An odd thought, but curious to hear feedback please.

Blue,

You need to check out this thread.  I think that it fits nicely.

@Ron H uses 2-Rail style outside rails with an 'N' scale center rail.

Mike

I guess that you never heard of DCC with sound!

Try the Soundtraxx website, soundtraxx.com

Ed

Blue,

This one's better yet:

   track paints & a possible ballast source, your input invited. | Ron H

Mike

There is a unique feature concerning the alteration of 0 "scale" gauges.

Regular 0 gauge track is wider than prototype at 60".

Popular 0 narrow gauge is under sized at 30".

It would not take much imagination to slightly off set the center rail of a three rail right away to run both trains on three rail track.  I am thinking all but the narrowest of rollers may work.

If you go two rail. change to a DCC system. its an open system so there are many manufactures of sound decoders and several systems that all work together. sound is much better ( real recordings from locos) and many more sound and lighting features available and all can be adjusted independently  . I have Lionel legacy on my three rail that I run on a club layout and it is nice but DCC is just much nicer. it also takes up much less space in the locos a high amperage decoder takes up just 2" X 1 1/2" of space as compared to Lionel and MTH units packed full of stuff. the only hang up I see would be the cost of converting the locos to two rail wheels.  a DCC decoder with sound runs about $150 to $175 depending on what brand you buy. just my two cents worth. Rick

Truthfully, I'd learn to look beyond the large flanges and enjoy the much greater reliability of the pizza cutter wheels.

gunrunnerjohn,

I disagree.  I am a 2 railer and routinely back a 30 car hopper train (no coal loads so light cars) 300+ feet, up hill and down hill and through switches and never had a derailment.  I am looking forward to the completion of the return loop at the other end of the RR though.

Ed

Bluebeard4590,

Both Legacy and DCS work on two rail layouts.  You don't have to convert to DCC to run two rail O scale.

Well Ed, you're a sample of one.  If it works for you, that's all that counts.

@Bluebeard4590 posted:

I had been contemplating for a while, converting the mainlines into 2R, however, I have come to understand that converting the locos (all steam), would result in the loss of many of the wonderful functions that the visionline and MTH premire locos I enjoy.  I have asked several folks who do these conversions and all have said that certain functions would have to be given up.

Your understanding is incorrect, and I'd find a different  set of folks to do the conversions.

Converting to 2 rail means changing the electrical pickup from the outside wheels and a center roller to the two outside wheels.  You electrically isolate one set of outside wheels, and connect that set to where the rollers were connected.  That's all.  That does not effect the control system or features

I run 2 rail with DCS and TMCC/Legacy and regularly enjoy all those wonderful functions you talk about.

@John Sethian posted:

Converting to 2 rail means changing the electrical pickup from the outside wheels and a center roller to the two outside wheels.  You electrically isolate one set of outside wheels, and connect that set to where the rollers were connected.  That's all.

True, but that's easier said than done to some locomotives.

It depends on what part of the hobby you enjoy most and where you want to devote your time and money.  I hand laid a few yards of code 148 track on a curved section of a three rail layout some years ago and also built a pair of switches.  It all worked well and looked nice when I was looking closely at just the trackwork.  The key point is that after it was done and the trains were moving I saw no overriding advantage to it.  I also experimented with using a smaller code center rail to minimize the appearance, but spiking it down just seemed to bring more attention to it, and I didn't like using glue.  It also would require some extra work for smooth transitioning through turnouts and crossings.

  It can all be worked out if that's what you want, including the scale flange conversion. No doubt having it done will pose some challenges, including a significant cost.  You'll have to decide for yourself if it's worthwhile.  I didn't think it was worth pursuing further, but try it yourself to see if you like it.  Good luck!

Lots of input.  Thanks for all the differing perspectives.  It wasn't the sounds or lights those gents were speaking of being potentially lost when converting, it was the potential loss of all the steam effects, especially on a Visionline locomotive like my BB and the couple MTHs.  To answer the other question, yes I have heard of DCC, but that was what the guys in my area that do conversions were referring to using when they spoke of losing some of the effects.  I have never used DCC but I am exploring it for use in the On30 locos I purchased second hand.  I am afraid for a while at least, I must ask for advice in these matters.

My interest in doing this came about from the visually odd difference in the rolling stock and track and especially the wheels when having the 2 different gauges with drastically different wheel and rail height appearances on the same layout.

Again, thanks for these varied perspectives and for the advice.

@Rick Rubino posted:

If you go two rail. change to a DCC system. its an open system so there are many manufactures of sound decoders and several systems that all work together. sound is much better ( real recordings from locos) and many more sound and lighting features available and all can be adjusted independently  . I have Lionel legacy on my three rail that I run on a club layout and it is nice but DCC is just much nicer. it also takes up much less space in the locos a high amperage decoder takes up just 2" X 1 1/2" of space as compared to Lionel and MTH units packed full of stuff. the only hang up I see would be the cost of converting the locos to two rail wheels.  a DCC decoder with sound runs about $150 to $175 depending on what brand you buy. just my two cents worth. Rick

Okay Rick.  This sounds interesting for one reason especially.  Could I not run everything, both narrow branch lines and the main line trains from the same tablet app if I went this route?  Can the steam effects then be put back into those locos easily? Again, I am just starting to read about DCC and the open LCC for layout lighting and animation control.  Very interesting so far.

if you use Lok sound ESU large scale decoders they have high amperage outputs for smoke and other features. not sure why you would want to run your train from a tablet rather than the handheld. I use NCE and their hand held is really nice , MTH copied it but in a smaller size. I find the NCE system to be very intuitive and almost never need the manual for anything. digitrax and Lentz are also good systems and each will run each others decoders as well as all the third party manufactures of DCC products. DCC has been fairly well standardized among the scale side of the hobby and is an  open system . Legacy TMCC and MTH are all good products but I don't like the fact that there are not many options outside other than the ERR for TMCC and none I know of for MTH wich at the moment the company is in limbo after mikes retirement. you can use a computer to control switches and trains or smart phone with the DCC AP but with NCE you need to run a computer with JMRI ( Java Model Railroad interface) to connect to WiFi. I think Digitrax has has a WiFi module that eliminates the need for a computer. there are also several computer programs out there designed to control DCC with.  lots to look at and it just keeps getting better all the time. most of the On30 locos have plugs to plug in a decoder if they are not factory equipped , so yes you could run it all on one system.

Has anyone given a reason why Legacy or DCS electronics being fed by 2 rail track as opposed to 3 rail track would make a functional difference? I thought Lionel had Legacy controlled S scale engines so maybe searching there might give some answers as well.

I know John Sethian has been running converted Lionel and MTH engines with DCS in 2 rail for a while now and is pretty knowledgeable about the electronics in 3 rail and 2 rail.

You might also consider running "dead rail."  While I know very little about it personally, there is an entire forum section discussing this developing topic.  Essentially, you are running on re-chargeable battery power with all the DCS, TMCC and Legacy features available.  System is built to operate off any smart phone, I believe, and requires no changes to wheels or track.  One real drawback may be how often, or how long, you have to charge batteries.

Chuck

@christopher N&W posted:

Has anyone given a reason why Legacy or DCS electronics being fed by 2 rail track as opposed to 3 rail track would make a functional difference? I thought Lionel had Legacy controlled S scale engines so maybe searching there might give some answers as well.

I know John Sethian has been running converted Lionel and MTH engines with DCS in 2 rail for a while now and is pretty knowledgeable about the electronics in 3 rail and 2 rail.

Good Morning.

I contacted the guys that were going to give the conversion a try after reading responses that made a lot of sense. "why would altering the manner of power supply possibly remove functions"  The guys I was asking about this are Fn3, HO and G guys that work exclusively in the DCC world and were not familiar with either Legacy or DCS so they made the assumption that I wanted a DCC conversion with 2R conversion and were not certain that I would keep all the functions so they cautioned me it might not be possible.  They did not tell me at the time they were assuming I wanted a DCC as well as 2R conversion.

My fault for not asking ALL the right questions.

They did say that If I was considering a "dead rail" option, like they do for Garden Rail projects, they would not recommend keeping all of the effects, as many of the steam effects would significantly reduce running time due to battery consumption of the steam effects.

Thanks to the folks who were pointing out that conversion to 2R would not affect the current control systems, as it caused me to re-contact them and get the full poop.

Being a solo act, I was keen on finding some alternative to having 3 separate controllers:  DCS, Legacy and DCC (for the narrow gauge).

I do have (4) laptops laying around so (1) could certainly be cleaned out and turned into a part of the control system if that is the best way to go.

So thanks to all of you I am at least on a better path of understanding of these control systems and can better ask questions to help me to narrow down my options.

Very grateful.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Well Ed, you're a sample of one.  If it works for you, that's all that counts.

Agreed...but... ...

I'm not entirely sure that "pizza-cutter" flanges ( a common term used also in N scale) are really needed, especially on layouts with wide curves. I bet they were originally designed that way for the 027 track that was the norm back in the day.

Early-ish HO had the large, "European" flanges, but fairly early on made the transition to the smaller NMRA size...and smaller still...with no problems.

Like a great many, when I was into N scale I re-fitted my stock with small flanged wheels, running on code 55 track and had no issues. Taking into the account the very light weight of those models, I think it shows that over-sized flanges aren't necessary for good operation...in any scale.

Mark in Oregon

My first experience with scale wheels on rolling stock was on Atlas track and switches, O72 and larger curves.  No sweat on the track, but they didn't do well at all on the Atlas switches, many derailments at any speed, primarily taking the divergent route through the switch.

I also had several of the MTH scale wheel PS/2 steamers that I attempted to run on O72 Fastrack, they wouldn't even make the curves, never mind the switches.  I decided that I could live with pizza cutter flanges for my 3-rail O-gauge stuff.  Since that time, I've never looked back, and I'm used to the flanges.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

My first experience with scale wheels on rolling stock was on Atlas track and switches, O72 and larger curves.  No sweat on the track, but they didn't do well at all on the Atlas switches, many derailments at any speed, primarily taking the divergent route through the switch.

I also had several of the MTH scale wheel PS/2 steamers that I attempted to run on O72 Fastrack, they wouldn't even make the curves, never mind the switches.  I decided that I could live with pizza cutter flanges for my 3-rail O-gauge stuff.  Since that time, I've never looked back, and I'm used to the flanges.

Okay, but Bluebeard has stated that he wants to use scale track and switches with his scale wheels whether in 3 rail or 2 rail, not Atlas giant 3 rail switches with monster gaps in the frog, or other 3 rail track. Your comparison is apples to oranges

I don't have any problems with derailments on my layout with the proper 2 rail Atlas track and switches. My experience is the same as Ed Kelly's backward and forward through the layout and 50+ switches, yards or anywhere. I do have adequate curves down to about 44" radius and less in storage tracks and switches are all #6 and above. It seems like Bluebeard has his stuff together with his desire for handlaying switches. As long as he gets the proper radius down for his steam engines, and not try to run them through ridiculously low radius turnouts, then he'll do fine. That will take some testing on his part.

Here's another thread that covers it, too.  @marker got me thinking about it and he even countersunk the weenie rail into the ties slightly, too.

Building 3RS Track?

Thanks,

- Mario

I've been running scale wheels on "flat-top" rail for years (I have a bunch of videos posted on YouTube). AGHR's layout consists of Ross 11-degree (#5) turnouts on the mainlines and, save a couple of bad-ordered cars, I didn't get derailments except on bad track (which we quickly fixed). With scale wheels, you have to stay away from curve-replacement turnouts because the arc of the curve extends through the frog which creates a curved gap that picks the scale wheels.

Numbered turnouts have a straight frog and the #5's gap is short enough that all you get is a "bobble". A #6 or larger has a pretty wide gap that can cause a derailment. The ScaleTrax #6 seems to be an exception (in preliminary testing) because MTH beveled the frog. Rich Battista seems to have had success with them on his layout.

FasTrack has two problems -- the rail head is rounded and the curve diameter appears to be measured to the OUTSIDE rail as opposed to the centerline, so 36" radius rated locomotives will have problems on O-72 curves. When we did our displays at Pershing Square, I only ran four-axle diesels with scale wheels and they worked on O-72 FasTrack curves (50-foot rolling stock).

Code 148 will support most modern hi-rail flanges (not some of the Lionel offerings, though). If you want to use 2-rail turnouts, the frog channels need to be widened and the guard rails moved a bit away from the stock rails to handle three-rail wheel sets as the flanges are set inward to handle sharper curves and provide a wider tread. If you build your own turnouts, this should be a problem and I believe the switch builders can accommodate this. For a center rail, H.O. Code 100 or Code 83 rail should work, but you have to ramp the center rail to let the rollers clear the closure rails on turnouts.

@AGHRMatt posted:

With scale wheels, you have to stay away from curve-replacement turnouts because the arc of the curve extends through the frog which creates a curved gap that picks the scale wheels.

Interesting observation, the switches we had issues with were Atlas O72 switches, which tracks with what you are saying.

Sadly, while most of my switches are numbered switches, I do have a few "curve-replacement" ones, and I have four curved switches, I suspect those might have a similar issue.

@Bluebeard4590 posted:

Good Morning.

I contacted the guys that were going to give the conversion a try after reading responses that made a lot of sense. "why would altering the manner of power supply possibly remove functions"  The guys I was asking about this are Fn3, HO and G guys that work exclusively in the DCC world and were not familiar with either Legacy or DCS so they made the assumption that I wanted a DCC conversion with 2R conversion and were not certain that I would keep all the functions so they cautioned me it might not be possible.  They did not tell me at the time they were assuming I wanted a DCC as well as 2R conversion.

Kudos to you for listening to those on this forum with the more relevant experience, and going back to your "advisors"   I, for one appreciate your follow up post!

My fault for not asking ALL the right questions.

Not your fault at all!  Model railroading, particularly in O Scale, is the classic example of the parable of the blind men and the elephant -- A group of blind men come across an elephant, and each starts feeling a different part.  Each of them comes to their own unmistakable conclusion of what the animal looks like based on the part they are touching.  Highly passionate arguments break out when others disagree, because each is convinced of their own truth, and that the others must be lying.   You have seen several examples of this throughout this thread alone.

In your case, you just happened to ask the guy holding the trunk, when you really needed to talk to the guy holding the tusks

They did say that If I was considering a "dead rail" option, like they do for Garden Rail projects, they would not recommend keeping all of the effects, as many of the steam effects would significantly reduce running time due to battery consumption of the steam effects.

Another case of you getting bad information!   I have measured current draw on my steam locomotives:  The motor, lights, and steam chuff sound draw about 1.0 to 1.5 amps, going up hill, and pulling or PUSHING, YES PUSHING!) a decent size train.  This load is independent of the control system. The smoke unit (which is the only thing that is on all the time) draws about 0.25 Amps. The other sound features (whistle, whistle steam, shrinking coal load, engineer waving, couplers activating, train wreck sounds) are intermittent and thus have minimal effect on battery life.  I will leave it up to you to decide if adding 0.25 amps to 1.0 to 1.25 amps (in other words another 17% to 25%) would “significantly reduce running time” due to battery consumption

And as long as we are (actually I am) on the subject of dead rail, you still need continuous electrically conducting rails:

TMCC/Legacy requires at least one rail to return the control signal back to the TMCC/Legacy base. The outgoing signal is supplied by your house wiring through the ground on the plug of the TMCC/Legacy base. So you still need to regularly clean one rail (as well as the appropriate wheels).  This kind of negates the advantage of Dead Rail

DCS two rail has less of an advantage for Dead Rail as it requires BOTH rails be continuously connected, isolated from each other and kept clean.  In three rail operation, the outgoing signal goes to the pickup roller and is returned via the outer rail.  In two rail operation, the signal goes from the control system, to one rail, through the locomotive electronics, then back to the control system via the other rail.   So in order to run DCS in dead rail, you still need to insulate one set of your locomotive's wheels, and the onboard PS system to the insulated wheels. You can decide if it makes more sense at that point to just to run in conventional track power

As for 2 rail conversions.  Diesels are generally easy. (Really easy if you get an MTH one with the 3-2 conversion capability.  And yes, as GRJ pointed out some steam locomotives can be hard. But it seems you have some people who are willing to do that. Just have them leave the control systems alone

Finally, I am sure you are aware of this, but MTH did offer many of its Premier locomotives in 2 rail, which saves you the hassle of doing a conversion.  Some are not easy to find, but they are out there.  If you go that route, make a list of what you want, and acquire them one by one as they become available.

Thanks to the folks who were pointing out that conversion to 2R would not affect the current control systems, as it caused me to re-contact them and get the full poop.

Being a solo act, I was keen on finding some alternative to having 3 separate controllers:  DCS, Legacy and DCC (for the narrow gauge).

I do have (4) laptops laying around so (1) could certainly be cleaned out and turned into a part of the control system if that is the best way to go.

So thanks to all of you I am at least on a better path of understanding of these control systems and can better ask questions to help me to narrow down my options.

Very grateful.

@christopher N&W posted:

Okay, but Bluebeard has stated that he wants to use scale track and switches with his scale wheels whether in 3 rail or 2 rail, not Atlas giant 3 rail switches with monster gaps in the frog, or other 3 rail track. Your comparison is apples to oranges

I don't have any problems with derailments on my layout with the proper 2 rail Atlas track and switches. My experience is the same as Ed Kelly's backward and forward through the layout and 50+ switches, yards or anywhere. I do have adequate curves down to about 44" radius and less in storage tracks and switches are all #6 and above. It seems like Bluebeard has his stuff together with his desire for handlaying switches. As long as he gets the proper radius down for his steam engines, and not try to run them through ridiculously low radius turnouts, then he'll do fine. That will take some testing on his part.

I was leaning toward at least 96" radius or mostly flex track where I could get wider curves on the mainline.  Space constrictions shouldn't be an issue (I think) I was going to re-purpose a stone building that was formerly a dairy barn on my property.  There is an more modern equipment barn that is a bit larger, but utilities, air sealing, concrete floor upgrade and insulation would make this a bit more pricey than I was hoping for and then I would need another building for my timber equipment and tractor.  The former dairy building is 68'x77' (weird size) on the inside.  It's very old but in good shape.  All this will need is glass block to replace the old windows, mini-split AC/Heater(s) and a ceiling.  I am guessing this should do.  The electrical has 110 & 220 single and 3-phase already in it.  I may need to add some outlets and possibly a new panel (old one is a little scary).  Lucky for me I have electrical subs that work with me regularly.

I am still trying to get a handle on a layout design to incorporate the building and the dual gauges.  I just know I really don't care for the look of those beautiful, detailed models with those wheels.  Can't explain it rationally, it just bugs me...a lot.

I was also interested in designing this for some degree of prototypical(ish) operations when all the grandkids (teens now) are visiting or I find someone(s) near me that might enjoy an afternoon ops session. 

Thanks much again for all the great input.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Interesting observation, the switches we had issues with were Atlas O72 switches, which tracks with what you are saying.

Sadly, while most of my switches are numbered switches, I do have a few "curve-replacement" ones, and I have four curved switches, I suspect those might have a similar issue.

At AGHR, we have a #8 curved turnout. The frog was so wide that even some 3-rail equipment derailed on it. We put in a "frog point" that allowed everything to go through without incident. Took some clever machining by Dave O'Connor from a 1:1 RR-Track print of the turnout. We removed the frog and Dave made the modifications. It's tied to a Tortoise machine under the layout that's parallel wired into the machine that throws the points. I also wired the closure rails to act as center-rail extensions for smaller locomotives that have pickup rollers that don't quite reach. They also act as common rail extensions so the locomotives don't lose the ground connection. I fully endorse Tortoise machines because of the electrical contacts. Makes turnout wiring a breeze in both two and three-rail operations.

Bluebeard, Here are the videos of the MTH 2 rail J smoking.

That really looks great.

The proper track and wheels really makes the realism of the scene.  Beautiful scenery as well.  The bridge scene in the first clip is a treat.  Really well detailed.

Thanks much!

@Bluebeard4590 posted:

Lots of input.  Thanks for all the differing perspectives.  It wasn't the sounds or lights those gents were speaking of being potentially lost when converting, it was the potential loss of all the steam effects, especially on a Visionline locomotive like my BB and the couple MTHs.  To answer the other question, yes I have heard of DCC, but that was what the guys in my area that do conversions were referring to using when they spoke of losing some of the effects.  I have never used DCC but I am exploring it for use in the On30 locos I purchased second hand.  I am afraid for a while at least, I must ask for advice in these matters.

My interest in doing this came about from the visually odd difference in the rolling stock and track and especially the wheels when having the 2 different gauges with drastically different wheel and rail height appearances on the same layout.

Again, thanks for these varied perspectives and for the advice.

I think the point that people were making is you can use dcs and legacy on 2 rail track if you convert an equipped engine for 2 rail otherwise. For legacy, you would attach the track connection to whichever rail is your ground. Legacy uses house wiring to transmit the signal that the engine picks up. For DCS, you would attach the DCS wire to the positive rail along with your track power. When you convert a dcs engine, you would need to make sure that engine power and the dcs input wire on the control board are connected to the wiper on the + wheel if I understand DCS correctly (you move the wire from the roller to the wiper, and solder the dcs input wire to that). The reason people don't use legacy and dcs likely is that 2 rail scale engines like HO and N are wired for DCC decoders.

The hard part likely will be to isolate the wheels from each other and then putting a wiper or something for the + side, that is tricky from what I understand, never tried that myself.

For what this is worth, I have an MTH Croc with scale wheels ProtoSound3. Its incredibly easy to change from 3 rail to 2 rail and back again. Simply remove the 3rd rail pickups and flip a switch from 3 rail to 2 rail - done. No loss of features. What's not easy is running scale wheels on track built to 3 rail standards - that does not work very well.