Thoughts on a new track product line

[DKS]

How pliable is the resin when cured? Would it be possible to make the cutouts slightly deeper so that the tie plates snap over the web of the rail and fake the appearance of smaller rail. Kinda like how Peco code 55 is just code 80 with a second "web" embedded in the ties.

Could you attach the points the same way that you attached them when making the code 25 Z scale turnout by bending the point rails so that they want to come together and grip a small protrusion on the throwbar.

The resin is not flexible enough to allow "snap-in" rail. It is, however, flexible enough to make flex track, which I've already done.

The point design you mention is exactly what I've been investigating.

As for the tie length/spacing issue, please note as I said at the outset, I'm making this for myself. If others like it, great; if someone doesn't, I have no problem with that.

[Bsklarski]

Yeah what Bryan said.. even *I* would give it a shot in N scale. You could have some nice custom switch angles there, ect.

[DKS]

Yeah what Bryan said.. even *I* would give it a shot in N scale. You could have some nice custom switch angles there, ect.

You mean standard gauge N? This is N scale, just Nn3.

[bbussey]

Yup, I meant standard gauge.  I should have been more specific, was answering during a short break at a client site.

[Chris333]

I'd post over at the Yahoo Nn3 group.

Heck they are talking about you right now 

[DKS]

Heck they are talking about you right now 

Hope they enjoy. I have issues with Yahoo, so I won't be joining any time soon.

[Bsklarski]

Yes sir, standard gauge N scale. Either way this opens many doors for many people. 

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Forget the narrow gauge stuff.

Do it for standard gauge and get it out now during the C55 famine. Then enjoy being the first person to get rich off of making model train stuff.

[Guilford Guy]

I would be very interested in a Standard Gauge N product if available. My era is pliable enough to allow for an abandoned logging railroad interchange, so if Nn3 tie strips are made available I would buy a few sections in support of the project, but not enough to influence your decision making.

[robert3985]

DKS, I really like this concept, especially the tieplate/spikehead details which appear to be big enough to actually be seen after painting and weathering.

Although I don't do Nn3, I do lay a lot of code 55 and code 40 standard N-scale turnouts (all of my turnouts are hand laid) and I have always wished for an easy way to include switch tie plate and spike detailing, which to my eye, is so obviously missing when building turnouts and using ME/Railcraft flex.

I've tried the Proto87 Stores tie plate/spike NS frets of parts, but the details go away when painted and weathered and I am still not sure if it's worth it to apply them to my turnouts from an effort vs visibility standpoint. They are also engineered for code 40, and when I use them on my code 55 turnouts, I have to cut them in half, then insert each half onto the tie between the tie and rail...which is a pain in the a$$ believe me.

However, your product, if applied to standard gauge turnouts would be something I would use in a flash because it would do two things: (1) save me a LOT of time, and (2) add prototypical detailing simultaneously.

Contrary to the postings here, I believe there's a bigger market for a code 55 product than code 40 in standard gauge, simply because the vast majority of trackage used by modelers interested in scale-appearing trackage is code 55 Atlas, and to a lesser extent, ME. 

Without much thought, I'd (offhand) recommend standard gauge #6, #8 and #10's and maybe a #12, accompanied by a #3 wye, and a #4 wye...in code 55 and 40.  In code 40, include a #4 turnout for light trackage, small engines and branchlines.

I use PCB construction for added durability because my layout is portable and gets broken down and taken to three shows a year.  I can see that replacing some resin ties with PCB ties at strategic points on the turnouts would be advantageous for me.  If you could include some shallow tie plate/spikehead parts to glue on to the PCB ties, that would be great!!

Another thought for rail attachment would be to include spike holes, or pilot holes in some or all of the tieplates on areas that need extra reinforcement to use etched spikes such as Proto87 Stores' really small etched SS spikes.  Of course, you could have some of your own design etched up too.  It wouldn't take too many spikes to really sock the rails down as they are already aligned on your part.

Really a great product DKS!!  I am sure that the Nn3 market is just waiting for this, and has the money to pay for it too.

[Bob Bufkin]

Ever think about doing dual guage?

[Scottl]

This is an attractive product concept from my perspective.  I have always liked the HO version that Central Valley sells and this is very similar.  I understand the narrow gauge because of your own need, but you could do very well with these if you produced a standard gauge version.  I found thick CA fine for turnout construction when I built from proto87 parts.

[wcfn100]

As for the tie length/spacing issue, please note as I said at the outset, I'm making this for myself. If others like it, great; if someone doesn't, I have no problem with that.

Ahh, that kind of 'open discussion'.  I have those with my wife all the time.

If this evolves into something that would represent Colorado narrow gauge track, I'm still definitely interested.  I can probably find any info needed as well.


Jason

[Alaska Railroader]

Sure looks beautiful with those rails on them David.

[DKS]

Ahh, that kind of 'open discussion'.  I have those with my wife all the time.

Well, honey, "open discussion" means that I am genuinely interested in all opinions. I am not, however, obligated to act on all of them, or even any of them. Because your particular observation was not embraced with enthusiasm does not automatically negate the intent of this thread. Perhaps you may have noticed that there seems to be considerable potential interest in spite of any shortcomings it may represent to those hoping for prototype-specific accuracy, and possibly even more interest in other versions, such as standard gauge, which I may pursue. What I'm not about to do is spend eons researching track geometry for D&RGW versus EBT versus ET&WNC, etc., etc. There comes a point of diminishing returns, and for this particular project I could foresee it easily getting out of hand. So anyone put off by my "arbitrary or whimsical" designs need not concern themselves with my silly little project.