What is the dimensions for N scale between two parallel track ? I red once is 1 1/2
- Thread starter daniel23
- Start date
Thank you .
Thank you , now I see what is the difference.
Mixed Freight
Well-Known Member
Modern day prototypical parallel track spacing is 14' minimum (center-to-center). That translates into 1-1/16" for N-scale. But that would be awful tight for our diminutive little trains. A little bit wider spacing is desirable in order to give a little extra finger room for putting derailed trains back on the track. And we're just talking parallel straight tracks. Parallel curved tracks generally require even more space. Even the prototype railroads may go wider than 14' spacing on curved trackage.
A good rule of thumb for home layout use may be just to let your turnouts determine your parallel spacing. For example, I have an N-scale layout with double-track mainline using Atlas code 55 flex track and their #10 turnouts to allow crossing back and forth from one line to the other. When originally starting to lay track, I found that placing the two diverging routes of the turnouts together resulted in a center-to-center straight route spacing of 1-1/4". Therefore, my double-track spacing is 1-1/4" all the way around the layout. Incidentally, my curved track radii were large enough that I was also able to maintain the same 1-1/4" center spacing through them. No problems at all, even with 80' passenger cars.
I used #7 turnouts in my yards and industries, and even those worked out to 1-1/4" for any parallel track spacing. I guess this also was easy enough to do, because I only used all flex track with the turnouts and crossings - no sectional track that might have altered the parallel spacings in the yards. However, if I had used any sectional track in these areas, I probably would have accepted whatever spacing that they may have yielded, within reason.
1-1/2" spacing on N-Trak modules is strictly for the three mainlines and has reasons for this spacing not related to turnouts or prototype. Actually, I'm not sure exactly why, but believe it may have something to do with a little extra margin of safety so that if one train on one line derails, it is less likely to to derail any other trains passing by on one or both of the other mainlines. Not totally guaranteed of course, but still less likely.
Hope this helps a little.
A good rule of thumb for home layout use may be just to let your turnouts determine your parallel spacing. For example, I have an N-scale layout with double-track mainline using Atlas code 55 flex track and their #10 turnouts to allow crossing back and forth from one line to the other. When originally starting to lay track, I found that placing the two diverging routes of the turnouts together resulted in a center-to-center straight route spacing of 1-1/4". Therefore, my double-track spacing is 1-1/4" all the way around the layout. Incidentally, my curved track radii were large enough that I was also able to maintain the same 1-1/4" center spacing through them. No problems at all, even with 80' passenger cars.
I used #7 turnouts in my yards and industries, and even those worked out to 1-1/4" for any parallel track spacing. I guess this also was easy enough to do, because I only used all flex track with the turnouts and crossings - no sectional track that might have altered the parallel spacings in the yards. However, if I had used any sectional track in these areas, I probably would have accepted whatever spacing that they may have yielded, within reason.
1-1/2" spacing on N-Trak modules is strictly for the three mainlines and has reasons for this spacing not related to turnouts or prototype. Actually, I'm not sure exactly why, but believe it may have something to do with a little extra margin of safety so that if one train on one line derails, it is less likely to to derail any other trains passing by on one or both of the other mainlines. Not totally guaranteed of course, but still less likely.
Hope this helps a little.
OleSmokey
Well-Known Member
Thank you for reply.
