0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Are the tie plates the right width for code 40 or do they need to be widened for everything?
Maybe it's my eyes but the ties on the CV product look wider than the Atlas ties. It's almost like they have the same center, but because they're wider there's still less space between them, which creates the closer together look. The closer spacing may make ballasting harder, unless you're going with a real fine particle ballast, like Ed's grout technique. The plate detail sure does look a lot nicer than the Atlas thing-a-ma-bobs.
So the rail I measured was at a camber (can I use that word for rails?).
Narrowing the rail base or widening the slot would fix the problem, but neither task is straightforward, and it shouldn't be necessary.
Thanks for the additional review and images. Sorry if I missed this, but does adding tie plate detail raise the rail significantly higher above the ties than otherwise? ("Otherwise" would be when you solder the rail directly to PC board ties, without tie plates). I ask this question because of the focus on using using more in-scale rail. MH
does adding tie plate detail raise the rail significantly higher above the ties than otherwise?
Thanks for the reviews and dimensional information. Echoing what was said, that is disappointing and actually makes no sense to me that someone would attempt to produce a tie bed which doesn't fit available rail. Really? Curious. Our track challenges continue....Otto K.