Gargraves Phantom Track Conductance

I have an extensive Gargraves tracked layout with Ross switches and have had absolutely no conductivity problems in the twenty eight years it has been in service.  I think the key is to be sure to have a strong bare wire  ground and drops to the power lines and ground at relatively short intervals, no more than 4 or 5 feet.  The layout has five zones and thirty two turnouts.  It is 19 by 26 feet, multi level.

John, are you having any issues?  I know your layout is under construction, and you have just been laying track recently.  
I agree with your assessment of the Phantom rail and with @Goody’s reply above, though my track has only been in service about five years.

I laid 100% new Gargraves Flex , Ross sectional curves, and all Ross switches, I didn't do any sanding, filing, etc. to the rails and I had zero issues.  I did wipe off any manufacturing oils using CRC Contact Cleaner on a rag after initially laying the track, that's it.  I've never seen any hint of issues with conductivity to the track.

The old Paradise and Pacific Railroad layout in the "Bunkhouse" at the railroad park in Scottsdale, AZ was Gargraves track, and it was in service for at least 25 years prior to the club moving to the new building in 2011.  The only issue it had was from all the years of constant operation was the inside flange of some of the curves had worn through.  A very robust track system.

Like Goody reported, I also have a large layout,  26 x 40, all with Gargraves, Ross and even some old Curtis, and Right of way track.    The vast majority of it was purchased used.   

I haven't had any issues, except when the track has gotten dirty.  Several years ago now, I found the threads on line promoting the use of Low Odor Mineral Sprits and an electrical contact grease called NO-OX-ID-A.   

Personally, the last thing I would ever do is use an abrasive to remove the black anodizing finish on the center rail.  If I could do anything over, I might actually have put a dab of the NO-OX-ID-A on the track pins, wiped off the excess then assembled the track.   There are numerous threads on cleaning track here on this forum and on line.   

NOTE:  The only exception to my "never remove" the anodized coating is when I am soldering track feed power wired to the center rail.  Solder won't adhere to the GG blackened coating.   I chose to add center rail power drops about every 4-5 track joints. 

I made sure not to use "old" track pins",  I did use pliers and wire cutters to tighten up loose fitting track pins as I was installing.   

I have absolutely no complaints, and with over 400 feet of track laid down, I never took out an ohm meter and started reading resistance.  Layout has been in use for well over 6 years now, some of the early sections of the layout were completed 17 years ago. 

Aegis21, you’re going way too far with this. Absolutely no problem with conductance and Gargraves track. The trick is to use power drops where needed.

I just put mine together with proper wiring and ran trains. Been operating for 35 years. The only cleaning the center rail got was after ballasting.

John I know you run DCS. When your done with a section. Run a train over it. DCS will read track voltage as well as the track signal. If the numbers are good and it runs well. Consider it done and move on to the next section.

Ditto. 25 x 33 layout. All GarGraves and Ross.  25 years. No problems. Drops every six to eight feet,

@Aegis21 a couple weeks ago I held an open house to celebrate that the lower level of my layout is operational.  I discovered one engine’s light flickered and could not run slowly on one section of Gargraves.  Testing other engines I noticed similar behavior.  I ended up learning that one section, for whatever reason (likely too heavy rail coating?) had poor conductivity on the center rail.  (Using a multimeter like you.)  I replaced that section and have had no issues with the rest of the case of track.  ~100 feet operating so far.  Note that the case of track I purchased was from an individual, and is at least 12 years old but still new in the case.  Hopefully your experience is limited to a section or two.

My layout, abiet much smaller than layouts mentioned above, is 100 square ft. Layout is comprised of 3 loops of track,  a long spur, and several sidings  I've been using GG track with  GG  and Ross switches  for the last 20 plus years and no issues with conductivity.  Soon i will embark expanding the layout by  building a small yard and will use GG track to do so.

Just what everyone else said, Gargraves, Ross switches, and power drops every 3 sections of 3' long track and no issues.

By the way an ohmeter is probably the worst way to try figure out conductivity for track.  Putting a load on the track and meeting voltage drop would be much more accurate.  The current coming from an ohmeter is too tiny to really measure track joint conductivity under load.

@Dougklink posted:

By the way an ohmeter is probably the worst way to try figure out conductivity for track.  Putting a load on the track and meeting voltage drop would be much more accurate.  The current coming from an ohmeter is too tiny to really measure track joint conductivity under load.

What he said.

First I want to thank everyone for their knowledge, experience and support of gargrave track. I am not running or even test running a train, so I haven't experienced an issue. I also agree, an ohm meter not being able to measure voltage loss/high current. Like using it to measure 30 gauge wire and reading .1 ohm then using that wire to power an electric dryer. It will be a fuse and have almost infinite current for an extremely short time. I was just trying to avoid poor connections and high resistance as I lay down track. Here is a video of what I was trying to accomplish (i hope I posted it ok). I will listen to all the comments and start putting track together and possibly do a real life test of a locomotive.  Again thanks for EVERYONE's input, great to be reassured on the gargrave/ross track/switches track record. pun intended.

Video doesn't play for me.

John_H

I do not know how to fix this.... Can someone help me post a .mov video taken with my iphone that people can watch...

I had no issues viewing the video. The Windows Media Player on my PC is capable of reading MOV (iphone) video files, but sometimes needs to be updated.

I was able to watch it fine on the iPhone 10.  I am not at the PC now to try there.

John,

I can see your video and I can say what folks are saying here is correct, this is not a good test.  The first thing I see is the auto-range on your Fluke meter is confused.  Use the range button to select the lowest OHM setting and try again.  I have a Fluke 77 that behaves similarly when the auto-range gets confused.

I have Gargraves on my layout and I did your test.  With Auto-Range off, I get relatively consistent reading under 1 OHM. I also used DeoxIT D5 to throughly clean the rails before the test. 

I have 2 tests I like to do when I think there is a connectivity issue.  First, I run a DCS engine around the layout on the slowest speed it will run and use the signal test function.  I strive for 10's all the way around but as long as it doesn't drop significantly, it's good.  Second I run a post war steamer around the layout with a decent load.  Speed as consistent as possible is what I am looking for.  The post war steamer will draw a decent amount of current and with no speed control will uncover poor connectivity.  Just know that the speed will almost always vary, especially if any part of the test train is in a turn or on any grade.  I don't want to see it running good in one spot and stalled in another.

Hope this helps
Tony V

Thanks Tony,

yes auto range is a pain sometimes and is why I tried on the otter rail as well. Of course your suggestion to take it off auto will ce tried when I get back. Certainly will do as you say to use real power going through pickups and wheels. Glad you mentioned you use a DCS engine as I do not have an idea which is more susceptible to finding high resistance track. Or if it matters at all whether it is dcs or tmcc

maybe use both!

again THANKS

@romiller49 posted:

Aegis21, you’re going way too far with this. Absolutely no problem with conductance and Gargraves track. The trick is to use power drops where ne

I thought that this was sounding too complicated as well. I have used Gargraves since building my 25 x 35 layout in 2011. No problems. I added grounds and power to each section of track. Drilled a small hole in the center rail, inserted the wire and added solder. Worked great. Seldom use any eraser type,  only clean with track cleaner liquid and denatured alcohol.

@Jeff B. Haertlein posted:

I thought that this was sounding too complicated as well. I have used Gargraves since building my 25 x 35 layout in 2011. No problems. I added grounds and power to each section of track. Drilled a small hole in the center rail, inserted the wire and added solder. Worked great. Seldom use any eraser type,  only clean with track cleaner liquid and denatured alcohol.

Hi Jeff,

To everyone, using an ohm meter to test conductivity was a poor choice, as it doesn't give any indication of current carrying capabilities.

Jeff,

My old age is getting the best of my brain lately, so I need a little clarification on what you did with your layout. I know this will not sound good, however -  did each section of track have it's own soldered drop? That would certainly eliminate contact resistance between track pins and track. Also where and what size hole did you drill for your drops? Into the side of the center rail, the bottom? And did you drill the outside rails, and did you do both outside rails or just one? What gauge wire for the drops, did you use 18ga

Again I thank everyone for their input!

Thanks in advance Jeff

@trumpettrain posted:

My layout, abiet much smaller than layouts mentioned above, is 100 square ft. Layout is comprised of 3 loops of track,  a long spur, and several sidings  I've been using GG track with  GG  and Ross switches  for the last 20 plus years and no issues with conductivity.  Soon i will embark expanding the layout by  building a small yard and will use GG track to do so.

Same here.  I use the older closed frog GG switches to run Marx and prewar Flyer.  All good.

Lou N

Thanks Lou for your reinforcing the use of GG track. I am guessing my test was flawed by not taking into account the breakdown voltage of the center rail coating. My ohm meter readings bounced around a couple of k ohm, however with 18 VAC applied it resembles a short circuit to the pickup rollers.

Jeff, I took a chance and on a scrap piece of GG track I drilled a small hole on the bottom of the track rail and soldered a wire to it. Worked good, although it went through the side of the rail a bit. I'm sure with a little practice it will work out well. I like the idea that the wire will be easy to hide directly under the rail.

Thanks John

@John H posted:

Video doesn't play for me.

Did you ever get video to play?