Peco turnouts

[El4774]

Hi all what turnouts does everyone use. I have pretty much everything code 80 and I'm debating on using the peco electrofrog's. How hard is it to wire them with dcc?

[jdcolombo]

Peco turnouts are excellent - I used the Code 80 electrofrogs for years, before switching to the Code 55, then finally to Atlas Code 55.  They will mate with Atlas Code 80 track easily, so you don't have to use Peco flex track if you don't want to (the Atlas track is much cheaper). 

Advantages:
1.  Powered frog (which I consider essential in N scale for trouble-free operation)
2.  Spring-loaded points, which means you don't need a separate switch machine or ground throw to move the points.  Flick with your fingers.  Particularly wonderful for switching areas on layouts.
3.  Very robust construction.  Nearly impossible to break.

Disadvantages:
1.  A bit pricey
2.  The guardrails tend to be a bit wide when compared to NMRA gauge.  If your wheels are set to perfectly correct NMRA gauge, this allows the wheels to slide over too far and pick the point of the frog, causing a derailment.  Easy fix: get a package of .010 x .060 styrene strip.  Cut a piece of the strip long enough to cover the entire "guardrail" (which is plastic).  Glue strip to guardrail with a few drops of plastic cement, holding it in place with a couple of round toothpicks at the ends.  Paint brown.  Done.
3.  Because the frog and point rails are powered by the point rail making contact with the stock rail, this area of contact must be clean to work correctly.  Requires regular cleaning via a small piece of 400-grit sandpaper folded over and wedged between the point and stock rails, then moved back and forth to clean and polish the contact area. 
4.  You must use insulated rail joiners on the rails exiting the frog to avoid shorts.

DCC operation:  Despite claims to the contrary, nothing is REQUIRED for DCC operation as long as you properly use insulated rail joiners on the frog exit rails.  I used Peco Code 80 electrofrogs for years with DCC without a single problem.  However, some people have experienced shorts as a result of metal wheels contacting the "open" point rail, probably because of wheelsets not being entirely in gauge.  You CAN modify PECO electrofrog turnouts to be more DCC-friendly, as well as power the point rails separately so that they are not dependent on contact with the stock rail for power.  See the following link:

https://dccwiki.com/PECO_Electrofrog

Note that Peco has released a new line of turnouts called "Unifrog" that has a metal frog which is unpowered.  The frog can be separately powered via a "frog juicer" or other polarity switch (e.g., a Tortoise's auxiliary contacts).  The Unifrog is a completely DCC-friendly design, but so far the selection of Unifrog turnouts is quite limited.

John C.

[MVW]

John pretty much said it all. A few follow-up points:

• At about $15 a pop through modeltrainstuff.com, I wouldn't call Peco turnouts pricey. My LHS sells 'em for $25; that's pricey.

• I have 25-30 Electrofrogs in use, and haven't run into the guardrail issue John mentioned. But nice to see his workaround, in case it occurs in the future.

• A toothbrush dipped in alcohol also works well for keeping it clean between the point and stock rails. I very seldom have to resort to sandpaper.

An aside, but I'm not sure the Atlas flex is that much cheaper than Peco's. Peco sections are 36" long, compared to 30" for Atlas, so a bit higher price is to be expected. I've found that the Atlas flex tends to require more cleaning than Peco; seems to attract more crud, for some reason.

I'm also using code 80, so obviously appearance isn't my top priority for track and turnouts. Dependability is. Peco's turnouts are both highly dependable in operation, and likely to be available when you want to buy 'em. They're manufactured in the U.K., I believe, so they're not continually subject to the "China syndrome."

I used Atlas code 80 products when I first got into N, and would have gone with Atlas code 55, but that was during the first major product drought. Great-looking stuff, but the turnouts seem flimsy and have QC issues when compared to Peco. No turning back for me.

Jim

[ncbqguy]

What is the consensus on plastic frogs nowadays?  With just about everything on the market having all wheel / tender pickup is not having powered frogs an issue?
Charlie Vlk
Railroad Model Resources

[nickelplate759]

What is the consensus on plastic frogs nowadays?  With just about everything on the market having all wheel / tender pickup is not having powered frogs an issue?
Charlie Vlk
Railroad Model Resources

Some of us insist on running our 40+ year old trains (like my Rivarossi 2-8-4) that don't have such nice electrical systems..

[Curtis Kyger]

I've used PECO Insulated turnouts for years with excellent results.  I did, however, "bar" the turnouts -- i.e. I run a bit of wire from under the field rails to under the adjacent closure rails.  his means I'm not solely reliant on electrical conductivity through the switchpoint.  Using Insulfrogs, I can also use metal rail joiners on the back end of the frog rails, and therefore there is electricity also flowing toward the closure rails from that direction.  My locomotives can creap extremely slowly though turnouts without any stalling.  As example; on a SW1200, while one wheel may be on the plastic frog, the other three on that side of the locomotive are on powered rails.
ElectroFrog turnouts do look better (IMO) since the frogs are made of rail.  On my Insulfrog turnouts, I've colored the frog with a silver hue paint.

[Curtis Kyger]

Here's example of painted frog.  Note also ballasted throwbar in an attempt to hide the big hunks of black shiny plastic.

[peteski]

Another positive experience with Peco track, on my friend's layout.  While I don't own the layout in question, I have spent many hours working on in, and now operating and maintaining it.  It is all-Peco layout, Electrofrog turnouts and code 70 and 55 (both wood and concrete tie) flextrack. DCC.  It operates very reliably (many operators used to operating on H0 layouts are surprised how well N scale trains run).

The only problems we had (in the last 25+ years of operating) I recall were:

1. About 3 years after laying the track, one of the curves ad the track buckle and push up, even with expansion gaps in multiple locations.  We balmed it on the plywood base contraction.  The area was repaired and no further buckling occurred anywhere.

2. Some (not all) of the turnouts had their guardrails shimmed (as described above) to prevent some locos climbing the frog. I don't remember the specific details as to which locos had the problem.

3.Couple of throwbars snapped over the years and were replaced with ones made from styrene, with the turnout still in-place.  We blamed that on excessive force exerted by the throw rods. Tortoise switches are used and the throw rods IMO are too thick, exerting too much pressure on the throwbar.  Not Peco's fault.

4, This is a fairly recent development (since Kato started using narrow-tread and low-flange wheels on their steam locos (like GS4 and FEF3). When the drivers traverse the frog, they "fall" into the frog. This does not cause any derailments, it doesn't look good - the loco wobbles going slow through the turnout.  I'm sure this could be remedied by making the flangeways shallower (gluing styrene strips on the bottom of the flangeways), but my friend is not bothered enough to do anything about it.

As I see it, Peco track is very reliable and I would recommend it.  The tie spacing is not accurate, but once ballasted and weathered, it is acceptable.  Code 55 is the most robust track you can buy (since part of the metal rail is buried in the tie strip), and it should be the track of choice for NTRAK modules.  Peco code 55 track is also designed to be compatible with older locos with deep flanges (it has very low profile "spokes" on the inside of the rail).

[NtheBasement]

Robust and reliable.  The ties and spacing are oversized but at @peteski says, unless you know what to look for the difference disappears with ballasting.

[MichaelWinicki]

Here's example of painted frog.  Note also ballasted throwbar in an attempt to hide the big hunks of black shiny plastic.

Heck of a nice job there Curtis!

[MichaelWinicki]

What is the consensus on plastic frogs nowadays?  With just about everything on the market having all wheel / tender pickup is not having powered frogs an issue?
Charlie Vlk
Railroad Model Resources

I can't talk about plastic frogs, but most of my Atlas code 55 turnouts do not have powered frogs...

I don't have any issues.  Once all loco's wheels are checked for being properly gauged (most come too narrow) and once that's done a major frog stalling problem sourece is eliminated.

[nkalanaga]

The only Peco turnouts I have are in my staging yard.  They work fine, and have been there for almost 20 years.  I shimmed the guardrails before laying them, out of general principles, since the rest of my track is all ME code 55, or handlaid 40/55.

The only problem I had, and it may have been unique to the 1990s, is that some of the points had a vertical end, and some had the upper corner cut at an angle.  Both worked with MT deep-flange wheels, but those don't like code 40 track, so were replaced.  The angled ends would NOT work with small-flange wheels, as the flanges rolled up and over the angled end.

I replaced those with turnouts with the vertical ends, and have had no more problems.

[jdcolombo]

What is the consensus on plastic frogs nowadays?  With just about everything on the market having all wheel / tender pickup is not having powered frogs an issue?
Charlie Vlk
Railroad Model Resources

While others disagree, I cannot imagine taking the time and effort to build a working N scale layout and not powering the frogs.  While electrical pickup in modern diesels/steam is quite good, it isn't ever perfect, and especially for short-wheelbase locos like switchers or even some first-gen hood diesels, I consider powered frogs an essential part of absolutely trouble-free operation.  I operate on a couple of extremely nice HO-scale layouts, neither of which has powered frogs.  And guess what: in both cases, locomotives occasionally stall on the frogs.  And this is in a scale where the engines weigh a ton in comparison to our N scale stuff.  Yet unpowered frogs are still an issue.  And that's why I liked (and still like) the original Peco electrofrog design.  Powered frog, without external accessories.  All you had to do was remember to use insulated rail joiners at the frog exit rails and keep the points clean.

John C.

[Cajonpassfan]

I absolutely agree w/ John on this.
Otto

[CRL]

+2