Fast Tracks

Hello there all,

I'm in the stages of planning my new layout, and I'm considering making my own turnouts with Fast Tracks jigs. I have one question though:

This is difficult for me to explain, so please ask for more clarification if need be. I have a position where I'd like to fit two custom turnouts into, but I'm wondering if it's even possible to build. I'm using code 55 N scale track with #6/7 turnouts. I have two left-hand turnouts that I'd like to connect end-to-end, and by that I mean having the two tangent exits of the turnout as close together as possible. The tangent frog rail of the first turnout would run directly into the outside tangent rail of the second turnout. Measuring along the tangent of the two turnouts, which are both aligned, the two frogs of the turnouts are both parallel, one being on the inside rail and one on the outside rail. Can I construct the turnouts with the frogs this close together? I realize that I could prepare the parts for the two turnouts and then I could fully assemble the one turnout in the jig and install it on the layout. The rest of the turnout would have to be built in place on the layout.

Do you all think that this would be possible to even do? If it were to be done properly, I think it could be a piece of trackwork that'd I be very proud of.

Please let me know your thoughts, especially those from anybody having direct experience with the jigs.

Cheers, Brent

Kane,

As I understand your needs, there will be only two issues to deal with. You'll need at least about 1/4" beyond the frog wing and guardrails before you attach to the second turnout.

You'll also have to custom handle the close point rails turnout throw as it will be located in the longer cross ties of the preceding frog as well. You'll need to have extra long cross ties and switch headers intertwined. I've seen this done by several folks, it just takes some planning.

I'd suggest you cut and paste the templates for your needs and visualize the planning for the construction. I've 'played' with a cut and paste - not really accurate - but to give an idea of the approach - see picture.

_________________
-ed mccamey-
COSLAR RR - http://www.coslar.us/
NMRA Standards and Conformance Department
PROTO & FINE Scale Coordinator
I estimate I have about 5 pounds of coupler springs somewhere in the vicinity of my workbench.

As I reread your description, I think you are asking about more like a lapped set of turnouts, similar to something akin to a 3-way. Here's a picture of perhaps what you mean. It's doable - but likely a full custom construction. Try and layout your needs graphically for more clarity.

_________________
-ed mccamey-
COSLAR RR - http://www.coslar.us/
NMRA Standards and Conformance Department
PROTO & FINE Scale Coordinator
I estimate I have about 5 pounds of coupler springs somewhere in the vicinity of my workbench.

What you are thinking is not what I'm considering, sorry for the mis-communication. Here's a rough drawing of what I'm thinking of, drawn in 3rd Planit.

Does what you say about the guard rail still apply? Because if I'm imaging corrrectly, one guard rail pair could serve both frogs? Any other thoughts re: my first questions asked?

Cheers, Brent

Brent,

OK - got the picture in mind now. You are correct that the two frogs can be almost exactly opposite. However using the wing rails on one frog for the guard on the other frog is a bit fraught with some problems. It can be done - but with some VERY careful attention to the track gage and the setting of the wing rails. Model standards, accommodating the outsize flanges have a different flangeway at the frog and the guardrail. It's based on the ideal track check gage relationship.

You'll need to construct the two frogs with a near MAX flangeway (but not beyond the MAX - say right at 0.030") and then set the track gage based on the track check gage (0.323" MIN - I'd say 0.325") in opposing relationships from the wing rail to the frog point rails. This will actually widen the running track gage from the absolute minimum ONLY ever so slightly between the frogs. This will not hurt normal running provided ALL your wheel sets on ALL equipment is set correctly. There's just a bit of allowance in the standards to handle the interface. NOTE: that the track gage is going to be very close to a dead tight (narrow) gage and NOT as wide as generally allowed in most construction. Maximum track gage will be about 0.355" between the two frogs.

I'd build essentially two partial lopsided turnouts with the diverging route and frogs without the straight stock rails and fit them together then fill the straight stock rails from the frogs back towards the opposing points. Allowing a very slight transition from the narrower gage back out to the more usual moderate track gage for the points area.

This is not a bad option or an impossible task at all. Should be very fine and a nice bit of trackwork for show and tell. Of course, the clearance gage of equipment will not allow simultaneous operation through both diverging routes at the same time as the fowling points are also overlapped.

-ed-

_________________
-ed mccamey-
COSLAR RR - http://www.coslar.us/
NMRA Standards and Conformance Department
PROTO & FINE Scale Coordinator
I estimate I have about 5 pounds of coupler springs somewhere in the vicinity of my workbench.

So how far apart do the turnouts need to be to use the conventional guides method? I have the turnouts drawn as close as I'd like them to be, will the conventional way of mounting guides work fine?

So now I guess I have to cough up some money for the jigs, lol.

Brent

For a fully 'conventional' overlap -you'd need to offset the frogs by just about the amount of the guard and wing rail extensions. You can get by with a slight extra narrowing together - but you need to adjust the slightly angled gather points and have them mid way.

_________________
-ed mccamey-
COSLAR RR - http://www.coslar.us/
NMRA Standards and Conformance Department
PROTO & FINE Scale Coordinator
I estimate I have about 5 pounds of coupler springs somewhere in the vicinity of my workbench.

Brent,

I'm getting into this discussion very late, but did you consider using a double slip for you application?

While in your soluton you cauld possibly have had two consists moving at the same time, using a double slip would restrict the application to only one mevement at a time.

Chuck L.

_________________
Chuck Lobaugh
cfl9280@sc.rr.com
"oldsnowtop" ... A seller of switches on eBay

I did consider using a double-slip, but I also considered the cost factor of buying another jig for just one turnout on a smallish (3 1/2 x 7') layout and realized it wasn't worth it. I actually had a brain wave last night on the computer and drew it a little different so as to make it work with conventional turnouts; I also ended up with a longer passing siding, whoo whoo! I guess I just had to think about it for long enough. Thanks for you guys' help on the subject!

Brent

I did the same thing with a # 6 double slip and a # 5 turnout that have oppossing frogs. To be honest I didn't really think about it...I just did it.

📷 Image no longer available Originally hosted at gallery.zealot.com — the host went away before this archive was made.