 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Railroads / July 2005Home Made Points
Fairly much of an armchair modeller to date, but am getting into helping out with my clubs' new N Scale layout that is slowly being built. To that end, I was wondering whether anyone can help in pointing me to good articles, merchandise etc to help us keep the cost of points down for our club layout. I expect we'll need dozens and dozens by the end of it. I think it would be a good exercise for my club to have building sessions and make some points, so any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, PK for what its worth, the hassles and problems that can occur, it would work out better to buy them, and build the layout over time, instead of all at once. >for what its worth, the hassles and problems that can occur, it would >work out better to buy them, and build the layout over time, instead >of all at once. Don't be so discouraging. Building your own can not only save a lot of money but you will also get much better results after a bit of practice, the principles are the same regardless of scale but some techniques are easier to shrink than others, for N I would recommend soldering to sleepers made of printed circuit board material. Iain Rice details this process for 4mm scale in his book on fine scale track but its probably a good idea to check out the 2mm association website first. <http://www.2mm.org.uk/products/shop1.htm> Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit <http://www.grovenor.dsl.pipex.com/> Garratt photos for the big steam lovers. > Don't be so discouraging. Building your own can not only save a lot of > money but you will also get much better results after a bit of > practice, the principles are the same regardless of scale but some > techniques are easier to shrink than others, for N I would recommend > soldering to sleepers made of printed circuit board material. I built at least 5 or 6 before I got one that looked and worked good enough to use. I've only made a couple more since then, but they've all been good as well. As you say, practice, practice, practice. I'm in HO, and I've gone to epoxy instead of soldering. I don't know how long it'll last yet, but probably longer than me.  SignatureBNSF = Build Now, Seep Forever > Fairly much of an armchair modeller to date, but am getting into helping > out with my clubs' new N Scale layout that is slowly being built. To that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Thanks, > PK http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ has jigs, templates and other fancy things for hand made points in all scales. http://www.cvmw.com/ has stuff suitable for HO. Model Railroader has a trackwork book "trackwork and lineside detail" <http://shop.store.yahoo.com/kalmbachcatalog/12235.html> that has a couple of articles on building pointwork including one in N scale. Michael S > http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ has jigs, templates and other fancy things for > hand made points in all scales. I agree here. If you are inMelbpurne and can travel to Ballarat, arrange with the Ballarat Model Railway Club there- to have a vist to their club rooms. See the code 55 hand laid points they have made - and there are at least 40 I saw - all "N" gauge. They look tiny, and look smooth, and I were taken back. There were a few unfinished ones around to compare. They blended well into the Railcraft or ME codee 55 rail. They have a jig form the above link - they work well. The layout looks interesting, as it is still well into construction. Two levels, a helix etc. I have a code HO scale #7 jig on it's way. Regards, David Head > > http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ has jigs, templates and other fancy things for > > hand made points in all scales. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > David Head > SignatureThe templates from the above site are US geometry, totally different to most Australian prototypes. The method of assembly using the templates is less accurate at the important locations compared to using conventional roller gauges. Finally the templates for H0 are using the sloppy NMRA standard. If you are going to build your own track, you can make it finer without any extra skill or effort by using the roller gauges from http://www.railwayeng.com/ . A more economic option. You might need to file down the ends of these gauges for use around the frog. This is not a critical dimension so can be done without fear of making them useless. Terry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards >> > http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ has jigs, templates and other fancy >> > things [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> Regards, >> David Head http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ will make the templates to any requirement you have (P4, Proto87, whatever) . You supply the artwork/drawing with the dimensions you want and they'll repoduce it exactly. See http://www.handlaidtrack.com/custom-order-instructions.php for details. Michael S. > http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ will make the templates to any requirement >you have (P4, Proto87, whatever) . You supply the artwork/drawing with the >dimensions you want and they'll repoduce it exactly. See >http://www.handlaidtrack.com/custom-order-instructions.php for details. If you have the artwork/drawing its straightforward to build from the drawing without using an expensive jig. Apart from the satisfaction of building it yourself the two main advantages of DIY pointwork are: 1. It can be built equally easily in any size and alignment you like to suit your layout producing prototypical flowing trackwork. 2. It can be built very much cheaper than ready made. Use of expensive machined templates destroys both of these advantages. IMHO the templates are only useful if you want a large number of identical turnouts and even then the advantage over building on paper drawings is minimal. If you want realistic track put your investment into producing the drawings properly, for example by purchasing 'templot' <http://www.85a.co.uk/> Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit <http://www.grovenor.dsl.pipex.com/> Garratt photos for the big steam lovers. To be honest, Keith Terry & Poath are all right.It all depends on what you wany, not what we all think is right. If you want scale trackwork not to NMRA standards, listen to Terry. He is right in that points and trackwork idfferes from co8ntry to country, even railway to railway. If that is important to you, then decide now and do some research into the trackwork of your railways. If you want to make free flowing trackwork listen to Keith - there are many instances on my railway that I will have to make a point to fit. Then there is the idea of making a lot of point consistantly, which a jig is good at. If you want to make a lot of point the same, the jif will help. I'm fairly confident that with a jig you can produce a lot of the commonf points you need. But to make a custom point either draw it out or try Templot ( will have to think about that one day) - and build the point either on site ot to a papper jig ( whcih is whatit is in the end). OR see Terry for his standards. I ownder if you could plot in his measurments into Templot to produce a point...I wonder. It's all possible and the final person to decide is YOU. No advise is right or wrong. Regards, David Head >OR see Terry for his standards. I ownder if you could plot in his >measurments into Templot to produce a point...I wonder. It's all >possible and the final person to decide is YOU. Indeed, templot can be customised to any standard, most common ones are pre-configured. >No advise is right or wrong. Not in this thread yet, but advice is sometimes wrong. And we should try to make our advice positive and encouraging, which was my concern with the first response on this thread. Regards Keith Make friends in the hobby. Visit <http://www.grovenor.dsl.pipex.com/> Garratt photos for the big steam lovers. To be honest, Keith Terry & Poath are all right.It all depends on what you wany, not what we all think is right. If you want scale trackwork not to NMRA standards, listen to Terry. He is right in that points and trackwork idfferes from co8ntry to country, even railway to railway. If that is important to you, then decide now and do some research into the trackwork of your railways. If you want to make free flowing trackwork listen to Keith - there are many instances on my railway that I will have to make a point to fit. Then there is the idea of making a lot of point consistantly, which a jig is good at. If you want to make a lot of point the same, the jif will help. I'm fairly confident that with a jig you can produce a lot of the commonf points you need. But to make a custom point either draw it out or try Templot ( will have to think about that one day) - and build the point either on site ot to a papper jig ( whcih is whatit is in the end). OR see Terry for his standards. I ownder if you could plot in his measurments into Templot to produce a point...I wonder. It's all possible and the final person to decide is YOU. No advise is right or wrong. Regards, David Head > >> > http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ has jigs, templates and other fancy > >> > things [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Michael S. I will repeat the most important information about these templates. 'The method of assembly using the templates is less accurate at the important locations compared to using conventional roller gauges'. This is because they rely on holding the rail at the bottom flange, not the head of the rail. For accuracy, using these templates the rail needs to be exactly flat when soldered. Also there is clearance which will limit these templates to coarser standards. For P4 and proto 87 you need to use roller gauges, with a rail clamping mechanism, to get the required accuracy. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards Terry, will supply how you use a jig: Put rail into jig, positon rail laterally, then HOLD DOWN RAIL at the sleeper you are soldering. Jig is in gauge, rail is firmly on sleeper. Work your way along holding the rail in place until the rail is done. Easy. and accurate. Want a 17.34mm gauge jig - you can have it made, want a P4, can have it made. I do not think the guage you want has anything to do with it, if the jig is accurate, the point will be if you take care. Or are you having a go at this person who builds this jig ?? You seen to rubbish the jig for no reason. No one says having a jig will automaticallt see you making perfect points, but there again using the roller gauges can also end up with inaccurate points. I'll still say a jig properly used is good for mass producing your own points of same point types. The build it onsite with roller gauges and a paper rempleate etc is ggod for buiding points for unusual situations, and for points you do not want to buy a expensive jig for. There is room for the jig and the other methods of point construction. BTW AlcoRS2 , what prototype are you running? Regards to all, David Head David, I guess Terry is commenting about the fact that the rail is positioned in the jig by its base. It will work perfectly providing you always use rail with precisely the same cross section. If you use a different brand of rail, even though it may have the same code, it may not have the same base width and therefore will not be positioned as accurately. John >Terry, will supply how you use a jig: > >Put rail into jig, positon rail laterally, then HOLD DOWN RAIL at the >sleeper you are soldering. Jig is in gauge, rail is firmly on sleeper. >Work your way along holding the rail in place until the rail is done. ========================================================== John Dennis jdennis@optusnet.com.au Melbourne,Australia Home of the HOn30 Dutton Bay Tramway and the Australian Narrow Gauge Web-Exhibition Gallery Dutton Bay URL: http://members.optusnet.com.au/duttonbay WebX http://members.optusnet.com.au/jdennis/ng_webex.html It is true if you use a different rail profile, and not just assume that the code rail ( which only refers to the height of the rail) is the same as the jig - that you will be disapointed in the point. So any device not used properly will result in something wrong. When I specified I wanted to use Peco code 80 for my ho scale point, and the copde 80 railw as ripped form "N" gauge track, at first the guy didn't know of it, and I then sent him the dimensions, by that time he had sourced the rail and now offers it. Terry was sayig the jg were bad - full stop. I do't think that is warrented. He just should have said he uses no jigs (though a roller gauge when used to make a point is a jig !) when he builds points. Since Terry does make his own points, I admire him for doing it ( as I do anyone who takes the plunge) ! Regards, David Head > It is true if you use a different rail profile, and not just assume > that the code rail ( which only refers to the height of the rail) is [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Regards, > David Head I never said they were bad. I have correctly pointed out these templates are less accurate compared to roller gauges at the important positions, and that the templates are not suited for P4 or P87 standards. However If people conclude they are bad after considering the more accurate and cheaper methods of construction, that's their decision.. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards Hi all, we all seem to have our own way of doing things, Iv'e found my way is to build points in situ, most important is the frog which I build first & I use a bogie & a wheel set to gauge it. Once the minor problems are tweaked out they work fine. I have been thinking about a double slip, a lot of thinking but I might tackle it in my holidays...... (maybe). cheers mick. > > It is true if you use a different rail profile, and not just assume > > that the code rail ( which only refers to the height of the rail) is [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > HO scale track standards Terry Wrote: " never said they were bad. I have correctly pointed out these templates are less accurate compared to roller gauges at the important positions, and that the templates are not suited for P4 or P87 standards. However If people conclude they are bad after considering the more accurate and cheaper methods of construction, that's their decision.. " How can you say "never said they were bad" yet in the next sentance say they are inaccurate? That makes them bad. So we are back to square 1 it seems. Have measured a jig and found it to be inaccurate ? Yes/No mismatch the rail in a jig - yes you will get inaccurate points. The same if you use a roller gauge for code 100 on code 80 trackwork. Accuracywill depend on the rail specified for the jig, and the rail you would use to test the jig with. I still see no reason to rubbish the jig by saying it is inaccurate ( how do you know), any more than someone making a in situ point "inaccuratly" with roller gauges. Simply put make the point the way you want, and if you abuse a jig or a roller gauge and use them not as intended you will get bad trackwork & points. Use them correctly you will be rewarded. A roller gauge is just a jig to hold the rails apart. A gauge check the rails are correctly apart. And I will be using my roller gauges and my check gauges as I built the points in the jig. I think we can agree you can never check the gauge enough when building a point ! > Terry Wrote: > " [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > So we are back to square 1 it seems. They are a less accurate method of turnout construction for the critical dimensions compared to roller gauges. A fact. > Have measured a jig and found it to be inaccurate ? Yes/No The jig can be accurate yet because it holds the rail at the bottom flange, the head of the rail can be out of position. The Jig is milled, therefore it's accuracy is going to be around 0.05mm. Roller gauges are made in lathes. A good lathe usually results in accuracies better than 0.02mm > mismatch the rail in a jig - yes you will get inaccurate points. The > same if you use a roller gauge for code 100 on code 80 trackwork. > Accuracywill depend on the rail specified for the jig, and the rail you > would use to test the jig with. I still see no reason to rubbish the > jig by saying it is inaccurate ( how do you know), any more than > someone making a in situ point "inaccuratly" with roller gauges. The point is the roller gauge holds the rail head, the jig does not, hence the difference in the accuracy of both methods. The roller gauges I use are home made, similar to the gauges developed for P4. They are suitable for any size rail thickness used in H0, the rail is held firm against the gauge reference surface by a spring. No clearance errors. > Simply put make the point the way you want, and if you abuse a jig or a > roller gauge and use them not as intended you will get bad trackwork & [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > points in the jig. I think we can agree you can never check the gauge > enough when building a point ! That is the best way to use these Jigs. Rely on the roller gauges for the critical dimensions. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards > It is true if you use a different rail profile, and not just assume > that the code rail ( which only refers to the height of the rail) is > the same as the jig - that you will be disapointed in the point. This Yank builds the frog/closure rail "X" upside down in a homemade jig. Any rail size works. Well, OK, the jig probably won't hold G scale or larger :-). SignatureBNSF = Build Now, Seep Forever > You seem to rubbish the jig for no reason. There *is* a reason for him rubbishing the jig - the magic phrase "NMRA standard" is all it takes to get him going. Sorry Mark, forgot about that. :) Regards, DavidHead > > You seem to rubbish the jig for no reason. > > There *is* a reason for him rubbishing the jig - the magic phrase "NMRA > standard" is all it takes to get him going. And dont forget "N" scale as well. SignatureSpam Bait john.howard@aph.gov.au minister@transport.nsw.gov.au alanjones@2gb.com Hi David, The club runs just about everything when it comes to N Scale. We have some Australian outline, we have a lot of Yanky stuff and we have some European. On any day you could travel the world on our trains :o) Regards, PK > Terry, will supply how you use a jig: > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Regards to all, > David Head > Terry, will supply how you use a jig: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Easy. and accurate. Not as accurate a method as gauges on the head of the rail. There is no guarantee the track is exactly square in the jig after soldering. A variation of around 0.05mm is probable using this form of jig. Then there is the clearance between the rail and jig, another 0.03mm possibly. Only just good enough for coarse scale standards. > Want a 17.34mm gauge jig - you can have it made, want a P4, can have > it made. I do not think the guage you want has anything to do with it, > if the jig is accurate, the point will be if you take care. Or are you > having a go at this person who builds this jig ?? The accuracy P4 and P87 requires means the jigs are not suitable for these standards. > You seen to rubbish the jig for no reason. No one says having a jig > will automaticallt see you making perfect points, but there again using > the roller gauges can also end up with inaccurate points. Only if the roller gauges are poorly made and the builder is not familiar with a proven method of construction. > I'll still say a jig properly used is good for mass producing your own > points of same point types. The build it onsite with roller gauges and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Regards to all, > David Head There are good reasons why P4 uses gauges that clamp the rail head. The same reasons why I use the same style of track gauge when making H0 fine scale turnouts. You are working in N scale, and as N scale requires flangeways similar to H0 fine scale you will need similar accuracy for reliable running. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards >There are good reasons why P4 uses gauges that clamp the rail head. The same >reasons why I use the same style of track gauge when making H0 fine scale >turnouts. You are working in N scale, and as N scale requires flangeways >similar to H0 fine scale you will need similar accuracy for reliable >running. How the hell would you know Terry?? Have you used a Fastracks Template?? How much N scale modeling have you done Terry?? I have a Fastracks template that I use for building #10 turnouts using c55 ME track. For some strange reason the completed switch turns out to be very accurate and reliable. Geez, you can be such a w.nker sometimes!! Phill > >There are good reasons why P4 uses gauges that clamp the rail head. The same > >reasons why I use the same style of track gauge when making H0 fine scale [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > How the hell would you know Terry?? Have you used a Fastracks > Template?? How much N scale modeling have you done Terry?? The engineering principles are the same for both scales. > I have a Fastracks template that I use for building #10 turnouts using > c55 ME track. For some strange reason the completed switch turns out > to be very accurate and reliable. How do you know it's accurate, and what do you mean by accurate? I have pointed out facts about how to be more accurate. It depends on what you consider to be accurate and reliable. Coarse scale track can be reliable, often the models will bump their way through without derailment. See my other posts on this subject. > Geez, you can be such a w.nker sometimes!! > > Phill Obviously your not interested in making home made track that looks and works better than ready to run track. SignatureTerry Flynn http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates DC control circuit diagrams HO scale track standards Wow, thanks for all the good advice everyone. It will give us N Scalers in our club some reading and thinking to do and hopefully get us on our way to building our new layout. Thanks again, PK > Fairly much of an armchair modeller to date, but am getting into helping > out with my clubs' new N Scale layout that is slowly being built. To that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Thanks, > PK |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.