trailrider
Well-Known Member
Sorry to hear of your problems with the T-1. You do realize that the prototype T-1's were restricted as to which route they were run on, as the rigid wheelbase caused problems on a lot of main lines?
A Beginner's Journey Pt 2
- Thread starter Jacob Z
- Start date
-
- Tags
- beginner layout build
ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.
As to the soldering - no worry you will get better ... practice, practice practice.
L8r
Dang, I intended to mention that. It's a peculiarity of Peco 55 track that it looks that way. The code 55 track is the same height as their code 80 track, so that they can be mixed, but the track is "buried" into the sleeper to create the lower profile. There is a "fake" foot to the rail on top of the sleepers just for appearance, and then the "real" foot that joiners go on to is below that. Every time I post a picture of it, people who have not seen Peco 55 track up close think it looks like the rail is not in the joiners.
Mind you, on one occasion it actually wasn't in on one side although I thought it was, but I figured it out by the misalignment of the rail heads.
Also, yes about the soldering. You should see how bad it was when I first started!
ETA: here is a much-magnified pic of Peco 55 end-on, which I hope shows the two feet, the upper one at sleeper level and the lower one buried in the sleeper. Sorry, this is the best pic I could get with 8x magnification and a tremor!
Anyway, I just ran my NMRA gauge through the problem area [LESSON LEARNED: this should have been my first resort, not my last] and it seems like it narrows a tiny bit there, enough to make it hard to push the gauge through. (I'm not sure how that is possible since the feet of the two rails are still in the fasteners, I guess it must be that the heads are somehow squeezed inwards?) I guess that would do it if the BLI locomotive's wheels are set slightly further apart than the Bachman's, i.e. they are less tolerant of being squeezed? I don't know whether there is anyway to fix that without tearing up a length of track and replacing it. I suppose I could try to bend the rails back outwards, but I fear that might make things even worse.
I feel like my life now is finding and fixing ever-smaller track problems...
ETA: I have squeezed a Tracksetta into the problem area and set a can of beans on top. I will leave it overnight and see if that helps. However, I suspect that, metal being metal, it will just spring back once the Tracksetta is removed. I foresee track surgery in my future.
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)
I knew they were considered a bit "touchy" by their crews, but I didn't know that, no. I guess they can add my line to the list ;-)
trailrider
Well-Known Member
I think the Pennsy had theirs restricted to between NYC and Chicago, but don't quote me on that.
[sigh] Well, I relaid the track, soldered the join, and ballasted to keep it from moving (I still have some touchup to do); then removed the pins. Pic below (try not to wince at my soldering...).
Anyway my Broadway Limited diva still derails there. It's the weirdest thing. If I run it over at a crawl I can see each driving wheel on the outside rail lifting off in turn very slightly (I will try to get a pic), which at any reasonable speed is enough to derail the leading truck. It looks like what I would imagine would happen if the flange were hitting some obstruction on the inside of the rail, but there is nothing there.
Weirdly, it doesn't seem to affect the leading or trailing trucks, or any rolling stock. And my other Pacific, a Bachman, takes it just fine and I don't see any lifting. Even more bizarrely, it was fine at the spot that is now trouble for several months until the other day.
I have looked at the track, cleaned it thoroughly, checked that there isn't a "hump" or dip there with a spirit level (I've had that before, and when the leading driven axle was one side of the hump and the trailing driven axle the other, it was enough to lift the leading truck enough for it to jump the rails.) I even inspected the back sides of both rails with my endoscope, and I can't see anything.
I'm about ready to put the diva in its box and forget about it. I feel like even if I solve this, it's just going to keep finding more places to inexplicably derail. In addition, it doesn't couple well to my rolling stock, even the wagons I got from Broadway Limited.
I swear to whatever railway gods are out there, I'm about done with Broadway Limited. And next time, I'm doing HO.
Anyway my Broadway Limited diva still derails there. It's the weirdest thing. If I run it over at a crawl I can see each driving wheel on the outside rail lifting off in turn very slightly (I will try to get a pic), which at any reasonable speed is enough to derail the leading truck. It looks like what I would imagine would happen if the flange were hitting some obstruction on the inside of the rail, but there is nothing there.
Weirdly, it doesn't seem to affect the leading or trailing trucks, or any rolling stock. And my other Pacific, a Bachman, takes it just fine and I don't see any lifting. Even more bizarrely, it was fine at the spot that is now trouble for several months until the other day.
I have looked at the track, cleaned it thoroughly, checked that there isn't a "hump" or dip there with a spirit level (I've had that before, and when the leading driven axle was one side of the hump and the trailing driven axle the other, it was enough to lift the leading truck enough for it to jump the rails.) I even inspected the back sides of both rails with my endoscope, and I can't see anything.
I'm about ready to put the diva in its box and forget about it. I feel like even if I solve this, it's just going to keep finding more places to inexplicably derail. In addition, it doesn't couple well to my rolling stock, even the wagons I got from Broadway Limited.
I swear to whatever railway gods are out there, I'm about done with Broadway Limited. And next time, I'm doing HO.
ctclibby
Well-Known Member
Jacob: It does not look like either rail is in it's joiner. That what you wanted?
As to the soldering - no worry you will get better ... practice, practice practice.
L8r
Dang, I intended to mention that. It's a peculiarity of Peco 55 track that it looks that way. The code 55 track is the same height as their code 80 track, so that they can be mixed, but the track is "buried" into the sleeper to create the lower profile. There is a "fake" foot to the rail on top of the sleepers just for appearance, and then the "real" foot that joiners go on to is below that. Every time I post a picture of it, people who have not seen Peco 55 track up close think it looks like the rail is not in the joiners.
Mind you, on one occasion it actually wasn't in on one side although I thought it was, but I figured it out by the misalignment of the rail heads.
Also, yes about the soldering. You should see how bad it was when I first started!
ETA: here is a much-magnified pic of Peco 55 end-on, which I hope shows the two feet, the upper one at sleeper level and the lower one buried in the sleeper. Sorry, this is the best pic I could get with 8x magnification and a tremor!
Last edited:
Jacob, not sure if this helps but I had a similar symptom that ended up being a very slight kink in the track are the joint. Used my NMRA gauge to discover it was slightly narrow at one spot then used track nails to remove the kink. It solved my issue that I had thought was a bump for several months...
Good suggestion. What exactly did you do with the track nails?
Anyway, I just ran my NMRA gauge through the problem area [LESSON LEARNED: this should have been my first resort, not my last] and it seems like it narrows a tiny bit there, enough to make it hard to push the gauge through. (I'm not sure how that is possible since the feet of the two rails are still in the fasteners, I guess it must be that the heads are somehow squeezed inwards?) I guess that would do it if the BLI locomotive's wheels are set slightly further apart than the Bachman's, i.e. they are less tolerant of being squeezed? I don't know whether there is anyway to fix that without tearing up a length of track and replacing it. I suppose I could try to bend the rails back outwards, but I fear that might make things even worse.
I feel like my life now is finding and fixing ever-smaller track problems...
ETA: I have squeezed a Tracksetta into the problem area and set a can of beans on top. I will leave it overnight and see if that helps. However, I suspect that, metal being metal, it will just spring back once the Tracksetta is removed. I foresee track surgery in my future.
Last edited:
I was able to put a couple on the inside of the joint to widen it just enough to solve my issue
So they are pushed right up against the rails? And driven in all the way so they don't foul the flanges?
Yes for me that is what worked....I only need 2 (one on each side of the joint...
OK, it seems like the combination of the Tracksetta and a track nail has it working. For now.
What makes this so frustrating is that this was working fine. I ran in that locomotive on that track, 30 mins in each direction, without a problem. And then something changed and I have no idea what.
What makes this so frustrating is that this was working fine. I ran in that locomotive on that track, 30 mins in each direction, without a problem. And then something changed and I have no idea what.
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)