#4 vs. 0-72 question....

I don't have an answer to the switch question.  However, the Home Improvemnt answer to the second:  "More Radii!".  Even O-27 stuff looks better on wide radii curves.  If you got the room, go for it!

For my yards I went all Atlas #5.   I got rid of my O72 switches.   Too sharp for me.   

Rick

It depends on the situation.  Numbered switches are far better for yard ladders, crossovers and sidings on tangent track since they allow tighter track spacing.  But  switches like O-72s still have places where they are useful.  What are you trying to do with them?  

I don't know much if anything about numbered turnouts/switches, maybe we need a primer on here about them.

I've heard that numbered turnouts aren't curved, but come off straight, correct?

If so, then you can join any radius curve to the turnout, correct?

If not, what number turnout would be used with a given curve, such as:

080

088

096

(all RCS curved sectional track)

What do you guys (who use numbered turnouts) do for a WYE, when your curves are larger than 072?  A 072 WYE is the largest I've found.

Thanks Guys,

Ted:

"It depends on the situation.  Numbered switches are far better for yard ladders, crossovers and sidings on tangent track since they allow tighter track spacing.  But  switches like O-72s still have places where they are useful.  What are you trying to do with them?"

I have enough Lionel 0-72 to build my layout. I have Atlas O 0-54 for my industry's. I have become very interested in 3RS, i.e. Kadee Couplers on fixed pilot locomotives and body mounted couplers on rolling stock. If I need to plan for larger radii in my industry's, would matching my 0-72 be best or would the #4's (or #5's as mentioned) be best?

Rick.

Gentalmen,

In an earlier thread I ask if the Atlas O 0-54 would be acceptable with fixed pilots and body mounted couplers, the anser was "yes" and I do not doubt that. But if I were to find a P&LE A2 class Berkshire in my price range, well, I will be ripping up a lot of track! So, If practical I could re-plan the 0-54's with #4's or #5's.

BTW, this is a 16' by 27 Steel Mill layout I am planning.

Rick.

Hi Again,

I do not have a track planning program so here is a scan of my hand drawn layout plan. This is a "keep it simple" type of idea. I have 16' by 27' to work with. I want 0-72 min mainline curves (which I have a bunch of) and at this point, 0-54 in the yard and industry (which I have a bunch of). The idea is to operate Hot Metal moves and Slag Pots between the two industry's as a Point to Point. Yet be able to run a train around the loop if wanted. The yard will hold trains for the dispatcher to call on and thus provide run through "trafic" for the mill trains to deal with. Very simple and basic. Purposely staying away from the bowl of spaghetti track plan. Along with this idea is BIG scenery which I totaly blame on Patrick H.  His layout has single handedly forced me to look into 3RS with big scenery! Which is not a bad thing.

The green is Lionel 0-72 while the yellow is Atlas O 0-54.

Rick.

From my experience an O72 switch is better than a ROSS #4 based on backing a 3RD RAIL PRR Decapod 2-10-0 with a coal drag. The Decapod will swing out to much on the #4 switch causing short.

Rick,

My current layout has 072 curves on the outer loop and 054 on the inner:

My 3rd Rail E7 and all my other engines/cars, run fine on the 072 track.  Both my 3rd Rail and WBB E7s CAN run on the 054 track, but I gotta go slow.  My OK Engines 21" passenger cars (with GGD trucks) don't like the 054 curves.

I don't know much if anything about numbered turnouts/switches, maybe we need a primer on here about them.

 

I've heard that numbered turnouts aren't curved, but come off straight, correct?

Numbered switches are only curved on the diverging route between the points (the movable part of the switch) and the frog (where the inside rails of the two routes cross each other.)  The diverging route is strait beyond the frog. 

The number is defined by the units of length traveled to diverge one unit of measure.  So a number 4 switch diverges one inch in four inches traveled on the diverging route.  A number six departs six inches for one traveled.  That convention is generally followed by the manufacturers although they fudge a little for marketing purposes.

Take a look at the degree of angle in the frog to determine what crossing is needed to make a double crossover.  The MTH ScaleTrax N0.4 and the Atlas No.5 are both 11 1/4 degree switches that use a 22.5 degree crossing to make a double crossover.  The Ross regular is close to the Atlas and MTH switches in dimensions and has an 11 degree frog.

The Ross No.4 is a 14 degree switch and will save some space in a yard compared to the MTH and Atlas switches.

All numbered switches No. 4 and greater will accommodate equipment requiring O-72 curves.  However, as Charlie's experience illustrates, if you are running ten coupled steal locomotives, especially brass, all bets are off.

Rick

I have enough Lionel 0-72 to build my layout. I have Atlas O 0-54 for my industry's.

Lionel tubular or fastrack?  Lionel's modern O-72 tubular switches are not good performers.  Ross has O-72 and No. 4 tubular switches if you really want to go with tubular track.  Personally, since you say you are interested in moving in a scale direction I would encourage you to move to a more scale looking track system with numbered switches.  That narrows the choices to Atlas, Gargraves/Ross and MTH ScaleTrax.

Your diagram shows your switches being used to make yard ladders and crossovers.  Those are where numbered switches are best.  They allow for closer track spacing and save space and reach in.  Numbered switches also reduce the reverse curve problem caused by using O-54 or O-72 switches to make a crossover.

I encourage you to get layout design software.  Compare to price of the software to just one switch.  It is an investment that will allow you to design with precision and make most of your mistakes on the computer, not on the layout. 

Thanks Ted,

I knew some of the info but not all.

I had planned on going with a traditional style layout but with wide radii there for I have purchased a lot of tubular rail. The Atlas O kinda fell into my lap. Now, I see all of the nice more scale appearing layouts and I want to go that way. But I can not afford to revamp my track stock all at once. So, the combination will allow me to be up and running with out further cost other than replacing the 0-54's if needed. I can always replace the tubular rail with better track as time and money permits.

Rick.

An O72 switch has a continuous curve throughout, unlike the usual prototype switches, so you can't make an exact comparison. But I estimate it this way: the O72 switch diverges about 3" over a length of 14.4", divide those numbers and take the inverse, it's about a #5 switch. But if you look at the frog angle, it diverges 1.25" over a length of about 10", that figures to better than a #6. But "normal" switches will actually have a sharper shorter curve through the points for the same number designation, because they don't have a continuous curve through the length of the entire switch.

The NMRA has data sheets on turnouts which might be useful to you:

http://www.nmra.org/standards/sandrp/rp12_1.html

When it comes to curves, bigger is better (assuming you have the space to pull it off.) Even equipment rated at O-31, O-36 or O-42 looks a lot better on O-72, O-80, O-96, etc. (again if you have the space.)

The #4 turnout is has a 14.1 degree diverging angle and is straight past the points and through the frog. It has no radius, per se because it isn't a curve replacement. An O-72 curve-replacement switch diverges at 2.5 degrees and literally curves all the way through. You'll get a better yard construction using #4's and using #5 (11-degree Ross or Atlas) for your mainline crossovers. Ross  #6's or #8's, or Atlas #7.5's will work if you have the space, but the 11-degree Ross turnouts make a good cross-over in less space, which is why we use them at the club.

If you're going 3RS and body-mounted couplers, you'll have a much better layout infrastructure with the numbered turnouts as the curve-replacement types may cause derailments when backing trains through them (even with 3-rail wheels.)

Just a couple of thoughts.

Here is what the western Maryland does... At a location called MV tower.

They have one straight track from tunnel to tower.

The first two switches go to the right down the main.

The next three are laid straight end into the existing track so that the diverging route sticks to the left at the same time on all three.

This avoids a ladder situation in the space that does not allow it.

I had a Atlas number 5 that the Sunset Mikado barely made it through and I use 072 or larger switches.

Enough about I, me and my.

Numbered switches are better for yard situations, but you will do well to keep large road engines out.

Rich made a suggesting to have a Crossover laid into the new Drill track at the Steel Mill Layout plan that is being discussed here on these forums. It is a outstanding suggestion. IMHO it needs to have the largest radius as possible to cut down on the S Curve between the two.

For a switching layout with small to medium diesels and a max of 50' cars, I would go with the #4 switches from Ross. Like Matt said, the Kadees will work much better with the numbered switches rather then the curve # switch (072). I have a 3' x 20' switching layout, and most of the switches I used were the "Regular" switch 11 degree from Ross. I did use a couple of 072 switches and an 064 because I needed that curve to get to an industry and space was limited. You can also shorten the switches where needed by cutting some of the straight track off past the frog end of the switch. IF space is really limited. 

The crossovers from the main to the siding are Ross Regulars. 072 leading to the crossing because of spacing issues, and a couple 064 switches to a couple of the industries.

I've had the BigBoy up there just for fun and it will runn everywhere except the 064 switches.

Hi, I would not go with the #4 switches.  I would use a minimum of # 5 and if you have the space # 6, especially on the main line. 

I used to have a 2 rail layout and used the old Atlas #4 switches.  They worked fine but if you ever decide to get  that special engine that you just can't live without and it's a 6 wheel truck diesel or a large steam engine you may be sorry.  You only want to do this once.  Why be sorry later?

Rick

I don't believe Ross has a #5... it's #4 or a "Regular" 11 degree, # 6 and # 8's.

Thanks RICKC & Laidoffsick.

I think I will just build a test board with Lionel 0-72 and some  Atlas O 0-54. Run my trains through them and see what happens. I know in the long run though the longer or smother turnouts will be much better! But, I may have to use what I have for now!

Keep it coming.

Rick.

Ross has a #5. It's called the "11-degree." Ross also has a #10 which is huge. Would be nice to have that one with a "frog point" installed.

I worded my previous post wrong and left out a few words. I don't believe Ross has a switch called a #5, they have #4, "Regular", #6, and #8. Like Matt said the #5 is a Ross "Regular", part number 100 and 101. Those are what I used for my mainline crossovers. My articulated steam engines run through them w/o problems and look very nice. I didn't like the looks of using 072's for crossovers, and will create too much of an "S" curve and sometimes even a reverse curve if placed close to curve track anyway. The Ross Regular would be a perfect choice. 

I had to tear out all of my '54 and put in minimum '72, except for the engine facility.  Guarantee you will do the same someday.  On the most visible corners I went with '96 outer loop and then 72 where not so visible or farther away from the audience. Have fun.  Most of us have ripped it up more than once.