is there a O scale switch that can handle high rail wheels and fine scale wheels material ?

O fine scale is usually 2 rail with small flanges, while hi-rail is usually 3 rail with large flanges. Two rail power is usually DC, with one rail positive and the other rail negative, and so the wheels must be insulated from each other. Three rail track has both outer rails electrically connected as the ground with the center rail as hot, usually AC, and the wheels are not usually insulated from each other.  Especially as far as turnouts are concerned, the two are incompatible, you need to choose one or the other, and stay with it.

Bill in FtL

Didier,

  You still have to try the Gargraves and/or Ross switches.  We have had success on our modular layout with both brands, running scale or hi-rail flanges.  The train can have all scale, all hi-rail, or mixed flanges in the consist.

Bill Kobernus

Midwest Division TCA Modular Group

Rich Batista told me at York that he can run both scale and hi-rail wheels through MTH Scaletrax turnouts without any problem. He uses O-72 and #6 turnouts. 

BKOBERNUS - can you elaborate on the use of Ross turnouts with scale wheels....  I have tested both wheel types and the scale wheel always "falls down" at the frog due to its flange not being supported by the plate around the frog (plate is short and sized for deep hi-rail flange).  Did you modify the Ross, or does the speed of the rail car compensate enough to get through without a bump with scale wheels.....

Boston & Maine Todd posted:

BKOBERNUS - can you elaborate on the use of Ross turnouts with scale wheels....  I have tested both wheel types and the scale wheel always "falls down" at the frog due to its flange not being supported by the plate around the frog (plate is short and sized for deep hi-rail flange).  Did you modify the Ross, or does the speed of the rail car compensate enough to get through without a bump with scale wheels.....

In my opinion, there is NO 3-Rail track system that PROPERLY handles 2-Rail SCALE wheels! Our 3-Rail layout is all Atlas O solid nickel silver track & turnouts, and I have "modified" each and every turnout by adding styrene shims to the tops of all the guard rails (thus bringing the guard rails up to the same height as the running rail). I no longer have derailments with 2-Rail SCALE wheel equipped rolling stock, however the scale wheels do indeed make noise through each and every frog, since the 2-Rail scale flanges can NOT ride on the bottom plate of the frog. Any attempt at adding shims to the bottom plate of the frog, then causes the 3-Rail "pizza cutter" wheels to serious jump up through the frogs.

Thus, I have learned to live with just a little bit of "noise" as the 2-Rail scale wheels "drop into the frog". Additionally, I have found the those 2-Rail wheels with slightly wider wheel treads work best, i.e. the Weaver 2-Rail wheels.

Maybe he really meant fine scale, as in .115 tread?  If so, the news is not good.  If he meant 2-rail, as in .172 tread and generous flanges, then maybe.  I had no trouble with the MTH locomotives on Old Pullman switches and .148 spiked rail.

If you actually mean 3R wheels and true fine scale (115 tread with, say, .021" flanges, in a word, no!

Jay

In the past there was a switch that could. It was from Trackmaster and had a closed frog. 

Backing up slightly, I know of no turnout, built like a prototype, that will do what you're asking.

Jay

I agree that the frog and guide rail are THE problem for those who want to run both 2 rail cars and 3 rail cars, but that may not be the only problem.  Some Atlas cars in my 2 rail fleet had excess wheel and axle lateral play in each truck assembly, and the wheelsets would not "follow the car body" through a diverging  turnout. (Note that the Kadee couplers were mounted to the car body, and NOT a part of the truck assembly, so the car body would follow the train, while the trucks and wheelsets would follow "eventually"...or not.) 

I wanted to make all of my 2 rail and 3 rail rolling stock interchangeable with my 2 rail and 3 rail layouts.  I especially wanted to run 2 rail rolling stock on my three rail layout, as the Kadee equipped cars couple closer to each other, and there is far less noise running 2 rail equipment vs 3 rail equipment.

I still believe that Hot's recommendation combined with the judicious selection of rolling stock will work, but the best solution is probably a new flange height standard and revised frog and guide rail dimensions.

Hudson J1e posted:

Rich Batista told me at York that he can run both scale and hi-rail wheels through MTH Scaletrax turnouts without any problem. He uses O-72 and #6 turnouts. 

I second.   The MTH scaletrax work extremely well for 2 rail wheels/fine scale wheels.  

Hold on, are were talking fine scale (.115 tread) or O Scale (.135 to .172 tread)?  Are we talking about fine scale, or not?  There is a difference.

Jay

I think when he's saying "fine scale" he's referring to the standard 2 rail wheel profile from MTH, not a true scale P48 profile of wheel. 

So no, not fine scale.

Jay

I have MTH european trains some are fine scale wheels and the others are high rail so I wanted to know if there is a switch O72 or bigger like a #4 or #6  that can accomodate both type of wheels????

Ok now I'm curious what wheel profile MTH is using for their European models. 

They have high rail wheels and also fine scale wheels for their european models

Didier,

Okay, who's fine scale standards did they use?  Can you provide actual specs?

Jay

DP.

Jay is correct, the answer is no.  However with some slight modification the original K-Line Super Snap Switches could be Re-Engineered to do what you are trying to accomplish.

I would also try using the FasTrack FTCC Switches and actually see what happens when running this particular rolling stock thru the 072 switches.

PCRR/Dave

There are a few ifs and buts however such switches have been manufactured.  O fine scale 17/64 has a slightly narrower check gauge  but common two rail O scale can run on Gargraves track or most any rail with a T profile and sharp edges on the rail head. Years ago Gargraves made a closing frog switch that could accommodate mixed traffic with common US O scale wheels as well as tinplate wheels. Another company  TRACKMASTER made a  similar switch I have attached photos of each the switch with the black base is Gargraves the one with wood base is trackmaster. This style switch is also rather easy to build yourself. Back in the 60s and early 70s I had a layout with two loops of Gargraves around a 12 X 16 room with sidings and reverse loops and I mixed two rail scale and three rail on the layout.  Once you overcome the coupler problem you can run two rail scale cars on the same train with three rail cars. However when running two rail locos you could not put three rail equipment on the track with two rail locos or cars. I just pulled three rail trains on an unpowered siding. I had a toggle switch and could switch between the two and the three rail mode.  Attached is a photo of a Gargraves closing frog switch and one by trackmaster.    J 

I operate O scale two rail rapid transit cars with mostly Q Car trucks and motors. I use Atlas track mostly the older type. As an experiment I set up a separate four track subway layout using Gargrave three rail track. I installed two Ross three rail double crossovers. I modified the switches by cutting the track connections to have them run two rail. I left the center rail but disconnected it. It was a subway and you could not see the center rails. The  scale wheels ran fine on the track  and through the switches. I never used the  subway much and I am in the process of removing  them. When I get to the switches all I have to do is solder wires where I cut the connections and they will be three rail again. You should have no problem at all using scale wheels on the new type Atlas track. Two rail wheels are available from many sources. I hope this information helps you.

How about a movable frog like here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bnza0i0cDY

Made by Weichen-Walter in Germany

Can’t have it both ways.

Larry

I run two and three rail rolling stock on Gargraves and Atlas track mixing scale and lobster claw couplers mixed and other than bouncing through the frog, I don't have issues with derailments.  Just my personal experience. 

I know this is very old, but Gargraves made 2R Hi-rail turnouts. Ross will also make their turnouts in 2R if you ask. As others mentioned there are still issues. I tested the feasibility of MTH Hi-Rail functionality a while back with mixed results.

I did a few experiments with a 2-rail boxcar with Weaver trucks, and it was a bit of a rough ride through the Ross switches at 25 scale MPH, but it stayed on the rails.  At 50 scale MPH, it did derail on the out route of a Ross 101 11 degree switch.  No problem at all on the 3-rail track, the switches are the issue.

I’ve looked at this very carefully, as I’m at an early point in my new O scale adventure.

I came at this from a 2-rail, scale modeler background. I’ve been in N scale, HO, 1/29 scale using LGB track, S scale 2-rail (not Hi Rail), and in O scale 2-rail DC with Kadee couplers and scale wheelsets.

Now, with a mix of 2-rail and three rail equipment, and no real ideas about the best way to power everything and to make it all work together and run smoothly, I’ve decided on the following…

2 rail track and turnouts, but with flangeways and clearances built for the traditional, deep flanges found on three rail rolling stock. That way my track will be built to accommodate one specific type of wheel profile. I can control those standards because I’ll be building the track and turnouts myself.

Kadee couplers instead of lobster claws on everything. They work, and they look good.

No track power. Deadrail, battery power only. Everything I own can be converted to this system, and it looks as though the operating bells and whistles (and sound, smoke, etc) are possible. This may get expensive, but at some point it’s all expensive, and in the end I’m not sure my total expenses will be any higher than anyone else.

The weirdest part of this so far is taking a scale-wheeled 2-rail diesel, and hunting around for deep flanged wheelsets in order to convert it—to my scale modeler lizard brain this feels very backward and de-evolved.

Jeff C

Sounds great Jeff, but your solution is hardly a universal solution.  Not many people are going to lay all their own track and switches, not to mention go all in on battery power and deadrail.

I guess I don't get why not just use 2-rail track and convert to scale wheels?

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Sounds great Jeff, but your solution is hardly a universal solution.  Not many people are going to lay all their own track and switches, not to mention go all in on battery power and deadrail.

I guess I don't get why not just use 2-rail track and convert to scale wheels?

I won't speak for Jeff, but for me the ability to purchase pretty much ANY steam engine I want AND have it negotiate 36"r is a HUGE benefit. Bob Bartizek has a fantastic 3R layout, but I can't help but think how much better it would be if he would have taken the approach that Jeff is taking. Believe it or not, 2R Gargraves doesn't look awful when ballasted and weathered.

What I would really like to see would be a new detailed 2R Hi-Rail track system from Lionel. Then they could offer 2R/3R switchable engines or even Factory engines that are DeadRail capable. There is absolutely no reason for an unrealistic 3R track system in 2023 except for the nostalgia and existing (admittedly huge) current install base. Offer it in parallel to the existing track system like they did with Fastrack and tubular until the new system takes over new sales. Unfortunately, I doubt Lionel will pursue this idea because there really is no competition for them anymore, and they keep selling out 3R products.  I personally just can't do it anymore. Can't look at 3R no matter how good the rest of the models and layout are.

It's actually REALLY frustrating to me. They already have this exact product line in S with the American Flyer product line. I would happily model in S as my sole scale, but there just won't be enough new products produced. So, I'm stuck between the space requirements of traditional 2R, Limited availability of S products, and the unacceptable 3R track. I just can't believe there aren't more modelers that feel like me.

Perhaps taking the more difficult path of building my own 2R track system like Jeff could be the answer?  Having access to all of those scale sized steam engines for conversion sure is tempting.

Roco in Austria made switches that match the Atlas track imported in the 80s and  90s which I think also came from Roco.    The switches spec out close to a #6.    They apparently were made to handle both European fine and coarse scale.   the frogs and guardrail slots are relatively wide.   They came with an insert for the frogs so a fine scale loco could ride through on the flange and not bounce.     They work fine on our US oscale.   I have a bunch in service and have had for years.     They came in 3 pieces split between the frog end and point end to fit in a small box about 89 inches long.

I don't know if they are still made or not.    They do show up at shows frequently and on auction sites in the US.

@prrjim posted:

Roco in Austria made switches that match the Atlas track imported in the 80s and  90s which I think also came from Roco.    The switches spec out close to a #6.    They apparently were made to handle both European fine and coarse scale.   the frogs and guardrail slots are relatively wide.   They came with an insert for the frogs so a fine scale loco could ride through on the flange and not bounce.     They work fine on our US oscale.   I have a bunch in service and have had for years.     They came in 3 pieces split between the frog end and point end to fit in a small box about 89 inches long.

I don't know if they are still made or not.    They do show up at shows frequently and on auction sites in the US.

I thought that they came in two pieces, split as you said, halfway between the frog and the points. The one in my hand is done that way. Anyway, I plan on using one (split) as a flatcar load being delivered.

That's my fat finger typo, and not proof-reading,    All the ones I have came in 2 pieces.    I did buy a few used ones that had been soldered together.

My recent buying binge left me with more three rail equipment than 2-rail, and some of that is three rail steam, which (at least to my way of thinking) would seem to be a more daunting challenge to convert to scale, 2-rail operation. The few pieces of 2-rail scale stuff I have (mainly diesel locos) are somewhat easy to convert to the deeper flange wheelsets.

And the other big factor is that the deeper flange wheels are the least objectionable of the traditional Lionel—toy train bugaboos to live with, where as lobster claw couplers, swinging pilots, and some of the other things bother me much more.

Then there is the matter of providing power to everything to make it run. I know nothing of TMCC, Leagacy, or DCS, or Ps1, Ps2, or Ps3—I don’t know what makes one good or bad, or what is compatible, or what a brick is … and when it comes to DCC I’m almost (but not quite) as clueless.

Anything I picked was going to be a MASSIVE learning experience—but very early on (with the exception of synchronized chuff and sound on steamers) it appeared that the Blunami boards and battery power were somewhat learnable, and that the advantages of battery power were something that looked very attractive to me in my particular situation.

As far as a track system was concerned it seemed like a no brainer for me to lay most of my own track, because I really enjoy that aspect of model railroading. Hand laying track is not for everyone, and I get that, but it does have big advantages at times, particularly when trying to shoehorn a large scale railroad into a small amount of real estate. It’s also relatively inexpensive, which helps me to afford the extra costs of buying Blunami boards, batteries, and other such things.

Commercial track is wonderful in many ways, but it is a big investment. It isn’t cheap.

Hand laying track and turnouts is a lot less daunting to me as long as I have one single standard in wheelsets to deal with, where as building a super turnout that can accommodate different flange profiles and wheelsets seems difficult at best.

The other thing about hand laying track is that it forces me to be realistic about whether I really need that super complicated track layout that draws up so easily on paper. With my method, every turnout is justified by contemplating the amount of blood, sweat, and tears that will need to be expended in relation to the supposed benefit. It is a built in check and balance against overreaching…

My way of looking at things is not at all a suggested way forward or any kind of mandate for others—and if it came off as such it wasn’t my intent.

Jeff C

If you are handlaying, 2 rails are 50 % less blood sweat and tears than 3!

And you are correct, converting steamers from 3 to 2 rail is a big job compared to diesels.

A point to consider, virtually all 2 rail stuff made in the USA today by mfgs of 2 rail product adhere to the NMRA standards for wheels and flanges and body height above the rail to set couplers.    Most are small mfgs and have to make compatible product to stay in business.     So if you want to use the same standard, that is something to consider.  

I think (and I may be wrong) but each of the 3 rail mfg designs their product to their own specifications which may or may not be compatible across product lines.    These are big mfg, and their business model is to sell complete systems including track, controls, couplers, signals etc.     so they do have a bit of interest keeping their products unique.

@Boston & Maine Todd posted:

BKOBERNUS - can you elaborate on the use of Ross turnouts with scale wheels....  I have tested both wheel types and the scale wheel always "falls down" at the frog due to its flange not being supported by the plate around the frog (plate is short and sized for deep hi-rail flange).  Did you modify the Ross, or does the speed of the rail car compensate enough to get through without a bump with scale wheels.....

I ran scale wheels on the AGHR layout for years. Ross turnouts handle them fine, though they will "bounce" in the frog gap. Hit my YouTube channel and there are several videos of scale-wheel and mixed trains being pulled by scale-wheel locomotives. The turnouts are Ross 11-degree (#5) and are unmodified. The two things that help this are that Ross guard rails are the height of the running rails and it appears the gap between the guard rails and the stock rails is narrower than some other turnouts.

Jeff scroll up the thread to a post by me in 2018 showing early Gargraves and Trackmaster closing frog switches. If you lay your own making a closing frog switch is the easest type switch to make yourself. If you have O scale fine scale your out of luck the gauge for fine scale is too narrow but standard O scale can be mixed with three rail with some reservations. You can run three rail and two rail cars in the three rail mode. However three rail trucks generally do not have insulated wheels and will short out two rail layouts. BTW almost all current O gauge 3 rail can run on DC if you give up horns and bells. Even the old Lionel Pullmor motors can run on DC. Better in fact than they run on AC. 2 rail locos with center rail pickups can also run on three rail track if the rail head is the T type rather than a round head rail. Much easier to adapt 2 rail equipment to three rail than 3 too 2.  Don't try and run modern 3 rail locos on DC without removing the modern electronics.                            j

many years ago, I had a 3 rail layout that was all gargraves track.    My locos were 3 rail at the time, some kitbashed, some new such as a Thomas 4-4-0 and a couple International models switchers.     As I did more and more model  building with various  car kits and an All Nation 4-4-0 kit, I started converting to Athearn 2 rail trucks.    I saw how well their HO trucks ran on a friend's HO layout and decided they were much better rolling and appearance than the various 3 rail I had including lionel, All Nation and Walthers (yes they offered their trucks in 3 rail at the time).

I also began operations with a tab on car top system.   I probably had 2 dozen switches on the layout and the ops required both trailing and facing point moves and locos running tender first.    I had very few problems with a mix of trucks and wheel types.    I think the main thing that made it work was the Gargraves 3 rail track had flat tops on the rails.    the scale size wheels were pretty happy with that and of course the 3 rail wheels did really well.    I think one thing I had to do because of the large frog gaps was to extend the height of the guard rails on the switches.    I glued a 1/16 inch squarestrip of styrene to the top of the guard rails and painted it flat black.    I think I used  that size to matchthe width of the existing guard rails. This kept the scale type wheels from wandering when going through the frog.    The guard rails built into the switchers were just a little low to hold the flanges on the 2 rail wheels.

Yes, just use stub switches.