Double Slip or not

[GAP]

I am at the stage where I want to install something to allow trains to pass from one loop to the other and vice versa.
First option would be a scissors crossing (Diamond Crossing for the US folk) which would involve the purchase of 4 steps of points (Turnouts for the US folk) and a crossing.
Second option would be to use a double slip which in the purchasing stakes is a far cheaper option plus there is the requirement for less space.
The majority of my locos are short wheelbase with the exception of an LGB 0-6-0 diesel, a Bachman "Connie" and a Bachmann 3 truck shay.
I know that the Shay and the diesel will squeeze around the R1 curves of some of my points but I am not sure about the "Connie" although it does have flangeless wheels for the inner 2 drivers.
Has anybody used a double s;lip and if so what success did you have?
What is the radius of the LGB double slip I have seen quoted as R2?
Wiring polarity etc is not an issue as I run Battery R/C locos.
I am just exploring options at the moment and the LGB ones seem reasonably priced but the TrainLi one would require a second mortgage.
Does anybody else make double slips?

 

[dunnyrail]

We had one in a station on the Ruschbahn, pretty well all LGB Locomotives were not troubled by it except for the small Field Steamer that just would not go over it or actually any other point for that matter without stalling. We never tried the 2-8-0.
Have you tried Connie on R1? If it manages them it should be ok on the slip, but likely you will need to run slow through the curves.

Markway in Sheffield UK do a Double and Single Slip, but they are expensive and made using Copper Clad Sleepers so the life outside cannot be regarded as long term. GRS also in UK have a tame man that produces track for G, even matches LGB proportions much better but the wait can be extended and the costs pretty high. USA may be another rich source of options, but again costs with postage are likely to be higher than your original thoughts.

As for the geometry of the LGB slip, I think that ine of the curves may be R1 the other R2, but I expect someone will confirm or repute that.

 

[ebay mike]

Can't help you with the Connie question GAP, but here's a photo with an R1 curve for comparison. Laying the track piece on top of the slip shows it is of slightly larger radius than R1 but nowhere near R2. For a short while LGB did offer an R2 version and one appeared on eBay not long ago. Despite it's poor condition it fetched a significant number of bids and a hefty price. I have another (older) double slip in my track box which, although LGB badged, is marked underneath 'Made in Switzerland'. From memory the maker's name was something like ELS.

 

[Gizzy]

PM replied to GAP....

 

[maxi-model]

I use a Garden Railway Specialist made wood sleepered double slip. It uses LGB code 332 rail and is designed to be used/integrated with LGB's R5 radius points and their own 6 ft radius ones. I have no problem with Bachmann locos, including the Connie and K-27 passing through as the "curve" built into them is the same as an LGB R5. I use it in my station/servicing area to provide a nice compact solution for a lot of operations.

I use the the 4 points and a crossing set up to go between the two loops on my line. The points are linked on my SVRR penumatic system to all throw together to either allow trains to cross or stay on the loop they are running. Max

Cross over between loops - 3 R5's and a Piko curved point, R3/R5




Double slip in the station area

 

[GAP]

PM replied to GAP....

Haven't seen it maybe its "in the mail"

 

[Brixham]

A Swiss firm called AZB made/makes the double slip. I was told that this firm uses people with special needs to assemble them. The older version 1225 used a single non solenoid motor to actuate the blades. The blades are either set for 'all straight' or 'all curved' running which seem easier to use than the current 1226 which can be awkward to use in comparison with two point motors...

I think AZB also make the 3 way point, again, an older version with a larger radii than the current EPL version. I bought the older version last year at Llanfair garden railway show.

Malcolm

 

[ebay mike]

A Swiss firm called AZB made/makes the double slip. I was told that this firm uses people with special needs to assemble them. The older version 1225 is slightly larger radius, and used a single non solenoid motor to actuate the blades. The blades are either set for 'all straight' or 'all curved' running which seem easier to use than the current 1226

I think AZB also make the 3 way point, again, an older version with a larger radii than the current EPL version. I bought the older version last year at Llanfair garden railway show.

Malcolm

Yes, that's the one Malcolm. Mine's at the bottom of the track box so couldn't get it out to check. I never used it because I didn't think the motor was up to outdoor use. There was a larger radius 3 way point on eBay a couple of months ago - again in poor condition but fetching a good (for the seller) price.

 

[Gizzy]

I have one of the R3 versions of the LGB 3 Way Point which I purchased from Ebay, not realising it wasn't a newer R1 version. I tried to off load it, but I couldn't sell it, so I brought a 2nd hand R3 RH point from Adverse Camber to use with it on my previous LGB (Logging, Gravel and Bricks) before moving to Cambridge.

It's now used on LGB II (The Sequel).

Now I'm home, I've taken some photos of my Double Slip for GAP, in case he finds another. The curve to the left is a half circle of LGB 15000 R2. The points to the right are Trainline R2, but the radius on these is a little more than LGB R2. They have an arc of 22.5 degrees like the DS. I've used them as part of a double track R1/R2 circuit which is in a restricted corner of the garden.




I'm certain that the curve is R2 although the length of the DS is slightly shorter as it is 22.5 degrees arc. I've over laid a LGB 15000 R2 (30 deg) here.




I found that overlaying a LGB 12000 R1 curve also seems to be close but is much tighter, as you can just see the DS rails under the R1 curve which is shorter and 30 degrees arc angle.




It certainly isn't a R3 LGB 16000, as again you can see the rails of the DS underneath the curve....

 

[Gizzy]

And there is a DS for sale on the forum now, although it is in the UK, so it might not be cost effective for you GAP....

LGB 12260 double slip reduced - G Scale Central

Hi all I have been sorting again and have a LGB 12260 double slip to sell. It's in very good condition and I have tested both motors. The price is £110 plus P&P. Thanks for looking Paul

www.gscalecentral.net

 

[GAP]

And there is a DS for sale on the forum now, although it is in the UK, so it might not be cost effective for you GAP....

LGB 12260 double slip reduced - G Scale Central

Hi all I have been sorting again and have a LGB 12260 double slip to sell. It's in very good condition and I have tested both motors. The price is £110 plus P&P. Thanks for looking Paul

www.gscalecentral.net

I saw that the postage would most likely be a killer

 

[Greg Elmassian]

Would like to see the pictures with the switch set for the curve, not the crossing, then comparing the curve of the track piece could be compared.

In the pictures, the straight part of the switch extends beyond where the curved piece of track set on top goes, i.e. not really getting a good "sample" to compare.

Greg

 

[GAP]

A couple of field tests with my big locos Connie and Shay reveal that both will go through R1 points at a squeeze (actually the Shay looks quite good going through them)
I first connected the curves together forming an 'S"

Connie went through forward but the tender kept derailing in reverse.
Cause the tender kept binding on the footplate when loco and tender were on the opposite curves,
The shay went through forward but the water tank road up on the frog (flanges to long/flangeways to shallow), in reverse the riding up caused derailment every time.

Next I put a piece of straight track between the points and ran the locos again and Connie did not have an issue at all, the Shay again suffered from the water tank riding up but to a lesser degree.

Conclusion the points cannot be connected directly, there has to be a straight of at least 300mm between them to allow for the Connie loco and tender to cross the curves separately which it does with ease but does look a little wierd.

The shay being effectively 3 short wheelbases did not really change the operation much at all Water Tank still road up on the frog (might have to check the wheel back to back on it as the other 2 did not ride up.)

I had a look around the internet and have found that depending on which seller you look at the double slips are described as either R1 or R2 (Hobbylinc R1; Only Trains R2).

Just looking at the pictures from Gizzy it appears the the fixed curved rail on the outside is more than likely R2 so I am leaning towards it being R2 or at least something my biggest locos could get around.

I did a bit of pricing for the crossing and some larges radius points at a couple of Australian shops and the total cost is about $660 + shipping, a double slip is $325 with free shipping as it is over $300 so the DS is looking more of an economical buy.

The search continues.

 

[phils2um]

'Made in Switzerland'. From memory the maker's name was something like ELS.

The double slip you're speaking of, LGB No. 1225, was 22.5º and was made by AZB, the same people who made/assembled the original "Model Overhead". It is a tighter radius than LGB R3 and requires a short 52mm, No. 1005(0), straight on each end to be equivalent to a section of LGB No. 1600(0) R3 curved track. The Gleiseplan-Buch 0026, published by LGB in 1980 has additional info. I don't think it is a violation of their copyright to include copies of the following as it is for reference purposes.



Edit added: The most recent LGB track planning guide must have similar info pertaining to the currently available No. 12260. The 2019/2020 LGB Catalog lists the 22.5º 12260 as "Branches: R2". Assuming you had a 7.5º R2 makeup piece (you need to cut it yourself) I'm guessing the branch would be equal to a section of 15000 R2 curved track.

I do wonder if the geometry is the same as the old 1225 where a couple of 1005 straights make it equivalent to a piece of 16000 R3.

 

[ebay mike]

GAP, further to phils2um comments above I'll look out the 1225 double slip and do some comparisons with R1 2 and 3. I'm still unsure of the suitability of the point motor for outside use though.

 

[PhilP]

Wow!

Think of the cost of some of those formations, shown in the leaflet!

 

[voodoopenguin]

Going back to the original post. If the object is to allow movement between two loops then adding a double slip would make the running of a train on each loop at the same time awkward or am I missing something?

Paul

 

[Gizzy]

Can the old motor be replaced with the newer version or versions....

GAP, further to phils2um comments above I'll look out the 1225 double slip and do some comparisons with R1 2 and 3. I'm still unsure of the suitability of the point motor for outside use though.

 

[GAP]

Going back to the original post. If the object is to allow movement between two loops then adding a double slip would make the running of a train on each loop at the same time awkward or am I missing something?

Paul

The double slip is proposed to be a replacement for a scissors crossing, no matter which way I go I will have to make a conscious decision to change points to allow the transition of a train from one loop to the other.
The loops are quite large; at the moment they are not finished and are close to 25 metres in length so a bit of train driving will be involved to avoid a collision.

 

[GAP]

GAP, further to phils2um comments above I'll look out the 1225 double slip and do some comparisons with R1 2 and 3. I'm still unsure of the suitability of the point motor for outside use though.

Will look for the 1225 but may have to settle for the 12260.
No need to worry about point motors as I do not used them, I have no power in the back yard so all my points will be/are manual (planning a central mechanical control point way into the future.
I am a bit fond off manual shunting which I think I will follow after this layout is working.
I am planning a couple of industry sidings.