Hi all,
When laying track for my new layout should I prioritise using flexi over set track, wherever possible?
My assumption is yes because of the considerably reduced number of track connecting points and therefore a much reduce potential for electrical/running issues.
Am I right, or do dropper cables make this a moot point? If so, is going mostly flexi just making life hard for myself?
The electrical issues don't really enter into it.
The use of flexible track allows for sweeping curves as per the prototype, and avoids the train set look.
As @Bealman (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=255) says, use flexi track for realism. As a by-product it does reduce the number of rail joints when used in long lengths.
I use Setrack for things like hidden curves, to avoid the "fun" of trying to get a consistent radius with smoothly curved joints. I still try and create a transition in and out of the curve using flexi, as you can see here:
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/68/5885-110918120003.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=68919)
i would say yes for visible areas of the layout and stick to large or medium points and if you are modelling a mainline then not sharp curves
are you using peco code 80 or code 55?
good luck
tim
Sorry guys I didn't word my question very well, I should have said I obviously appreciate it's more flexible for slight curves and realism. :)
More thinking about the reliability. After all, every connection is a potential failure - no?
But I guess for ease, fiddle yard can be set track.
Quote from: bluedepot on September 11, 2018, 12:04:03 PM
i would say yes for visible areas of the layout and stick to large or medium points and if you are modelling a mainline then not sharp curves
are you using peco code 80 or code 55?
good luck
tim
Code 55!
Code 55 is stronger than code 80 as it is embedded in the sleeper base and so, when being curved to shape, resists popping out of the chairs. It is also marked underneath with arrows showing which direction to bend it in. For sure, flexitrack reduces the number of joins and therefore possible voltage drop but on well laid track, unless you have a huge layout, won't make a great deal of difference. Try not to have a join in a curve. Flexitrack looks better than set track in the main as there are no huge plastic ends to each piece. Many tend to use set track on hidden curves but set track is code 80 and I refuse to mix the two owing to the height difference.
Ah, am I using the wrong terminology? I just assumed 'set track' meant the set shapes, be they 80 or 55.
That's what I meant, code 55 in fixed lengths (set) or flexi lengths.
For N Peco do 3 types of track.......
Set track - small lengths of preformed curves and straights plus small points which were originally intended as a 'train set' on a table a bit like Kato Unitrack i.e. you could put it together, have a running session and then put it all away again when the table was required. It is code 80 rail.
Code 80 streamline - flexitrack lengths and various sizes of points/crossings designed for permanent layouts. The rails sit on the surface of the sleeper webbing.
Code 55 'finescale' - flexitrack and various sizes of points/crossings designed for permanent layouts. The rails are partly embedded in the sleeper base, and there is therefore a height difference between code 55 and code 80.
Peco do describe how to bring code 80 and 55 to the same height. Basically gently jack up the code 55 so it matches 80 ay the join. Not difficult. On my new layout I have done just that in the fiddle years jacking up the scenic code 55 to the level of code 80 glued to electrical conduit (a cassette approach to the fiddle yard). But you would not want too much of it. So if, say, I was doing a continuous layout with curves round to the fiddle yard, I might use code 55 for appearance at the front, then jack it up to code 80 Setrack for the curves and then assuming using Setrack points in the fiddle yard to get maximum siding length and the wider track spacing (makes hand shunting less difficult), use code 80 flexi for the hidden loops. Sorry if that sounds complicated but hopefully you get the idea.
Quote from: Newportnobby on September 11, 2018, 12:37:06 PM
For N Peco do 3 types of track.......
Set track - small lengths of preformed curves and straights plus small points which were originally intended as a 'train set' on a table a bit like Kato Unitrack i.e. you could put it together, have a running session and then put it all away again when the table was required. It is code 80 rail.
Code 80 streamline - flexitrack lengths and various sizes of points/crossings designed for permanent layouts. The rails sit on the surface of the sleeper webbing.
Code 55 'finescale' - flexitrack and various sizes of points/crossings designed for permanent layouts. The rails are partly embedded in the sleeper base, and there is therefore a height difference between code 55 and code 80.
Got it. Thankfully I've been using the code55 settings in my SCARM project, so hopefully everything should fit together and be okay! Pretty much all straights beyond 6" are flexi though, with very few set pieces.
Quote from: Portpatrick on September 11, 2018, 12:52:28 PM
Peco do describe how to bring code 80 and 55 to the same height. Basically gently jack up the code 55 so it matches 80 ay the join. Not difficult. On my new layout I have done just that in the fiddle years jacking up the scenic code 55 to the level of code 80 glued to electrical conduit (a cassette approach to the fiddle yard). But you would not want too much of it. So if, say, I was doing a continuous layout with curves round to the fiddle yard, I might use code 55 for appearance at the front, then jack it up to code 80 Setrack for the curves and then assuming using Setrack points in the fiddle yard to get maximum siding length and the wider track spacing (makes hand shunting less difficult), use code 80 flexi for the hidden loops. Sorry if that sounds complicated but hopefully you get the idea.
Interesting, is there any reason for mixing instead of just sticking to code55?
Quote from: Ted on September 11, 2018, 12:28:29 PM
Ah, am I using the wrong terminology? I just assumed 'set track' meant the set shapes, be they 80 or 55.
That's what I meant, code 55 in fixed lengths (set) or flexi lengths.
NN's covered it, but just to be explicit - there is no code 55 set track. Code 55 is flex track only. There is both set track and flex track (aka Streamline) code 80.
Like everyone else I would use flex wherever possible, and code 55 at that. I do have some code 80 points in the fiddle yard, and haven't had issues with raising the height of the code 55 to match it. I can see why people would want to avoid it though.
As to why you'd want to do it - the point geometry is different - there are very short set track points plus curved ones which can be useful to save space, at the expense of reliable running of short wheelbase locos.
On my design, I've been mainly using:
SL‑E391F
SL‑E392F
SL-E395F
SL‑E396F
These are code55 flex (streamline).
What I did notice is that there seems to be limited stock on many on these, they're not end of life are they - or is low stock just the nature of this industry? Either way, they don't make it easy!
Quote from: Ted on September 11, 2018, 12:53:45 PM
Interesting, is there any reason for mixing instead of just sticking to code55?
For me, always code 55 on the scenic part of the layout for best looking track, and code 80 in the fiddle yard because I used the code 80 Setrack pointwork as space-savers. If such small points were available in code 55 I'd use it everywhere as it's actually stronger as mentioned by others above. I don't physically join the two different codes, but because my layout is portable the ends simply line up at the board joints.
You can join code 55 and 80 using fishplates, just be aware that you may get a small step in the top of the rails unless you file or squash the fishplate slightly flatter. It's because the fishplate tends to lift the code 55 by it's middle section. There's a photo illustrating this on here somewhere.
To pick up on Ted's reasonable question about why mixing. Partly covered by others reinforcing my own point. Setrack points are shorter and give wider track spacing. This might be helpful in a point based fiddle yard as you maximise the available length and the wider spacing makes putting stuff on the track much easier - I speak from bitter experience on that.
As to why I have mixed codes on a simple terminus-fiddle yard layout, that is simple. I had plenty of code 80 in hand as I had overbought on a previous layout and it made sense to use most of it, especially as it is out of sight. Even when retired, an accountant's habits die hard!! But if I had bought more code 55 for the cassettes I would still have needed to jack up the (hidden) approach rail because of the thickness of the conduit which is the basis of the cassettes. The idea of using conduits came from an article on Apa Park in an NGS journal a couple of years ago. A simple easy and cheap way of doing cassettes so I decided to try it.
Incidentally Ted the reason you may be having trouble sourcing especially medium radius Electrofrog Code 55 is that Peco are changing to their new Unifrog design, and the medium radius are the first to change. See specific threads on this. To me they are replacing something which is so very simple and usable straight from its box to something which requires more complex wiring or alterations to its built in wiring to achieve the same effect. I do not know if they will change code 80 as well.
Quote from: Ted on September 11, 2018, 01:13:19 PM
On my design, I've been mainly using:
SL‑E391F
SL‑E392F
SL-E395F
SL‑E396F
These are code55 flex (streamline).
What I did notice is that there seems to be limited stock on many on these, they're not end of life are they - or is low stock just the nature of this industry? Either way, they don't make it easy!
395 and 396 have been replaced by a Unifrog design SL-UxxxF. The old E models are getting hard to find, which is upsetting some folk as the Unifrog doesn't *quite* work the same electrically without modification (but that's a separate debate you'll also find on here).
Quote from: ntpntpntp on September 11, 2018, 01:46:22 PM
Quote from: Ted on September 11, 2018, 01:13:19 PM
On my design, I've been mainly using:
SL‑E391F
SL‑E392F
SL-E395F
SL‑E396F
These are code55 flex (streamline).
What I did notice is that there seems to be limited stock on many on these, they're not end of life are they - or is low stock just the nature of this industry? Either way, they don't make it easy!
395 and 396 have been replaced by a Unifrog design SL-UxxxF. The old E models are getting hard to find, which is upsetting some folk as the Unifrog doesn't *quite* work the same electrically without modification (but that's a separate debate you'll also find on here).
Oh jeez, every other item I want is 'out of stock' and it's really starting to grate. :censored:
I've seen a video about rewiring the frog which seems simple enough, shame I'll have 28 to do. :smiley-laughing:
Glad you find it simple Ted. Given the construction of Code 55 with well buried rail it looks horrendous to me, even if I did not have a major hand tremor, and a major step backwards from the former simplicity of straight from the box. Some have said it makes life easier for DCC users but I remain in DC. And having to do 28 points. Help!
Quote from: Portpatrick on September 11, 2018, 02:25:29 PM
Glad you find it simple Ted. Given the construction of Code 55 with well buried rail it looks horrendous to me, even if I did not have a major hand tremor, and a major step backwards from the former simplicity of straight from the box. Some have said it makes life easier for DCC users but I remain in DC. And having to do 28 points. Help!
Haha, well I did just add sound to my 08 shunter which is probably the hardest job I'll ever have to do - it all seems simple now! :D
But I do have the luxury of starting from scratch, no retrofitting track etc, this is all blank canvas for me. A veritable luxury... although I'm chomping at the bit to just get things running.
Well, as I have just finished laying my track, here are my comments:
My layout is a long narrow dogbone with double track. R2 inside R3 at each end.
I went for code 80 as I wanted to use set track for the 180 deg + curves at each end as I was afraid of trying to sculpt the curves in code 55 flex.
That was a mistake! Experience has shown that I could have laid the code 55 on the curves without problem. Experience has shown that code 80 is awful to work with as it is so delicate and rail can pop from the sleepers at minimal provocation and when cutting the rail and soldering droppers for isolated sections etc. it is difficult to avoid melting the chairs and having the rail pop out of alignment. (OK, my failing, but my experience).
I sincerely wish I had chosen code 55.
Cheers,
Tom
And just to upset some folk (again) I would never countenance using set track points as way too much of my stock will not traverse a 9" curve. therefore the smallest point I use, being all code 55, is the small electrofrog through which everything passes.
Yeah - I know some folks have no issues with set track points but I do.
Well we all find our own "no nos". Part of the fun of this hobby
. I last used setback points in the fiddle yard of a layout I sold in 2003. In those days few things had trouble with 9 inch points etc.
Ted
You say:
"On my design, I've been mainly using:
SL‑E391F
SL‑E392F
SL-E395F
SL‑E396F
These are code55 flex (streamline)."
The 'F' in the point names (e.g. SL-E391F) is for 'Finescale' = code 55. There is no such thing as Peco "code 55 flex" points. Code 55 comes as flexitrack in yard (or is it metre?) lengths and (rigid) points/crossings/slips (e.g. SL-E391F).
Streamline is code 80, so the "(streamline)" in your description is wrong and confusing.
Ideally I think you should stick to one type (e.g. code 55).
Neil
Quote from: NeilWhite on September 11, 2018, 08:38:52 PM
Streamline is code 80, so the "(streamline)" in your description is wrong and confusing.
No, Streamline refers to both the code 80 and code 55 systems which include flexi, whilst Setrack refers to the fixed sectional track system.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/68/5885-110918222604.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=68946)