Goodbye theater, hello layout.

Excellent answer, thank you. I will most likely use both methods and try to stick to dimensional where it’s easier and flex for more “flexibility” in the trickier parts.

John is right about both points.  I used a minimum at flex on this layout after butchering several pieces trying to get around a jog in the room where I built my Ceiling Central Railroad.  I do have curved sections left over, mainly because we originally designed the layout for 042 on plans A, B, and C, then changed to 054 on Plan D.  I also bought some very nice used 064 from someone thinking they were 054.  I don't know if it was my mistake or the long forgotten other guy's mistake, but I have a lot to inventory and offer for sale.  If I had used flex throughout, I would be able to use the left over for another 11-foot long display shelf instead of having to buy more straight for the shelf. 

Once you bend some, it gets easier.  Obviously, the tight curves that Tom was talking about in a different thread are a whole different deal, those must be fun to bend!  The tightest curve I'm bending is around O80 and up, not too bad with new track that the ties slide well on.  I'll probably have some Ross O72 left over, I bought 75 pieces when I was planning on mostly O72 curves.  When I decided to go bigger, I just used a lot of flex track for the larger curves.

We used all dimensional tubular and Gargraves track in our new layout on about 95 percent. Some of those pieces were bought off of forum members who chimed in elsewhere in this thread. Glad they switched to flex...I got a good deal on sectional because of it!

The other 5 percent we used flex. I think we used 4 pieces of flex in all.

Something to consider, if you truly want your track "straight", buy straight track. Although the flex starts out as straight, the moment you bend it at all is the moment you might as well forget about it ever being truly "straight" again. You can do it, but not very easy.

But the flex pieces were handy when having to do little "jogs" in odd dimensions. I didn't make any into true radius pieces though.

@Jeff_the_Coaster_Guy posted:

We used all dimensional tubular and Gargraves track in our new layout on about 95 percent. Some of those pieces were bought off of forum members who chimed in elsewhere in this thread. Glad they switched to flex...I got a good deal on sectional because of it!

The other 5 percent we used flex. I think we used 4 pieces of flex in all.

Something to consider, if you truly want your track "straight", buy straight track. Although the flex starts out as straight, the moment you bend it at all is the moment you might as well forget about it ever being truly "straight" again. You can do it, but not very easy.

But the flex pieces were handy when having to do little "jogs" in odd dimensions. I didn't make any into true radius pieces though.

Amen to that.  In fact, I think it is next to impossible to get them straight again. 

I’m very open to buying leftover pieces of track from forum members. I have about 20 foot of MTH set up right now with an O-72 curve in the middle for testing  and I’m not very happy with it. If you have track to sell, send me a message.

David, I'd reconsider used track.  Since I only had minimal exposure to Gargraves Flex before this layout, I bought some pieces early on just to see how flex would be to work with, and get some practice.  Old track ties get brittle and hard to slide, making it more difficult to easily form proper curves.  That also have a tendency to kink or twist much easier than new track.  It's workable, but since the track isn't that expensive for factory fresh, I recommend going that way.  The new track is much easier to slide the ties and make smooth curves.

@Mark Boyce posted:

Amen to that.  In fact, I think it is next to impossible to get them straight again. 

I agree, but you can come pretty close.  I have a 3-track yard hidden behind my grade, I'm thinking of using the older track that I practiced on for those tracks.  I managed to bend them pretty straight, certainly more than sufficient for a yard.  I'll see how my track supply is running as I get nearer the end, if I'm running short, I may use them for those yard tracks.

Just wanted to say that I like your track plan. The folded dog-bone as they call it is my favorite type of track plan. I like that you can pretend the train goes somewhere (leaves a scene) and then comes back from the direction in which it left. I understand if you don't want to do any switching (hey it's your railroad) but I highly agree with the suggestion to add some passing sidings. For me a circle, even a giant circle of track will get boring after a while. If it hasn't been already suggested you could add staging tracks for full trains so you can easily switch trains. There is no right or wrong way to do this hobby. All opinion. Good luck and have fun.

Good point on the used track. Thanks.

im thinking of adding a wye dead center in the top that will go nowhere for now but will basically point to the center of the room. That way I can turn trains and it leaves me open for a peninsula yard if I want in the future.

David,

If you are dead set on using older GG track, whether it is used or NOS, buy a big can of WD-40. Spray the wood/metal contact points, and let the sections sit a bit. I let mine sit overnight b/c I had other things to do. The stiff joints really soften to a point where the ties will easily move. Be sure to wipe the rails down before moving on. It works.

Chris

LVHR

Still pretty undecided on the right side (per pic) of the layout but the left side is pretty solid. Sold the two arcade machines this morning so that made it easy to go buy some wood with the “free” money from them. Built some bench work and quickly realized how different it is to see this in person as opposed to a screen. Amazed at how much real estate even an O-72 curve takes up. Let alone that that will be my minimum. Also amazed at how hard it is and how much time it takes to find somewhat straight wood at the big box stores. What was straight when we bought it was twisted up when we got home. Not a huge deal but took longer during building to make things straight. You also quickly learn how not straight and square your house is!

I built it all in modules so it can easily be taken apart if I change my mind before anything is made permanent. I’m more of a visual person I guess so I had to build something to see the vision as I was  getting frustrated with paper and screens. Biggest decision now is do I shorten the left side as it’s shown in the pic or go the full 25 or so feet which means hole in the lower wall as the space is only 6 feet wide. Hate to give up that space when all it means is possibly drywall repair for the kids when I’m dead.

my very supportive wife used the parts I wasn’t currently working on to set up and do some paint by numbers. Was a pretty good day overall.

It's looking good, David.  Yes the best I could fit in my room was 054 curves!  O gauge takes up a lot of room!

Was originally planning on 2% grade max. Is 3% that much worse? I only ask because the supplier I’ve chosen doesn’t offer the 2% kit. Only 3. I can get the 2 from someone else but they are the same people who sold me the O-72 curves and it took them forever to ship. The chosen supplier shipped my Gargraves track the same day and also answered the phone and were quite helpful. Those are important points to me.

My grades are roughly 2.7% grade and are no problem for any of my engines pulling relatively short trains since the layout is in an 11x11 room.  I don't see any problem with 3% grades if you are running modern engines.  Postwar without magnatraction would be another story.

I have used 2% up to 4% on my layout, work just fine.

I'm at 2.5% grades, and I don't anticipate any issues.  We have a long 2.5% grade on the club layout, and I had two Legacy U-Boats pulling 115 cars around that layout and they managed the 2.5% grade, so my little 23 x 12 layout shouldn't have any problems.

I chuckled at the wood comments.  I took the shortcut around the crooked wood by using the Mianne benchwork for the underpinnings of the layout.  For the top, I used Baltic Birch 1/2" sheets, they're 11 ply and as flat as a pancake.  They resist warping much better than big box store plywood as well.  I had to go to a real lumber yard about 30 miles away to get my birch.  That's topped with 1/2" Homasote for some sound deadening, and the track is laid on 1/4" foam roadbed.

There was one important feature i wanted that the 2% grade would not allow, and that was a reversing switch. Thankfully a 3% grade allows me that as well as the option to not cut a hole in the lower wall if I do not want to. I can only currently fit one reversing switch in which means you have to go all the way around to reverse again but it was a very important feature to me. Now to work on either passing sidings which I love the idea of or a yard somewhere.

I'm not sure why a grade is necessary for a reversing switch.  I have all the reversing on my plan on the main level with no grades.  How does the grade percentage enter into reversing?

The two double-slip switches and #201 and #100 allow crossing between sides of the loop as well as access to the yard and the inner O72 loop.

On another section, these switches allow movement between inner loops and change direction on the main loop.

The grade is needed for the over under on the left side. So the only place I could have a reversing switch on flat ground was where I have it in the pic. With a 2% grade the incline started too far back (towards upper right) to make it happen as I wouldn’t want a switch on a hill.

OK, starting to make more sense, you had me going there for a minute.   Why couldn't you slide that whole reversing part down a bit?  The two crossovers don't have to be next to each other to get the job done.

Excellent point. Thanks. Didn’t think about that but will play with it and see how it looks.

I'm a fan of making the grades as gradual as practical within the building envelope you have available.  No reason to ask for trouble if you don't have to.

The next issue is the reversing switch is a one way street, and the only way to reverse the reversal will be to back the train through the switch. I’ll have to get the laptop back out and look for a workaround.

Yep, that's why I have a number of switches, I wanted to be able to run on any of the loops in either direction.  For some of them, it's a bit of a run to get the train turned around, but it can be done.

This is the whole plan, red is the second level, all the rest is the main table level.

Well I just served myself a pretty major blow. All along I had myself mistakingly thinking O72 to O80 would have 8 inches between centers. Obviously as you all know I was horribly wrong. I had radius stuck in my head when in reality of course radius is half of diameter.

This means basically the entire layout as drawn is scrapped as the two locos I most want to run can never be on the track with anything else. Unless I went with O72 inside and something like O90 on the outside which I’m not sure I want to do.

The only other option I see right now is to only run either of them on a “special” train all by themselves. But then there’s the issue of most of my rolling stock being long passenger cars.

Time to walk away from it for a few hours. Glad I figured it out before buying and laying track.

Well walking away didn’t happen but I think I’ll be ok. The big boy seems to be the only thing with clearance issues. Even the DD40 seems fine so I’m wiping my tears and moving forward knowing the big boy will only ever run by itself.

I'm not going to 'Like' your last two comments.  Yes it is good you figured it out sooner rather than later, but that is a big hit to your plans.  I'm sorry none of us caught on to this earlier. 

Appreciate it but I think I’m ok. If it only limits one loco then it’s not that bad. I put the DD40 on the tracks and even it’s outside to a passenger cars inside I should be fine.

You are right.  If you have to be selective and only run one big engine at a time that isn't too bad.  I had to go with 054 curves.  I have one engine I can't run at all, but I knew that when I bought the scale GG1 for a exceptionally great price.  It looks great on the shelf!!

You probably don't want to know how many plans I discarded over the years, but it's a bunch!  I think it's great that you found out the issues before laying track, I found some of them after the track was purchased and I was trying to make the plan work this time!   No matter how many times you do a layout, the "next" one will always be better.   I already know some compromises I made on my current build, but none are truly fatal, so I'm bulling ahead.  If something pops it's ugly head in the future, there's a reason for reconstruction.

@c.sam posted:

Good evening David and good luck to you on your adventure!

No one else has brought this up but how dead set are you on using Realtrax? You said you had "some". Before you acquire all you will need, please give this some thought. You can easily resell it. Your choice of track is very important as it will be a sizable investment in $$, time, and effort. Once started, you are committed and it's not easy or recommended to change horses in mid stream. . There are several good choices out there, each with advantages and disadvantages. The MTH track does not look very realistic with it's wide spacing of the ties - Fastrack would be the better choice if you want plastic ballast in place. Primarily because there are so many more sizes and pieces available and it's still in production. If you like the larger scale locomotives and equipment perhaps you should consider Gargraves and Ross track systems as they are the most popular and again, come in many sizes and offer flex track. The other good choice is Atlas for scale realism and ease of construction. Perhaps pick up a few pieces of each and handle them awhile to help make a sound decision?

I’d like to thank you for opening my eyes in this particular situation. I set up a 50 foot “test” track tonight with all MTH realtrax, and I’m not happy with it at all. Especially the curves (which are brand new). Many don’t line up very well and I could see it taking a lot of bending and modifying it to work smooth. Especially the big boy which is quite noisy through this curve. I have no doubt that joints that are pinned will be better.

Hard to go wrong with Gargraves track and Ross switches.  If you're considering all sectional track, just do the whole shooting match with Ross track and switches.

When I first got into O gauge after years in HO and N scales, I bought an MTH set with MTH track.  I did not like it as well as Fastrak, which I only use for Christmas setups.  Who knows if MTH track and switches will be available in the quantities needed for a good sized layout that will probably be modified over time.  Sure it will be on the used market, but will the exact piece someone needs can be found.

After buying some Ross track to go with my Ross switches and GarGraves track, I will have to say I like Ross track better.  I think it looks better with the spikes holding the rail in, and I found the rails seem a bit more secure, but that could just be me.

Mark, since you mentioned that, I thought I’d give Ross a try. Unfortunately, trying to convert an O-36/O-45 design proved fruitless. I refuse to resort to O-31 and O-42 is too large to fit the O-36 space. Since I’d have to resort to O-32 with GarGraves, Atlas appears to be my only option. I don’t even like having to use O-36, but it’s a compromise I’m willing to make. Christmas is almost put away, so I’ll get my part of the craft room back and should be able to finally start building the display layout for Bedford Falls.

I plan a little and build a little. As I mentioned before, I’m a physical visual person so I have to see it in real life to “see” it. Built some more today and got the southern loop structure done. Went back and forth about going through the wall but very glad I did. Helped me figure out inside and outside spacing from the walls and the hole. Also, the little aisle wasn’t originally planned but makes great sense now. At least for the moment.

That sounds great, Dave!

Consider this more of a proof of concept update.

Finally found a local retailer who carry’s and can get gargraves track so I bought a box of 72 and 80 curves. Quite surprised at how much variance there is due to the ends not butting up tight to each other and how you can visibly see how “untrue” the curves are. A simple template should help solve that. Anyways, I’ve been dreading using the foam risers and been trying to think of a decent way to get around them. Well, some 5mm hardboard, a jigsaw, and some math is apparently all it takes. Mocked up this 3% hill tonight. Basically 3/8” rise per foot to a final height of 6 inches. The “riser” will be done better and will be full width (7”) but for proof of concept I just cut up a 1X4. Wasn’t sure what to expect when I started but I’m actually impressed. Plenty sturdy and if I ever had a feeling of doubt it would be quite easy to stiffen further if needed before scenery was added.

I thought it was just me that the GarGraves curves weren’t exact.  I used 054, and it all worked out.  Your mocked up grade looks good.  My two grades are roughly 4%.  Make sure you allow for a vertical easement at top and bottom of the grades.  With 4% I didn’t allow enough vertical easement, The pilot on one of my steamers hit the track at the bottom of the grade.  I had to rework them making for a longer transition.

I was told by someone at GarGraves that all their curved track is formed using the bending techniques shown in the videos on their site. That might explain the inconsistencies.

Might as well buy flex track and have the "flexibility".