Double Radius Turnouts


The reason why the Peco turnout works so well in that location is precisely because it's not realistic. Peco makes them to install with snap track, where you're likely to want the diverging leg of a turnout to substitute for a curved section, so you can't have a straight segment through the frog. Now they're recognizing that serious model railroaders want that straight section, so they're offering newer products that have it, but if it's going to be part of a continuous curve, an all-curved turnout is better.
 
John P said:
The reason why the Peco turnout works so well in that location is precisely because it's not realistic. Peco makes them to install with snap track, where you're likely to want the diverging leg of a turnout to substitute for a curved section, so you can't have a straight segment through the frog. Now they're recognizing that serious model railroaders want that straight section, so they're offering newer products that have it, but if it's going to be part of a continuous curve, an all-curved turnout is better.
Click to expand...
Sorry I have to take exception with several points in this. Peco is a European company. The code 100 turnouts are built to European standards. Curved departure tracks are realistic for European railroads. So it might not be realistic for a U.S.A. railroad but that doesn't mean it isn't realistic in the bigger picture. Has nothing to do with snap track. Their code 75 line is also European standard.

It isn't "serious" model railroaders who want straight numbered frogs, it is those who seriously model North American railroads who want straight numbered frogs. Seems this puts a pretty sharp line on what a serious model railroader is defined as. My opinion is that people who are that serious are probably not using code 100 track and are modeling Proto-87 rather than HO scale anyway.

The Peco code 83 line was introduced because code 83 was popular in North America. It is a product designed for the North American market, so of course it follows the North American standards.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Except for some engine yard track leading to a Walthers 90' turntable, I use Code 100 exclusively. I have used Peco and Shinohara (Walthers distributor) where needed on my 14 x 13' 7" layout. Seldom have any problems with them, and where I do, it usually has to do with proper adjustment of the twin-coil switch machines. (I do NOT like the Peco machines, and they don't seem to give positive enough activity
 
John P said:
The reason why the Peco turnout works so well in that location is precisely because it's not realistic. Peco makes them to install with snap track, where you're likely to want the diverging leg of a turnout to substitute for a curved section, so you can't have a straight segment through the frog. Now they're recognizing that serious model railroaders want that straight section, so they're offering newer products that have it, but if it's going to be part of a continuous curve, an all-curved turnout is better.
Click to expand...

Not correct on multiple counts. The PECO Code 100 Streamline offers only flex track, not sections. (SetTrack sections are a different line with different turnouts) So they are not made "to install with snap track". The Streamline turnouts don't substitute for any specific curve the way an Atlas Snap-Switch does. And note that even an Atlas Snap-Switch has only one leg curved.

Turnouts with both legs curved are offered by many lines -- it is not just a PECO quirk. Double curved turnouts are not unknown on the real railroad, but very rare. They are certainly handy on a model railroad.

The curved diverging leg of the Streamline "straight" turnouts is probably what you mean to be taking issue with ... but it's not pertinent to the discussion at hand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've seen pictures enough of unusual track work in the United States so it would not greatly surprise me that you could find a prototype for just about anything made for model railroads. While certain configurations may be rare it only takes one to make the appearance on our model railroads "legit".

The Peco Code 83 Streamline products work well and, IMO, look just fine. I especially like the fact that the guard rails and the frog (electrofrog version) are all metal.
 
GenSet said:
Double curved turnouts are not unknown on the real railroad, but very rare.
Click to expand...
Being a westerner with the great open spaces and miles and miles of straight track I used to think this too. Then I started taking the train to travel back east. Especially going into the Philly 30th street station the first time I noticed that there was not a "straight normal" turnout anywhere to be found. They were all curved or non-symmetrical Ys.

Side note - I also saw what I could have sworn were Atlas track risers for a set of double track that came out of the center of the yard. The tracks went up and up until they were high enough to be able to turn and cut across the rest of the yard tracks. A bridge over a yard. I had always thought Atlas was smoking something when they put that configuration into their various track plans. Now ignorant of eastern railroading I was.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Iron Horseman said:
Being a westerner with the great open spaces and miles and miles of straight track I used to think this too. Then I started taking the train to travel back east. Especially going into the Philly 30th street station the first time I noticed that there was not a "straight normal" turnout anywhere to be found. They were all curved or non-symmetrical Ys.

Side note - I also saw what I could have sworn were Atlas track risers for a set of double track that came out of the center of the yard. The tracks went up and up until they were high enough to be able to turn and cut across the rest of the yard tracks. A bridge over a yard. I had always thought Atlas was smoking something when they put that configuration into their various track plans. Now ignorant of eastern railroading I was.
Click to expand...

Just goes to show that the 1:1 RR's have selective compression problems and solutions also.
Queensland Rail has a steep grade on it's eastern flank to reach a bridge over the northern end of it's main Bowen Hill yard so that suburban trains can travel to Brisbane City's north western suburbs from the main lines which are on the eastern side of the yard.
Even on John Allen's original G&D, there was a timber through truss bridge across the yard.
 
While late on the uptake I have some "old" experiance with Shinohara and Peco curved turnouts . Shinohara, I have used both the large and small radius, while there was no need to measure the large radius turnout, it was large. I never had a single problem in the days before DCC. I used them both on my mainline and on spurs, if memory serves I had both Sinohara's tight radius and Peco's simular model in my yard and yard throat. I did't know that these were problematic so I used them. If I have problems I assumed those problems were mine and did a little troubleshooting. I wish I could afford some now!
 
Iron Horseman said:
Then I started taking the train to travel back east. Especially going into the Philly 30th street station the first time I noticed that there was not a "straight normal" turnout anywhere to be found. They were all curved or non-symmetrical Ys.
Click to expand...

I am still comfortable saying that statistically straight turnouts are the vast majority.
 
I agree that the majority are straight, but sometimes curved turnouts are necessary to make trackwork to work with the limited space most of us have to work with. I had an instance where a curved trunout was a necessity, but I was handlaying my track, so I was able to build what I needed.
 
GenSet said:
Agree, that's why I said earlier
Click to expand...
Another good comeback Genset! Be careful what you say around Genset. He runs circles around all of us and he's never wrong. Plus he's always extraordinarily cheerful and magnanimous. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does anyone recall the photos from the time the Union Pacific "Union" Class 4-12-2 #9000 was moved to its current place in California in 1954? At one point, they had to take a crossover on a curve on Cajon Pass because the curvature of the double track running around the bluff was a bit tight. That crossover would have included two curved turnouts, and the curve between them would have been wider than both curves between which it crossed...hence, it being the preferred path around that bluff.
 
railfan said:
Another good comeback Genset! Be careful what you say around Genset. He runs circles around all of us and he's never wrong. Plus he's always extraordinarily cheerful and magnanimous. :D
Click to expand...

Did you have a point that was on topic (besides taking a gratuitous shot at me)?

Have you and I ever interacted on a topic? I don't care to serve play-pretend food and drinks to my imaginary friends in the "coffee shop", so I don't know that we have ever participated on the same thread -- unless you have more than one identity. :confused:

I've provided useful factual information on this thread -- I guess I missed your informative post in this thread.

If you have a problem with me personally, please take it up with the site administrator -- or with me off-list. And don't believe the gossip you hear from the forum "regulars" about other people.
 
GenSet said:
Did you have a point that was on topic (besides taking a gratuitous shot at me)?

Have you and I ever interacted on a topic? I don't care to serve play-pretend food and drinks to my imaginary friends in the "coffee shop", so I don't know that we have ever participated on the same thread -- unless you have more than one identity. :confused:

I've provided useful factual information on this thread -- I guess I missed your informative post in this thread.

If you have a problem with me personally, please take it up with the site administrator -- or with me off-list. And don't believe the gossip you hear from the forum "regulars" about other people.
Click to expand...
Ahem, well Genset you certainly make my points......er....uhm......I mean YOUR points rather clearly. Well said of you. :) (BTW.....care for some coffee?)
 
My sincere apologies to the forum "regulars" for interrupting this discussion with petty BS. I should know better.
 
I used a bunch of these on my layout (link below), all Walthers Shinohara code 83. As I discuss on the web site (see the section on turnouts) I had a bit of trouble with many of the turnouts, having to redo and beef up the wiring. Maybe they have fixed their quality control issues, but it was a bit of a pain. Other than that, I really like the turnouts. Using the double curves made possible what I had imagined.
 
Sante Fe Jack, I took a look at your website, with your layout build. Pretty amazing, I haven't seen a model railroader so fastidious! I know I'm not. I get the idea and some sketches in my head and I go. I've been pretty happy so far as the system seems to have worked for nearly sixty years. Whatever floats your boat though. We don't agree on my design wise either, I'm a meander through the woods guy, you like track. We do agree on Shinohara track though. Their turnouts can be maddening and I avoid them as I am able.

Your Pike is looking great, keep us mear mortals posted eh. Save me a shower today just taking a look. Jim
 
Selector said:
Does anyone recall the photos from the time the Union Pacific "Union" Class 4-12-2 #9000 was moved to its current place in California in 1954?
Click to expand...
Yes, that photo was on one of my calendars a few years back. In the photo I had there were crew men out looking at the wheels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top