I've yet to find anything that won't run on it. The gauge widened version might cause problems for narrow profile wheels, but otherwise anything G Scale or Gauge 1 should work a treat.
considering llagas creek aluminum track since its 1 dollar per foot much cheaper then LGB track
- Thread starter NorthwestGarrattGuy
- Start date
The rail profile is very precise, so I would expect it to be better than larger codes. The only model I've ever had that struggled was the Occre tram wheels, which are too narrow, have very small flanges and are poorly cast, so not really round! They were fine on straight track, but could not negotiate small radius corners.
Very small / non-existant flanges won't work outside period. Small does not describe properly, but you referred to thin flanges, that will affect back to back spacing and gauge at the same time.
If you don't get derailments over switches, you will have issues with needing a better level of tolerance with track gauge.
NWGG: why are you asking this question when just starting out? The only models with finescale or prototype flanges are very expensive, mostly museum-level models.
Greg
If you don't get derailments over switches, you will have issues with needing a better level of tolerance with track gauge.
NWGG: why are you asking this question when just starting out? The only models with finescale or prototype flanges are very expensive, mostly museum-level models.
Greg
I am terrible sorry to say but, i agree with what others are stating, it will not work.
I did myself a lot of experiments with prototypical flanges and prototypical turnouts ect, every test/experiment was mostly failure.
I even let go of the whole idea of prototypical, it is just to small to get things running properly.
Needles to say the AA20 in 1:32 in nmra let alone proto is not even possible.
My experiments with printing with abs are great, including a turnout, once you go bigger (3way scissors crossover ect)you will probably encounter problems.
The 5way was a piece of art, until the temperature droped 10C.
Why probably: i use alu strip and not a code rail.
To get your costs down really, look at some of my topics, i had some really great success with wood and alu strip, total cost per 125 cm/4.1 ft of finished track....not even 1 euro.
1 euro 25 if you must buy the hard wood and the putty.
The filament is also pretty costly i could get 5-6 meters/5,5-6,5 yard of track from 1 kilo.
In proto a flange depth will be 0.8mm by 0.8mm i thought( iam quick with forgetting useless things), nmra standards will tell you something that will work. since you have a 3d printer? i would recommend to print some boogies and some section of track.
In that section of curved track you want to make some safety rail and even mimic some frogs, go from proto typical measurements to nmra standard measurements.
Go from 4mm gap to 3mm to 2mm to proto.
Wheels with flanges from 4/0,16 to 3mm/0,12 to 2mm/0,8 to proto.
i suggest stick to 1mm/0,04 of flange thickness to start with.
This will save you a huge amount of time.
On
Greg Elmassian
, website you will find all the info you need to develop your own track.You will find a lot of standards there, incl his "last level" of what he is referring to as: our grandfather tracks (or something simulair, i can not recall exactly)
i could not find the pdf's very quick, but Greg will chime in.
Basically you need 2,5 to 3mm deep flanges and the gap between the safety rail and the stock rail would also be 3 up to 3.5 mm.
For my outside track (only for the biggest of the biggest loco's) i will even go to a 4mm gap(read,4.5mm).
Again sorry to say and i am the last one that wants to discourage or insult you, prototypical wont work.
Welcome to a world full of possible experiments, fun and learning
With best regards Igor
If you find any broken links on my standards pages, please let me know, the NMRA re-reorganizes their site, and I reference their standards directly from their site. (corrections and suggestions always appreciated on my site).
Here is the page of the standards, reviewing them, and I do make a recommendation later down the page.
elmassian.com
And again, please read Igor's thread, you can see all the effort he put in to research different woods, ways to fix the rails and practical information about how to cut the slots. (Igor I would like to actually compile that thread into a single article on my site some time, maybe you will agree to this if you have final say so)
Greg
Here is the page of the standards, reviewing them, and I do make a recommendation later down the page.
Track & Wheel Standards
Greg Elmassian web site on large scale trains and garden railroads, cigars, and computers
And again, please read Igor's thread, you can see all the effort he put in to research different woods, ways to fix the rails and practical information about how to cut the slots. (Igor I would like to actually compile that thread into a single article on my site some time, maybe you will agree to this if you have final say so)
Greg
I agree, but i cant take all the credit, Templot is big time involved and a 3 month course for admission at the TU of Delft for Ing education for proto, yes i passed but i declined, it is to expensive..1600 dollar per moth and i dont have study time
Those where a big (free)help:
If i can ask: for a mention(link) to this site and the site of templot(link) with my you tube name(link) attached to it, it would be very nice.
But the final is almost there, i just need time, yes there are some construction changes and some final fine tuning, i think i will be done this summer with the final and thus no more experimenting but end results.
Incl the expansion of the alu strip and ect, it will be in a new thread("the final with track making" or something).
I will keep you informed on email and send you pictures you would like to have and how if you wish.
Or did i miss your point/your wish?.
Regarding your site, you have some video names only, i could send you some train vids (links only) from the soviet only from around 1920 to 1950, you want name and or links?
They are hard to find and pretty exclusive incl the emperor train.
Not wanting to derail this thread i send you a email btw (2 times) replay on those if you want?
With best regards Igor K
ok this sounds promising but we we were going to try making our own ties for the track
$157 US for 30 feet is $5.33 a foot for stainless, a great deal, wonder what the shipping to the US or Canada would be?
Worth investigating. Also, stainless cheaper than brass? That is pretty unusual. Is it really stainless, or perhaps aluminum?
Greg
Worth investigating. Also, stainless cheaper than brass? That is pretty unusual. Is it really stainless, or perhaps aluminum?
Greg
Let me say again:
On his site stainless is cheaper than brass. He does not have aluminum (check the cliff barker site from the link provided)
I know you are battery power.
You already stated you would do part of the layout in brass and part in aluminum. (post 18)
If stainless was cheaper than brass (hard to believe as I stated) you would choose stainless over brass.
Please consider people are trying to help you but you do jump around in your statements.
Greg
On his site stainless is cheaper than brass. He does not have aluminum (check the cliff barker site from the link provided)
I know you are battery power.
You already stated you would do part of the layout in brass and part in aluminum. (post 18)
If stainless was cheaper than brass (hard to believe as I stated) you would choose stainless over brass.
Please consider people are trying to help you but you do jump around in your statements.
Greg
I have around 60m of Cliff Barker stainless running around my garden. It has lower expansion than brass and the smaller, lower profile looks better to my eyes than the Code 325 LGB track.
It's harder to cut than brass or nickel silver, but I found that a dremel and cutting disc works very well. I made all my pointwork in brass, as its easier to bend, cut and solder - and I was given a box full of coarse scale 32mm point work which was easily re-gauged to 45mm using Cliff Barker turnout kits.
Cliff sells just the rail, as well as parts to make your own ties, including rail chairs. Just bear in mind it's designed to look more like bull head rail than the more common flat bottomed, but this is true of most model rail profiles, as otherwise the drawing process to create the profile requires many more stages and the cost increases.
It's harder to cut than brass or nickel silver, but I found that a dremel and cutting disc works very well. I made all my pointwork in brass, as its easier to bend, cut and solder - and I was given a box full of coarse scale 32mm point work which was easily re-gauged to 45mm using Cliff Barker turnout kits.
Cliff sells just the rail, as well as parts to make your own ties, including rail chairs. Just bear in mind it's designed to look more like bull head rail than the more common flat bottomed, but this is true of most model rail profiles, as otherwise the drawing process to create the profile requires many more stages and the cost increases.
-
1
- Show all
So those prices are not with sleepers/ties? Or do you mean you can ALSO buy just the rail itself, besides buying the rail and ties?
This links shows track with ties and a very good price. Again, have never seen SS be cheaper than Brass on new track: Cliff Barker - Starter Packs
Ahh!!! it is code 180 !!! That won't work on LGB and many of the knockoffs in my experience. For the stuff we get, much under code 250 can be problematic, code 200 really limits you, and I have never seen anyone use 180 outside in the USA on 1:29, 1:22, 1:24, 1:20.3.... maybe some 1:32 people could be using it.
By the way, not narrow flanges (side to side), but deep flanges (how much further down from the railhead).
The issues will be dimension "D" - flange depth (deep/shallow)
not K-B, flange thickness (narrow/thick)
This links shows track with ties and a very good price. Again, have never seen SS be cheaper than Brass on new track: Cliff Barker - Starter Packs
Ahh!!! it is code 180 !!! That won't work on LGB and many of the knockoffs in my experience. For the stuff we get, much under code 250 can be problematic, code 200 really limits you, and I have never seen anyone use 180 outside in the USA on 1:29, 1:22, 1:24, 1:20.3.... maybe some 1:32 people could be using it.
By the way, not narrow flanges (side to side), but deep flanges (how much further down from the railhead).
The issues will be dimension "D" - flange depth (deep/shallow)
not K-B, flange thickness (narrow/thick)
I believe there are some on this forum (
3 minutes of fame
) use Cliff Barker, with very little problems, but i could be wrong, next time will not be the first 
That will be T# then
Yes, it's code 180, but I have some LGB stock, as well as 3D printed wheels with very deep flanges and it really does run! The shape and depth of the rail chairs maximises the available flange depth. Please see some picture below of my 3D printed Stephenson's Rocket, which has real cookie cutter wheels. The flanges are over 3mm in depth, but this runs faultlessly.
The track kits contain all the track work ready built up, plus track joiners and pins. I've bought all my track from Cliff as kits, plus extra rail joiners - the ABS ones are fine for insulated, relatively straight track, but for curves and electrical continuity, the lost was brass joiners are very solid.
If you are used to LGB track, this is a different track laying technique, particularly with electrical continuity. This track grew out of the G3 / G1 fraternity, where most models are radio controlled and battery or steam powered. Stainless is an excellent material, the ABS sleepers are extremely tough and this track will probably see us all out!
The track kits contain all the track work ready built up, plus track joiners and pins. I've bought all my track from Cliff as kits, plus extra rail joiners - the ABS ones are fine for insulated, relatively straight track, but for curves and electrical continuity, the lost was brass joiners are very solid.
If you are used to LGB track, this is a different track laying technique, particularly with electrical continuity. This track grew out of the G3 / G1 fraternity, where most models are radio controlled and battery or steam powered. Stainless is an excellent material, the ABS sleepers are extremely tough and this track will probably see us all out!
-
1
- Show all
I see, and I did mean to comment that it would depend on the "chairs" (which we would call the spikes here, even though they are way different things in the real world)
That angled design is pretty smart! I am all stainless and it was one of the smartest decisions/investments I made, since I am track power in a coastal community.
Greg
That angled design is pretty smart! I am all stainless and it was one of the smartest decisions/investments I made, since I am track power in a coastal community.
Greg
-
2
- Show all
Cliff Barker Gauge 1 fine is certainly that at Code 180 with back to back to match. Flange gaps at 1.75mm rather than 3mm would certainly appear to exclude LGB (and most so called G scale) standards. Looking at Cliff’s site he produces a fair few different sorts of 45 gauge track. So one needs to understand what you are trying to achieve before an order.I believe there are some on this forum (
That will be T# then
-
1
- Show all
I was not going to even TOUCH the turnouts!!!
Good call, the NMRA standard "standard" is 2.92 mm target for flangeway width, so not only flange thickness, but more importantly the back to back measurement on the wheels, and how consistent it is.
So, that is in the realm of fine scale or proto scale (although the terms mean nothing without referencing a standard with numbers)
Greg
Good call, the NMRA standard "standard" is 2.92 mm target for flangeway width, so not only flange thickness, but more importantly the back to back measurement on the wheels, and how consistent it is.
So, that is in the realm of fine scale or proto scale (although the terms mean nothing without referencing a standard with numbers)
Greg
-
1
- Show all
If i understand it all well?:
Apparently there seems to be a bit of confusion between proto typical scale, fine scale and scale one.
All 3 tend to be 1 at 32 scale, however there are minor differences into the scaling.
As giving some measurements for flange way gaps:
Prototypical in scale 1 at 32 would be 0.8mm to 1.0mm according to the DUTCH railroad system
scale one is 1,5 mm
gauge 1 fine is 1.75 mm
nmra is 2.82
gauge 1 course is 3mm.
Old day gauge 1 up to 4mm.
But OP still did not stated what his end goal is going to be nor what he wanted, all we can do is provide some information.
I tend to agree with
Greg Elmassian
turnouts are a long way away from starters point.
To let them work properly below nmra standards (less than 2.82mm flangeway gap) you will need very quickly turnouts above 1 meter and or a radii of 4 meter minimum.
Especially if OP wants to drive some 0-8-8-? something.
To let those kind of locos run on scale one you wil need quickly a 8.5 meter radii a 1:10.
In real prototypical scale build i would not go bigger than locomotives with more than 2 driving wheels or 3 smaller driving wheels.
With best regards Igor
Apparently there seems to be a bit of confusion between proto typical scale, fine scale and scale one.
All 3 tend to be 1 at 32 scale, however there are minor differences into the scaling.
As giving some measurements for flange way gaps:
Prototypical in scale 1 at 32 would be 0.8mm to 1.0mm according to the DUTCH railroad system
scale one is 1,5 mm
gauge 1 fine is 1.75 mm
nmra is 2.82
gauge 1 course is 3mm.
Old day gauge 1 up to 4mm.
But OP still did not stated what his end goal is going to be nor what he wanted, all we can do is provide some information.
I tend to agree with
Greg Elmassian
turnouts are a long way away from starters point.To let them work properly below nmra standards (less than 2.82mm flangeway gap) you will need very quickly turnouts above 1 meter and or a radii of 4 meter minimum.
Especially if OP wants to drive some 0-8-8-? something.
To let those kind of locos run on scale one you wil need quickly a 8.5 meter radii a 1:10.
In real prototypical scale build i would not go bigger than locomotives with more than 2 driving wheels or 3 smaller driving wheels.
With best regards Igor
-
2
- Show all
When we get onto the effects of real scale we need to think about the complete thing. For certain real locomotives (except for shunters) would not go round the sorts of curves that we are modeling. In fact the only place I know of where a prototype curve comes close to an LGB R1 curve is the Darjeeling and Himalaya line where the sharpest curve is alleged to be 69.5 feet radius at 2ft gauge. You can do as much calculation as you like about that with our flexible ruler and multiple scales, but it is still a big bigger mostly that LGb R1. Ok so we are talking about other things and sizes here. So….
Perhaps for real scale offerings we need to learn a lot from the P4, S4 and Proto 7 guys in UK. These guys tend to make lines with few compromises, however they have to make some compromises for curves other wise a roundy roundy with say a standard gauge 4-6-0 would be near impossible. And that is the rub, gauge 1 society members tend to talk in terms of 10ft radius curves for a garden line, that is mostly cos they have handrolically driven live steam that they chase round the garden so big curves mandatory to ensure they stay on the track at high speeds. For us scale track means large radius curves and you can be as perfect as you like but unless your garden will take those large radius curves then much of the discussion about true scale track and wheels in our scale is pretty accedemic.
Perhaps for real scale offerings we need to learn a lot from the P4, S4 and Proto 7 guys in UK. These guys tend to make lines with few compromises, however they have to make some compromises for curves other wise a roundy roundy with say a standard gauge 4-6-0 would be near impossible. And that is the rub, gauge 1 society members tend to talk in terms of 10ft radius curves for a garden line, that is mostly cos they have handrolically driven live steam that they chase round the garden so big curves mandatory to ensure they stay on the track at high speeds. For us scale track means large radius curves and you can be as perfect as you like but unless your garden will take those large radius curves then much of the discussion about true scale track and wheels in our scale is pretty accedemic.
-
1
- Show all