Hand Laid Track and Turnouts for 3 Rail

No issues at all - when doing your own switches you can just lay them in place and build them to whatever your layout design calls for - no real need to be bound by any numbers - you can customize them to be what you decide!

Code 148 should permit most 3-rail flanges.

My experience working to 3 rail Atlas 148 2 rail turnouts is to have the negative juice only flow through the outermost rails only.  If you retain negative flow through any negative divergent rails the equipment rollers may short on the divergent rails. I was going to build my own turnouts, but fell into an attractive deal on the atlas turnouts. My turnouts are 7.5 and I recommend as broad a turnout that will work in your space.

Best of luck .

Ron H

Yes the whole Idea on using a 2-rail fixture or 3-rail fixture (If I could get one made) was to build some the turnouts off the layout if I wanted. Especially for areas that it may be tough to build in.

Ron - If ground is only applied to the outside rail will the train lose ground when it goes to the divergent route or will the outside closure rail will need a ground feed? My idea was to provide ground to both outside rails but electrically isolate the outside rail near the closure to the frog, so there is no short. I am probably over thinking this. Where with the outmost rail having ground when the turnout goes divergent the outside most closure rail would make contact with the outside rail and have ground applied. Correct?

Thanks for your response guys.

Chris

Interesting idea. I've used the FT templates in other scales to build my own turnouts with great success. I don't see any problem with using code 148 for 3 rail. You may want to use a smaller rail for the center rail. I would measure the flangeways on an Atlas or MTH turnout and use those dimensions. The free paper template should be enough to get you going. I would use a few PC board ties so you can solder the core into place first then add the other ties.

I may have to give this a try myself to see what can be built.

Jonathan,

I learned about Fast Tracks from my buddies in HO and On30. I am also planning on hand laying my On30 portion of my layout as well.

I will look into using the smaller rail for the middle rail as well. Good Idea! Like code 100 or 120?  I would measure a production turnout, but don't have any on hand. 

I already planned on using PC ties to tack everything together. Then will add the wood ties. 

I bet if we get enough people interested in this. Fast Tracks would be willing to make 3 rail templates or fixtures. If not at least there is the two rail version.

 Being a guy who reinvents the wheel on a daily basis, I like this concept! 

My layout was built with 2-rail track, so I'm not very familiar with 3-rail operations. But wouldn't the use of a lower rail (e.g. code 100) for the middle rail cause problems at switches, where the pickup rollers have to cross one of the taller running rails? It seems as though the rollers could snag the taller rail at these points, unless perhaps the center rail was raised slowly as it approached a running rail. I think Marklin's stud-contact system (HO) was arranged so that the studs rose higher above the ties as they approached the running rails of a switch.

I hand-made my own turnouts for both O ga. and STD ga. founded off an article written in the TCA E-Train on-line magazine: 

http://www.tcaetrain.org/artic...ng/marxsw/index.html

Rich Reichard attends the York meets, and sells binders of his plans on how to build a marx-style switch for O ga. I bought his set of plans and slightly modified his ideas for my needs.

If I had trains from the 1950's and later I probably would have saved up an gone for the Ross switches for sure, but I run Std and O ga ranging from early 1900's tinplate to modern. I found that the new trains didn't run well through the old tinplate switches, and the old tinplate with the large wheel-mounted gears wouldn't run through the modern switches. 

The 'good, fast, cheap' rule applies. I am very happy with my hand-made switches but they took some time to make. I have probably have less than $10 of material in each switch.  I ended up making some simple tooling to assist in the work. There is the clear the advantage of making any turnout profile you can imagine.

I'm happy to report that instead of the normal clikety-clak, bouncey-bounce that my trains usually went through using especially old pre-war switches, they go 'woosh' like there was no turnout underneath them. Very quiet, very reliable. Just my two-cents.

I would use MTH scaletrax ,the rail is not as tall as Atlas , but tall enough as some brands of 3 rail have different flanges . It is also easy to solder and cut ,ties are a Euro style look . I built a long 60ft model of the KEY WEST Extension for a guy , wood ties cut from cypress and the scale trax rail . I had a mountain of code 172 in steel , which would be ideal for this . I had over 600 ft . sold it to a guy doing 1:20 scale narrow gauge . 172 was used in the past for early 2 rail with large flanges , I think I have 150 ft of nickel silver left , great for turnout as it is easy to solder .

Ted Hikel had built some turnouts using MTH ScaleTrax rail and Ross templates. For the frogs, he used shaved-down Ross Delrin frogs.

If your hi-rail equipment is more modern, you'll probably be fine with Code 148 rail which Micro Engineering sells. I think you can get the spikes and ties from Micro-Mark and other sources.

In theory, you could use FasTracks jigs to make the turnouts, but you'd need to widen the frog slightly and widen the guard rails out to about 1/10" to let the hi-rail wheel sets clear. Obviously, you'd have to add a center rail, but I recall that from what I've seen with the ties FasTracks sells, there's actually a center pad in the copper ties with cuts on either side (probably for dual gauge).

Hope this helps.

Everyone thanks for your responses. I'm glad to see that hand laying track and turnouts isn't a lost cause. 

Matt my hi-rail equipment is more modern, so Code 148 is a go for me. I'm glad to hear that the Fast Tracks jig will work. I guess I will need to make my own jig for the frog and guide rails. From what I know. The PC ties are a solid piece of copper at the top, so I don't think that will align the middle rail. 

Chris 

Good discussion Chris - thanks for starting.  Do you have any photos of what you've done so far?

c.sam posted:

Good discussion Chris - thanks for starting.  Do you have any photos of what you've done so far?

Thanks. No problem. I don't have any photos. I'm currently only in the planning stage of this. This post was to see if I was nuts for wanting to do this or to see if it was actually doable...hahaha

Chris 

Anybody still interested in this thread?

Replacing warped insulator rails with metal.

Great thread. I've built some basic 2 rail turnouts before, and would like to build substitutes for my 3-rail 0-42s eventually. The Reichard method definitely interests me.

When I went to add a eye level third rail nostalgia run to my 2 rail layout I started with Atlas flex and code .100" darkened center rail.  When testing my first right of way I noticed quite a few recent car's and some engine's flanges would click along the spike heads. 

Infact I display some PW three rail cars on Atlas flex and noticed the spike heads keep the cars from rolling off the ends.

I believe for a bullet proof set up you may want to get some code .172" rail plus some Ross frogs.

For the new 3 rail portion I use GG and Ross.  Great combo.

The reverse loops.

Tom:

Your bench work never ceases to amaze me.

@Empirical Builder posted:

Anybody still interested in this thread?

I am still interested in this topic. I haven't done anymore planning of my layout and I want to start it this fall. I still need to get my track plan developed. I guess I am slacking.

Anyway, I would like to somehow develop a method to hand lay track with fixtures (jigs) similar to FastTracks (Handlaidtrack.com). This would be very important to do for turnouts. It doesn't seem like straight or curved track would be a problem. It is more so the switches in my opinion. Trying to determine angles for points and frogs are a real challenge. Any ideas?

Chris

The person I kew that hand laid all his own switches and crossovers was Bob Weaver  We used to tour his layout while at York   Here is a thread of pics of his layout  Includes a couple of shots of the switches

https://ogrforum.com/...ose-ogr-weaver-tours

@AGHRMatt posted:

Tom:

Your bench work never ceases to amaze me.

Same here. I wish had 1/10 of Tom's talent!

"I'm thinking of hand laying my track and turnouts. Well for right now my turnouts. This very common in other scales."  

Is it, really, "very"  common? I do know people who do this (not 3RO'ers), mostly - only, really - in HO, but the one I know who does this most often does a switch or two every so often, and does not hand-lay his own track (a short "fitter' here and there, maybe). I imagine that a good percentage of S-scalers (not the Flyer S-gaugers) do it, but I don't know enough of them to have a feel for it.

What would your cost per trackage foot and per turnout be? Materials aren't free, and time is money (so is frustration)...

I tried a first run with a #60 trolley. Worst case as far as pickup and wheelbase. Ran smoothly both forwards and reverse through either direction of throw, with no stalling or stutters.  I tried to upload the video but it is 85 mb too big.😕

I am using homecut ties, o rail for material, some bits if metal for frogs and points, and arrow t50 staples for spikes. Just drill, insert and mash them down. Solder staples to hold critical alignments. Low budget alternative.

@bluelinec4 posted:

The person I kew that hand laid all his own switches and crossovers was Bob Weaver  We used to tour his layout while at York   Here is a thread of pics of his layout  Includes a couple of shots of the switches

https://ogrforum.com/...ose-ogr-weaver-tours

Thank you for sharing this.

@D500 posted:

"I'm thinking of hand laying my track and turnouts. Well for right now my turnouts. This very common in other scales."  

Is it, really, "very"  common? I do know people who do this (not 3RO'ers), mostly - only, really - in HO, but the one I know who does this most often does a switch or two every so often, and does not hand-lay his own track (a short "fitter' here and there, maybe). I imagine that a good percentage of S-scalers (not the Flyer S-gaugers) do it, but I don't know enough of them to have a feel for it.

What would your cost per trackage foot and per turnout be? Materials aren't free, and time is money (so is frustration)...

No it is not common in 3-rail O scale, but very common in Ho, 2-Rail O Scale, On3, On30, and others. You can check out the following link, https://www.handlaidtrack.com/ for more information.

In terms of price it is cheaper than buying readily available track. I do agree with you on time and frustration, but if a fixture or template was developed for 3-Rail Scale like shown in the link provided. It would take less time and frustration. Like I stated previously. Straight and Curve track shouldn't be that bad. Just the switches.

Chris

@crood58 posted:

I am still interested in this topic. I haven't done anymore planning of my layout and I want to start it this fall. I still need to get my track plan developed. I guess I am slacking.

Anyway, I would like to somehow develop a method to hand lay track with fixtures (jigs) similar to FastTracks (Handlaidtrack.com). This would be very important to do for turnouts. It doesn't seem like straight or curved track would be a problem. It is more so the switches in my opinion. Trying to determine angles for points and frogs are a real challenge. Any ideas?

Chris

Hi, Chris. My feelings on turnout number are relative to the amount of offset of one of the rails per unit length. Since the gauge is 1.25", calculating the length to the rail intersection is a function of gauge times turnout #. For instance, a #6 will cross the other rail at 7.5". This works for me. As far as the angle goes, you can use the gauge as one leg of a right triangle formed with the "x" length. Then with trig functions, the exact angle can be determined. I am on lunch at work, so please excuse my barbaric drawing. This is not scientific, but works for me in practice.

Kind words, thank you Matt and Phil. 

Nice thing about custom made turnouts is that you do not start with the sizes available in the Mfg. catalog. 

All you need to do is to layout your center lines using your predetermined curve minimums and/or  r.o.w. center lines then cut accordingly. 

Or as I opted, I crayoned brown paper over the converging tracks and sent the rolled up paper to Brad Strong at Signature Switch and he made the turnouts to fit the track alignment.

This was for a switcher run around added after the fact

@Empirical Builder posted:

Hi, Chris. My feelings on turnout number are relative to the amount of offset of one of the rails per unit length. Since the gauge is 1.25", calculating the length to the rail intersection is a function of gauge times turnout #. For instance, a #6 will cross the other rail at 7.5". This works for me. As far as the angle goes, you can use the gauge as one leg of a right triangle formed with the "x" length. Then with trig functions, the exact angle can be determined. I am on lunch at work, so please excuse my barbaric drawing. This is not scientific, but works for me in practice.

Thank you for the info. Stupid me never that about it that way. So I guess the angle for a #6 turnout would be 9.46 degrees by using the inverse tangent function, so

Θ = Tan^-1(1.25/7.5) = 9.46 degrees

What have you done for the frogs? I hear that can be tricky in 3-rail.

Chris

Wasn't David Vergun handlaying track?

@crood58 posted:

Thank you for the info. Stupid me never that about it that way. So I guess the angle for a #6 turnout would be 9.46 degrees by using the inverse tangent function, so

Θ = Tan^-1(1.25/7.5) = 9.46 degrees

What have you done for the frogs? I hear that can be tricky in 3-rail.

Chris

I am doing my own project in 027 for a ceiling layout which doesn't show the starkness of the build; but reliability and derailment- free are imperative, as it is 7' off the ground! I am using 1/4"  cold rolled flatstock. To groove it for flanges, I have a homemade china freight mill with a cross slide and drill press. A cut-off wheel on an arbor makes the cuts quickly and accurately. These other switches are o gauge, so I shimmed up the frog with a piece of oak of the proper thickness to being up to level.

I am also re-bent 027 for my ceiling layout with a homemade roller jig. Take the track apart, rebend it, and reassembled. Trouble free operation.

I'm curious... 

Have you investigated a source + cost of the basic rail you might use in a "very large 3-rail O-scale multi-deck layout"??? 

Just wondering what that information might do to your enthusiasm for this approach....

One of my best friends in this hobby....Frank...insisted on hand-laying his entire spaghetti bowl, basement-consuming HO layout.  And that over an unbelievable spline roadbed consisting of 1"X clear white pine stock ripped to 1/4" widths by the local lumberyard/millwork specialty, then splice-glued to a set of risers built onto a CWP egg-crate benchwork.   The eleventy-seven bazillion custom switches worked flawlessly....from a bank of hand throws through cables.  It was an incredible sight as it unfolded...over 35+ years time. 

And then he died.

Frank was of the this-is-the-only-way-to-go crowd.  But in the end, for him it was a hobby unto itself....bench work, roadbed....hand laying track.  He never uttered a word of regret to me.  He was proud of his accomplishments.  He accumulated a bunch of already-built buildings, bridges, gizmos, and gadgets to 'someday' complete his layout.  In truth, he had a quiet disdain for spending a lot of time on scenery.  In fact, for those tour layouts that were spectacular for their scenery, Frank was always trying to look UNDER the layout, ask the creator(s) about the benchwork, roadbed, track, switch contstruction/control....which would lead into lengthy exposé about HIS approach.   But he was truly an enthusiastic friend.  I miss him.

Tearing down his layout was particularly sad.  There wasn't anything...zero, zip, nada...of the trackwork that was salvageable or reusable.  Even the benchwork was in pieces and perforations so numerous to be of no interest, free for the taking, among local craftspeople, hobbyists.  We tried.

But, one thing I took away from Frank's lifetime experience was a re-balancing of priorities, approaches.  I was mostly into HO when I shared time with him.  Failing eyesight and dexterities... and a belly full of pickers-of-nit than seemed to dwell in that scale locally!...led me to O3R.  Would I do what you propose, what Frank did??.......never entered my mind.  I ultimately chose the Ross/Gargraves approach, working a layout plan through RR-Track and its libraries of components.  I'm a long way from 'completion' of the layout (never really happens as many will tell you!), but I'm enjoying each challenging step......EXCEPT electrical gremlin-searching!!

But, that's what's great about the hobby.....something for each and every.

BTW, your interest brought to mind an old issue of  Model Railroader magazine...from the 50's-60's of the last century, I recall.   The cover story featured a gent in Britain who had hand-laid his entire O-scale layout to fine-scale British standards.  The bull-head rail was supported on every tie with 'chairs' (mounted on cardstock ties) as in the prototype.  The sweeping broad curves, faultless turnouts, nary a kink, wriggle, or glitch noticeable.....anywhere.  The eye was drawn to the trackwork.....everywhere.  Even at my youthful age I knew craftsmanship of trackwork when I saw it.  Holy moly!  THEN, I noticed the locomotives and rolling stock....nicely done, of course, but nothing particularly eye-catching.  And THEN I checked the 'scenery'....a building, a swichtower, a station, here or there. (ho-hum)  But, that hand-laid trackwork!?!?!?,,,,,,,,,absolutely incredible.  You'd think I'd have saved that issue.....but, no.  I came across it at a flea market once....equally drawn to the images even 40-50 years later!

So, if it's your 'thing', go for it!

And, best of luck......and share your efforts with others on the forum.  You may start a whole new group of gandy-dancers!

KD

@crood58 posted:

Thank you for sharing this.

No it is not common in 3-rail O scale, but very common in Ho, 2-Rail O Scale, On3, On30, and others. You can check out the following link, https://www.handlaidtrack.com/ for more information.

In terms of price it is cheaper than buying readily available track. I do agree with you on time and frustration, but if a fixture or template was developed for 3-Rail Scale like shown in the link provided. It would take less time and frustration. Like I stated previously. Straight and Curve track shouldn't be that bad. Just the switches.

Chris

Chris, 

I bought two fixtures from that website. I would like to tell you of my experience. First of all I am a 2 railer but I don’t think that matters in this discussion. Second I do not intend to knock them. They are made of very high quality. Okay, I got my first fixture and I built a switch. I don’t remember how long it took and I didn’t add the rest of the ties. I wasn’t totally happy with it. It was not a hinged turnout and I didn’t like that. Seemed unrealistic to me but what I remember most was when you had to file a rail (I also used code 148) it took forever. I was filing and filing and filing and filing. That got old. I later found out that other guys used a type of sander to speed up the process when filing the larger rail. When they show you those HO videos of the guy filing the rail he does it in a few minutes but that is because the rail is so much smaller. The one knock I will say about Fast Tracks is that in HO they have the ties already cut and ready to go (I forget what they call them) and once you build the switch you glue it to the ties but they don’t make that for O scale. I really wish they did. That would save a lot of labor. I do plan to build more switches some day with the jig but I will go with a sander for the rail and I will build a bunch at one time to speed up the process. I also have some other ideas to speed up production like I might buy frogs and point rails from Right O Way. True it will increase cost but save on labor and look better. I will also try building a hinged switch but back to the discussion. 

I also wanted to see how cost effective the Fast Tracks jig is. I believe I paid $150 for the first one I bought. Not sure what they cost now. I also bought rail from ME, circuit board ties from FT and regular turnout ties (I forget where). Anyway, this was a long time ago and I added up the cost of the rail, the cost of enough ties to do one switch, and the cost of the Fast Tracks ties (the ones you solder the rails to) and the total cost back then was $29 and change. I didn’t think it would come out to that much but that was the total. The most expensive part is the code 148 rail. Since I bought my supplies years ago at those old prices it is definitely worth it to build switches as Atlas 2rail switches are now about $95 each or more and both of the other 2 rail switch manufacturers are over $100 each. So I will definitely be building some switches in the future. My layout will need about 25 switches. I am not sure what a 3 rail switch costs these days. They may be cheaper than 2 rail switches but IDK. I just can’t see spending $2,500 on switches but that’s me. 

I have always felt that if you want to complete a layout in your lifetime in this day and age you have to farm out some of the work. Unless a guy is single and wealthy where he doesn’t have to work and is still young is the only way anybody could build a layout and scratch build everything including track, locomotives, cars, structures, scenery, wiring, bench work, weathering, etc and even then I don’t know if it’s possible. It’s my philosophy that you do what you like and enjoy and some of the other less fun stuff (to you/me) you farm out to the pros. 

JUST MY OPINION. 

These are all valid points. Time and money. Let me explain my approach further. I received my Dad's trainset at a very young age. Every year it has always ended up under the Christmas tree. It would stay out for a month, get used and then put away for another year. Later in life, marriage, children, career, I would still carry on the "tradition". I never had room for a full size layout in O scale; at least not like the one I would like to have, so I bargained for some room in the basement. It was not being used, was high up and out of the way, and allowed me to at least display the postwar stuff year round. My ceiling layout was born. I hated the sharp toylike curves of 027 or even O; and yes, you can buy wider radius curves; usually for a premium. And they are fixed. My variable geometry allows for variation, easements, and just generally making the track to fit the space; instead of vice-versa.  The cheap O27 can be had by the boxfull on ebay for $50 or less. All I needed to do was create a way to bend it. Two loops were done in a week or two, off and on.

I love the look, feel and operation of Ross switches, but a double crossover or a pair of them to allow switching trains from loop to loop for me is cost prohibitive. Especially if I can come up with a perfectly functional switch unit for a 10th of the cost of these units. Why do this? Why not. Being a ceiling layout, scenery and structures, other than a few bridges and signaling are a moot point when they can't be seen. My postwar stuff is semiscale and look better viewed from a distance, IMO. I do need to add undercarriage detail now though, as that much is visible! But track that works well, that can't be seen, needn't have every tie or spike included to complete the illusion.

@Empirical Builder posted:

I tried a first run with a #60 trolley. Worst case as far as pickup and wheelbase. Ran smoothly both forwards and reverse through either direction of throw, with no stalling or stutters.  I tried to upload the video but it is 85 mb too big.😕

I am using homecut ties, o rail for material, some bits if metal for frogs and points, and arrow t50 staples for spikes. Just drill, insert and mash them down. Solder staples to hold critical alignments. Low budget alternative.

A shorter video...

@bluelinec4 posted:

The person I kew that hand laid all his own switches and crossovers was Bob Weaver  We used to tour his layout while at York   Here is a thread of pics of his layout  Includes a couple of shots of the switches

https://ogrforum.com/...ose-ogr-weaver-tours

👍👍 Thanks very much for posting this - it's exactly what I have in mind, albeit on 0-42 curves.

@Hudson J1e posted:

Chris, 

I bought two fixtures from that website. I would like to tell you of my experience. First of all I am a 2 railer but I don’t think that matters in this discussion. Second I do not intend to knock them. They are made of very high quality. Okay, I got my first fixture and I built a switch. I don’t remember how long it took and I didn’t add the rest of the ties. I wasn’t totally happy with it. It was not a hinged turnout and I didn’t like that. Seemed unrealistic to me but what I remember most was when you had to file a rail (I also used code 148) it took forever. I was filing and filing and filing and filing. That got old. I later found out that other guys used a type of sander to speed up the process when filing the larger rail. When they show you those HO videos of the guy filing the rail he does it in a few minutes but that is because the rail is so much smaller. The one knock I will say about Fast Tracks is that in HO they have the ties already cut and ready to go (I forget what they call them) and once you build the switch you glue it to the ties but they don’t make that for O scale. I really wish they did. That would save a lot of labor. I do plan to build more switches some day with the jig but I will go with a sander for the rail and I will build a bunch at one time to speed up the process. I also have some other ideas to speed up production like I might buy frogs and point rails from Right O Way. True it will increase cost but save on labor and look better. I will also try building a hinged switch but back to the discussion. 

I also wanted to see how cost effective the Fast Tracks jig is. I believe I paid $150 for the first one I bought. Not sure what they cost now. I also bought rail from ME, circuit board ties from FT and regular turnout ties (I forget where). Anyway, this was a long time ago and I added up the cost of the rail, the cost of enough ties to do one switch, and the cost of the Fast Tracks ties (the ones you solder the rails to) and the total cost back then was $29 and change. I didn’t think it would come out to that much but that was the total. The most expensive part is the code 148 rail. Since I bought my supplies years ago at those old prices it is definitely worth it to build switches as Atlas 2rail switches are now about $95 each or more and both of the other 2 rail switch manufacturers are over $100 each. So I will definitely be building some switches in the future. My layout will need about 25 switches. I am not sure what a 3 rail switch costs these days. They may be cheaper than 2 rail switches but IDK. I just can’t see spending $2,500 on switches but that’s me. 

I have always felt that if you want to complete a layout in your lifetime in this day and age you have to farm out some of the work. Unless a guy is single and wealthy where he doesn’t have to work and is still young is the only way anybody could build a layout and scratch build everything including track, locomotives, cars, structures, scenery, wiring, bench work, weathering, etc and even then I don’t know if it’s possible. It’s my philosophy that you do what you like and enjoy and some of the other less fun stuff (to you/me) you farm out to the pros. 

JUST MY OPINION. 

Phil,

The points you made are a very valid ones. Although I know a lot of people who hand lay track in HO and Narrow Gauge O Scale and I can see your point about the rail size and it makes total sense. You are the first person I ever came across that didn't like the FastTracks fixtures and tools. All my buddies use them and love them.

I do have to say I know this is no easy thing, but the whole point to the fixtures and tools is to make it easier. It will take a lot more time on your first go around building a turnout then say the second or third. There is always a learning curve. My problem is that I model 3-Rail O Scale (Hi-Rail) and there is nothing available to hand lay track. This is way I started this thread. I am planning a very large layout and I don't plan on hand laying everything, but maybe some. Commercially available track I plan to use Gargraves and Ross Switches.

As far as cost is concerned. Lets say there are 100 switches on a layout and there cost is $95/each. That means just in switches a lone would cost $9,500.00. I came up with the same price has as you for hand laying which is around $29/each, which would equal $2,900.00. Lets just say all the tools needed cost around $1,000.00 (Probably way less). You still looking at a $5,600.00 savings, which doesn't account for time and again I agree with you on this, but I think repetition is the key here.

I also forgot to mention that my other point to doing this is because I also model in On30 and would like to dual gauge some of my track. I am planning on running my On30 equipment using battery (Deadrail) in order to isolate them from 3-Rail AC.

Chris

Bravo on those 100 year old switches! 

Thanks for posting these photos!  They made my day!

otimo

@otimo posted:

Bravo on those 100 year old switches! 

When I began building my own 3 rail switches I started collecting all the info on homemade 3-rail turnouts I could find, and have discovered that photos of genuine hand-made 3-rail switches are pretty rare.  In several years of off-and-on searching, I've only run across of a dozen or so photos, and have collected only five or six articles on the subject.  (On the upside, I have discovered 40 or 50 companies that have actually manufactured 3 rail switches, and there are a lot of different designs out there to try out!)

 

The running rails on those vintage switches look hand-rolled. Is the rail hand-fabricated? What were they using to construct the center and insulated closure rails 100 years ago? Wood? Copper? Something else?   

 

Thanks for posting these photos!  They made my day!

otimo

Here is what I know. A gentleman contacted me on facebook when he saw my efforts at fabricating switches for my own layout. He said his grandfather made them in the '20's? The rail looks like tube rail and dimensionally is; other than the bottom flange is not double rolled as on standard O gauge. The insulating material appears to be some type of insulating material, maybe even wood, as grains are apparent in it, but the red color is throughout the material. It has cracked and warped over the years and obviously no longer kept rolling stock on the track. It also left a major electrically "dead" zone for any equiptment on it. There is minor surface rust, some kinking and other obvious defects, but they were built sound and solid. In fact, the tacks he used on the ties were actually peened over, and pulling them generally would destroy the tie or make nasty holes in them. It is a project as he wishes me to maintain the character, but is also open to any improvements or enhancements I can make. I figure what I learn on these will help me perfect mine. Oh, and he sent four total. Oh, well. Glad to help if I can.

Oh. Getting used to this. Everyone else signs their posts. I am Dave.