Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / General / Railroads / June 2006



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

HAnd laying track code 100

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
John C - 17 Jun 2006 18:15 GMT
IS there any advantages to hand laying track and how is it done?
-john C
BillsRREmpire@gmail.com - 17 Jun 2006 19:06 GMT
> IS there any advantages to hand laying track and how is it done?
> -john C
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This should help:

http://www.railwayeng.com/handlay6/hndly-h3.htm

Bill
Bill's Railroad Empire
N Scale Model Railroad:
http://www.billsrailroad.net
Brief History of N Scale:
http://www.billsrailroad.net/history/n-scale
Model Railroad Bookstore:
http://www.billsrailroad.net/bookstore
Resources--Links to 1,100 sites:
http://www.billsrailroad.net/bills-favorite-links
Wolf Kirchmeir - 17 Jun 2006 19:37 GMT
> IS there any advantages to hand laying track and how is it done?
> -john C

Advantages? Well, like beauty, they appear in the eye of the beholder.
Here's my take:

-- There used to be a cost advantage, but it's diminished of late - too
small to justify the extra work IMO.

-- There also used to be an appearance advantage, but the quality of
flextrack has improved a lot. Take a look at Micro Engineering's track,
for example. In any case, the realism of track depends more on
ballasting and colour than anything else. Paint rail and ballast to
match the prototype, and even Atlas's code 100 flex looks (reasonably) good.

-- There is still a major advantage when it come to turnouts. Handlaid
turnouts, built in place, free you from the constraints of the geometry
of the commercial ones. There are some turnout kits out there, too, as
well as frog and point castings. I've not tried any of those, though.
The specs indicate that in most situations, they will save work, but not
cost.

How to do it? First, make sure the subroadbed is as smooth, level across
the track, and as sturdy as possible.

a) mark the centre lines of the tracks as accurately and precisely as
possible.
b) lay and glue your ballast former (cork roadbed, for example) if used,
otherwise, mark another line to show where the ends of the ties will be.
c) make a jig (about 12"-18" long) to lay your ties in, drop in the
ties, and tape a piece of masking tape on top.
d) lay a bead of glue along the centre line of the track, and spread it
with a spatula.
e) drop the tie strip (held together by the masking tape) onto the glue.
f) adjust the ties so they align closely but not perfectly with the tie
end line.
g) using a straightedge to hold down the ties, lift off the masking
tape. Tamp down the ties with the same straightedge.
h) repeat until you have enough ties down to suit your whim of the day.
i) when the the glue has set (allow at least half a day), stain the
ties, if they're not stained already.
j) lightly sand the ties until the original wood shows through on all of
them. This will ensure they are all the same height. Restain the ties.
k) mark the position of the rails so the track will be centred on the
ties. I use a short piece of track, and a pin to prick the every fourth
or fifth tie.
l) curving a piece of rail with light finger pressure as needed, and lay
it down so that it covers the pin holes marking its position.
m) spike it down: first every ten ties or so to fix its general
location. Don't drive home the spikes at first: sight along the rail,
and adjust the spikes by pushing them one way or the other to get any
wiggles out of the rail, then drive the spikes home.
n) fill in spikes about halfway between the ones you just installed,
and the halfway between again, sighting and adjusting as you go. Spikes
every 2 to 5 ties is enough to hold the track.
o) using two or more 3-point track gauges, lay the second rail to gauge,
and spike it down as above. On a curve, the two prongs of the gauge must
be on the outside of the curve.
p) solder the rail joints. Gaps left for electrical reasons should be
filled with epoxy (which you file to shape after it sets.)
q) you probably don't need expansion joints, but if it makes you feel
better, then every other rail joint should be left unsoldered, with a
1/32" gap (max) between the rail ends.
r) add track feeders as needed on the outside of the rails.
s) paint the rail. Add ballast.
t) Weather the track - a whole 'nother topic.

Building turnouts: another time, or else e-mail me for photocopies of a
couple of excellent articles on how to do this.

HTH&HF
Roger T. - 17 Jun 2006 19:59 GMT
> -- There used to be a cost advantage, but it's diminished of late - too
> small to justify the extra work IMO.

Obviously you don't live in Canada.  A 36" length costs well over Can$8.00.

A decent switch will cost you something around Can$30.00 to Can$40.00 EACH.

Besides, don't hand lay code 100 if you model HO scale.

First, code 100 just looks like, well, code 100 and you can always tell it's
code 100, no matter how well it's painted.

Code 100 in HO scale is just a bit too difficult to work with as it's well
out of scale.

And no, you can't justify it by saying that either the Pennsy or NYC used it
on their main lines. The used so little of it as to make it insignificant
and is used just as a poor excuse to use code 100.

Code 100 looks toy like, period.

--
Cheers

Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway
http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/
Wolf Kirchmeir - 18 Jun 2006 21:08 GMT
>> -- There used to be a cost advantage, but it's diminished of late - too
>> small to justify the extra work IMO.
>
> Obviously you don't live in Canada.  A 36" length costs well over Can$8.00.

I do live in Canada, and I sell the stuff, too. Price depends on brand,
obviously. Following are prices on what I have in stock.

Atlas Code 100: $4.00 each.
Atlas Code 83: $4.50 each. Plus postage. Want some?

Micro-Engineering code code 83 concrete tie $7. Plus postage. (Old
stock: newer stock would be around $8, which IMO is a good price for
such excellent track.)

Peco code 75 wood "sleepers" $7 each. Plus postage. (This is old stock.
I don't have a price for newer stuff, but Peco generally is overpriced.)

> A decent switch will cost you something around Can$30.00 to Can$40.00 EACH.

Atlas Code 100 Customline Mk3 #6 $15. Plus postage.
Atlas Code 83 #6 $16. Plus postage.

I can supply M-E turnouts at about 10% above US list (ie, about $20Can
each); Walthers the same (Ie about $17Can each and up).

[snip rant against code 100]

Sure, code 100 doesn't look that good, but that's what OP wanted to know
about.

Just for fun, I calculated the cost of 3ft of code 83 track using Micro
Engineering rail, ties, and spikes, and Walthers 2005 catalog prices.

M-E's weathered, wood tie flex track lists at $32.90 for 6 pieces, or
$5.48 for 3ft.

For hand built, I'm assuming 126 ties per 3ft length, and spikes in
every fourth tie. Cost works out to:

Rail: 2 at $1.81 ea --> $3.62
Ties: 126 at $0.0135 ea --> $1.66
Spikes 126 at $0.0113 ea --> $1.42
Total: $6.70 for 3ft of track.

The ready made is cheaper.

H'm.....

HTH&HF
Roger T. - 18 Jun 2006 21:23 GMT
"Wolf Kirchmeir"

Wolf, you obviously don't frequent my LHS.  Come to think about it, neither
do I these days.

--
Cheers

Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway
http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/
Wolf Kirchmeir - 19 Jun 2006 20:36 GMT
> "Wolf Kirchmeir"
>
> Wolf, you obviously don't frequent my LHS.  Come to think about it, neither
> do I these days.

Roger, I _am_ the LHS. :-)
Roger T. - 19 Jun 2006 21:04 GMT
>> "Wolf Kirchmeir"
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Roger, I _am_ the LHS. :-)

Not out here you're not.  That's where I quoted my prices from.

*Decent*, code 70 or 80 switches, not Atlas nor anyone else's code 100,  are
between Can$35 and Can$40 each.

And people wonder why I hand lay my own track?  If you want a bigger than 4
x 8, that permits proper operation, car forwarding, hidden staging etc.,
etc.,  then on my budget I need to hand lay.  I have something like 54
switches on my 12 x 16 footer.  Conservatively, that's $35 x 54 =
Can$1890.00 in switches, if I were to purchase them.

--
Cheers

Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway
http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/
kt0t - 17 Jun 2006 22:59 GMT
Thank you Wolf; a very clear and well organized instruction!
Signature

73 de KT0T
Bob Schwartz
Modeling Waseca, MN in the '50s

>> IS there any advantages to hand laying track and how is it done?
>> -john C
>
> Advantages? Well, like beauty, they appear in the eye of the beholder.
> Here's my take:
<SNIP>
Bob May - 18 Jun 2006 00:06 GMT
I stain ties first and then put them in the tie spacing jig and put the
masking tape over them.  Then lay them down in the glue, making sure that
they line to the mark on the roadbed (I use the spline method with 100%
splines) and flow well as they are the guide to laying the rails and then
come back the next day and just pull the tape up, no straightedge needed.
Sand the tops of the ties and restain.  The next step is to ballast (do this
before laying rail as you get a nicere looking ballast), making sure that
the ballast doesn't go above the tie tops (prototype track has the ballast
top below the top of the ties!).  Then comes the raillaying which is done by
laying the rails on the ties, centering them and the long job of spiking
them in place.  I spike every 20 ties or so for the first pass, insure that
the rails are nice and flowing, and then go back and spike every other tie
when things are right.
Do use easements on your curve starts and you will find that the track looks
wonderful.
Turnouts are basically the same but leave a little larger space for the
throwbar between the two long ties so the throwbar will fit in there.
Cut gaps in the rails only where necessary and don't worry about a seperate
piece of rail for turnouts as you can cut the clearance for the points at
any place along the rail.  Just don't have a joint near the points and
things will look better.
Handlaying track is a real pleasurable timewaster but isn't that what the
hobby basically is?
I'll also note that you can conrtol the track gauge by handlaying the track
and thus get trackwork that is more resistant to derailments.  Wide track
gauge is one of the banes of buying track already assembled and using the
correct gauge will make things run a lot better.  In addition, turnouts will
look much better than the readymade ones with smaller frogs and guardrails.

--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
kt0t - 18 Jun 2006 05:57 GMT
Thanks for an excellent write-up Bob. I have been seriously thinking about
using splines for a planned extension; this connvinces me even though I
probably will use flex-track.

Signature

73 de KT0T
Bob Schwartz
Modeling Waseca, MN in the '50s

>I stain ties first and then put them in the tie spacing jig and put the
> masking tape over them.  Then lay them down in the glue, making sure that
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> --
> Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
Bob May - 19 Jun 2006 01:02 GMT
I find handlaying track to be a very relaxing job that allows me to
contemplate the things that have been going on in my high tension job.

--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
Larry Blanchard - 18 Jun 2006 17:44 GMT
> I stain ties first and then put them in the tie spacing jig and put the
> masking tape over them.  Then lay them down in the glue, making sure that
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> the rails are nice and flowing, and then go back and spike every other tie
> when things are right.

I also stain the ties first, but I lay them individually.  The slight
variances in angle, position, and spacing seem to me to make things look more
realistic.  Of course, a jig with loose tolerances would probably do the
same.

I also use spline roadbed and ballast before laying the rail.

I prepaint the rail for a rusty appearance and attach it with Barge/MEK, using
spikes only at rail ends and stress points.

Of course, so far I've only done about 20 feet that way, so others have a lot
more experience than I do.

Signature

It's turtles, all the way down

Bob May - 19 Jun 2006 01:01 GMT
The quality of the tie alignment depends upon the trackage type.  I've done
track from round ties (twigs for some logging track) and made a jig to carry
a Dremel across the tie tops to cut the notches for the rails.  That was
some interesting trackwork!
--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
John C - 18 Jun 2006 03:02 GMT
I have always wondered how difficult it was to lay your own switch.
-JoC
> IS there any advantages to hand laying track and how is it done?
> -john C
Bob May - 19 Jun 2006 00:54 GMT
I fond that it takes me about 3 hours of work from some rail laying about
and the ties laid to a finished turnout (sans wiring for the switch motor)
able to run a train over.  I've actually done it in less time than that on
occasion
You do want to have a NMRA or equivalant gauge to assist in insuring that
the gauge is set correctly - the 3 point gauges will work for most of the
less important parts of the turnout but the frog does need to be set
accurately and the NMRA gauge is the only gauge I really have used in HO.
When I have a number of turnouts to make, I usually make up the frogs and
points ahead of the benchwork stuff so I don't have to keep going back and
forth from the bench and the track area.  I use the filled and cut
flangeways on the frogs and  the point of the frog is one of the rails with
the other rail stopping  back of that point.  This makes for a more solid
point in the frog and is easier to cut as you don't file as much material
away.  There are a few articles on the web that deal iwth making turnouts
but, unfortunately, none of them is really that complete but by reading all
of them, you will get a good idea of how to do a turnout..

--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
NSWGR - 23 Jun 2006 03:58 GMT
> I fond that it takes me about 3 hours of work from some rail laying about
> and the ties laid to a finished turnout (sans wiring for the switch motor)
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> --
> Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?

If you are going to go to the effort to build your own turnouts, it's
best to avoid the NMRA track gauge for the crossing V area (frog) and
use a finer standard as found on my web page below. Also on my web page
you can find a spread sheet which will calculate crossing V dimensions,
and give required dimensions for any standard or scale.  The XL spread
sheet allows you to compare standards, the result is the NMRA standard
is coarser than necessary yet requires similar accuracy to get things
correct. You can get fine scale track gauges from Railway Engineering
at http://www.railwayeng.com/

Terry Flynn

http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html

HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates

DC control circuit diagrams

HO scale track and wheel standards

Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet
Ray Haddad - 23 Jun 2006 08:56 GMT
>HO

Hey! Who you callin' a . . .

Oh. Sorry. Never mind. That's the big trains. Right?

Thanks for the link to the model railroad electronics link. I see
another lost weekend coming up. Sigh.
--
Ray
Ray Haddad - 23 Jun 2006 09:01 GMT
>Thanks for the link to the model railroad electronics link.

Electronics RING. Not link. Ok. It's a link, too, but it's also a
ring. I meant the ring. Back in a few days. I'm busy reading.
--
Ray
Bob May - 23 Jun 2006 23:05 GMT
Fine scale is nice but the quality stqandards are higher than just laying
NMRA spec track by a long shot.  Some people don't want to change all of
their wheelsets to go to that standard.  Better is to just do the track
gauge correct for HO scale rather than the wide crud that the commercial
stuff is done to.
First let the guy get his feet wet doing something without having to present
him with the many finer scale alternatives to the regular "crude" HO
standard rolling stock.

--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
NSWGR - 26 Jun 2006 04:22 GMT
> Fine scale is nice but the quality stqandards are higher than just laying
> NMRA spec track by a long shot.  Some people don't want to change all of
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> --
> Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?

Bob, it about time you read the information on my web page and Railway
Engineering's web page about H0 fine scale. You DO NOT need to change
the wheels on most regular US 'crude' HO standard rolling stock. The
correct gauge for standard rolling stock uses scale clearances, not
sloppy NMRA clearances. The correct minimum gauge is caculated on XL
spread sheet on my web page. Performance is what counts, and using
sloppy NMRA clearances results in increased chance of derailment.

Terry Flynn

http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html

HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates

DC control circuit diagrams

HO scale track and wheel standards

Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet
Bob May - 26 Jun 2006 22:03 GMT
Which fine scale standards are you talking about???  Steve's changes to the
NMRA standards is to fix the gauge problem with the track.  I'd not call
that fine scale.
All of the real fine scale "standards" have refined the wheel contour as
well as change the track dimensions and this isn't where you really want to
go if you run regular equipemnt without any changes in the wheel contours.
Please understand that there is a difference between running RP-25 wheelsets
and fine scale wheels.
I hope that we don't have to have this discussion again.  It hasn't been the
first time for this in variuos forms and it's a bit tiring to have to keep
identifying the difference between proper track dimensions (I fought a big
battle with the NMRA engineering dept. back in the early '80s) and what the
various "fine scale standards" are.  The end result of the argument that I
had with the NMRA was to have the track gauge decreased by one thousandth of
an inch, hardly what I was promoting.

--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
NSWGR - 27 Jun 2006 04:50 GMT
> Which fine scale standards are you talking about???  Steve's changes to the
> NMRA standards is to fix the gauge problem with the track.  I'd not call
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> --
> Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?

The answer to your first question is the H0 fine scale standard as
defined on my web page. You may not call Steve Hatches track standard
fine scale, but that is what it is. He also makes Proto 87 track. The
NMRA calls H0 track with flange ways of around 1mm wide fine scale and
that is what it is.  Proto 87 is the name of the standard that uses
close to exact scale dimensions. NMRA RP25 does cover fine scale H0
wheels, however this RP has always produced hard to make poor tracking
wheels compared to correctly designed alternatives. See my web page for
an easier to make superior H0 wheel profile. H0 fine scale wheels use
flanges about double scale size. That reality has been around since the
first fine scale H0 layouts were built before the existence of the
NMRA. The current NMRA H0 S3.2 standard and the NMRA S3.1which includes
NMRA fine scale and NMRA Proto 87 are all using a flawed formula which
results in hard to make track. I suspect the formula is scaling down
some of the prototype dimensions. The reality is you cannot scale down
all the prototypes manufacturing tolerances. That's why the NMRA's
Proto 87 standard is impractical. The NMRA fine scale standard is a
waste of time because you need to replace or reguage all your wheels
and still end up with an over wide wheel front to front dimension. The
NMRA standard S3 track has the same tight span to back to back
clearance as the fine scale track I use,  making the NMRA standard with
it's coarse flange ways unsuitable for track using 18" radius curves
for most US prototypes.  Another reason manufacturers making train
set's ignore the NMRA S3.2 standard. Those in control of the NMRA
standards committees have shown they do not understand how to design
properly toleranced practical standards with relevance to ready to run
equipment. Even with existing standards (Proto 87), they change things
for the worse.

Terry Flynn

http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html

HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates

DC control circuit diagrams

HO scale track and wheel standards

Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet
Bob May - 27 Jun 2006 23:25 GMT
You're not listening to what I said.  I never called Steve's track standard
a fine scale standard.  I've not been to see what he's been making for a
long time but I've known him for a long time and was around while he
developed the narrower gauge for HO standard gauge.  I know why he did it
and have seen the results of both his work and my own work on trackwork.
I'm not interested in fine scale trackwork as that trackwork won't accept
equipment from others unless it has been modified to meet that standard.
Besides, I consider detail above a certain level as unnecessary.  It's nice
to have scale width wheels with scale flanges but then you go and blow it
with unprototypical couplers and other such things.  Even the springs in the
trucks done't scale well.

--
Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?
NSWGR - 28 Jun 2006 09:05 GMT
> You're not listening to what I said.  I never called Steve's track standard
> a fine scale standard.  I've not been to see what he's been making for a
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> --
> Why do penguins walk so  far to get to their nesting grounds?

Bob,

Clearly you are having trouble translating my Aussie English into North
American English.

I was the one who stated Steve Hatches track standard is a H0 fine
scale standard and my H0 fine scale standard is my metric version
developed from Steve's unpublished? standard. All I have done is
provide a metric version of it after doing the sums to prove to myself
his solution was valid. Therefore what you use and I use is the same,
within 0.05mm. I call it H0 fine scale because that is what it is. It
does not comply with any H0 NMRA standard.
The NMRA H0 fine scale standard is different and incompatible with
ready to run equipment. The NMRA should discard it's H0 fine scale
standard.
Proto 87 is not H0 fine scale, it's a close to exact scale standard and
should always be referred to as Proto 87. The NMRA has it own version
of Proto 87 which is different but just as problematic as the original
standard developed back in the 1970's.
I to share improved running thanks to Steve's work in this area and
don't have to change wheels or work to unrealistic tolerances. I also
agree with you about the level of detail above a certain level being
unnecessary. So the only difference of opinion is about terminology of
what is H0 fine scale and what is not H0 fine scale.

Terry Flynn

http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html

HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates

DC control circuit diagrams

HO scale track and wheel standards

Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet
 
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.