Yes I did and very happy with it.

Yes I did one side of all my FT curves.  Looks great.  I used 1/8 inch plexiglass.

You are referring to "Superelevation" I believe, and if so it can definitely add a realistic touch to curved track.  

Bob

I am In the process of adding drywall shims cut into 1/2 inch by 1 1/2 and placed under the outside ties. They end up getting covered by ballast. You can see 2 of the cut shims in the photo.  Nick T. 

Yes, I have done this and it makes highballing on the curves much safer, besides the added look.  I purchased bulk sheets of plastic on ebay (pretty inexpensive) and cut to shim similar to above.  I purchased black plastic sheets and it gets covered with ballast.  I am pleased I did this.

Banking curves make a huge difference in the realistic factor. They look especially good on mountain scenes.

BOO Man,

   I did at one time bank some of my Conventional Tubular Track depending on what area it was located in on my layouts, with the cool slow speed DCS & Legacy Remote control I got away from doing any curve banking, really do not need it any more most of the time.

PCRR/Dave

All of my main line turns are banked and I really like the look. But, you have to be careful not to over do it. Too high and it can create problems. My rule of thumb is a six inch torpedo level, elevate just enough to off center the bubble to the outside center line and no more. And remember to walk your turn into the elevation slowly. Start very low and work your way up to full tilt.

If done right it not only looks great it will also help the tracking of a long string of cars. Done wrong and you will have a nightmare of problems with your pilot wheels as well as some cars coming off of the rails.

You have to play with it until you get the effect you wont. What you are looking for is a noticeable tilt in your turns as well as a smooth transition in and out of the turns that enhances speed and operation.

Oh yea, don't worry about lifting your track, I had to redo mien a number of times before I got them to work right.        

Yes  I did. I used 1/6" basswood strips glued to the underside of the outside of my curves. This works out to a prototypical superelevation of 3". If it wasn't pointed out, you probably wouldn't notice.

You need to extend the superelevation back to the straight transitioning into the curve.

Railroads do not "bank" curves. NASCAR does that.

Railroads use "superelevation" to raise the outside rail. That's the correct term to use in railroading. You "super elevate" your curves.

Banked curves are for lashups.

I am planning on super elevating my main line curves as well. My plan is to use 1/8th thick strips of plastic 1/2" wide by 2" long. In this thread I saw that Gilly@N&W mentioned using 1/16" thick basswood strips. Seems to me that over time heavy consists may push the ties into the basswood decreasing the elevation. If the basswood is holding up, is there any reason to use one over the other. I just want to make sure I do it right the first time.

Mark

John H posted:

Banked curves are for lashups.

LOL!

Gilly@N&W posted:

Yes  I did. I used 1/6" basswood strips glued to the underside of the outside of my curves. This works out to a prototypical superelevation of 3". If it wasn't pointed out, you probably wouldn't notice.

You need to extend the superelevation back to the straight transitioning into the curve.

I did exactly the same thing on my On30 layout, on a 180-degree curve that I knew would be really tough to reach if I had a derailment back there. I noticed that even at the slow speeds I was running, the freight cars seemed to want to lean to the outside. So I placed slivers of coffee stirrers (best $10 I ever spend on the hobby for a box of 1000 of them. Those suckers can be used for just about ANYTHING) under the outside rails from past the transition from straight track at each end of the curve. One other curve was 90-degrees and the rest were lesser than that, so I didn’t see the need to provide elevation on the outside at those points.

After several months of running stuff to be sure the track was how/where I wanted it, I ballasted over it and now you couldn’t tell by looking that the outside rail is higher than the inside. I’ve run trains through that one curve at max speed which I can’t say what that scale speed is for On30 (the DCC controller says about 120 which is probably as estimation of HO speed), but the train is really hauling through there. On the first run after I raised the outer edge, I saw no ‘roll’ in the cars in that curve, even then.

I superelevated my curves way back when. Easy; subtly looks better. 

Something to note: I intend to remove some badly-done s'elevation from 2 curves in 2 corners that cannot be seen from the outside (the only place it is greatly apparent to my eye) anyway and were hard to reach. They "look" fine, but longer locos (steam or diesel) tend to raise a wheel every so often. One day. When I start running things again.

Gilly@N&W posted:

Yes  I did. I used 1/6" basswood strips glued to the underside of the outside of my curves. This works out to a prototypical superelevation of 3". If it wasn't pointed out, you probably wouldn't notice.

You need to extend the superelevation back to the straight transitioning into the curve.

You will notice when your train passes over the curve. A small elevation of the rail head will translate into a very cool tilt of the roof line.

1/16 would be somewhat prototypical in O scale.   Working up from 1/64 to 1/32 to 1/16  in a varied radius turn of course. Did they actually do this pre 1960 on American railroads?

I did on my last layout and will again. Not in my mountain area were the trains will run slow but on the high speed areas. Don

We have super elevated curves on most of our layout at NJ Hirailers. It does make a difference moving trains at speed especially on the helix. Looks good too.......

I recall reading somewhere, that the maximum superelevation on the big Lionel set is 6".  I just look up the subject and couldn't find a definitive answer.  However, here is a picture posted on the Wikipedia page showing a 5" SE on the Keystone Corridor.

Since there are cosmetic and functional benefits to super-elevating curves, when will track manufacturers incorporate it into the production of their track?  

After reading all these posts, I am kicking myself even harder!!!  

Ever so slightly, so as not to induce string lining on the tighter curves.   The subtle tilt goes a long way towards realism, without the need for steeper scale embankments. I used 1/16" card stock for shims in 1/4" strips.  If you're doing super elevations for improved high speed performance, easements are just as important.

Bruce

Most of what I read said that there is very little, if any, benefit using super elevation on any type of model train.  

I read that also "CARSNTRAINS", but I don't agree at all. Though the physics in a toy trains motion is  far less complicated then that of a real locomotive the basics still holds true.

So, if that is true then it should be basically true that super elevation would not be needed on a 1-1 scale train as well and we know that it makes a big difference on how fast a train can take a turn, how  smooth of a ride for the freight or passenger will feel through that turn. Not to mention the reduction in stress on the track and ballast.

Now before our mechanical engineers jump all over me let me conclude with this simple scientific  observation, it looks cool!  

GG1  I agree!  It looks cool!   But I do believe it will make little or not any difference.   Now the combination of super elevation, radius curves that are varied, and easing into both may help 100 car long trains or some steamers running 225 scale MPH : ) 

I first ran various engines, steam and diesel, over all my trackage and this helped to determine super elevation was necessary.  Running the largest steam engines, Big Boy, YB3, etc. on the elevated/mountain area tracks improved tremendously with doing the super elevation.  And not just at higher speeds.  In particular, the 360 plus curve, where the line passes over itself in mountains, it was almost a huge necessity.  So, I have used this, with curve easements, over a large portion on my layout and all pieces of motive power run fine after needed adjustments.  Would not be running long consists and double heading without it.  As for manufactured track, American Flyer "O" from the 1930s had super elevation built in, along with a 4th rail to activate the whistles in steam engines.  Will post pic of AF super elevated when I locate pic I took of it.

Jesse   TCA  12-68275

OK... pics of 1930 era American Flyer super elevated O gauge track.

Jesse

Those last pictures look like track designed for some other purpose. Why would you super-elevate a straight section of track?

B Smith posted:

Those last pictures look like track designed for some other purpose. Why would you super-elevate a straight section of track?

I saw pictures of this track before and I asked myself the same question. The answer I rationalized was that large turns had straight track incorporated into most turns. How else would you build an easement on a mountain spiral?

Hey, not a bad answer for a guy who has no idea why they built super elevated straight track.

Of course I could always fall back to observation number 1, it looks cool!

B Smith posted:

Why would you super-elevate a straight section of track?

 

Because if you put it just on the curve, there is no transition from flat to superelevated.

I superelevated on half of a 37" section before the curve. I secured each end and allowed the center to float. This allows my track to gradually superelevate from "0" to "max" over the entire 37" length.

I super elevate all my curves larger than 086 on the main, seems sharper curves you really cannot tell. Looks great for photos...

I prefer curved banks

The pictures that Jesse posted are familiar.  I recall seeing track like this many years ago at the Old Nicholas Smith store at 11th and Arch.  I didn't think it was American Flyer however.  Not sure whose track it was.  

As for whether or not to super-elevate model railroad track, I believe it definitely enhances performance.  Back in the '80s, I built a high rail layout using Gargraves track.  It had 48" diameter curves that I super elevated a full 1/4".   I was running a GG1 under catenary with Congressional cars in tow.  I was able to maintain a constant high speed throughout that entire layout.  It certainly was fun to watch. 

Granted, a curve should have a spiral transition approach and the superelevation should also increase gradually from 0" (level across the rail heads)  to whatever the curve requires, but the strange section of track illustrated doesn't appear to provide an increasing degree of super-elevation.

An easy and inexpensive way to super elevate is to use round toothpicks under the ties. 

I use a length of hard clothes line stapled in place, then put the roadbed(Homasote) on top of that.

Putting some curved switches in, so how do you super elevate track where there is a crossover? Both tracks are on the same piece of wood.

BOBBYD.....I did that and I won't do it again...doesn't work right with all equipment.

Clem k 

BobbyD posted:

Putting some curved switches in, so how do you super elevate track where there is a crossover? Both tracks are on the same piece of wood.

In the real railroad world crossovers are not superelevated. Running speed through a crossover is rarely more than Medium Speed (30 mph) or Limited speed (45 mph.) At those speeds there is no need for any superelevation.