Lock-Ons

Dan Padova posted:

Has anyone used the old Marx lock-ons for tubular track ?   I like the design.  First, the blades that get inserted into the slot on the underside of the track seem to make a nice tight fitting connection.  Second, the clip where the wires are inserted has a hole instead of the bent piece of metal seen on most lock-ons.  This seems to be a longer lasting and tighter holding design than the standard lock-on clip design. 

My 3rs layout uses FasTrack, so I don't have lockons there, of course.  But on my Marx tinplate layout, I do use Marx lockons.  My observation is that, yes, the way the blades fit into the slots beneath the rails does make for very positive contact.  But on the other hand, pushing those blades into the slots can be difficult; it's a tight fit.  Many's the time I've bent the blades, trying to get them to seat.  I generally spread the slot very slightly with a knife or small screwdriver before pressing the lockon into place.  So there are both good and bad aspects involved.

As to the method of connecting the power wires, I see it as more a matter of personal preference.

My version of a Marx lock-on:

Use a male disconnect bent at a right angle -

Add a double barrier strip.  Bottom -

Top -

There it is!

Pete

ps - I use a small screwdriver to open the slot for insertion.

Why not just solder the wire directly to the side of the rail and be done with everything...... A Weller 100/140 watt gun is more than adequate to get the job done permanently.

I like what Pete does.  When I started my layout (07-02-82) I was going for a permanent situation that would never be visited again.  Everything was soldered and is still in place.  The Marx does work but I would give Pete the nod over Marx.

In past layouts I have soldered the feeds to the track.  However, when changes have to be made, the soldered connections proved to permanent.  

Since I am building a post-war type layout, I want to be able to make changes at will.  

Pete has a very good idea there.  

I agree. I like these better than the newer ones and recently picked up ~20 from my LHS.

I agree with the above statement about soldering once is confident that the layout won't change.  I tend to "design on the fly" and like the flexibility of lock-ons for interim and semi-permanent use.

For those that don't like to solder Marx lock-ons can also be used on Gargrave track.

Pete's method is a good one which I use also.  Even better though, I use a male disconnect to insert into the track.  It's a solid "blade" rather than just two prongs.

dwp425 posted:

Pete's method is a good one which I use also.  Even better though, I use a male disconnect to insert into the track.  It's a solid "blade" rather than just two prongs.

Read the description and have a closer look at the top photo.

Pete

I used Texas Pete's method, and it has worked very well. At the time I laid the track,  I wasn't comfortable with soldering, so this seemed to be a great alternative.  Since then, I've purchased a new soldering iron, practiced a lot, and now have reasonable confidence in my ability. There are parts of my track plan that I've decided to modify.  After removing the track, while it's off the layout, I solder the feeder wires to the rails before reinstalling. 

John

Has anyone used the old Marx lock-ons for tubular track ?

I used them when I was a kid and ran out of Lionel lock-ons.
As I recall, they worked OK.
Eventually I went to soldering wires directly to the underside of the track. I also soldered jumpers between sections of track.

Today I only have a small layout. I use traditional Lionel lock-ons, and also use the power and ground terminals of my UCS uncoupling tracks to feed power. No jumpers.
I have a couple of LTC lighted lock-ons to act as pilot lights. No wires attached.

Marx also made single conductor terminals for use with track side accessories that were very similar.