Large radius gauge 1 points?

DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
Does anyone happen to know how well LGB/AMS/Aristo handle points for larger radii (thinking R5 and greater)?

I'm up for some fettling as I don't suppose it'd be without issue, but was interested to hear of anyone had any experience of it..

Thanks!
Darren
 
PhilP

PhilP

G Scale, 7/8th's, Electronics
5 Jun 2013
25,490
1,301
Tamworth, Staffs.
Darren,

What are you wanting to do?

If you are wanting to use a larger radius curve / point, then it is not a problem.

If you are wanting to use gauge 1 products, then that is a different matter. - The rail profile will be different, and you will have trouble with the flanges on your stock being too deep to pass through the frogs.. amongst other issues.
 
DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
Hey Phil, thanks for the quick response.

Apologies for not articulating my question a little better. I'm looking at running the usual Bachmann, USA Trains, etc locos and rolling stock through larger radius Gauge 1 pointwork.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flying15
PhilP

PhilP

G Scale, 7/8th's, Electronics
5 Jun 2013
25,490
1,301
Tamworth, Staffs.
Hey Phil, thanks for the quick response.

Apologies for not articulating my question a little better. I'm looking at running the usual Bachmann, USA Trains, etc locos and rolling stock through larger radius Gauge 1 pointwork.
The radius, is not the problem..

The gauge 1 trackwork, will probably be a different 'code' to LGB track, for a start: 'Code' refers to the height of the rail-section. LGB etc. track is code 332, whereas gauge 1 track is nearer to scale-size, so is smaller.

Lgb et al wheels have large flanges (bigger diameter) so one problem is as the wheel goes through a frog, the flange rides-up, as the 'groove' is not deep enough. - At a minimum, there will be a jolt/bump, which can be enough to either uncouple stock, or cause the stock to derail.

Gauge 1 standards are a lot finer, so the wheels are thinner, than 'G'.. - A g scale wheel may be too thick for the flange to fit between the running-rail and any check-rails. Again, this will cause the wheel to ride-up, and very likely derail the stock.

The physics, and tolerances of rail, wheel-profile and gauge are quite complex. Scaling this down, means our tolerances can be quite exacting.
Get any of it wrong, and you have problems.


I have a leaning to British outline stock, and have found that gauge 1 wheelsets will drop completely into the frog of g scale pointwork..
You can fit shims, to reduce the width of the 'slot' through the pointwork, but this (if not done carefully) will give problems with LGB stock and loco's.


If you want 'larger than R5' then there are offerings, in code 332 rail-section, from some of the manufacturers. - Second hand Aristocraft, comes to mind..

Am sure someone will drop the diagram of differing radii and manufacturers?? - My Google-fu is not good today.

PhilP.
 
Gizzy

Gizzy

A gentleman, a scholar, and a railway modeller....
26 Oct 2009
33,138
701
59
Cambridgeshire
www.gscalecentral.net
A mate of mine runs Gauge 1, as well as G scale and 16mm, on Code 332 track, mostly LGB and TrainLine.

Most of his points are LGB R3 and R5. I acquired some Train Line R2 from him, as their radii wasn't large enough for his Class 66 locos which need a minimum of R3.

The G1 trains run fine on his layout....
 
DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
Thank you Phil.
Yes, I had reckoned the code would likely be different which as I understood it would present inter-connectivity difficulty between rail types but which for straight trackwork at least, may not be a problem unless there was chair/flange clearance issues.

To my (admittedly untrained) mind, I picture G as coarse and 1 as fine when it comes to wheel profiles, so the check rails and frogs where were I had additional doubts. If there weren't any code issues though, perhaps these be modified, or would the difference in tolerances be too great.

My only reason for asking is that I have been offered some large, handmade stainless points but they're gauge 1. I don't want to look a gifthorse in the mouth and they'd be incredibly useful but if even some modification isn't likely to make a workable solution, it may not be worth the effort only to end up with butchered G1 points that then don't work with anything!

Ultimately, I suppose the best thing may be to see what the issues are with one first and then take a decision accordingly..
 
DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
A mate of mine runs Gauge 1, as well as G scale and 16mm, on Code 332 track, mostly LGB and TrainLine.

Most of his points are LGB R3 and R5. I acquired some Train Line R2 from him, as their radii wasn't large enough for his Class 66 locos which need a minimum of R3.

The G1 trains run fine on his layout....
Thanks Gizzy :)
This was more the other way around, whether G1 points could be fettled enough to work with G scale. Good to hear the G1 works well on the G scale track though - I do have a G1 class 47 to build at some point, which I'd like to run if I can
 
PhilP

PhilP

G Scale, 7/8th's, Electronics
5 Jun 2013
25,490
1,301
Tamworth, Staffs.
First thing to check with ANY handmade track. - Is it designed for track power?

If not, you may have a myriad of issues with frogs not being isolated, needing to add polarity switching, and avoiding shorts..
 
dunnyrail

dunnyrail

DOGS, Garden Railways, Steam Trains, Jive Dancing,
25 Oct 2009
16,867
1,525
72
St.Neots Cambridgeshire UK
Thank you Phil.
Yes, I had reckoned the code would likely be different which as I understood it would present inter-connectivity difficulty between rail types but which for straight trackwork at least, may not be a problem unless there was chair/flange clearance issues.

To my (admittedly untrained) mind, I picture G as coarse and 1 as fine when it comes to wheel profiles, so the check rails and frogs where were I had additional doubts. If there weren't any code issues though, perhaps these be modified, or would the difference in tolerances be too great.

My only reason for asking is that I have been offered some large, handmade stainless points but they're gauge 1. I don't want to look a gifthorse in the mouth and they'd be incredibly useful but if even some modification isn't likely to make a workable solution, it may not be worth the effort only to end up with butchered G1 points that then don't work with anything!

Ultimately, I suppose the best thing may be to see what the issues are with one first and then take a decision accordingly..
One of the problems you will have with Stainless (steel.) and Brass or Nickel Silver (peco G) is the differing rail sizes, these are measured in thousands of an inch. To be aware of what you are getting a Micrometer if you have one is very useful. as an aside I have picked up a couple of good ones for Peanuts at Boot Sales, grovel through boxes of old tools! My friend uses Gauge 1 and LGB Track and to join the two I Silver Soldered up some jointing Rail Sections using a few inches of each type of Rail which can then be used with the correct fishplates or clamps for each type. Making up the difference in height over a foot or more with some packing. However with Stainless I am not sure that the Silver Solder option would be available to you even if you have the ability. Thus Track Clamps would appear to be the way forwards though again since the demise of Hillman I am not sure that anyone does converer clamps. Though with a bit of initiative and ingenuity it ought to be possible to make some out of Brass Block?
 
Rhinochugger

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
27,068
1,301
North West Norfolk
Does anyone happen to know how well LGB/AMS/Aristo handle points for larger radii (thinking R5 and greater)?

I'm up for some fettling as I don't suppose it'd be without issue, but was interested to hear of anyone had any experience of it..

Thanks!
Darren
I have a couple of Aristo #6 turnouts - they perform OK - the biggest issues is that they have an integral switch for the frog which sometimes fails and, as I can't work out how it works, I run dead frog because I use locos with lots of wheels.

Physical running is OK, but you can get a bit of a bump where the flange drops. I've recently seen someone in the US who makes inserts for the frogs. I've made my own using 3mm brass strip, but the purpose made ones would be better.

I also have a USA trains #6 - again, OK with all the usual manufacturers' wheels.

There is an interesting point issue here :nerd::nerd: don't be confused about the finer flanges of Accucraft US (Fn3) rolling stock. It is only the flanges that are finer (or the LGB & Bachmann flanges that are coarser depending on how you look at it :p ) but the wheel standards are the same as regards track gauge and back-to-back.

I run a fairly wide variety of manufacturers' wheels, and all of them run through these points / turnouts without difficulty.

>:)>:)>:)>:)>:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGE-Railroad
DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
Thanks all, seems as though it's likely to be something of a lottery, but it may not preclude using them altogether, which is promising.

Phil I'll be sure to run a multimeter over the whole thing first. I'm unsure yet whether I'm going to go the deadrail route but I want to assume I'm not and make sure they're capable of power-delivery

I have tried a long Tenmille turnout which from a mechanical perspective don't seem to cause any issues when pushing stock aross it, although the multimeter shows continuity *everywhere* which was quite a surprise given the plastic sleepers.

If the rolling stock is mechanically happy and I can ensure the track polarity, the main challenge would then become track joining as you mentioned JonD, with a workable approach being some clamps machined to suit..
 
maxi-model

maxi-model

UK/US/ROW steam narrow gauge railways 1:1
27 Oct 2009
4,781
334
Bucks/Oxon/Northants area
Garden Railway Specialists in Princes Risborough can produce made to order/spec code 332 wood sleepered track parts, using LGB's brass rail. At a price. They also do more "conventional" items like 6 ft radius points ( a good alternative to LGB R5), Y's, slips and crossovers as stock items. Max
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGE-Railroad
DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
Garden Railway Specialists in Princes Risborough can produce made to order/spec code 332 wood sleepered track parts, using LGB's brass rail. At a price. They also do more "conventional" items like 6 ft radius points ( a good alternative to LGB R5), Y's, slips and crossovers as stock items. Max
Thanks Max, I'd been eyeing those up and they're on the to-purchase list

These were only a few beer-tokens for 5 so it seemed worth it, but I'll evaluate them and if they fall at either the mechanical or electrical hurdles, I may sell them on to help fund some GRS ones
 
P

Paul M

Registered
25 Oct 2016
4,538
715
57
Royston
I've been reading this with interest, I use G1 track, but with predominantly 16mm scale rolling stock, which is fine. I have some LGB stuff and their wheels barely miss the ties. I have no points at present, but I'm thinking about using the Peco G45 range as the rail codes aren't quite as different in height
 
Greg Elmassian

Greg Elmassian

Registered
8 Mar 2014
3,759
485
San Diego
www.elmassian.com
Hey Phil, thanks for the quick response.

Apologies for not articulating my question a little better. I'm looking at running the usual Bachmann, USA Trains, etc locos and rolling stock through larger radius Gauge 1 pointwork.
The "larger" the switch, normally the better the operation. At larger switch sizes, you normally go by frog number. So the higher the frog number, the gentler the diverging route. Prototype railroads use things like frog numbers 14 to 20, by comparision, things we use are often #4 or worse.

I try to keep #6 on all my mainline routes.


Greg
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGE-Railroad
DGE-Railroad

DGE-Railroad

Registered
26 Jan 2020
140
18
48
United Kingdom
I've been reading this with interest, I use G1 track, but with predominantly 16mm scale rolling stock, which is fine. I have some LGB stuff and their wheels barely miss the ties. I have no points at present, but I'm thinking about using the Peco G45 range as the rail codes aren't quite as different in height
For what it's worth Paul, I do have an SL-995 which I picked up for a good price after reading lots of favourable reports.

It's very nicely made and althought it's not in active service, I've yet to find anything that has a problem with it. It's a shame Peco don't do a wider range but I suspect down that route is an ever diminishing market in this country.

As an aside, my trip to the Peco HQ in Beer was fantastic day with the family. Well worth the visit
 
railwayman198

railwayman198

Registered
24 Oct 2009
1,815
5
East London
A friends layout has handmade track using code 200 rail, including pointwork. My LGB stock runs on his line without any problems. However his pointwork was built to suit 16mm/ft stock so the clearance at check rails and frog may be more generous than G1.
 
Rhinochugger

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
27,068
1,301
North West Norfolk
A friends layout has handmade track using code 200 rail, including pointwork. My LGB stock runs on his line without any problems. However his pointwork was built to suit 16mm/ft stock so the clearance at check rails and frog may be more generous than G1.
Most G1 and G scale wheelsets have the same back-to-back - the only dodgy stuff is the early Bachmann plastic wheelsets which were too narrow.
 
T

tim stevens

Registered
5 Feb 2016
13
1
58
East Devon
Darren,

What are you wanting to do?

If you are wanting to use a larger radius curve / point, then it is not a problem.

If you are wanting to use gauge 1 products, then that is a different matter. - The rail profile will be different, and you will have trouble with the flanges on your stock being too deep to pass through the frogs.. amongst other issues.
Hi.
I have been using Peco gauge 1 code 200 track for the last 20 years or so. 10 years of that was in Sweden and the track and points have been fine down to temperatures of -20C and up to +27C. I have been living in the UK for the last 9 years and used the same track for construction of a layout in my garden here in Devon. I have found that the Peco code 200 is absolutely fine with Bachmann spectrum locomotives (mogul 2-6-0 and climax). My dcc sound converted marklin maxi locos and coaches also were fine. Where i have had problems has been with the big hauler rolling stock plastic wheels. They negotiate the code 200 track fine but rattle terribly on the point frogs. They dont derail but its a nail biting rattle!. I have fitted all my stock, flat cars cabooses and big hauler coaches with Bachmann metal wheels and these are absolutely fine over the points.
As for LGB i have only owned the Spreewald which didn't like negotiating the code 200 points and would also tend to rub in the chairs on some but not all of the Peco track.
Anyway thats my experience for what its worth.
So to summarize Bachmann fine with spectrum locos and metal wheeled rolling stock on Peco code 200 track. The Peco track also looks great too.
 
Rhinochugger

Rhinochugger

Retired Oik
27 Oct 2009
27,068
1,301
North West Norfolk
Where i have had problems has been with the big hauler rolling stock plastic wheels. They negotiate the code 200 track fine but rattle terribly on the point frogs. They dont derail but its a nail biting rattle!.
And sometimes a death-defying leap o_Oo_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim stevens