On3 sectional tracks and turnouts

Looks like not too many here on Trainboard are into On3. Thus I may be the only one who is still in search of sectional tracks for temporary layouts. But one giant step that is also welcome for other On3 modelers are the new RTR turnouts by San Juan Car Company. http://www.sanjuancarco.com/RTRswitch.html

Definitely a very fine product. Particularly when considering the price. I once bought two PSC switches at more than twice the cost; and when they arrived, several of the wooden ties had already fallen off. No such hassles here with the SJCC switches.

 

I don't think you'll ever find sectional track in On3, but you could make your own. In the past, there were no assembled switches available and flex track was tough to come by. I'd be shocked if most On3ers would purchase it, being how prevalent hand laying is amongst us, I believe that there is a market for flex track, but sectional track is a long way off (if ever...On3 has (is) historically been experienced models that enjoy craftsmanship...not the type that typically uses sectional track in any scale). Still, the RTR On3 business has kicked off and so the market is changing (read: a more inclusive On3). Maybe sectional track is in the future...but it would be the distant future.

I understand where you are coming from, having built temporary On3 layouts before. I would suggest that you create your own EZ-track. Take some pink foam or plywood and lay some track...hand laid or flex track. Cut out these pieces and you have sectional track. 36" radius will accommodate most models. I've used 27" on mine...the minimum radius for my 3 Grandt Line's SUF freight cars...and I don't ever plan to have a Rio Grande 2-8-2.

 

I have had a HO layout for decades, all made with sectional tracks. Same with a small N scale layout. My main interests are with the rolling stock and fairly long trains, plus I can't have a landscape on my HO layout as I would not be able to get to any derailed vehicles anymore. But I do like to see my stuff running.

On3 has certainly changed a bit already. Those fine looking MMI models are no longer just brass, but a combination of diecast and added brass parts. This has brought down the price and thus opened up the market for guys like me who would never have bought an expensive brass model. The same with the RTR plastic cars from SJCC. Again, I would not have a full train if these cars had not become available. And now the RTR switches. Thus, there is hope (for me) to get the final missing parts eventually. At least, SJCC did mention a possibility to get into it.

And any manufacturer of On3 rolling stock is interested to increase the number of potential customers. Without sectional tracks, that number will always remain much smaller than with them. Thus MMI and all the others should actually push and subsidize ;-) SJCC (or another manufacturer) to produce a basic set of curved sectional tracks. Flex tracks are OK for straight sections.

 

Personally I like the flex track for everything. I have access to a lot of Bachmann Fast track...mainly from On30 "sets" I have picked up. The sections are nice for laying things out but when you need something that creates a tighter curve...or a curve that is a bit wider the sectional track just won't work. Since I work on a VERY tight budget I use Model Power flex track, and anything I find cheap on EBay (no brass though ). The lack of affordable anything is what stopped me from going into On3 in the first place, and track is no exception. Also, I simply don't have time to hand lay track...just my 2 cents worth...

 

I really wonder what the long term future will be of On30 and On3. Historically, the movement has been towards greater accuracy.

On30 has had two selling points: the skill level required to start is lower (all RTR and sectional track available) and lower start up costs (locomotives, turnouts, and flex track). Most people don't consider it to be all that much fun if they have to learn how to create their own track before they can even run a train. I know a few people whom hace recently switched to On3 due to the availability of flex track, the new turnouts, and the non-brass RTR equipment...all selling points that have built On30 into possibly the most popular narrow gauge (except maybe F/G/0.5").

Finescale modeling (which is what On3 is) has historically attracted people whom enjoy building...these people are usually experienced modelers. In America, very few modelers beyond the beginer stage use sectional track...it doesn't look as good as flex or hand laid. The appearance really matters to most On3 types...just as the level of detail on our models. We are more likely to add tie & fish plates than to use sectional track. SJCC, Grandt Line, PSC, and co know that they won't sell a single piece of sectional track to the old market (whom they frequently can't even get to buy their flex track...if they can find it)...and so sectional track would be gamble...will the newer market grow adequately for it to pay? Now, if you emailed SJCC and asked them about it, they will say "possibly"...all of the manufacterers do that...but if they came out and semi-announced it on their own, that would be something else.

If sectional track was available, and relatively cheap, an On3 version of BLI's 2-8-0 and some less expensive (which would also be less well detailed) freight cars would also be needed (and they probably wouldn't sell well with the old market). 1/2" scale used to be a major up and coming scale, much like the On30 of today, but ultimately it has died due to the growth of closer-to-finescale Fn3.

Further, what would the radius be of the sectional track? Sectional track has traditionally been to the minimum radius (commonly it establishes the minimum radius) for that scale/gauge. What would it be of On3? 24" like the new AMS 2-8-0? Then no 2-8-2s or Grandt Line C&S cars will be compatible. What about 36"? That is about as close to a minimum radius as exists, but I don't think all the 2-8-2s out there are compatible with it. 42" would definitely be fine, but that's a 7' diameter circle...ouch. Further, 36"R is too large for tables and 4x8 sheets of plywood...so you'll be limited to modelers with: a) a ready to use layout table b) people with hardwood floors or C) people with unfinished basements. Now, since you are essentially limited to floors, how many people will want to place their $400 locomotives and their $100 cars on the floor? I don't think that you'll find all that many. In America, fitting on a 4x8 is a huge deal...and that is a major reason why On30 really shines amongst those whom lack the space to build a layout of it.

Swissboy, you are in Switzerland, right? I seem to have gathered that sectional track is around 10x more popular with non-begineers on your side of the pond. Therefore, it may seem like a more obvious and practical move on your side of the pond than on ours. SJCC may come out with it...they could possibly do the tooling (I believe they do their own tooling, as does Grandt Line), and begin offering the track. I think that it would be a great thing for On3...a tremendous thing for broadening the appeal. But, I want to encourage you not to wait for it and to mount some flex track on foam core (or some other base) so that you can enjoy your trains.

Please don't interpret what I'm saying here as being anymore than my personal opinion that it is a long shot.

 

Yes, I do live in Switzerland, but North American NG is so scarce here that it would not pay to offer ANY mass produced items (be that cars or track etc) just for the European Market. The few who are into n3 (be that HO or O scale) are of the traditional sort you have described quite fittingly. My argument is that this sort of aficionados is a rather limited breed all around the globe. And it is definitely not everybody's bag to spent lots of hours laying track when you are really interested in what is supposed to roll on it. But the idea is not very appealing to have excellent looking models which are extremely accurate in every detail only to see them ride on a gauge that does not fit all the rest. In that respect, I consider On30 to be toys, and not models of the real thing. That can be a rather acceptable alternative though. It all depends on one's priorities. But if one likes the real looking thing because of the appeal of the original, then On3 or HOn3 is the way to go. Obviously, there is a certain number of people like myself. But whether there are enough of us for making sectional tracks pay off, is anybody's guess. I think a certain indicator might be how well those new RTR On3 switches sell. They might not be bought by the traditional market. So if they are being sold anyway, it might be because of people who care less about tracks than they do about rolling stock, including engines.

If I remember correctly, it was SJCC on their own who mentioned publicly they were considering sectional tracks. And I think a 36" radius would be fine for most engines, MMI models should have no problems with that. 24" would definitely not be a good start. I must say that my permanent HO layout is on the floor in the attic. It was the only way I could accomodate long enough trackage to have trains with more than 30 freight cars plus several engines. As I had mentioned earlier, I had to sacrifice the possibility of landscaping for that as well. And a temporary layout is usually no problem on the floor anyway. But I really mean temporary, like for a few days or hours only.

I should add that I very much adore those finely detailed landscapes, but I just don't see myself spending the time on creating something like it. It would also be impossible to do it for all the many scales I love to have models for. On3 became a new dimension for me only because MMI started to offer relatively affordable models of my favorite steam engines, those DRGW outside-frame Mikados.

 

Robert,
I know what you mean! I currently have Nn3, N, HOn3, HO, OO, On30, On3, and Fn3 stuff sitting around my house. No way that I can work with them all! The Nn3 is pure novelty...and the n-scale to go along with it. The HOn3 is primarily in the past. The HO will probably have a future on some modular club...and as an expression of my interest in standard gauge roads (NKP, C&O, Colo Midland, Midland Terminal, the Cripple Creek Shortline, etc). Some of the OO will be for my son's Thomas layout (and my OO will occasionally visit). The On30 is either exploratory or future On2 stuff. The On3 is for my primary layout, and the Fn3 is for my son's Christmas tree railroad (one Colo Central flat car under construction...a chasis for a Colo Central 2-6-0 in the mail). I'm glad that sectional track exists for all but the HOn3 for temporary operation.

I didn't see anything on SJCC's site, but that isn't always the best place to find such info. There's no mention on the On3 group of it, but I was surprised to see that the switch does allow for rail joiners to just slide in...like sectional track. SJCC cars require a min radius of 34", so a 36" curve would be compatible.

I've heard about the prices for 0m models in Switzerland, and my impression was that it is cheaper (and faster) for you to purchase On3 brass models than 0m stuff (ouch!). I've been surprised at the US modeling popularity in Europe, but it definitely isn't close to as popular as US stuff is here...and agree that the US market will continue to drive the product availability. That is why I wanted to point out that sectional track seems to be more popular in Europe than here...because it is sometimes difficult to get a pulse on common practices for foreign modeling...as it has been for me to figure out what is happening with Fleischmann's 0e Magic train, Liliput's HOe, and British OO in general.

I have always known of people with On3 locomotives...but no On3 track. I would like to say that hand laying track is no where near as time consuming or difficult as most people think...just as scratchbuilding is usually more about fear (and a lack of information) than actual difficulty. What really gets me is when people have dozens of unbuilt kits to go along with their locomotives! I have only 2 unstarted kits...both I'll start once I get the correct hardware for them. When these people have such fine locomotives, I tend to think that a couple pieces of flex track are more appealling to them than an oval...because then the locomotives can be on a table/counter.

I hope there are more people out their like you...because if sectional track is produced (which I still severly doubt), I want it to succeed and to lead to a growth on both On3 modeling and in the variety of On3 items available.

My layout is in my attic as well, and I recently elevated it up to a bench height of 24" (the maximum feasible in the attic). I had the same dilema as you regarding the lack of a layout, and I solved it with a couple bags of Kappler ties, a bundle of rail, a bag of spikes, a bit of cork, and a couple sheets of foam. Essentially, it became sectional track for a fraction of the cost of flex track, and I then cut it out and glued it to the roadbed.



It is now a bit past here:

I'm wiring it up for a future Prodigy or Power Cab DCC system.

A cool thing to note is the PSC handcar on the track...it is a working model for around $20. Well worth it!

I generally have the same feeling about On30 that you have expressed...much like "shorty" passenger cars. The dimensions of the rolling stock are extremely important to me. I want my modern steel passenger cars to be 85' long...I despise Athearn cars for this reason...even if they have less overhang on curves. I can't stand the look of the track under the trains being too narrow. It makes the smaller 1870s equipment look too large, and the 2-8-2s look cartoonish to me. Still, I understand that not everyone looks at things with the same selective compression as me, and I greatly appreciate what the On30ers have done for us (I believe it is something like 5x as many On30 models from MMI as On3 models...so the On30 are what really make it possible). There are two MMI engines which I really enjoy...the 4-4-0s and the 2-6-6-2.

Michael

 

Once again I have to point out that the primary difference in On3 and On30 (even HOn3 for that matter) is cost. I consider myself a skilled modeler, having been at this on and off literally since I was eight years old and I do NOT consider On30 to be "toys."

Would I model On3 if I could? Of course...actually I would model HOn3 if I could...BUT...I have two mortgages to pay, a business to run, four kids to support, bills to pay and college to pay for still. If not for On30 I would still be stuck modeling HO scale wanna be's like the Colorado Midland (my last HO layout) or simply give up and model standard gauge Santa Fe in N (my last N scale layout). No On30 is not true narrow gauge in the strict sense of the word, but for a guy who cannot afford anything else it is close enough. It tests my skills as a scratch builder constantly and makes any other scale I have modeled pale in comparison on the "fun-o-meter." If you want to count rivets and have the bucks, On3 is great. If you want to run narrow gauge without selling your soul, On30 is good enough.

 

John,
I want to apologize if we have insulted you. We all have to selectively compress whatever we put on our layouts. I know an On30 modeler whom can model circles around 95% of the On3 modelers I've ever seen/met. You've build craftsman kits and kitbashed stuff; you've displayed that you are a skilled modeler.

From looking at your pictures, you operate on around the same (or perhaps more) budget as me. My models are cheaper than (or comparable to) the available On30 models. Cost alone isn't the difference...time, skill, and preference also matter. Hand laying track isn't hard, but it isn't quite as quick as tacking down flex track. It can be cheaper to hand lay than to use Atlas HO track...because of the savings in turnout costs. The downside is that you have to spend additional time to save that money. If you don't enjoy it and On30 looks fine to you, than it wouldn't make much sense. In the past, the reliance of On3 on craftsman kits certainly raised the minimum skill level beyond that of scales with RTR stuff...but now RTR is available for those with adequate budgets whom want to model the modern Rio Grande (which isn't me), and this just isn't the case.

Today, building an On3 layout can be just as easy as building an HO layout...just slightly above the level of skill required to assemble a trainset! At the same time, HO, On30, and On3 can all be built with 100% from scratch everything...built on such a level that only the most gifted modelers ever could achieve such a level. (and they wouldn't achieve all that much)

I do understand (although not agree with) Swissboy's view that On30 is toylike. What is the difference between a model and a toy? I don't really know...I think it is gray. Dropping a RTR On30 locomotive on the track takes the same skills as dropping a RTR On3 locomotive. On30 trains have more realistic flanges than HOn3 trains have. The locomotives typically look much nicer than HOn3 locomotives...especially in the rods. I don't model HOn3 because this bothers me too much. I'd model On30 over HOn3...due to this. Still, I wouldn't be able to handle the track gauge issue, so I'd probably model central america or some sort of non-common carrier road. Different people see selective compression differently. Some guys love the athearn 72' cars and hate the rivarossi 85' cars, others hate the 72'ers and love the 85'ers. Both have their cases...and that is fine. The more important part is that they know what matters the most to them...and get the most enjoyment out of their hobby whether it is a 3 car N scale train of scratch built equipment or a 33 car train of accucraft passenger cars behind a live steam 2-8-2.

 

No offense taken at all. Just pointing out what you have made clear...it is dependent upon the situation and each modeler's choices. I am interested in hearing how your cost is the same or less in On3, aside from hand laying track, something I choose not to do because of time constraints.

 

Hand laying my track is a component of the cost savings. It doesn't take as much time as people think, until you get to the turnouts which is where you save money relative to Atlas HO track. Still, it isn't something that everyone enjoys. If I didn't do this, I'd have waited and spent $90 to purchase 3 packs of PSC flex track.

When I purchased my pair of On30 freight cars, they cost $20 a piece. I built my own South Park cars for less than that. The biggest expense is the wheels: $6.50ish for my beloved NWSL wheels. $4.50 for my beloved L&P couplers. I could just as easily use HO Kadee couplers and Grandt Line's plastic wheels to save money. So, I'm at $11. The brake wheels are $1.50 a piece from TCE. I'll add the lead for around $1.50. That's $14. If it is a boxcar, it will run $3.50, but I can get 2 CC boxcars out of a piece...or parts for two DSP&P cars...so I'll say I'm at $16. The framing will consume about a pack of styrene...$1.79 at my LHS. I've lettered a car for $2 using alphabet sheets...and different types of cars use more or less styrene...and the prices for the styrene and wheels have gone up. $20 per freight car. (Passenger cars require more styrene and I'm currently using Grandt Line's trucks...which raise the price to more like $40).

Locomotives. I picked up an On3 Galloping Goose with sound and DCC for $66 (wouldn't have gotten it otherwise). I picked up an old brass mogul for $240. My On30 mogul was $75 (which I regauged...most On30 are easy to regauge). Those are what I run (and what I've purchased). My transformer is from high school. My DCC unit is a bad MRC Command 2000 which I picked up for $90 (only my goose is DCC).

I have $120 per quarter (in the past it was $90) to spend on things I want...some of my budget goes to other things, but the majority goes towards my hobby. My balboa mogul and my goose ate up most of my christmas money last year. The year before, I shelled out $230 for an HO NKP Hudson and $70 for alumilite which ate up my Christmas money (this year I'll be saving it for tools).

We all have different time constraints and tastes. I prefer to end a hard day in the office/lab by building intricate models. I want my models to be as accurate as possible...or else they will bother me...and little things such as the body's height above the rails, the width between the rails, and the flange height matter to my eyes.

The ultimate decision in model railroading is what brings the most fun for your $$$. Preferences and constraints...as we agree.

 

I think Michael said it all in post #10. And I had also tried to make it clear that the "toy" feeling is what I for myself think. But I also said that it was all a matter of one's own priorities. Actually, that is one of the great things about model railroading that there is so much variation in how one can find happiness. Cost is certainly an important point, and ten years ago I would never have been able to get into On3. I notice that we seem to be roughly 20 and 40 years apart, with myself being by far the oldest. I no longer have kids in school. On the other hand, I notice lots of common ground. I am not exactly kit bashing, but I started out trying to make cheap HO models look more authentic. There are nowhere that many detailing parts for European models as there are for US models. But they often came with a bit more detailing even for the mass market. All too often, the only thing I could find were new pantographs. Meanwhile, it's mostly US and Canadian models I try to improve. But I have to admit that there are way too many started models at this point. Some of them waiting for years, and some I will never finish as there are now better models to start on. A case in point being several Athearn CP Rail SD 40-2s. Instead, I have since upgraded two SD40s from Kato (see attached picture).

Michael, you seem to find a good excuse by supplying your young child with trains before he can even use them. ;-) Actually, I got bit by the model train bug again (after having been into it as a boy) when I bought a HO starter set for my oldest son who was six at the time. But the kids mainly played with LGB/Playmobil train stuff which is mutually compatible. At that time, I bought myself a fine LGB narrow gauge Mallet which I also improved (replacing the factory windows with inserted ones that needed a lot of filing work). But it was only now with the grandchildren as an excuse that I finally acquired a (used) RhB "Crocodile" ( RhB is meter gauge). When my younger son saw it, he immediately said that this was the engine he had always dreamed about. Well, maybe he'll inherit it at some point. In the case of the LGB models, the track gauge is correct for our narrow gauge, but the rails are way too large. Again a compromise, but one I can live with in this case.

Right now, I am trying to convert a RTR On3 SJCC flatcar into an idler for my OP model that I found relatively cheaply (but without its idler). So I'm not starting from scratch but from existing models.

 

I found a source for HOn3 sectional tracks: Aspenmodel - Fine Model Trains

You need to go to their shop and then to the tracks section. There you'll find their STS Sectional Track System. HOn3 is on pages 10 to 14. These tracks are made to order, and it takes about 10 weeks! But at least I now have two sets of curves. The first one I ordered (16" radius) is a bit tight for many models. But I had chosen it because it still fits on our living room table. The tracks are compatible with Shinohara flex tracks. The rails are actually glued to a laser cut plywood bed. Thus not as nice because they lack the spike imitation. But no big problem in HO scale. It took me a while to make room for the joiners though. And the manufacturer advises to be careful because too much heat from the micro drill I used will melt the glue. I had no major problems with that, fortunately.

As for the On3 announcement: SJCC tends to have things on their news page which later can't be found any more. It was when they announced that they would develop their own flex tracks that they had the addition about considering sectional tracks in the future. And from my recent correspondence with them, they are actually working on the flex tracks, but apparently have not decided on the sectional tracks yet. So it's clear that I can't hold my breath for those.

You mentioned a On3 group. Could you provide a link, as I assume you don't mean one on TrainBoard?

 

That is interesting! I didn't realize that Aspen did track (their Nn3 K-28 sure looks great). I'd still be inclined to produce my own instead with rail swiped from Atlas N scale flex track, but it is different.

Do you have any On3 flex track? If you can get your hands on some, at least it can hold you over for now (between my dad and I, we had only a 2'x2" On3 layout for close to 30yrs). If they do come out with it, you'll be ready to build ovals...and if not, you won't be stuck waiting. What I meant by "that isn't always the best..." was that they could have announced it and then pulled it off their website...it seems like they do that sometimes. I wish they ran their website more like PSC: In stock, in production, or considering production.

I basically expect my son to enjoy large scale stuff as I did (my first LGB set was around my 1st birthday). I don't expect him to be able to enjoy the Thomas stuff for a couple years, but by starting it in advance, it will be ready for action by the time he is old enough for it. I see this as the best approach for me to get the most possible for him.

I've always loved LGB. I'd love to get the Zillertalbahn stuff...or the 0-6-0t from the Luzern-Interlaken line. I saw the former and road the later line a few years ago. I just can't afford either. I love the crocodiles and I remember the mallet. Nice and durable, despite their fudging the scale-gauge and not being extremely well detailed, some of my favorite model trains of all. My two locomotives from the mid-1980s are still going strong and gave enjoyment to my son and nephew this past Christmas.

 

The track Aspen sells is made by a German fellow and sold through Aspen.

Oh yes, I do have several packages of PSC flex track. Some of that I use to display my models though. That means several pieces are cut into smaller sections. But there are still a few. I originally got code 83, but I now bought code 100 to be better compatible with the SJCC switches. Though I also have joiners to connect the two code types.

By the way, I found my notes on the required minimum radius again:

HOn3:

Blackstone K-27: 18" according to their specs. But my experience shows that 16" is OK as long as one does not have countercurves.

MMI: 18", my K-27 is running on 16", but it produces a scratching sound. So 18" is definitely needed. Which is why I bought a wider (about 21") radius from Aspenmodel.

On3:

MMI say that their C-19 takes 32", but they don't say anything about the K models. I assume it would be the same radius.

SJCC: 34" for the cars, according to their web site.

 

Ok. I knew their awesome K-28 was made by someone in Germany, so that that makes sense.

I know that the old MDC 2-8-0 can be coerced into negotiating 15" curves with a little help from a file. I've been planning on turning mine into one of three engines: a Silverton Northern #3, a F&CC 2-8-0, or just harvesting the wheels to build a C&S 2-8-0. Currently, it is still a stock (ugly) model.

If MMI's 2-6-6-2 is accurate, it'll be able to handle 23"R curves!

You could turn the flex train into sectional track. Super glue the rail into place at one end, bend the track to the desired curvature, and then glue at the other end. Then add a few glue drops in between. Cut into sections and notch the ties for rail joiners. Voila! Sectional track.

 

Thanks, that is a simple method if it works. I'll definitely give it a try. Possibly using the full piece as one section. I'll have to figue out how many pieces I would need for a full circle.

 

If super glue doesn't hold, give 5min epoxy a try. Some people hand lay track using glue...I believe they use liquid nails. Good luck!

Interestingly, I just received my first issue of the Gazette and there is a guy with a couple of the B-man's On30 locomotives in service on his gorgeous On3 layout.

 

Thank you very much Michael, I really appreciate your help. If one of these methods works, it will probably have saved me a fair amount of money, and it will certainly have restored my peace of mind at the same time. These things really stir up one's mind if there is no solution in sight. Of course, now I wonder why I did not have the idea on my own. ;-) Well, sometimes thoughts seem to get stuck just because one is too anxious to find a solution.

I have since produced a jig to facilitate the construction. See the attached picture.

The super glue alone did not hold, but I have some stuff that speeds up and improves adhesion. I have now tried that as things would look cleaner than with the epoxy that tends to spill. But I don't know the results yet. I want to give it some time before I test the first track.

I figured out that six of the flex tracks make a circle of just about 34" radius (of course, I calculate it all in metric dimensions). Thus my first attempt for such self made sectional tracks is going to be six pieces. Plus one or two that I will cut to have shorter curves like to serve as counter curves for the turnouts.

The metal rod on the picture is the tool I used to draw the correct circle. The four small holes to the right are for the rails and the edges of the ties. Actually only the latter would be needed for the jig.