Scratch Building #6 Turnouts (was Trout Creek/BK Enterprises Turnouts???

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

Jay,

Here's what the rail looks like from the end:

DSCN0825_646.JPG (228.65 KiB) Viewed 6510 times

If you can tell from the photo, I notched the inside of the thru rail web and dremeled/filed down the backside of the points. Looks like I need to clean up that solder joint! On the next one I might try the pivot vice solder.

[Jay Criswell]

Hey Bob,

Yep, I got that. What I'm struggling to articulate might be described as, where the points hinge.

Jay

[Robert]

Robert, query from the ignorant...but are you talking about filing on the backside or on the inside???

I am actually referring to filing a bit off the INSIDE edge...that surface which the wheel actually contact. See photo for an example of my point filing...really not much different than yours actually...but this is a point filed on the inside surface as I mentioned above.

Robert

IMG_4605.JPG

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

Jay,

Gotcha! I don't think I need it (yet). The rail seems to bend quite easily by finger, but I need to add the ground throw to really make sure how it's going to work.

Robert, thanks! I see what you mean in your photo. I can do that

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

Found something interesting this morning.

I happened to pick up the 2-rail and 3-rail trucks, I've been using as a guide, at the same time and noticed the back-to-back distance of the wheels was not the same.

The 2-rail truck matches the NMRA gauge at 1.125" while the 3-railtruck was 1.0625", a 1/16" narrower.

I placed another 3-rail truck on the turnout and it felt like it was jerking over to one side so I measured that one. It was also 1.0625" but the tread of the flange was thicker than the one I had been using to test the turnout with.

Then I started looking at all my rolling stock and found more with thick flanges, these will have to be replaced with Athearn 2-rail trucks if possible. I may try to spread the offending wheels apart to see if that will fix them.

I checked several of my engines and they are also at 1.0625" but they have the thinner flanges and roll thru the turnout fine.

Bottom line...I just love the standards all the manufacturers incorporate in their offerings

question, is the NMRA gauge ONLY for 2-rail? If so, do they even make a 3-rail gauge??

[Rufus T. Firefly]

question, is the NMRA gauge ONLY for 2-rail? If so, do they even make a 3-rail gauge??

As far as I know, yes.

As far as I know, no.

The NMRA does have a set of standards for 3-rail track on their web site.

[bob turner]

One of the few advantages of three rail - looser tolerances. You could file down the offending wheels, but to spin them up and hold the file at the same time would involve a simpe jig. Use a sanding drum without the sandpaper and a vise bolted to the workbench.

I believe the flange distance is narrower for three rail.

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

If the hi-rail wheels weren't so tapered it would be a cinch to chuck them in the lathe. Still might give one a try but that means taking the wheel sets out of numerous trucks.

I was doing some searching yesterday and ran across a topic at OGR where a guy made a tool to spread the wheels apart using a common pipe/tubing fitting. I told myself I'd come back later and look at it but forgot now I can't find it anywhere

Basically what he did was take a small tube fitting and cut a groove down the length of it so it would fit over an axle. He then turned the nuts on each end until it spread the wheels apart.

I'm searching for it now but so far nothing.

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

LOL found it:

http://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/topic/a-simple-spreader-for-2-rail-wheel-sets?reply=70693071088453435#70693071088453435

Just typing it in kick in the old brain cells!

[CMorrill]

As was pointed out in the comments in that thread, using the tube fitting tool will not keep the wheels exactly centered on the axle. NWSL makes a wheel puller for O wheels that works on one wheel at a time. But you still have to measure so that each wheel is moved one half the total desired spread distance.

Charlie

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

Thanks Charlie, for now I think I'll work on a few turnouts and if I find trucks that won't work then I'll replace them as I find them.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

.... and if I find trucks that won't work then I'll replace them as I find them.

And so the path to standardization is stepped upon......

[Seaboard Air Line Fan]

.... and if I find trucks that won't work then I'll replace them as I find them.

And so the path to standardization is stepped upon......

I've been thinking about converting all freight and passenger cars to 2-rail trucks, leaving only the engines with their hi-rail wheels.

The problem is going to be correcting the heights of the cars and couplers (all Kadees) when the hi-rail trucks/wheels are replaced, going to be a lot of work ahead

[Rufus T. Firefly]

.... and if I find trucks that won't work then I'll replace them as I find them.

And so the path to standardization is stepped upon......

I've been thinking about converting all freight and passenger cars to 2-rail trucks, leaving only the engines with their hi-rail wheels.

The problem is going to be correcting the heights of the cars and couplers (all Kadees) when the hi-rail trucks/wheels are replaced, going to be a lot of work ahead

At the end of the effort though you get more reliable operations.

[rex desilets]

And so the path to standardization is stepped upon......

I've been thinking about converting all freight and passenger cars to 2-rail trucks, leaving only the engines with their hi-rail wheels.

The problem is going to be correcting the heights of the cars and couplers (all Kadees) when the hi-rail trucks/wheels are replaced, going to be a lot of work ahead

At the end of the effort though you get more reliable operations.

...and better-looking rolling stock.
If you have a lot of 3-rail rolling stock (I do) the conversion process goes on and on and on, when I'd rather be modeling. Did I mention it ain't cheap?