Vintage Canadian.


K&Srwyco

K&Srwyco

New Member
Hi i have some limited experience doing some 4x8 foot layouts in the past as several years ago (20-25) my wife and i built two for her father. Eventually he had to downsize and gave them back. Along with all his other treasures lots of large steam power up to say 6-6-4 and a few early diesels. I retired a couple years back and we finally finished building our house before our body's wore out.
I recall problems with the longer locos having difficulty on the curves. So now here i am trying to come up with a track plan that i can fit into a room about 12 x 20. My wife likes the idea of having a continuous loop. However i am of a mind to do more of a branch line point to point setup. However i have a bit of a plan to set up a loop and piggyback a late 1890’s mining branch line onto it and run it up a short helix and onto a wall. That should give me the separation i would need to pull off 2 different eras.

I would be interested in peoples opinions about minimum radius required for the larger locomotives.
 
K&Srwyco said:
Hi i have some limited experience doing some 4x8 foot layouts in the past as several years ago (20-25) my wife and i built two for her father. Eventually he had to downsize and gave them back. Along with all his other treasures lots of large steam power up to say 6-6-4 and a few early diesels. I retired a couple years back and we finally finished building our house before our body's wore out.
I recall problems with the longer locos having difficulty on the curves. So now here i am trying to come up with a track plan that i can fit into a room about 12 x 20. My wife likes the idea of having a continuous loop. However i am of a mind to do more of a branch line point to point setup. However i have a bit of a plan to set up a loop and piggyback a late 1890’s mining branch line onto it and run it up a short helix and onto a wall. That should give me the separation i would need to pull off 2 different eras.

I would be interested in peoples opinions about minimum radius required for the larger locomotives.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the forums! There's lot of nice (and very helpful) people on here. I don't know if you can (or want to) take up the entire 12' of your room, but if it helps any, my track plan is roughly a 9'x12' in HO scale with 24" radius curves. While some locos perform better than others on the 24s, I can and do occasionally run locos as big as 4-8-4s and articulated locos, including an older Rivarossi 4-8-8-4 Big Boy, without any troubles. Here's the thread for my layout, which includes the track plan several posts down, and many photos throughout. https://modelrailroadforums.com/for...do-midland-midland-terminal-short-line.37444/
 
K&Srwyco said:
I would be interested in peoples opinions about minimum radius required for the larger locomotives.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the group!

As far as minimum radius:

Go with the biggest you have room for. If you have your heart set on running certain bigger locomotives, best way is to get som used Kato Unitrack, or EZ track in as close to the radius you have room for and test them to find out if they will run on that with a few of your longest and shortest pieces of rolling stock in different combinations to make sure you wont push or pull it off the track.

Just make sure to lay out easements into and out of the curves. It will help you get away with a little tighter radius than just going from a straight section straight into a curve. You ease into it. Your equipment will look and operate much better with them.

Nothing will kill this hobby more than having derailments all the time or not being able to run the equipment you want too.
 
K&Srwyco said:
Hi i have some limited experience doing some 4x8 foot layouts in the past as several years ago (20-25) my wife and i built two for her father. Eventually he had to downsize and gave them back. Along with all his other treasures lots of large steam power up to say 6-6-4 and a few early diesels. I retired a couple years back and we finally finished building our house before our body's wore out.
I recall problems with the longer locos having difficulty on the curves. So now here i am trying to come up with a track plan that i can fit into a room about 12 x 20. My wife likes the idea of having a continuous loop. However i am of a mind to do more of a branch line point to point setup. However i have a bit of a plan to set up a loop and piggyback a late 1890’s mining branch line onto it and run it up a short helix and onto a wall. That should give me the separation i would need to pull off 2 different eras.

I would be interested in peoples opinions about minimum radius required for the larger locomotives.
Click to expand...
Welcome!

I second the above post, go as big as possible. With a 12x20, that is a nice size space, you can easily go 30" radius. Good idea to follow the other advice and check it on a test track.

Dave LASM
 
K&Srwyco said:
Hi i have some limited experience doing some 4x8 foot layouts in the past as several years ago (20-25) my wife and i built two for her father. Eventually he had to downsize and gave them back. Along with all his other treasures lots of large steam power up to say 6-6-4 and a few early diesels. I retired a couple years back and we finally finished building our house before our body's wore out.
I recall problems with the longer locos having difficulty on the curves. So now here i am trying to come up with a track plan that i can fit into a room about 12 x 20. My wife likes the idea of having a continuous loop. However i am of a mind to do more of a branch line point to point setup. However i have a bit of a plan to set up a loop and piggyback a late 1890’s mining branch line onto it and run it up a short helix and onto a wall. That should give me the separation i would need to pull off 2 different eras.

I would be interested in peoples opinions about minimum radius required for the larger locomotives.
Click to expand...
K&Srwy: I just went through something like this, except it was for a multi-track helix. You can see the overhang and underhang, read about it Here . You can kinda get the idea of what you need to do for clearances and what stuff will 'look like'.

Your mining branch will probably have smaller locos and cars so you have room to play with just about any radii that looks good although I would try to keep it 24" or above just cuz. Is this going to be an 'around the walls' type? You might think about a 'no-lix' as 12x20 is long enough to do a rise of 16" at a reasonable grade. Helix at 24" + outside space, say 28" would be about 4.6' square with a 2.2% grade at 4" of ramp separation. However the realized grade because of the curves will be greater and could cause problems with longer trains.

Oh, and we love pix, post them when you get a chance, have fun and welcome to the group!

Later
 
Welcome to the forums! I had the same dilemma when planning out the layout and wanted flexibility over time with what I could run. I have a 5x12 foot island layout and decided to go with 26" curves. Could've gone up to 28", but wanted to leave room for an interchange track and have more depth on the busier side of the layout.

Besides testing out fit with track, definitely recommend using some track planning software to plan out the track on your footprint that you end up using. I used SCARM (free version) and it helped me do a lot of work before I committed to buying track.
 
Thanks everyone for the warm welcome and great advice and info. This looks like just the place i needed to find before i get dug in and get started on something, Yes it will definitely be an around the wall setup. I hope i can find the room to squeeze in a peninsula. I have been working on a track plan with SCARM Using the 33.5” curves. But yes that's a great idea about laying out some test turns before i get to committed. Also thanks for those links to your setups. I really like the repurposed Christmas tree idea. Thats very good timing on that tip i got to say.
 
K&Srwyco said:
... other treasures lots of large steam power up to say 6-6-4 and a few early diesels. ...
I recall problems with the longer locos having difficulty on the curves. ... However i am of a mind to do more of a branch line point to point setup. However i have a bit of a plan to set up a loop and piggyback a late 1890’s mining branch line onto it and run it up a short helix and onto a wall. That should give me the separation i would need to pull off 2 different eras.
Click to expand...
I missed the 1890s connection. Is there some vintage type equipment from your father's collection you want to use?

There are plenty of modern examples of mining branches.

One of my favorite scenarios I've always wanted to do was Wadley Georgia where I could have the "Central of Georgia" main line with its modern streamliners, meeting the Petticoat Junction type 4-6-0s of the Lousiville and Wadley short line (like a branch).

Another is Salida Colorado where the Denver & Rio Grande Western main line meets the narrow gauge 2-8-2s running on the Monarch branch which served a couple small towns but mostly the limestone mine for the Colorado Fuel and Iron corporation.

Then are you thinking an around the 12x20 space, or taking up an area inside of that space? 33.5" Radius is an interesting choice. Are you thinking about using Bachmann EZ track? That is the only manufacturer I know of that makes that radius.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your interest and suggestions. My connection to the 1890’s would be the Kaslo & Slocan Ry. It was about a 30 mile line that went from Kaslo to Sandon during the big silver rush around that time in the SW area of British Columbia. Part of James Hills Great Northern Empire. I have a limited amount of appropriate stock for that but most of what we have to work with is from dads collection. Being more 1900 to early diesel stuff. Like F1s ect.

I would tend to agree that keeping things more narrow would be a good idea. However trying to get the larger radius curves in for the larger trains will require a lot more then that. So i am trying to come up with something that snakes around a couple walls and drops down to more of a large peninsula kind of center table.

So my design thoughts are revolving around having 2 different time periods with a transfer track between the more modern continuous loop my wife is wanting and joining it to the mining railway with a transfer track, where it terminated at a ferry landing. cargos were shifted by sternwheeler further south to where it resumed rail travels on Great Northerns Nelson & Fort Sheppard Ry.

I just went with the 33.5 as a guess i guess as that was available in the track set i picked in SCARM and gave me a turn inside of 6’ with a few inches to spare on each side of the tracks. I am certain i would end up using mostly flex track on the eventual layout.
 
Last edited:
K&Srwyco said:
I would tend to agree that keeping things more narrow would be a good idea. However trying to get the larger radius curves in for the larger trains will require a lot more then that.
Click to expand...
For around the walls, you could go as much as 24"-30" and still have adequate reach. Some of mine are up 32" which is doable but a stretch. I don't have many trains running back that far, just scenery that only has to be dusted from time to time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top