Hand laid turnouts or store bought - a discussion


twforeman

twforeman

Certified Great Northern Nut
I'm moving house and will be building a new layout. I have the space and a general plan. Obviously I will need some turnouts.

On my last layout I hand built the turnouts. I did enjoy doing so, but I wasn't careful enough with my gauging and the turnouts did not work very well. I have a good handle on what I need to do to improve the next batch, assuming that I hand build again.

On the other hand, the new Walthers turnouts are getting good reviews, and you can't go wrong with Peco of course. Buying the turnouts would save time in construction.

I currently don't know how many of what type of turnouts I need, so I'm not sure how it would pan out cost wise for hand built vs. purchased. I know the hand built ones cost me about half of the store bought ones would, if you don't count my time and the cost of the jigs.

And then there are the jigs. I have the frog jig and the point filing jig for #5 turnouts, but I'd probably need to get some more for other size turnouts.

So, hit me up with some pros and cons.
 
It seems that you have learned by your past mistakes in building hand-layed turnouts and also seem to like the process. Then go for it and build your own turnouts on your new layout and enjoy the pride of hand building them that goes along with the journey.

However, commercial turnouts of a high quality offer relatively trouble free operation and are easy to install.

In my opinion hand-layed turnouts do not blend well in appearance with commercial, flex-track.

Its your choice, but I would stick to commercial turnouts for ease of installation and good operation over the years.

Greg
 
Hand laid when you go to close a complicated loop that differs slightly from what was planned. I have twice built custom two-way turnouts to get the geometry and needed minimum radius, and they worked beautifully. And reliably. Unfortunately, I never did get to the point, so far, where I painted it all up and weathered it to blend the hand laid turnouts in with the rest of the trackage, but it would have been rather simple to do.

Here is a half-hearted attempt to make a Code 100 double slip, which I built, blend in with the Code 100 around it and to what it is mated.

index.php


Another view. This raises the matter of how oversized Code 100 looks when taking a 'ground level' photo of one's layout. In scale to prototype, it comes out of about 165 pounds/yard of steel, much heavier than anything used in Canada or the USA by any Class 1 railroads. Maybe some overhead heavy gantry cranes use that in foundries, but none other that I know.

index.php


Another hand laid #8 in Code 100 that I never did attempt to blend in because it was hidden from the operating position about 3' to the right by that berm you can see.

index.php


I have used Peco Code 83 Streamline #6 turnouts, and Walthers Code 83 of the Shinohara line, which Walther's purchased outright a couple of years ago. Both worked very well, although the Walthers/Shinohara curved #7.5 turnouts were not of the geometry advertised in terms of inner radius. The inner radius was about 3" shorter than claimed, which caused me a lot of grief later. I have just installed the Micro Engineering #5 ladder system, and so far they work well with the five or six locomotives I have run over them for testing. They're nice turnouts.

I recommend that a person learn who to make turnouts so that customized needs can be met without contracting for a distant builder to build what you want. A double slip will set you back at least $40, so not bad compared to the commercial ones available. A complicated switch with a crossover built into it will be almost twice that, and it just gets worse as you design complicated trackwork and can't build what you need yourself.

So, final analysis: Learn to build what you need to save costs and for the satisfaction of closing a main loop on a unique track plan. Otherwise, for speed and satisfactory results, resort to any of the currently available turnouts with the possible exception of what I abandoned long ago, the Bachmann EZ-Track variety.

Like the many different DCC systems available across the globe, they're all great...IF...they meet your current and foreseeable needs. You'll get the odd problem, but who doesn't in our hobby. Learn to be patient.
 
Selector said:
Another view. This raises the matter of how oversized Code 100 looks when taking a 'ground level' photo of one's layout. In scale to prototype, it comes out of about 165 pounds/yard of steel, much heavier than anything used in Canada or the USA by any Class 1 railroads. Maybe some overhead heavy gantry cranes use that in foundries, but none other that I know.
Click to expand...
The rail on some of the West Australian Iron ore roads would be close for code 100 modeling
 
Selector said:
Hand laid when you go to close a complicated loop that differs slightly from what was planned. I have twice built custom two-way turnouts to get the geometry and needed minimum radius, and they worked beautifully. And reliably. Unfortunately, I never did get to the point, so far, where I painted it all up and weathered it to blend the hand laid turnouts in with the rest of the trackage, but it would have been rather simple to do.

Here is a half-hearted attempt to make a Code 100 double slip, which I built, blend in with the Code 100 around it and to what it is mated.

index.php


Another view. This raises the matter of how oversized Code 100 looks when taking a 'ground level' photo of one's layout. In scale to prototype, it comes out of about 165 pounds/yard of steel, much heavier than anything used in Canada or the USA by any Class 1 railroads. Maybe some overhead heavy gantry cranes use that in foundries, but none other that I know.

index.php


Another hand laid #8 in Code 100 that I never did attempt to blend in because it was hidden from the operating position about 3' to the right by that berm you can see.

index.php


I have used Peco Code 83 Streamline #6 turnouts, and Walthers Code 83 of the Shinohara line, which Walther's purchased outright a couple of years ago. Both worked very well, although the Walthers/Shinohara curved #7.5 turnouts were not of the geometry advertised in terms of inner radius. The inner radius was about 3" shorter than claimed, which caused me a lot of grief later. I have just installed the Micro Engineering #5 ladder system, and so far they work well with the five or six locomotives I have run over them for testing. They're nice turnouts.

I recommend that a person learn who to make turnouts so that customized needs can be met without contracting for a distant builder to build what you want. A double slip will set you back at least $40, so not bad compared to the commercial ones available. A complicated switch with a crossover built into it will be almost twice that, and it just gets worse as you design complicated trackwork and can't build what you need yourself.

So, final analysis: Learn to build what you need to save costs and for the satisfaction of closing a main loop on a unique track plan. Otherwise, for speed and satisfactory results, resort to any of the currently available turnouts with the possible exception of what I abandoned long ago, the Bachmann EZ-Track variety.

Like the many different DCC systems available across the globe, they're all great...IF...they meet your current and foreseeable needs. You'll get the odd problem, but who doesn't in our hobby. Learn to be patie
Click to expand...
@Selector Surely you're kidding - I could not really tell that this was Code 100 and furthermore it has been blended in beautifully with the flex. This is real craftsmanship!

I stick to commercial turnouts because I'm pretty clumsy laying track. I have long admired the Fast Tracks approach to scratch building turnouts but I know that I don't have the skill or patience to build them :)
 
Thanks! I think you're kind to say so. :) Standing 400 scale feet above the rails, as we operators do when playing with our trains, it's hard to notice the differences, but when you get that camera down to ground level, all sorts of iffy things begin to show up. I used to spend almost 20 minutes taking a photo, noticing something out of scale or in the wrong place, or just dusty or laden with spider webs....something was wrong, and I'd have to delete the image, return to the layout, fix the problem, maybe relocate the camera, and then do it all over again. Sometimes it would take an hour before I was able to take six images at different focal lengths, and then process them by stacking and fixing things in post production. It was a hobby all by itself!
 
I've done a lot of them, and they can certainly look good and work well. Notice the "tools of the trade" scattered around! By the way, this is "Jack Work's trackwork" style, all spiked with no PC board ties. It's code 83 rail.

Clipboard01.jpg
 
@John P : Do you ballast prior to laying the rail?

I learned that from a friend, its easier to get the ballast smooth and by having the ballast down first I never have to worry about ballast in the flanges or mechanism.
 
Yes Dave, and I've been surprised to hear that some people do the ballasting after the rails are down. If you use commercial track, then you're forced to do that, but it seems obvious to me that the order ought to be ties-ballast-rail. Why force yourself to pick ballast grains off the ties and rails if you don't have to?
 
You needn't go to much effort for clearing the rails.......at least, I haven't, and nor do most who spend time on the forums I frequent. The idea is to glue or nail down the tracks in the orientation you want, directly to the roadbed, and to run trains for a while to see how things work, trailing, backing, and at different speeds with different motive power and consists. Once the tracks work well, you can then ballast and weather.

For clearing the rails and the tops of ties, a good lot of it can be done with a longish camel hair brush about 3/4" wide. What remains in place can be cleared by turning the brush so that you're holding the bristle end and tapping repeatedly, gently, on the rails. You'll be amazed at how effective that is at clearing the ballast grains from atop the ties and off the feet of the rails. No, not a perfect result by any means, but in the time I took to type the description you can get 98% of the grains into place using that method.
 
twforeman said:
So, hit me up with some pros and cons.
Click to expand...
Handlaying PRO
Can make any size, shape, configuration one wants.
Looks as good or bad as one's skill level
Operates as good or bad as one's skill level
Not hard to develop a good skill level.
CON
Initial jig tools can be expensive - but you don't really need them, I have never used any just freehand them all.
Time consuming

Manufactured PRO
Quick
Large knowledge base available when something goes wrong with one
CON
Money consuming

I will probably always use both depending on the situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top