What ever happened to stud rail?

Marklin has had it in HO for many years. And continues to this day.

 

When I think about it, It would be awesome for perhaps someone like MTH to come out with something this. I saw them because they seem to be innovators in modern era 3 rail (and HO).

 

Biggest advantage's are obviously appearance, it would look like 2 rail, more realistic. The other major benefit is of course the ease of not having to worry about polarity. It's basically has all the ease of our current 3 rail, but with an awesome appearance.

Swap out pick up rollers for a pick up shoe and we would be good to go.

Could change O gauge as we know it.

 

Side by side, given a choice between 3 rail traditional look, or 3 rail stud(which looks like 2 rail), stud rail wins all the time.

 

Just my 2 cents (well, maybe 5 cents worth)

When it comes to one of the major manufacturers introducing an all-new track line, I think it's safe to say that ship has sailed.  That wouldn't preclude a cottage manufacturer for coming up with something, but it's also safe to say that he/she would need VERY deep pockets and be well connected in order to do so.

 

Given the current state of the hobby, the economy in general, and the number of 3-rail and 2-rail track systems already available, I think it's probably unrealistic to think that you'll be seeing anything new in the near or even long-term future. 

I think the stud rail is a good idea and I think you would have to copy what Marklin has already done with their 3 rail system. I would think there would be some issues with three rail  command and sound systems currently on the market.

 

I will leave the stud rail system to somebody who wants to experiment with this type of track. As for me I'm too settled on what I have already have done. This stud rail has been talked about for some years but it seems it never gets off the drawing board for us 3 railers, maybe it will in the future.

It actually did get off the drawing board many years ago.  An article in CTT showed samples someone had made.  The construction was quite intricate, as I recall, and would be quite expensive to manufacture.  But boy, it looked great compared to what we have.

Stud rail is an interesting idea, but it would require special skates under locos for the power pickup. Conventional 3-rail locos couldn't run on it without modification.

 

Something I have always wondered about, would the skates sliding on stud contacts make more noise? Maybe someone with Marklin experience can tell us about that.

There was a very long forum post on this subject several years ago.  I believe it was on the the 3rs forum.  One of the people told about his efforts to develop a stud rail system.

I don't know if this post is still available.

 

I think that the biggest problem with stud rail is converting all the equipment from rollers to shoes.  

 

Joe

I remember those posts,that would of been Lisa Marie Tahatras (spelling?).She made her own three rail stud track and shoes for her locomotives.I always enjoyed her posts and insight. R.I.P Lisa Marie.

 

I think the next big technology leap in the next ten years will be to abandon all electrical pickup from the rail and use rechargeable lithium batteries(These are getting smaller and smaller and more powerful each year) with wireless digital control. I think Legacy may be headed in this direction since Lionel uses radio signals to communicate directly to the locomotive.The batteries will be small enough to sit in the tenders or the voids in the diesels and electrics.

 

Charging and programming can be done via a hidden USB or mini USB port on the locomotive or tender.

 

The G scale and one gauge modelers are already doing this. When this comes to pass one can drop the third rail and rollers all together if one chooses to do so.

 

 

Ricky

I looked into having the center studrail manufactured a few year ago after buying a few hundred feet from Hugo. The cost to make this rail in small quantities would make it expensive at best. And as Allan has mentioned, the current economy would make  the development and production of a completely new track system financially unfeasible. I remember it was these reasons (and a few other personal ones) that discouraged me from pursuing stud rail and lead me to loose interest in the hobby.

 

I've had alot of time to think about how I would realistically build a stud rail layout, and it turns out I was headed in the right direction. I have enough Atlas code 148 2-rail track and stud rail to build a single track mainline with a few sidings, and six 2 x 6 modules already made. I also have converted most of my 3-rail Atlas rolling stock and some of my favorite MTH and Lionel freight cars to 2-rail. 

 

There were also a few big mistakes I made- building 3-rail style benchwork for what is essentially 2-rail track, trying to permanently mount the track and studrail directly on the benchwork, and trying to pack too much track into a small space. Admittedly a 20 x 20 room is a large space to work with, but trying to fill it with 7 foot deep benchwork and 400' of track is a good way to waste building materials and time. My next attempt at a layout will be a modular setup that can be broken down if needed (our family room also hosts my wife's choir on occasion), and I will build the track on a sub-base before mounting it on the benchwork.

Geno

 

 

 

 

Boomer,

 

I think your on to something. I have seen engines converted to batteries, mostly in G scale but as the batteries keep getting smaller and more powerful, will O scale be far behind. The days of 2 rail track needed to run your 3 rail trains may not be too far off. 

 

That would be a much better alternative then stud rail and all the complexity that go's with it. All other track systems would also be obsolete except for 2 rail.

I think even two rail electrical pick up would eventually be rendered obsolete.You would never have to worry about cleaning track again,not to mention all the related wiring etc.The track could be used for triggering signals,train occupancy,etc.Power supplies like Z4000's could be used for switch motors,lights and accessories.

 

Ricky

Years ago on this forum there was a good bit of activity on this subject.  In particular there was a forumite by the name of Hugo (The Dane).  He had a stud rail layout in Rheims,France where he lived.   He modeled the PRR if my memory is correct.  Hugo came to York a few times and visited with some OGR forum members.  His posts were quite informative and he seemed like a pretty nice guy.

Perhaps you could do a search for Hugo.

 

Norm Rish

I could see O gauge trains being powered by Lithium-Ion batteries- I'm a carpenter and the latest generation of 18v Li-Ion power tools run on a single charge being used hard for 8-10 hours a day. If this technology could be designed to fit under a shell, or be incorporated into the design of a locomotive (think battery pack shaped like a fuel tank) , it would make power supply from the track redundant. But I think having a stud rail to power older engines would still be a good thing to have- I'm sure I'm not the only one who has a number of 3-rail command-controlled engines, and would rather keep them then sell them.

 

Some brands of battery-powered power tools like Makita or De Walt have two sizes of batteries. Both are Li-Ion, but obviously the bigger battery runs longer. Even a smaller battery could provide 2-3 hours of continuous power, and having more than one battery (one on the charger, one on the engine) could provide all-day power.

Geno

 

There is absolutely no reason for that to happen again. If you don't like the idea, then don't use it! But don't go on to criticize and bash those that think the idea has merit.

Fred,

I'm not too worried about other O gaugers say about me or doing a stud rail layout- I came back into the hobby for my own personal enjoyment and I doubt anyone will discourage me from trying build my own layout and running my own trains as I see fit. Hopefully this time Rich and Allan will just edit out the negative posters and keep the thread alive so that myself and other 3-railers can try to duplicate your efforts.  I'm going to pick up where I left off years ago, work on a layout design that suits my space better, build better benchwork, and then begin the task of laying the actual track down.

 

What amazes me is how 3-rail scale guys could find such an idea as stud rail w/ 2-rail track so horrible that they would attack you and your work. I remember when 3RS emerged in the early 90's and there was some negativity from the tinplaters and 2- railers, but nonetheless it still took off and grew in popularity- this no doubt made the introduction of more scale-appearing 3-rail track like Atlas O and MTH Scaletrax possible. These same 3RS guys pushed for more detail, 2-rail TMCC from Atlas and Proto-scale 3-2 wheelsets and fixed pilots from MTH, and the O gauge manufacturers responded with the equipment the 3RS market wanted.

 

I don't see the same thing happening with stud rail, since it's not a RTR track system,  the economy is in recession and there's not enough demand for it to be made. The biggest issue I see is the manufacture of the stud rail- easy enough for a large corporation with millions in resources to bring a new item to market, but difficult at best for a single individual with only the will to create the part that makes it all happen. If others found a way to make it on their own in the past, I will too. I have no illusions about going into the track manufacturing business either, but 

I will attempt to reproduce the stud rail to a quality similar to the product I bought from Hugo. I know I have all of the parts to make this track system happen- only time will tell how my quest will end.

Geno

 

 

 

hello guys and gals.........

 

Well you can always go back to O scale 2 rail but why?  I grew up with 3 rails and so i am used to it so can you.  If it wasn't for 3 rail,I would in different hobby 

 

the woman who loves the S.F.#5021

Tiffany

I mess with Marklin now and then, and I really like the look of their track.  It would be nice if it were available in O.  I also seem to remember that someone had an idea for a snap-on shoe that would fit on roller pickups.

 

John

Those days are here now. There are several people running via battery power, and there have been threads on the subject on this forum. Andy Romano has written magazine articles about his battery controlled "Ironbound RR" and has been using battery power for several years.

 

Simon

 

 

My guess is that you'll see battery power for O gauge/scale trains before you'll see a new track system.  Battery power is very prevalent in Large Scale these days, and it's only a matter of time before technology will lead to efficient and smaller rechargeable batteries that can power O gauge trains.

I have a Williams NW2 that runs on battery that we use for track cleaning in our subway system  Used the Aristo Train Enginner 2.4 with DC board  I put the battery in a trailer car  

Some of us are already using battery power coupled with radio controlled DCC. Check out this thread (http://www.oscalemag.com/wordp...iewtopic&t=218.1). There is even a video of me running an O scale steam engine on battery power. I calculate that I can run for almost 4 hours on 1 charge.

Joe

Thanks for the link to that club's website....Greg

Hello all, here is some new  info on this topic.  MTH HO now has a Proto-Sound 3E+ model that contains a 3rd rail slide shoe for use with Marklin HO stud rail and can operate on AC power.  Since some newer products start in HO I always check mfg's other catalogs for coming attractions.  Check it out on page one of the new MTH HO catalog.

 

Jack   

There ya go!  The future is now!  Good going, Joe!

 

I'll be giving one of those MTH HO stud-rail locomotives a try once they become available since I have a lot of Marklin HO track, not to mention a good number of Marklin HO locomotives.

Battery Power radio control system running on my 3-rail track

 

That's because of the European HO market.  Roco, Fleishmann and other European manufacturers also have sliding shoe equipped locomotives for those who use the stud contact track. 

 

Marklin has had 3-rail HO since who knows when.  I think they developed the stud contact system in the late 1960's or early 1970's.  It's as well established in Europe as 3-rail O is over here.  Anyone who wants to sell HO trains in Europe understands they'd miss out on sales if they ignored the Marklin system.

 

I seriously doubt you'll see MTH make stud contact track for O.

 

Rusty

A few years ago, I had announced a stud rail system that I was going to produce. It was placed on the back burner due to a monetary setback. Here is the computer sample I had worked up. If I recall, this is a 10" section of track. The rail distance is Standard O gauge (5'). The ties are based on prototype measurements and spaced a prototypical 20" apart. The stud rail, pictured here in red, was grey and would rise up between the rails and lay in the ballast. This helped make the stud rail disappear.

 

I was designing two pick-up types: a clip on and a direct replacement for a pick-up roller. The pick-ups would be about an inch in length.

 

 

 

 

 

JFTR, Marklin introduced stud rail in 1953.

Here are a few pieces that I did for a display. The first is an Atlas #5. The second is a piece of Atlas flex track. The third is a small kings post bridge I scratch built one evening. The last is just showing a slider that I clipped onto the bottom of a simple K-Line caboose.

 

 

Well, whatever else one can say, Fred certainly has made a beautiful turnout.  The studs could be imagined as oil drips from various locomotives.

 

Just for a point of reference, how much for track and switches, assuming a fairly large market, and assuming no cold feet as the battery power stuff takes over?

The biggest reason to do stud rail is the ability to run your favorite 3RS locomotives on 2-rail track- you don't have to sell them off, just retrofit them with fixed pilots and scale couplers. You will also be able to run those Atlas 2-rail TMCC and MTH 3-2 Proto-scale wheel equipped engines with ease, as well as any 2-rail rolling stock or any converted 3-rail car with scale wheels.

What about 2-rail engines with DCC? Hmmmmm...... another experiment to conduct.

 

Geno

Even on my small scale you'd basically need to add about $12 to the cost of each 2 rail Atlas switch and about $2 per foot of track. That adds up to about 50% more than the cost of a piece of Atlas flex track. I am no longer in a position to have any of it made though.

 

I was into rc cars as a kid. I was getting back into it around the time I was working on stud rail. Once I got caught up on modern brushless motors, 2.4ghz control systems, and lipo batteries, I realized that the future was indeed in no track power/wireless control and that I was trying to do something that was 50 years too late. It is the way I am most likely going to ultimately go heading forwards. 

See?  Because you do not allow folks to make 2- rail comments, this worthwhile thread is going to die.

 

Fred did some really good work - pay attention to his ideas.  Opinion.

I have never actually lost interest in it. I made the decision to just go full 2 rail since I don't really own much to convert and battery power is appealing to me. My original goal was to develop it studrail enough along that the diy'ers could make it work pretty easily. That desire was killed when my thread died. The link to the Swiss club above has gotten me playing with an idea though. I spent some time tonight playing with a few things.

Geno I have a small 3 rail inglenook sidings that I built (hand laid) using code 172 brass rail. The ties are overly large but they and the brass rail were used to match the look of the old Scalecraft switch that it uses. That switch is a closed frog design and the code 172 rail works with scale and deep flange wheels. The only thing preventing anyone from smoothly and reliably running both wheel types on the same track is the frog area of modern switches. Closed frog designs work wonderfully.

Since I came from n scale and dcc I made the decision early on to keep dcc in o scale. I originally wanted to stay in 3 rail though since I'd like the option of running my dad's old postwar Lionel or my nephews Lionel trains. You can see the dilemma. I also like fairly scale accurate looks. Abandoning the idea to run those trains leaves me with the easy decision to go 2 rail but I do have a few engines to convert. There is a system out now that turns any dcc system into full wireless battery power so I wouldn't even have to change control systems.

Post updates on your progress. I still like the idea of studrail even though I may not personally go down that path anymore.

Many years ago I was in Germany and bought a Marklin narrow gauge steam set. It was O scale running on HO track with the studs in the center. It runs very well. I am reducing my collection so I will sell it one of these days. I do have a lot of the track.

This makes total sense to me.  I am using 18v battery powered saws that draw a lot more demand from the pack than an O gauge engine.  They will quickcharge in 15 minutes or so.  A "power station" accessory for recharging that looked like a diesel or steam servicing facility would be really cool.  I don't see this technology being that far away for O gauge.

 Marklin Minex: http://www.guidetozscale.com/html/marklin_minex.html

 

 It runs on standard old metal Marklin stud track, you've got to love the sound of that and then the smell of ozone from the motor   . The Minex sets show up regularly around here but are always too expensive for my taste. 

Defiantly a interesting post! How would one convert said locomotives/rolling stock to stud rail? Use a special glue to glue the shoes to it?

I find it interesting this thread got moved to 3-rail trains- not really a big deal though.

 

Hugo the Dane, the gentleman I bought the studrail from, also sent me a few clip-on sliders with the studrail. They were made from brass, and configured in such a way that they would just snap onto your roller pickup with little effort. If I find them I will post pics of them (probably buried somewhere in a box of trains).

 

Most 3-rail trains have the ability to run on 2-rail track, provided the flanges on the wheels of the engine or rolling stock aren't taller than the code 148 rail that Atlas O uses for their 2-rail track. I tested this theory on a Lionel SD-90MAC on a 6' test track I set up a few years ago- works fine with studrail, but when I put a DRG SD-40T-2 dummy on the track the flanges were contacting the ties.

 

Geno