Author Topic: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!  (Read 6775 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8793
  • Respect: +1109
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« on: May 16, 2016, 12:51:21 PM »
+4
I finally got to my train space again and was able to set up my photo rig to show the CV tie strips.

I made a few comments in the other thread that I'll repeat and also correct.

First, for those that don't know, the configuration CV decided to venture into N scale with is a combination of 8.5' and 9' ties with a few 8' one's thrown in. 

As I mentioned in the other thread, there's a lot of flash clean up.  The amount of time spent really depends on how clean you want it.  I would recommend a side-cutting type nail clippers which give a straight cut.  This will leave a slight burr but goes quickly.



Another thing to mention is that the ties don't line up perfectly from top top bottom, there is a parting line mid-way.



Also shown in that picture is that the ties are injected from one side which leaves more cleanup on that side.

So here's the cleaned up strip. You can see the guide ways for the rail, which we'll get to next.




In the other thread I said the rails were not in gauge when I measured them.  Now I know why.  The guides for the rail are not wide enough for the ME c55 rail to seat all the way. So the rail I measured was at a camber (can I use that word for rails?).  IOW, they were both leaning into the center so it measured under gauge.  To fix this I ran the outside edge of the rail base along a mill file until the rail would slide just a bit in the guides.  I recommend only doing the outside because when I was done, the rail was is gauge. 



And here it is with a piece of Atlas c55.  Sorry for the weathered rail comparison but that's all the shop had.


Someone mentioned how close the ties are spaced and I agree it's maybe too close.  I'll try and get a true center-to-center measurement when I get a chance.

I was planning on trying to use c40 rail on the other track, but I'm not sure at the moment. I may just do a full on Atlas c55 comparison with painting and ballast.

Sorry for the big pics (which you should be clicking on), but it was the only way to really see anything without me doing a ton of cropping.

Jason





« Last Edit: May 16, 2016, 12:58:47 PM by wcfn100 »

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8793
  • Respect: +1109
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2016, 01:26:25 PM »
0
One thing I didn't mention is that the tie strips have an interlocking ties on the ends to join more than one strip.



One more note is an initial thought laying these vs. wood ties.  You can't go back and sand anything down with the tie strips if there's some up and down action on your road bed.  You will definitely want to make sure everything is smooth and level like normal flex.


Jason

garethashenden

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1834
  • Respect: +1209
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2016, 01:04:19 AM »
0
Are the tie plates the right width for code 40 or do they need to be widened for everything?

sirenwerks

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5799
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +350
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #3 on: May 19, 2016, 01:59:08 AM »
0
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.
Failing to prepare is preparing to fail.

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8793
  • Respect: +1109
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #4 on: May 19, 2016, 02:59:38 AM »
0
Are the tie plates the right width for code 40 or do they need to be widened for everything?

Code 40 has a lot of play.  You could try and glue it, but I don't think the designed-in 'spikes' would hold it.  I haven't gotten to those yet since I need to paint and ballast first.

Jason

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8793
  • Respect: +1109
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2016, 03:07:02 AM »
0
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.

The CV ties line up about 8 ties for every 7 on the Atlas.  The CV ties aren't much wider than the Atlas, but remember what I showed about the parting line and the tops and bottoms not lining up?  The ties 'halves' measure around .061", but together they measure around .067" since they aren't aligned.  I'm curious what ballasting will do if I cover the bottom half.

I decided to finish my test sheet with some c40 on wood ties since that's where my interest level is at.  So score one for tie strips vs. placing individual ties.  :P

Jason

CNR5529

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 604
  • Respect: +609
    • My Shapeways Store
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2016, 09:11:52 AM »
0
So the rail I measured was at a camber (can I use that word for rails?). 

This is called rail cant (railroads may use tie plates with a 1:20 or 1:40 inward cant of the rail for example to optimize wheel wear and counter lateral forces). This should not be confused with track cant (supper elevation in curves), or cant deficiency (the lack of adequate track cant for a given speed, causing an imbalance due to lateral accelerations of the vehicle carbody). You'd think the industry would use clearer terminology to differentiate these things...  :D

Now back to the regularly scheduled program. Thanks for the detailed review, I got my package of CV ties not long ago, and am anxious to try them out! I'm hoping that the parting lines and some of the flashing will disappear under the ballast.
Because why not...

GaryHinshaw

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6297
  • Respect: +1813
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2016, 02:00:41 PM »
0
I opened my package last night and tried these out and I'll add a few notes of my own here.  First the good news: the tie strips look great in person, and the tie plate detail is excellent, as Jason's photos show.  It is by far the most prototypical looking plate detail available in N scale today.  The tie spacing is a bit close, and the stagger of the ends seems a bit more accentuated than necessary, but not enough to bother me.  The flash and offset that Jason note are also present in my sample, but that will be hidden by a good ballast application.

Now the bad news: my experience is the same as Jason's: ME code 55 rail is too wide to fit in the tie plate slots without canting.  :facepalm:  I don't have any spare Atlas rail to test, so I can't comment on that, but given that ME is the only supplier of code 55 rail that I know of, this seems like a significant design flaw.  I tried pressing the rail down with a great deal of force, but it simply would not settle into the base of the slot.  Narrowing the rail base or widening the slot would fix the problem, but neither task is straightforward, and it shouldn't be necessary.

I was able to make the cant small enough that the rails were in gauge, so a car with narrow tread FVM wheels would roll fine on it.  But I would not consider this test track suitable for a layout because there was not enough rail/tie contact to allow for a good glue bond, and the process is not well controlled.  (But again, maybe Atlas rail would be different.)

Some measurements: the base of my code 55 rail is .055" wide (same is its height), and I found the slots to measure in the range of .056-.058", so this should all fit in theory.  I think the issue is that there is enough lateral play from tie to tie that the clear width of the slot - across many ties - is just a bit under .055".  If they had tooled the slot to .060", I think things would be just about right for the ME rail.

My code 40 rail has a base width of .039", so it swims a bit in the slot and looks a little silly.  But if you align it with the inner edge of the slot, the rails will be in gauge and FVM wheels will roll on it without hitting any tie plate detail.  If CVP decides to go forward with a branch-line tie strip sized to code 40, I will be first in line to use it for my industrial areas.

Summary: these are great looking strips with a significant design flaw that will make them very unlikely to be a commercial success (even in a niche market), unless there is another source of code 55 rail I am not aware of.  This is very disappointing to me because I would love to see CVP go forward with a code 40 branch-line strip, but they'v e said they would not do so unless there was a demonstrated market.  That seems very unlikely to materialize based on this release.  :|
« Last Edit: May 19, 2016, 02:02:52 PM by GaryHinshaw »

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8793
  • Respect: +1109
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2016, 02:25:34 PM »
0
Narrowing the rail base or widening the slot would fix the problem, but neither task is straightforward, and it shouldn't be necessary.

I'll disagree here only to that narrowing the base is pretty straight forward.  Pinch the rail against a mill file with your thumb and draw it across.  Repeat the same side a few times.  For me it was a simple enough solution to overcome the disappointment of the gauging issues caused by the canting (if that makes sense).

Thanks for your notes Gary, and anyone else please feel free to add what they can.  If we get enough good info here, I'll pass this thread along to CV to show them we are interested in the ties strips (but you should checked with us first  ;)).

Jason

pastoolio

  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: +4
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2016, 04:49:13 PM »
0
Thanks for the write up Jason. You too Gary. That's disappointing, I was hoping these would be really nice. The tie spacing almost looks like bridge ties to me, when compared to the Atlas track.
Can either of you give us dimensions of everything using a scale rule?

-Mike

mark.hinds

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 475
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +62
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2016, 04:50:06 PM »
0
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. 

WRT the the offset tie castings, perhaps the lower half would be hidden by ballast? 

MH

wazzou

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6623
  • #GoCougs
  • Respect: +1566
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #11 on: May 19, 2016, 05:11:55 PM »
0
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


I'm sure the tie plate detail is just at the shoulders not fully beneath the rail base.
Bryan

Member of NPRHA, Modeling Committee Member
http://www.nprha.org/
Member of MRHA


GaryHinshaw

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6297
  • Respect: +1813
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2016, 06:27:36 PM »
0
does adding tie plate detail raise the rail significantly higher above the ties than otherwise?

As far as I can tell from my measurements, the base of the rail slot sits about .004" (0.6" scale) above the top of the ties, so almost flush.  Some other measurements (with uncertainties of about ±.001"):

Tie height: 0.046" (7.4")
Tie width: 0.061" (9.8")
Mean tie spacing: 20 per 30 scale feet, or 18" centers.

Cajonpassfan

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5370
  • Respect: +1953
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2016, 07:58:23 PM »
0
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.

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8793
  • Respect: +1109
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Central Valley Ties strips - with N scale icon!
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2016, 08:13:11 PM »
0
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.

Well as per the conversation Mike and I got into about the code 40 rail, maybe the CV ties are to ME 'spec' but the actual c55 rail base is running oversize like the height of the c40.

We'll see if Mike can share that top secret info or not.   :P

Jason