2 rail track that takes Lionel

I've never seen any 2-Rail SCALE track with rail height THAT high, no to mention the turnouts.

Sure.  Just do an "all these words" search for  "148 tinplate flange" and your question will be answered by posters who actually know what they're talking about.

 

SZ

Lionel postwar and most modern Lionel flanges are 0.095" deep.  Some modern Lionel locomotives have (for some unknown reason) flanges that are up to 0.115" deep.  Most 2-rail track that is at least code 148 (meaning the rail is 0.148" tall) can handle 0.095" flanges without those flanges contacting the spikes or molded plastic nubs that hold the rail to the ties.  Atlas 2-rail track is code 148.

 

Switches are another matter.  The flangeways are too shallow and too narrow (guard rails too close to the running rails) for 3-rail equipment to work.

 and you'd have to insulate Lionel wheels to use them on 2 rail track , so unless the plan is to use 2 rail track as outside 3rd rail track might as well change the wheels to 2 rail flanges and be able to use common methods? .......DaveB

Gargraves made 2-rail track to the exact same profile as their 3-rail track.  Also early 2-rail used .172 rail, which was almost as high as Lionel.

The older Atlas 2 rail track from the 70s works fine with Lionel flanges.

The European tinplate manufacturer Merkur supplies insulated rails with hi-rail profile with tinplate ties for 2-rail track system (straight and curves), look into the catalog here:

http://www.merkurtoys.cz/en/pr...ck-and-switch-remote

Gargraves makes and Ross will make 2-rail track (special order) with their .250 rail.

 

Or you could get their 3-rail track and remove the middle rail like I did and run battery power remote control.

 

Ross is the best IMO, even their curved track (they don't make flex track).  The rail is held on by glue and small spikes and can be easily pulled up.

 

 

Yes, Gargraves and Ross tracks are compatible and for 2-rail hi-rail operations easily to join the outer rails with two pins. Gargraves has ready 2-rail flexible tracks and even 2-rail (manual and RC) switches with 72" or 100" turnouts alternatively. But removing the phantom center rail from Gargraves 3-rail tracks is painful and not recommended, because the sensitive wood ties will be surely damaged. On the other hand Ross 3-rail tracks are manufactured in a different way, therefore much easier to remove the glued center rail. Any way, the block sections should be electrically separated through plastic pins, when operating 2- and 3-rail in parallel on the same layout using AC and DC transformators simultanously.

because the sensitive wood ties will be surely damaged

 

Exactly.  Gargraves embeds the rail in a groove in the ties, when the rail is removed it leaves an empty groove.  By squeezing the rail using the nippers shown in my photo I was able to remove the Gargraves center rail with a bit of a rocking motion, but still broke a few ties doing so.  Fortunately 90% of my curved pieces were Ross (and all the switches) so I had only a small number of curved sections and of course the straights that were Gargraves.

 

But getting back to the OPs original query, we need to know more info (what do you intend to do?) to give some good responses.

 

From my searches, the only choice you have for "readily available" track (and not have to scrounge around, hoping to find everything you need) that will handle hi-rail flanges is Gargraves and/or Ross.

 

But you can't just remove the center pickup rollers and run the engines by supplying power to the 2 remaining rails, because the wheels are not isolated electrically, that is unless you're going to use BPRC.

I was hesitant to explain my approach as purists will shudder.

Here goes.

I am considering replacing the rollers on engines, tenders, passenger cars, cabooses with sliders (tapped to accept the rods that hold the rollers).

Then I can use a Marklin - style pickup (their method gave me the idea).  Blackened screws in the ties would replace the center rail.

Thanks to all who posted - Ross & Gargraves will be my sources.

Macduck

That should be interesting when the train encounters a turnout, crossing, or street crossing.

What you are describing is a type of what is known as stud rail. When you come to a crossing or turnout you will have to have longer studs that will allow your sliders to raise up higher to avoid shorting.

Jeff C

Sounds a lot like the stud-rail concept.

 

A Forum member whose name I don't recall at the moment, proposed a system where sheet-metal strips could be fitted to 2-rail track with "studs" that stuck up between the ties to provide center-rail power to slider-equipped 3-rail trains. I don't think the concept attracted enough attention to get much farther than the concept stage.

 

Listing of threads mentioning "stud rail"

 

---PCJ

The screws go completely through the ties and into a conductor of some sort I assume? Perhaps a strip of sheet metal concealed by the roadbed?

 

Sounds like a pretty neat idea. The crossing part with the longer studs I am picturing; the switches seem to need more than just longer studs in the picture I am drawing in my head. I am thinking parts of the switch need to be isolated or shorted to the stud rail depending on the position of the switch. Nothing a bit of trial and error won't cure (along with a relay or DPDT switch maybe?)

 

And of course I've been wrong before. I do hope you will post your progress on this project as it sounds interesting to me.

 

J White

 

I recall Hugo Pallison was "Hugo The Stud" and used Studd rail in 0 scale. Then he went to 2 rail. A woman named Lisa Marie also was using stud rail in 0 scale and she then went to 2 rail. I think she sold the stud sticks that would stick up between the ties for Atlas 0 2 rail track. The last I recall a guy named Geno out in California bought the sticks from Lisa Marie and was going to mess with them. It would be interesting to see where Geno is at this point.

 

After seeing Hugo's article in the late 90's in OGR about stud rail, I gave stud rail some consideration but switched over to 2 rail after all.

"Sounds like a pretty neat idea. The crossing part with the longer studs I am picturing; the switches seem to need more than just longer studs in the picture I am drawing in my head. I am thinking parts of the switch need to be isolated or shorted to the stud rail depending on the position of the switch. Nothing a bit of trial and error won't cure (along with a relay or DPDT switch maybe?)"

 

     You could probably google up marklin (or mare kleen) trains and see how they handle the turnout problem.  In general these schemes never are worth the trouble. If building a new layout I'd recommend just using common 2 rail track and sell the 3 rail equipment and buy 2 rail equipment with the money. or keep the 3 rail stuff and run it on 3 rail track as JLC intended :> ...DaveB

Marklin studs (and those on the track Hugo built) rise to just above the height of the closure rails on turnouts to the "ski" clears without touching. Hugo went 2-rail right before he left the forum.

Hummm, interesting. I would also think that old fashion outside third rail could be adapted by extending a pickup shoe from the locomotive or cars using lights to what is essentially an electrical fence that follows the rails. Use something like gargraves or even tube rail with the center rail removed.

 

When I was a kid I thought about 2 rail built from tube rail but using wood ties which would provide rail to rail insulation. Then insulating locomotive and car wheels to isolate them electrically as done on HO and other two rail scales. But it didn't take too much investigation into Lionel and Marx equipment to learn what a daunting task that would become.

 

Frankly old Lionel Super O is a simpler solution too bad Lionel didn't modernize it instead of cooking up that ugly FasTrack stuff.

 

Bogie  

I think doing what Bob Delbridge is doing makes a lot of sense, but then Bob always makes sense.

 

The 2-R Atlas F-units I have on order will be run on batteries, along with a Weaver RS-3 I currently own.

 

Jeff C

 

Thank you gents.
The screws will be black no.4s, flat head.

Yes, I have considered switches & crossings.  These (especially switches) will have round heads that ascend gradually.  Note also that I had stated that I would replace the rollers w/ sliders.  That would allow the sliders to pivot to meet the higher round heads.  Crossings (there will be one junction) will also have the ascending round heads - smack dab in the middle.

As I see it, fabricating the sliders will be the real challenge.

Mark (macduck)

I don't mean to be negative but I agree with daveb. For me it wouldn't be worth the trouble. I wish you good luck and I hope you have fun.

 

I think you and I may have a lot in common. There was only one reason I went to 2 rail and that was because I don't like the look of 3 rail track. The lobster claws didn't bother me nor did the large flanges. However, when I did find out about how overly large those things are and the 2 rail versions are much closer to scale I was like this is pretty cool. Back when I switched over there was no such thing as stud rail. That came later and I had already switched over. Personally, I find outside 3rd rail much less obtrusive than inside third rail. If there had been an outside 3rd rail track system back then I'd still be a 3 railer today.

 

Just to get off topic slightly, the names Lisa Marie and Hugo really brought back some memories. It's a shame that Lisa is gone and I have tried to get in touch with Hugo to no avail. I fear he may have taken that great train to heaven. I sincerely hope I am wrong. Has anyone heard from Hugo at all in the last year or two?

On this link, there some older ideas for standardizing stud contact from the British O Gauge Guild: http://www.gauge0guild.com/manual/01_1_Standards.pdf

Way back when, it became popular for a time in Brit garden layouts and allowed the newer-fangled electric and older O scale live steam to run together. Yes, we're talking a looong time ago.

Doing a search for Fred Swain on this forum will bring up his stud contact display. (done with Atlas 2-rail track I believe)

Just to get off topic slightly, the names Lisa Marie and Hugo really brought back some memories. It's a shame that Lisa is gone and I have tried to get in touch with Hugo to no avail. I fear he may have taken that great train to heaven. I sincerely hope I am wrong. Has anyone heard from Hugo at all in the last year or two?

 

Both have passed to the roundhouse in the sky. Hugo died a couple of years ago. I remember his articles back in the 90's, they were very interesting.