|
|
 Posted - March 11 2007 : 12:16:01 PM
|
Here's a couple pics of my progress this weekend on my new layout project.
I'm doing this totally old time with ONLY Code 100 Atlas Snap Track...no flex track at all. I'm following the plans from an old copy of Atlas' 6 Layouts You Can Model.
Friday night I brought home my collection of snap track. Here it is on the board...
You might notice I painted the layout's frame and pillars a dark green over the week. Also painted the layout's top a gray color.
Here's a look at the future engine area where the turntable will eventually be sunk into the board...
In case you're curious...the locos here in the pic are a custom painted Rio Grande Bachmann-Spectrum F40PH...done years before the Ski Train stole my idea and did their own...a Proto 1000 ATSF Erie Built...a custom painted Rock Island Athearn GP-40-2 paired with a recent run Atlas Rio Grande GP-40...an MRC Espee Black Widow F-7A...a Proto 2000 TP&W GP-18...Proto 1000 GM&O F-3A...a custom built and painted SP GP-60 made from the Athearn GP-50 model...a classic TYCO Western Pacific GP-20...and riding the turntable base is the recent run Bowser-Stewart Executive Series Rock Island U25B.
Opposite the engine area is a small yard area...
I picked up a case of cork roadbed yesterday and will begin working on that this week.
More pics to come...
Tony Cook
HO-Scale Trains Resource
http://ho-scaletrains.net
Edited by - Tony Cook on March 11 2007 12:21:14 PM
|
Country:  USA ~
Posts: 1658 ~
Member Since: December 03 2005 ~
Last Visit: February 07 2010
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
 Posted - March 11 2007 : 11:14:47 PM
|
LOOKING GOOD!! what radius on the curves are you using?? 22? are you going to have a round house also??
Edited by - Brianstyco on March 11 2007 11:15:58 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2507 ~
Member Since: January 31 2006 ~
Last Visit: October 21 2017
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 11 2007 : 11:20:42 PM
|
Tony,
I like the "old school" code 100 approach! Takes care of the problems caused by non-RP25 wheels. Now you don't need to worry about those over-sized U25C wheels!
Can you tell me about your plan for the turn table? Is it home made or mass produced?
Edited by - Hypoponera on March 22 2007 4:29:22 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 715 ~
Member Since: May 03 2006 ~
Last Visit: March 03 2025
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 12 2007 : 10:44:38 AM
|
It's funny you mention not worrying about the non-RP25 wheels on my old AHM U25C's. That's in a small way one of the reasons behind my switch here to Code 100 rail. I miss my trio of Rio Grande Krauss Maffei locos and other big flangers.
I also had nothing but troubles with Code 83 rail for some reason. I got sold on it originally for my now out of commission pike due to its small more scale size. However, I found derailments and poor operation was very common. Here's an example...on Code 83 flex-track with 28" radius curves, I continuously had the front pilots coming off my Spectrum 4-8-2 Mountain and other steam engines. Derailments over and around turnouts was very common...and we're not talking TYCO rolling stock here...I'm talking $40 Kadee Box Cars! Could simply be my experience or track laying skills, but I just couldn't make Code 83 work well.
The 4x8 I'm working on now was built last fall and I used Bachmann E-Z Track to test out my Code 83 vs. Code 100 troubles. Going from 28" radius Code 83 to 18" radius Code 100, I suddenly found to my total surprise that my Spectrum 4-8-2 was running smoothly. My little Mantua 0-6-0 suddenly didn't die over turnouts. Derailments became almost a non-happening event. In short, I was sold.
Also to my surprise, I kinda got a kick outta the Lionel-like look of stuff bending around sharp 18" radius curves. Decided that I'd pick out a nice "spaghetti bowl" track plan from an old Atlas book and build a 4x8 pike just as prescribed to play around on.
Eventually, I plan to wrap my room with a shelf layout that will feature larger radius curves.
This new layout features combination 18"-22" radius curves and #4 and #6 turnouts. All will be wired for DCC operation.
[:)]
Tony Cook
HO-Scale Trains Resource
http://ho-scaletrains.net
Edited by - Tony Cook on March 12 2007 10:54:23 AM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 1658 ~
Member Since: December 03 2005 ~
Last Visit: February 07 2010
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
obtrey
Little Six
Status:
offline
| |
Posted - March 12 2007 : 5:11:49 PM
|
Funny how you should mention about troubles wit 22" radius, it brought to mind problems I had with the tripple dome tank cars the first yaer I had them. They just wouldn't take the turns, my Father in law suggested I bank the track a little as he had to do that with his "Big Rugged Lionel's" sometimes he used paper matches or toothpicks or sometimes whole matchbooks to shim up one side (bank the rails) and that stopped his from jumping off the track. I tried it with varying success but eventually gave up using a tdome tank car I even tried a short piece of straight between the curves but that still didn't work.. The AHM passanger cars worked well however and they are also a long car but the couplers are longer/different. I never knew you could get 22" or even 12" radius track until later in my layouts. 22" radius finally worked for my tdomes but I still didn't put them up only to test the radius. What I liked about the 12" was you could run 2 trolleys or something with a short wheelbase side by side all the way around 1 northbound and 1 southbound and not give up the space you lose on the curves.
Bob
In Malfunction Junction:
When all else fails get a bigger hammer.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 182 ~
Member Since: January 20 2007 ~
Last Visit: April 05 2013
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 12 2007 : 6:39:12 PM
|
Looking forward to more pics! I'm glad I'm not the only one with "pooled power". (I blame the Belt Railway Co. of Chicago for being a bad influence on me) [;)]
I have a mix of 83/100, flex and snap. Just whatever I had and could find at the time.
Now, I DID have one calamity. I purchased a bit of snap track but had to store it (in the packages) with a bunch of my train stuff, in an uninsulated outdoor shed when I was in my tiny shared apartment in Lexington a few years ago. When I built the layout, the track looked fine enough. Even ran some trains without any problems - until I busted out the six-axle power. Kept derailing in one section - the entire one end of the layout, basically. Turned out that section (18"R) used most of the track I'd had in storage... and it had warped ever so slightly "on a diagonal". It was very subtle, really only obvious when I held a spare piece up level to my eye. So I had to redo that section of the layout.
About tri-domes: Have a post in the works for the future on those; I recently assembled the whole set for that purpose. One thing I planned to mention is that they indeed, run like crap. If you painted one brown - that'd be some true realism from Tyco. [:P]
Although, some are worse than others. The one I got from you Obtrey was especially bad (this is not your fault but I'm just agreeing with your experience that you warned me about [:)] ) but others weren't much better. I found that many of the axles were bad... slightly warped. Not sure if this was a production run goof or what. I replaced them with others and greatly improved the performance.
But the design of those cars is not prone to smooth operation in the first place - the center of gravity is too high and they are too narrow over the bolsters.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2175 ~
Member Since: July 15 2006 ~
Last Visit: January 31 2010
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
obtrey
Little Six
Status:
offline
| |
Posted - March 12 2007 : 7:00:03 PM
|
I remember pulling the trucks off of a couple and rolling the wheels to see if the axels were straight ,or if needle bearings on the trucks were dirty (they seemed to pick up everything) causing a drag even replaced a few couplers and it didn't change a thing. Father in law suggested moving the cars to a different location on the train, I put the heavier cars up front and still had problems. The 6 wheeled trucks on the AHM ran well though so I just gave up using them after the first experience. Nice to know I'm not the only one. I used to keep a paper towel or napkin with a small amount of oil on it to dab the needle bearings and see if lubricating would help (I know oil attracts dirt) but again success varied. At one point I even tried removing the center wheel I was so frustrated didn't help. I know the car you have was new so I guess it is inherent to that particular car I was considering trying to adapt the AHM trucks as they worked so well but it was easier to just put the cars away.
Bob
In Malfunction Junction:
When all else fails get a bigger hammer.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 182 ~
Member Since: January 20 2007 ~
Last Visit: April 05 2013
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 13 2007 : 12:49:31 AM
|
Tony,
I fully agree with you on the deep flangers. I have that same U25C, and AHM's other deep flangers like my fleet of GP18s and C628s. I got into trains to get away from the high detail armour models I used to build. I wanted a hobby with less stress. Having trains derail isn't my idea of a fun time. So, I use only code 100 and predominantly snap track. While code 100 may not be "accurate", it sure seems more reliable with my rebuilds!
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 715 ~
Member Since: May 03 2006 ~
Last Visit: March 03 2025
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
obtrey
Little Six
Status:
offline
| |
Posted - March 13 2007 : 7:35:07 PM
|
Tony,
I am curious about what you're using for the turntable. I had an Atlas for a while but didn't want to cut a hole in the platform, if I remember correctly it had built-in stops so you wouldn't pass where the track feeds in or out and you could use the supplied hand crank or buy the add on motor. But each rail had to be wired to a cutoff switch not that I minded the wiring but just didn't want to cut a hole in something that wasn't going to be permanent.
I even remember reading somewhere years ago about using an old record player turntable (yeah I'm that old). Just wondering what you were going to use?
Bob
In Malfunction Junction:
When all else fails get a bigger hammer.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 182 ~
Member Since: January 20 2007 ~
Last Visit: April 05 2013
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 13 2007 : 8:52:43 PM
|
quote:Tony,
I am curious about what you're using for the turntable. I had an Atlas for a while but didn't want to cut a hole in the platform, if I remember correctly it had built-in stops so you wouldn't pass where the track feeds in or out and you could use the supplied hand crank or buy the add on motor. But each rail had to be wired to a cutoff switch not that I minded the wiring but just didn't want to cut a hole in something that wasn't going to be permanent.
I even remember reading somewhere years ago about using an old record player turntable (yeah I'm that old). Just wondering what you were going to use?
Bob
Originally posted by obtrey - March 13 2007 : 6:35:07 PM
|
I'm using a Heljan model with a 14" turntable. I got a Walthers turntable motor that states it work with this turntable. This turntable business is totally unknown to me, so we'll see how and if it turns out. It does require cutting a hole and sinking it into the board.
Tony Cook
HO-Scale Trains Resource
http://ho-scaletrains.net
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 1658 ~
Member Since: December 03 2005 ~
Last Visit: February 07 2010
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
obtrey
Little Six
Status:
offline
| |
Posted - March 13 2007 : 10:29:59 PM
|
Doesn't the cork roadbed raise the rail enough? Or am I asking a dumb question not having seen the turntable you're going to use. I don't remember too much about the Atlas I had but it seems that maybe the cork would raise the rail enough.
Bob
In Malfunction Junction:
When all else fails get a bigger hammer.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 182 ~
Member Since: January 20 2007 ~
Last Visit: April 05 2013
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 22 2007 : 09:34:05 AM
|
| Would someone explain the diferences between "codes" (83/100...) as it pertains to HO track...And rate HO flex track for us...ThanksFISH.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 33 ~
Member Since: January 28 2007 ~
Last Visit: July 21 2012
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 22 2007 : 4:37:56 PM
|
The "codes" deals with rail hight. Code 70 is 0.07 inches tall. Code 83 is 0.083 inches tall. Code 100 is 0.1 inches tall. On real railroads, the rail is measured by weight in pounds per yard. The code 100 has a rail size that comes out to something like 210 pounds per yard. That is way to heavy for most roads to use. Code 83 is closer to prototype mainline rail size.
Sorry, I didn't read the posting by Tony that gives a better answer then mine!!
Edited by - Hypoponera on March 22 2007 4:40:36 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 715 ~
Member Since: May 03 2006 ~
Last Visit: March 03 2025
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Forum Admins & Mods
Register
