Author Topic: Modified PECO code 55 elements  (Read 671 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

motofavorite

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 80
  • Respect: +25
Modified PECO code 55 elements
« on: December 24, 2021, 01:07:41 AM »
0
 I wonder whether anyone has built an N scale version of the track below using modified PECO code 55 elements?  There is a person who will build an OO or greater size version on request. Unfortunately he declined to build an N scale version.
 
Apologies for the narrowly-tailored call of my question. I am not interested in hand laying the track, nor am I interested in using the Fast Tracks system. I imagine someone has performed this surgery in the past and might have advice for successful completion. Thank you.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 28250
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +3204
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2021, 01:29:31 AM »
0
4 double-slips and a crossing?  That is some complex track work!  Looks like some serious surgery is needed if standard components are to be used.  No, can't offer any useful input here, except that I would love to see it come to fruition.
. . . 42 . . .

John

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 12252
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1701
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2021, 06:20:13 AM »
0
You would have to manufacture some new frogs at the crossover .. personally, I would just add additional turnouts on both sides of the scissors to accomplish the same thing

/>
« Last Edit: December 24, 2021, 06:29:01 AM by John »

motofavorite

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 80
  • Respect: +25
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #3 on: December 24, 2021, 12:33:19 PM »
0
Patrick Nicholls built the OO track shown in the YouTube links above. He does nice work. And Fred Soop has made some gorgeous track of this variety for his HO version of Chicago Union Station.
 
This arrangement is madness, as is carving up expensive and complicated turnouts. Nevertheless it appears to avoid reverse curves while conserving track length. Every inch I can save in my station throat benefits the platform tracks it serves. That’s what I am telling myself now, hopefully loudly enough to drown out the part of my brain shouting “derailment machine.”
« Last Edit: December 24, 2021, 12:41:34 PM by motofavorite »

peteski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 28250
  • Gender: Male
  • Honorary Resident Curmudgeon
  • Respect: +3204
    • Coming (not so) soon...
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #4 on: December 24, 2021, 12:40:21 PM »
0
If you can pull this off, and make it reliable, it will be some of the most impressive (and complex) trackwork I would have seen in N scale. A track-maintainer's nightmare!  :-)

Thankfully PECO turnouts are quite reliable and well-made (although they do have rather wide and deep flangeways, not friendly to the narrow-tread and low-flange wheels.  Their slip turnouts also look more realistic than any other brands of ready-made tracks.

. . . 42 . . .

John

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 12252
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1701
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #5 on: December 24, 2021, 05:09:42 PM »
0
Are you doing DCC or DC for this layout?

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8635
  • Respect: +919
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #6 on: December 24, 2021, 10:54:59 PM »
0
I don't think I'd want to wire that for anything less than live-overhead traction.  Or, today, possibly, RC battery-powered trains.  There is a limit to how many gaps can be put in track before it starts to fall apart!
N Kalanaga
Be well

motofavorite

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 80
  • Respect: +25
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #7 on: December 24, 2021, 11:38:01 PM »
0
Peteski: I wonder whether the greater challenge will be track construction or adapting my rolling stock to a standard suited to this nightmare.

John: DCC.

Nkalanaga: I hope the double foot of Peco code 55 along with a really rigid substrate will compensate for the weakness introduced by the joints. I wonder whether keeping the frogs dead might make shepherding the electrons easier. It’s my understanding that modern keep-alive units are sturdy enough to keep things rolling over such distances.

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8635
  • Respect: +919
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #8 on: December 25, 2021, 01:40:28 AM »
0
With some types of Peco turnouts dead frogs might be the solution.  I hadn't thought of that.

I haven't had trouble with modern wheels and my old Peco staging yard turnouts.  When I installed them, about 20 years ago, I shimmed the inside of the guardrails with styrene strip.  By narrowing the flangeways the RP-25 wheels work fine.  The only problem I had was the the turnouts I bought came with two styles of points (blades, to the British):  One with square ends, and one with the tip cut at an angle.  The angled ones wouldn't work with lo-pro wheels, as the small flanges rode up and over the angled end of the point.  They both worked fine with MT pizza-cutters.

Once I figured out what the problem was, and replaced the offending turnouts, I haven't had any problems.
N Kalanaga
Be well

motofavorite

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 80
  • Respect: +25
Re: Modified PECO code 55 elements
« Reply #9 on: December 25, 2021, 02:04:06 AM »
0
Thanks for the heads-up about the point blades. That information should save me a few headaches!