Transitioning Between Different Track Codes?


T

Trackside

Member
In planning my route, I'd like to have my industrial siding made of a much thinner, shorter track than the mainline - like real life. What have you guys done in order to correctly transition between different track codes, and what would you recommend? Is there a piece I can purchase to do this?

Thanks for the advice.
 
Sure there's transition tracks, but there's ALSO transition rail joiners. I'd say go with the rail joiners.
 
Trackside said:
In planning my route, I'd like to have my industrial siding made of a much thinner, shorter track than the mainline - like real life. What have you guys done in order to correctly transition between different track codes, and what would you recommend? Is there a piece I can purchase to do this?

Thanks for the advice.
Click to expand...

What I did on my old layout, and what I'm doing on the current one, is where I have "transition joints" from one code to another is to cut a slot across the middle of the railjoiner, and flatten one end. The joiner is then slipped onto the larger rail and the smaller rail is placed on the flattened joiner. Then I solder the rails to each other, making sure the running surfaces are smoothe.

Now Atlas makes transition joiners that work very well from code 100 to code 83, but no one makes the transition joiners from 83 to 70. You can get a pack of several dozen, 4 I think, for a little more than the price of regular joiners. Using these or making your own is cheaper and easier than using transition tracks.
 
I'm thinking the joiners will look more correct than the transition track. I've used joiners between Code 100 and 83 and just bent them for correct alignment (by lifting the code 83 rail to the correct height) and soldered as usual. Once ballasted, they look fine. I think CJ's method would be better though.
 
Cjcrescent said:
flatten one end [of the rail joiner]. ... and the smaller rail is placed on the flattened joiner. Then I solder the rails to each other, making sure the running surfaces are smoothe.
Click to expand...
That is what I do too. Not had a problem yet.
 
I have tried CJ's method and it works great. Actually it is the ONLY method I seen that seems to work great LOL.

Just my opinion though.
 
Cjcrescent said:
What I did on my old layout, and what I'm doing on the current one, is where I have "transition joints" from one code to another is to cut a slot across the middle of the railjoiner, and flatten one end. The joiner is then slipped onto the larger rail and the smaller rail is placed on the flattened joiner. Then I solder the rails to each other, making sure the running surfaces are smoothe.

Now Atlas makes transition joiners that work very well from code 100 to code 83, but no one makes the transition joiners from 83 to 70. You can get a pack of several dozen, 4 I think, for a little more than the price of regular joiners. Using these or making your own is cheaper and easier than using transition tracks.
Click to expand...
I though there was an 83-70, maybe it was a transition track, not joiner...
 
The transition tracks work well, too. I use them between my code 83 visible track and my code 100 hidden track. In code 83 to 70 transitions from mainline to spurs and industrial tracks, I use the sliced rail joiner method.
 
Here's a tip I forgot to add. If you are going to use code 70 rail anywhere on the layout, instead of buying "code 70" joiners, just use Atlas N scale joiners. They work just as well and are a lot cheaper than the code 70 joiners.
 
I used several transition joiners between Shinohara Code 83 curved #7.5 turnouts and my Code 100 flex. I found them to be VERY difficult to install, even nearly breaking the skin on my finger tips. I found it necessary to "tune" the foot of each rail with a small file, and also to slightly splay the enclosure wings on the joiners before they would slide on without slicing open my finger tips. Due the the kink for the transition halfway along their lenghts, you can't really use pliers, so a finger nail placed along the upper level at the kink seems to have worked for me without bending and ruining the joiner completely.

After it was on, I would take needle-nosed pliers and slightly rotate the tips so that the railtops aligned neatly. I have not used the transition rails, but after this experience I would probably look on them more seriously.

Have any of you fellows had similar grief?

-Crandell
 
Selector said:
I used several transition joiners between Shinohara Code 83 curved #7.5 turnouts and my Code 100 flex. I found them to be VERY difficult to install, even nearly breaking the skin on my finger tips. I found it necessary to "tune" the foot of each rail with a small file, and also to slightly splay the enclosure wings on the joiners before they would slide on without slicing open my finger tips. Due the the kink for the transition halfway along their lenghts, you can't really use pliers, so a finger nail placed along the upper level at the kink seems to have worked for me without bending and ruining the joiner completely.

After it was on, I would take needle-nosed pliers and slightly rotate the tips so that the railtops aligned neatly. I have not used the transition rails, but after this experience I would probably look on them more seriously.

Have any of you fellows had similar grief?

-Crandell
Click to expand...
Very true, but you'd rather have them be tight & hard to put on then loose, easy & slipping off constantly...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top