Gap-less Turnouts, reducing wheel dips in turnouts

[beiland]

REPEAT,...a reason for my desire for Gap-Less turnout(s)

I’ve been complimentary about my Peco turnouts in the past as one of the better (best) commercial built ones available off the shelf . After all 95% of the turnouts on my new layout are Pecos.

But yesterday I experienced another hic-cup that reinforced my desire for gap-less turnouts. I was playing around running a couple of my steam engines thru a track section on my upper deck,….a mainline section that would take my trains pass the port facilities and into the SantaFe train station. Bumpy, bumpy, bumpy, as they traversed this series of 3 curved-switches, then a 3-way switch at the end. Here is that section of track,..


It appears as though the leading truck wheels, and possibly some of the tender wheels all took turns dropping into the frog voids. In some cases the leading truck wheels even wanted to derail, and some did. I took out one of my very nice Kato trucks and pushed it thru that section of track,...same thing, bump, bump, bump as it dipped in every frog. And look at the Peco turnout, it certainly looks like close tolerances that should prevent this excessive dipping !!


The Peco 3-way is even a bigger problem in the straight thru direction,...both wheels drop into two frog voids simultaneously,...and I have multiple 3-ways on my layout.

Likely one of the problems here is the small diameter of those wheels. Look here at their size in comparison to the leading truck wheels on several steamers, and a container car,..





I know, I know,.... the std answer will be why don’t I build my own turnouts. My answer might be, how many new, or even existing modelers build their own turnouts?...my guess, less than 30%.

Sure would be nice if there was a commercially available gapless turnout?

 

[Hutch]

Now I want to see a gapless turnout next to a gap turnout. Seems like if it was a thing, the mfg. would already be doing it.

 

[Smudge617]

Swinging Frog by
Fleischmann EXPRESS turnouts



That doesn't look too bad does it,...unusual / non-prototypical? Looks better than my single swinging track version !

Operation,...(by the way there is a simple way to slow the video down, that I just learned,...and it may be easier to see this video)

PS: Why hasn't some American firm done something like this over the past how many years is it??

Probably because of the cost of re-tooling to produce something like this with no guaranteed return, end of the day, it's the bean counters that run companies

 

[BigGRacing]

A primary reason I would like to have turnouts that would accept different size wheels,..

I have a whole host of these Mehano C&O Mountain locos that have larger flange wheels

So am I just expected to sell them,... or throw them out as they likely will not run thru the latest 'dip-free' turnouts??






In addition to those I have a nice oriental express set thats lead by a Lima locomotive with larger flange wheels.

I also have a TGV set from France with larger flange wheels.

I think i still have a few of those older Rivarossi steamers, nicely weathered and with good motors, larger flange wheels.

Several nice Roco steamers from Europe (that outpull many of my American steamers),...and have larger flange wheels.

ETC,...and more I can't think of at the moment.

Then on to more modern engines that have trouble with the larger gaps of commercial turnouts,....like the AC6000 diesels from Broadway, and some of the Genesis engines, both 6 and 4 axles.

This is what has lead me to this desire to see if a NO-GAP turnout could be developed in this modern day,...and particularly one that would be easier to build than the Fast Track ones.

Don’t throw them out Beiland, great for some us steamer newbies even if just for parts!

 

[beiland]

I think I have made things too complicated by suggesting some sort of 3D printing for the frog,...its not as complicated of a shape as Andy's.

Its a simple triangular block of metal that doesn't even need that rounded end,..





That rounded shape shown in the one illustration could just be a separate piece (metal or plastic) glued to the bottom of the triangular block frog at that one end. Its the piece that sits in a receptacle hole in the tie structure below it. The 'frog rails' on that end of the turnout do not need to touching the frog itself. There could (would) be a gap(s) there.

On the opposite end the 'wing rails' need their bottoms filed just like point rail fittings.

Using code 83 or smaller rail sizes, one might not even need a joint in the point-closure rails.

PS: That triangular block frog does NOT need any rail type shaping,..just plain old vertical sides !!

 

[Hutch]

Swinging Frog by
Fleischmann EXPRESS turnouts



That doesn't look too bad does it,...unusual / non-prototypical? Looks better than my single swinging track version !

Operation,...(by the way there is a simple way to slow the video down, that I just learned,...and it may be easier to see this video)

PS: Why hasn't some American firm done something like this over the past how many years is it??

After watching the video again, I have a better understanding of how this works/helps. Seems like someone should try manufacturing these. How is the frog moved?

 

[santafewillie]

So no one on this forum has an interest in a gap-less turnout?

Sorry but not me. I have zero problems with my 115+ Atlas code 100 Custom Line switches. Most of them are #6's, but I have a few industry tracks with #4's. All but 12 are controlled by Caboose Industries ground throws.

 

[beiland]

Sorry but not me. I have zero problems with my 115+ Atlas code 100 Custom Line switches. Most of them are #6's, but I have a few industry tracks with #4's. All but 12 are controlled by Caboose Industries ground throws.

So you never experience any problems with small dia wheels dropping into these 'frog valleys',...even steam engine leading trucks??
https://modelrailroadforums.com/for...eel-dips-in-turnouts.35889/page-2#post-576000

 

[beiland]

How is the frog moved?

How about something like this?
It might be operated by a normal slide switch with a hole drilled for a continuous piece of music wire linking the point's throwbar and the swinging frog. Selecting the correct piece of music wire and its flex characteristics would eliminate the need for any other springs for the turnout.



Control Linkage for my Swinging Frog

In the past there have been a number of folks asking about controls to operate this gap-less turnout, and some of those folks suggesting it is going to be very difficult.

Here is my latest thoughts on controlling that swinging frog,...a simple one piece length of music wire attached to the swinging end of that track piece. It could be easily camouflaged along side one of the ties. (and the rod shown is oversized to what would be required)

 

[trailrider]

REPEAT,...a reason for my desire for Gap-Less turnout(s)

I’ve been complimentary about my Peco turnouts in the past as one of the better (best) commercial built ones available off the shelf . After all 95% of the turnouts on my new layout are Pecos.

But yesterday I experienced another hic-cup that reinforced my desire for gap-less turnouts. I was playing around running a couple of my steam engines thru a track section on my upper deck,….a mainline section that would take my trains pass the port facilities and into the SantaFe train station. Bumpy, bumpy, bumpy, as they traversed this series of 3 curved-switches, then a 3-way switch at the end. Here is that section of track,..


It appears as though the leading truck wheels, and possibly some of the tender wheels all took turns dropping into the frog voids. In some cases the leading truck wheels even wanted to derail, and some did. I took out one of my very nice Kato trucks and pushed it thru that section of track,...same thing, bump, bump, bump as it dipped in every frog. And look at the Peco turnout, it certainly looks like close tolerances that should prevent this excessive dipping !!


The Peco 3-way is even a bigger problem in the straight thru direction,...both wheels drop into two frog voids simultaneously,...and I have multiple 3-ways on my layout.

Likely one of the problems here is the small diameter of those wheels. Look here at their size in comparison to the leading truck wheels on several steamers, and a container car,..





I know, I know,.... the std answer will be why don’t I build my own turnouts. My answer might be, how many new, or even existing modelers build their own turnouts?...my guess, less than 30%.

Sure would be nice if there was a commercially available gapless turnout?

Question about your Peco turnouts: Are these Code 100 or 83? The reason I ask is that their Code 100 turnouts are actually for OO scale rather than true HO! The guard rails opposite the frogs have too much gap between the guard and the stock rails. That can result in wheels "picking" the point of the frog when the car is going toward the point end of the turnout. The newer Code 83's are correct for HO scale. The solution for the Code 100 is to add a .010" shim to the inside of the guard rails. You might also want to make the top of the shim a little above the surface of the guard. (I have had only one (1) single Peco Code 100 turnout where I had to do that; the rest of the Peco Code 100 turnouts don't give me any problem as-is. Not sure why, but I solved the one with the above shim.
As to wheels dropping into the bottom of the frogs, just put a small amount of epoxy into the bottom of the frog and then use a Swiss needle file with the serrations on the edge to file the filler down to a height that allows the wheel treads to not drop down. The only problem with that technique is if some of your rolling stock has pizza-cutter flanges and other wheels are NMRA standard.

 

[beiland]

So I guess I need to repeat this posting,...I have lots of engines that shimming existing newer tighter commercial turnouts does not help the drop in the frog area. This gap-less concept would solve those problems,...and I don't think it would take a big fortune to offer some changes,...perhaps even an easy to build kit form.

A primary reason I would like to have turnouts that would accept different size wheels,..

I have a whole host of these Mehano C&O Mountain locos that have larger flange wheels

So am I just expected to sell them,... or throw them out as they likely will not run thru the latest 'dip-free' turnouts??






In addition to those I have a nice oriental express set thats lead by a Lima locomotive with larger flange wheels.

I also have a TGV set from France with larger flange wheels.

I think i still have a few of those older Rivarossi steamers, nicely weathered and with good motors, larger flange wheels.

Several nice Roco steamers from Europe (that outpull many of my American steamers),...and have larger flange wheels.

ETC,...and more I can't think of at the moment.

Then on to more modern engines that have trouble with the larger gaps of commercial turnouts,....like the AC6000 diesels from Broadway, and some of the Genesis engines, both 6 and 4 axles.

This is what has lead me to this desire to see if a NO-GAP turnout could be developed in this modern day,...and particularly one that would be easier to build than the Fast Track ones.