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.
I've made the switch to N scale and would like to know what the normal radius is for most N scale diesel locomotives. I know about HO (18" and 22"), but don't have a clue when it comes to the smaller scale.
Also, what are the normal and more prototypical track codes for N?
Thanks!
i go for 22" curves and track stick with code 80 atlas,, code55 is a pain in the butt for real, and if you even lay the code 55 a little off your gonna have alot of problems, belive me im good at laying track and i still have problems laying code 55 urgggggg...... either that or do kato unitrack but your limited, i find the best route or best combination to be atlas code80 track with peco streamline code80 switches, cant beat this combo.... goodluck and ill let others chime in....
I'm a total Kato Unitrack convert. If I ever did an N scale layout again it would be all Unitrack without hesitation. It's worth the cost...
As for turn radius, I've run 4 axle road switchers on 9 1/2" radius. I don't recommend it at all, and it looks very "toy train" like, but the point is you can do it.
11" to 12" radius works fine for even modern 6 axle diesels.
18" and 22" radius curves would be beautiful broad sweeping mainline curves, but most of the time people are doing N scale because of space issues and if they had room for 22" radius curves they'd likely be modeling in HO.
I forget the exact weight rail code 80 would be, but I remember it's heavier than I think even the heaviest prototype rail in service. Code 55 is much closer to scale, but it will take a very large amount of work and patience if you ever get your layout running smoothly. If.
Thank you for all the info!
It helped a bunch when I stopped and picked up track. Kept away from the code 55 and went with Atlas code 80 and 11" curves. Picked up some switches, too. 18" and 22" seemed a bit much, as I'm trying to keep this first project small and simple. We'll see how it goes from there.
Again, thanks!
There are many N-scale layouts, including mine, that use Code 55 quite successfully. I have not found it to be difficult to use at all. Perhaps I just don't know any better, but I don't understand what the fuss is about.
I'm using Atlas Code 55 flex and turnouts, and ME Code 55 bridge track. Looks great, works fine!
- Jeff
^^^ great to hear jeff, but for a new person to just lay code55 track and have it easy for them is not the same ,,, i just told him the truth thats all i did,,, no fuss just truth didn't want to start drama, but if it offends you im so sorry...
I'm not offended in any way.
I never considered using anything but Code 55 on this, my very first layout. Perhaps I have just been lucky, but my experience is that Code 55 can work for a beginner (me) without major problems.
- Jeff
Lots of good info already, so I'''ll just add that if you are familiar with HO, just cut everything in half.......so 22 in HO becomes 11 in N and 18 would be 9 in N. As you can see you'll have to adjust a little........N doesn't have 9, it has 9.75, but divide by 2 and you'll be close.
The exact scaling factor to convert from HO to N is 0.54375. In other words, N-scale is a little larger than one-half of HO.
Thus, 18" radius in HO scale is equal to 18 x 0.54375 = 9.7875" in N-scale, very close to 9.75" radius curves commonly available in N-scale sectional track.
The difference between one-half and 0.54375 isn't much, but if you simply divide every dimension by one-half when converting from HO to N, you may occasionally find things getting a little bit too crowded.
- Jeff
It also depends on WHICH version of N you are working with.......some european N is 1/144, japan uses 1/150, and the US uses 1/160. but no version of N is half the size of HO. But HO isn't half of O scale either, despite the fact that HO originally stood for HALF O. And G scale has at least 6 different scales from 1/20.3 to 1/32, but they use the same track. The point is if you're using sectional track, if you divide by 2 and pick the closest match, you'll be fine.
I never considered using anything but Code 55 on this, my very first layout. Perhaps I have just been lucky, but my experience is that Code 55 can work for a beginner (me) without major problems.
- Jeff
Very good to know! I plan on using Code 55 on my first layout. I have laid out a basic 2x8 oval (10" radius ends) with a Timesaver in the middle and a staging track on the "top" side, to get a combination of continuous run for my 2yo son to watch and switching for me when he's asleep or not around. It's still in RTS but I want to get a good idea of what to finalize. Scenery should be easy, but what would you, or anybody else for that matter, do extra here?
Set up a small oval with the track and ran a train around in circles for a while. Talk about bringing back some old memories! The two Kato SD40-2's run like a dream. Quiet and oh so smooth. Unfortunately, the older Bachman Northern 4-8-4 seems a bit temperamental on the 11" curves. Seems kind of jerky on the straights as well, so it may just need some cleaning or something.
Refreshed my memory that an outside the oval switch and loose points placed right at a curve is bad operating procedure. The switch was necessary to get a length of track to attach alligator clips from the transformer, as I don't have a terminal track just yet. The code 80 does seem a bit tall, so I may try the code 55 in the future. After looking at Pauls layout plan, including some switching is in the future, too for when the "race track" gets boring.
Refreshed my memory that an outside the oval switch and loose points placed right at a curve is bad operating procedure.
I plan on using Walthers' end of track bumpers to ease your fears.
I plan on using Walthers' end of track bumpers to ease your fears.
Oh, I wasn't referring to your plans when I mentioned the switch. Yours would work fine. I had it set up with the switch going to the outside of the oval instead of the inside. Not to mention the points were loose. So, when I reversed the direction of the train, the lead locomotive split the switch and derailed.
Another problem I had was even after I 'pinned' the switch points, backing into the siding would still derail equipment for some reason. At first I figured it was the sharp S curve, but I noticed that the wheels would catch on the point and lift up and over the rail.
The track bumpers are a good idea, anyways. Nothing like accidentally hitting the controls and sending stuff flying off the table.
I'm a total Kato Unitrack convert. If I ever did an N scale layout again it would be all Unitrack without hesitation. It's worth the cost...
Dude, I second that! I had C55 and everytype of track before and after it! Kato is the bomb, If they ever make a c55 with proper tie spacing they would make a killing in n scale! Either way track choice is more or less matter of opinion any ways!
Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website
(Learn More Here)
