Peco turnouts

[peteski]

+2

+100,000,000

[propmeup1]

Most of my BLI engines stall going over many of my Peco long turnouts. Especially the T1. I have the insulfrog type. Any ideas how to help this problem other then going back to Atlas which i have already done on most of my main line turnouts.
Keith

[djconway]

+3 on John's recommendation. 
It is easiest to power the frog before installing the turnout on the layout.  30 seconds of effort to add a jumper vs hours trying to trouble shoot pickup issues.

[Curtis Kyger]

Take your multi-meter and see whether you have electricity on the closure rails.

[nickelplate759]

Anectdotal evidence for powering frogs.  Some of my engines with lesser pickup abilities were sometimes stalling on a switch I installed some time ago. It's an Atlas code 55 #10.   I had installed a lead to the little ring that is supposed to power the frog, but my multimeter showed that the frog itself was unpowered.  Alas, the older Atlas code 55 turnouts (this one was in fact re-used from a previous layout) sometime have the connection to the frog fail.

So - I soldered a lead directly to the frog (not all that easy in an installed turnout, but doable), and now those same engines no longer stall!

So yes, I always want frogs to be powered.

[jdcolombo]

Just to be clear, my current layout uses Atlas Code 55 track, although I used Peco Code 80 Electrofrogs and Code 55 Finescale (electrofrog) for many years.  All of my current Atlas Code 55 turnouts have powered frogs via the Tortoise switch machines I use to throw the points.

And every single day I'm running trains on the layout, I miss the simplicity and robust construction of Peco.  Yes, the Atlas Code 55 looks much more realistic, particularly in photographs, but now I have 117 Tortoise switch machines to maintain, along with 117 turnouts that are finicky, lose their nickel plating on the frog after a couple of years' worth of cleaning, and which one day will be replaced by hand-made turnouts using Fast Tracks jigs or paper templates (I already have 10 built; only 107 to go!).  And they will have their frogs powered, too.

John C.

[robert3985]

I agree that powered frogs are the most reliable, but...only on turnouts that are longer than #6's.  I installed (as an experiment) two ME C55 #6's in my Echo Yard leading to the sand house spur track, wired the frog but didn't connect it to the Tortoise underneath, so the frogs are dead.  ALL of my motive power runs without hesitation through them and has for over 15 years, including my LL Alco SW switchers and brass 2-8-0's.  However, on my hand-made larger turnouts, ALL of the frogs are powered, since some of my shorter wheelbased engines will stall on them...but not on #6's with dead frogs.

I work on my friend Nate Goodman's  @Nato layout, and he specified Peco C80 Insulfrog turnouts overall, with the over-center spring point mechanism.  Every now and then, we have problems with the power routing, but it's easily fixed by cleaning the closure point toes and adjacent stock rails.  When I designed, installed and painted the finished Branchline Yard...I forgot that Nate's turnouts were not powered by Tortoises underneath like all of mine, and that they were power routing using the points as the electrical contacts.  Took me a couple of work days to scrape off the completely cured Krylon Camo Black ultra-flat paint from the point toes to get the yard to work again!!     Nate also runs switchers, and doesn't experience any hesitation/stalling on the plastic Peco Insulfrog frogs, but his yard turnouts are small turnouts, so the dead frogs are also short.

Although I am big proponent of C55 and C40 track, with proper painting, weathering and ballasting, even Peco or Atlas C80 flex and turnouts can look pretty decent...much better and with less effort than Kato Unitrack.

Photo (1) - Peco C80 flex & Peco Insulfrog turnouts on Nate Goodman's Branchline Yard on his layout in Salt Lake City:


The new Peco C55 Unifrog turnouts are available only in #6's and have isolated frogs with a wire attached to power the frog.  They're also not power routing down at the point toes, which makes them more DCC friendly than Peco's Electrofrogs because the closure rails and points are the same polarity as the adjacent stock rails.  My hand-made turnouts have been this way from the start back in the early 1980's since it's the logical way to make trouble-free turnouts for use on either DC or DCC powered layouts.  Seeing how short the Peco Unifrog frog is on their #6, I would venture an educated guess that it will work just fine if left dead.

Photo (2) - Peco 55 Unifrog #6 Turnout...notice how short the isolated frog is:


Photo (3) - Peco 55 Unifrog #6 Turnout showing DCC friendly wiring from underneath:


This is a big improvement over both the Insulfrog and Electrofrog Peco turnouts IMO, and requires no insulating rail joiners on either rails coming off the frog heel, but I wish that Peco had gapped the frog one tie further on at the frog point to eliminate any chance of a short.

If I were using Peco Electrofrog turnouts, I would DCC-ize them by isolating the frog by cutting gaps with a jeweler's saw on the bench and wiring the closure points and rails so that they're the same polarity as the adjacent stock rails.  Not complicated to do and worth the effort IMO...then using Tortoises underneath to both throw the switches and power the frogs.

From a simplicity standpoint, the Peco over-center springs switch is really handy, but the Micro Engineering #6 in C55 is equally handy...and in my experience, doesn't need the frog to be powered...and is a DCC friendly turnout as opposed to the Peco Electrofrog turnout, and looks much more prototypical for a layout set in North America.

I would rate the Peco 55 Unifrog turnouts just a bit less electrically reliable than the ME C55 #6, but much more robust (if that is really needed) because of the buried track construction method.  I would rate the ME #6 C55 turnout the best-looking N-scale turnout made, with the Peco C55 Unifrog turnout looking worse than both the Atlas55 #7 and the ME C55 #6 because of the spindly closure point rails and the out-of-proportion ties.

Best combination of both function and appearance for commercial N-scale trackage would be to use ME C55 flex (unweathered), ME #6 C55 turnouts, Atlas #10's and curved turnouts, Atlas diamonds, and Peco 55 Electrofrog turnouts that fit where Atlas and ME turnouts don't, and Peco55 crossings to fill if Atlas diamonds won't do the trick.  Mainline lightly trafficked sidings and spurs would be hand-laid C40, as would branchlines & industries.  You'll note that I didn't recommend the Peco #6 Unifrog turnout.  That is because the ME C55 #6 is a much better model although functionally nearly identical.  Hopefully, Peco will replace their smaller and larger turnouts with the Unifrog design soon.

In all of my N-scale trackage laid over the years on both layouts and modules, I have never missed the over-center spring switching simplicity of either Peco's or ME's turnouts, as I've always powered mine with Tortoises and removed the spring from my ME #6's.  I certainly don't miss the out-of-proportion ties on all Peco N-scale track, nor the out-of-proportionality of Atlas55 turnouts and their oversized track attachment thingies.  Micro Engineering C55 flex and hand built turnouts have done the trick for me since I got into N-scale model railroading back in the late 70's along with the more recent addition of ME #6 turnouts every now and then.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[rgengineoiler]

MY Current Layout that I started in 2012 after taking down my old layout is all Peco Code 55 Elcetrofrog with 67 turnouts of all types and sizes, straight and curved and all hand operated except for a double crossover which is powered by Tortoius machines in a hard to reach area.  I clean with denatured alcohol and a tooth brush when needed but I just don't have much trouble with contact on the sprung points. If I do have a problem it is usually a loose grain of ballast that is causing the issue and not dust and lint.  For me they have been very reliable most of the time and I do have an air purify, " Lasco", brand machine for dust and lint.  I also have a dog who loves to lay under the layout.  I personally think that Peco is the finest track product out their period and they have the most reliable selection of products needed at any given time.  No waiting for China and no tariff issues.  Peco is made in the UK

As far as rivet counting track tie spacing goes, after the ballast goes in and scenery etc.,  It just doesen't matter visually except for placing the layout in a museum where the Scientist's are eyeballing.  Another words it comes under the heading of,  "It's my layout", and proud of the work.    Doug   

[robert3985]

...As far as rivet counting track tie spacing goes, after the ballast goes in and scenery etc.,  It just doesen't matter visually except for placing the layout in a museum where the Scientist's are eyeballing.  Another words it comes under the heading of,  "It's my layout", and proud of the work.    Doug   

@rgengineoiler Doug, if you're using "rivet counting" and "Scientist..." as prejoratives ("expressions of contempt or disdain") then you're gonna get some feedback from the rivet counters and actual scientists who are long-time crew here at TRW...and from the modelers here who build and have built models and displays for various museums..where y'know all the scientists are at...,"eyeballing" things. 

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

   

[El4774]

So I have never wired them for dcc. I looked at the link https://dccwiki.com/PECO_Electrofrog and am I supposed to use a frog juicer for each switch or can i get away with just insulating and using the feeders?  I like all the replies that I have gotten from this thread. Its very informative and thank you for everyone who responded. I have the old insulated remote code 80 atlas on my layout. I'm ready to get reliable track since my specialty is dcc sound installations and I have a lot of sound installed engines. I want to have smooth reliable track without the shorts that i have been getting from the atlas track and before anyone says it about a capacitor in the sound engines its not an option. I had problems even with just straight dcc engines stopping randomly at points.

Ryan

[MVW]

Seems like the conventional wisdom is to use a juicer ... but I don't. And after 4.5 years of operating without 'em, I don't intend to start.

Jim

[jdcolombo]

So I have never wired them for dcc. I looked at the link https://dccwiki.com/PECO_Electrofrog and am I supposed to use a frog juicer for each switch or can i get away with just insulating and using the feeders?  I like all the replies that I have gotten from this thread. Its very informative and thank you for everyone who responded. I have the old insulated remote code 80 atlas on my layout. I'm ready to get reliable track since my specialty is dcc sound installations and I have a lot of sound installed engines. I want to have smooth reliable track without the shorts that i have been getting from the atlas track and before anyone says it about a capacitor in the sound engines its not an option. I had problems even with just straight dcc engines stopping randomly at points.

Ryan

If you're into sound, then any decision not to power the frogs is asking for a world of frustration.  Sound dropouts are common even WITH meticulously laid, powered, and cleaned rail.   Not powering a frog is simply multiplying the potential points of failure for sound installs.

And you should find a way to add keep alive caps.  It's not impossible.  I've added them in every hood diesel, cab diesel and steam loco I've installed sound in, including a VO1000 switcher, an Atlas S2, and an Atlas RS3.  Without them, you will get momentary sound dropouts on everything except maybe an Athearn Big Boy, even with clean wheels, clean track and, yes, powered frogs.

John C.

[robert3985]

If you're into sound, then any decision not to power the frogs is asking for a world of frustration.  Sound dropouts are common even WITH meticulously laid, powered, and cleaned rail.   Not powering a frog is simply multiplying the potential points of failure for sound installs.

And you should find a way to add keep alive caps.  It's not impossible.  I've added them in every hood diesel, cab diesel and steam loco I've installed sound in, including a VO1000 switcher, an Atlas S2, and an Atlas RS3.  Without them, you will get momentary sound dropouts on everything except maybe an Athearn Big Boy, even with clean wheels, clean track and, yes, powered frogs.

John C.

What @jdcolombo says.

I don't have keep alives on my Big Boys and Challengers, but I do on everything else.  I only have two #6's with dead frogs, and that was an experiment since they've got the wires installed (green) but just not hooked up to the Tortoise underneath.  I also have a 22AWG solid-core copper feeder on every single piece of rail on my layout too, not relying on teensy little NS soldered railjoiners for anything other than mechanical alignment...and I would say the feeder overkill is another reason for smooth running on my layout.  It was a Hell of a lot of work to do it, but IMO, it was well worth it...

Photo (1) - Just for giggles, here's a photo of Echo Yard with only 1/2 of the feeders stuck into their respective holes heading underneath the layout as I soldered them to the underside of the center of every piece of rail:


Soldering feeders to every piece of rail wouldn't be nearly as difficult if done before the track is painted, weathered and ballasted...so, it's something that should be planned on in advance. 

Soldering them to the bottoms of the rail foot makes them disappear when the track is painted weathered and ballasted...which is good from an appearance standpoint, but ya gotta make sure it's a proper soldering job on each and every joint.  I also put a blob of gap filling CA on the underside of my subroadbed on the interference-fit hole where the feeder is protruding downward from with a spritz of Accelerator to make sure the feeders are not going to pull off the rails...because my layout is portable and gets stressed a lot more than a layout that is not portable...only after making sure the wiring is perfect however.  The only problem with concealing them like this is sometimes ya need to know where they're at to do some troubleshooting or to modify your track.  That's why I try to solder them as close to the middle of the rails as possible, which gives me a starting point to look for them if I need to do that.

Photo (2) - 22AWG solid copper feeder soldered to the rail web as is traditional:


Photo (3) - 22AWG solid copper feeders soldered to the rail foot:


Just sayin' that even if your frogs are all live, if you haven't taken care of the rest of your trackage, you're still just asking for problems....which DCC sound exacerbates.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[NtheBasement]

I too am a confirmed Peco user, would never use anything else.  I bought a gorgeous Atlas curved turnout once... maybe it's because I'm so used to Peco's robustness but calling the Atlas "delicate" is an understatement; I wrecked it the first time I cleaned the track.

FWIW here is an alternative to using Tortoises and juicers to power a frog on a Peco, using a slide switch as a switch stand.


Details: the turnout is thrown using a Radio Shack SPDT slide switch, still available for a buck per: https://www.radioshack.com/products/radioshack-dpdt-submini-slide-switch  It links to the Peco throw arm via a bent up piece of piano wire.  The SPDT's center pole goes to the frog and the others go to the rails' power.  The holes on the switches' solder contacts are too small for my feeder wire so I drill them.  The SPDT's travel is a bit more than the Peco's throw, so to compensate the wire hooks into an 1/8" oversized hole in the switch handle to add slop.  Adjust the wire bends so that the Peco throws reliably with the slide before turning on you DCC power, otherwise you can get a short.

I've been using these for a couple of decades now.  I did have one of the SPDTs fail on me once and had to replace it, otherwise no issues whatsoever.

The flex is ME code 55.  As you can see, it's hard to notice the difference in the ties once things are ballasted.

[CRL]

I use Peco code 55 exclusively, including both turnouts and flex track. Only exception is cut down crossings in configurations not available from Peco. I solder track feeds to the outside lower web of the double web of the code 55 track. When painted & ballasted, the track feeds are practically invisible.

I use electro frog turnouts, and use the power routing provided by the points to feed the live frogs. It’s fairly easy to keep the points clean... just mask them during painting and ballasting. I have some Peco code 80 turnouts I laid over 20 years ago that still function perfectly... power routing and all.