves...
Your T-TRAK layout looks fantastic Bruce and I'm happy to learn that my positive experience with the 11-ish radius curves isn't unusual. You're to the near extreme on car length and train length, so is an even more severe test than mine! Thank you. PS - those metal wheelsets sound great
We find that we can pull 50+ car trains around these tight radius curves...something I would have never thought possible.
Lots of great information in this thread (it's what finally made me sign up!). I was interested in the Kato #4 turnouts for building my yard ladders, since I believe their geometry is optimized for that application. Now, I'm a bit less apprehensive to go with the #4s (since their reputation has been less than ideal). Thanks!
I have the Unitram V50 set. I ended up spray-painting all of my Unitram roadplates and sidewalks. Everything looks much better:
The entire Unitram product line is so cool and so very unique. It makes a great addition to Kato's portfolio. Your cityscape looks fantastic and we're glad to have you riding with us on TrainBoard. My Kato No. 4 had the odd problem of a gap between the points and the stock rail on the normal/straight route. I'm hoping that this is an uncommon problem. My next small purchase will be a Single Track Pier Set 23-047, Truss Bridge 20-434 and Plate Girder Bridge 20-454 to determine the exact clearances beneath each bridge type and affirm that my track plan is sound. If all is well there, the demolition of my 30 Year old N Scale road will begin and my new road will get underway.
Rick, I'm just starting up my first N Scale. Your top picture, what type board are you using as a base to your complete set up. I remember my brother using very thick plywood. But, I think there are much better choices than that. It must have been 45 yrs ago.
I have 1/2” plywood (birch furniture grade) as my actual base, which was overkill. But, in that photo, what you see is 2” extruded foam, which was painted with a tan latex paint. The track along the entire layout sits on anywhere from 1” to 4” of foam (or the risers), depending on where it is, scenery wise. (Well, except the track on the high trestle)
The lower picture of it looks great. I'm very surprised to hear that the plywood is only 1/2", and that the base is actually 2" foam. You see, after all these years, I would have never guessed that. I woulda did like 45 yrs ago, my brother must have used 3/4 plywood, covered with the green grass paper. I'm glad I asked. and that you responded. Thanks
On my layout I don't even use a plywood base at all. Just two inch pink foam. But the foam is resting on an open lattice 1x4 frame. It has held up for over 10 years.
That's amazing. I was honestly thinking so old school, 3/4 plywood. I'm glad I'm getting all this info from you guys.
Hi Frank and welcome. A lot of N Scalers are also employing hollow core doors (HCDs) for their layouts. HCDs are strong, lightweight, not costly, come in various widths and adapt easily to having legs added. I plan to use two HCDs on my new layout, both cut to shorter lengths because of limited space.
Frank, I found these very old pictures! It was posted here in Trainboard many many years ago! The size is about 6' x 3' but the lattice concept can be extended to any size. BTW, all wood work was hand cut with a miter box. I didn't have a table saw back then.
