Tuning a turnout


R

RJasonB

ITS_MFRR est. 2010
Hello all. Any tips for closing the gap between the point rail and stock rail in a Kato turnout? I model HO scale and have #6 turnouts, electric and manual, throughout my layout. My steam locos are able to navigate all but three of my turnouts. One is a #6 manual turnout that diverges into a yard. The other two are #6 electric turnouts joined back to back to make a crossover. The locos short out about 75% of the time when passing through. All the turnouts are configured as non-power routing. Upon close inspection, it appears there is a small gap between the point rail and the selected stock rail. The gap is just big enough that wheel flanges could go one side or the other. Ideally, the point rail would rest flush against the selected stock rail. Any tips on how to achieve this, preferably without bending the point? Seems to me a bend in the point would only cause a problem when said point is selected away from the stock rail.

Thanks! Jason in Colorado.
 
You might consider using cyanolitic glue as an insulation coating on the side of the rail that causes a short.
 
I know what's wrong, but since I am not familiar with Kato's Unitrack, I will have to take a guess with the "cure", so forgive me if I am wrong.

What needs to be done is to close that gap. Any where the points can't contact the stock rails correctly, leaving an air gap, is a derailment waiting to happen. I have had this happen with my hand lain turnouts occasionally, when I mis-position the switch machine slightly, or I slightly under cut the throw bar's length.

I would first compare the spacing of the points between each one that causes derailments with one that doesn't. If the spacing between the "good" and the "bad" is the same, then the problem is either with the switch machine, its position, (which I doubt as I don't think Kato's QC would let it occur, although possible,) or something between the stock rails and points is preventing the rails from closing completely. (Perhaps some flash on the stock rail base, or ties that holds the stock rails.) A visual comparison, again, between good and the bad should reveal this.

If points are too close to each other on the "bad" ones, there should be a way to spread the points farther apart within the throw bar. I know that on the Atlas brand, as well as several others, the points are merely held to the throw bar by a built in plastic clip. These have a nub in that clip that snaps into a hole in the points base, which is fairly easy to snap out. This allows a modeler to "flip" the long side of the throw bar to the other side of said switch if necessary.

Sometimes on these turnouts the nub get popped out of the rail and the points are pushed in closer on the throw bar, which doesn't allow them to close properly with the stock rails. While this may not be the way Kato does it, it should be a similar system.

Correct re-positioning of the points in the throw-bar should correct it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cjcrescent,

Thank you for the thorough response. I inspected and fiddled with the turnout following your suggestions and found nothing obviously causing or contributing to the problem. I decided that, for forty bucks, the appropriate solution was to request a replacement from the vendor who sold it. This is the first issue I have had with Unitrack, so I don't have much of a headache over it. The layout will be down for about two weeks while I send off the defective turnout and wait for the replacement, but this will give me an opportunity to work on other things. Thanks again. Jason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top