# 24" radius and switch track



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Maybe this is a dumb question, but how do I create a 24" curve with a switch track?

Put differently, I need to use 24" curves on a layout b/c of the size of rolling stock. I'd like to have a turnout come out of curve tracks instead of straight pieces.

Hope that Makes sense?


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

Started typing reply but the attached probably going to do a much better job explaining substitution radius

regardless. peco c100 small radius turnout is about ~24"


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

tankist said:


> Started typing reply but the attached probably going to do a much better job explaining substitution radius
> 
> regardless. peco c100 small radius turnout is about ~24"


Thanks for this. So after reading a bunch of times, does it say that Turnout #4 would give me the closest radius (R Subst) to 24" at 29"? 

Also the track wont be long enough obviously so would have to close the gap with some sort of flexible small track? Or am I making that up? (Total newb here BTW).


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

You do understand that the diverging leg of a non-curved turnout comes off at a straight angle, right? Only Atlas Snap Switches have a curved diverging leg.

Basically you'd want to use a #6 or better, a #8 turnout with 24" curves. Start your actual curve st the end of the diverging leg. If you want to use them in the middle of a curve, use curved turnouts. The Walthers ones are marked with the radii of the through and diverging legs.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

CTValleyRR said:


> You do understand that the diverging leg of a non-curved turnout comes off at a straight angle, right? Only Atlas Snap Switches have a curved diverging leg.
> 
> Basically you'd want to use a #6 or better, a #8 turnout with 24" curves. Start your actual curve st the end of the diverging leg. If you want to use them in the middle of a curve, use curved turnouts. The Walthers ones are marked with the radii of the through and diverging legs.


 Actually I don't. This is my first crack at real design layout since I was a boy - maybe 35 years ago. LOL So let me see if I can break this down....




CTValleyRR said:


> You do understand that the diverging leg of a non-curved turnout comes off at a straight angle, right? Only Atlas Snap Switches have a curved diverging leg.


I thought all of the "diverging" legs of turnouts came out at a curve, and hence could be used as a curve track. Reading the above I see that one part of that leg is at a straight angle. 



CTValleyRR said:


> Basically you'd want to use a #6 or better, a #8 turnout with 24" curves. Start your actual curve st the end of the diverging leg.


Ok, so I'll use #8 turnouts. 



CTValleyRR said:


> If you want to use them in the middle of a curve, use curved turnouts. The Walthers ones are marked with the radii of the through and diverging legs.


Hmmm, so it makes a difference where I use it, at the start of the curve or middle? And when you say use curved turnouts you mean Atlas as they're the only ones who have them?

I think what I'll wind up doing is starting a new thread with pictures of my layout. I found this cool software from Atlas that's allowing me to do it.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

If you are using flex track, just put a #6 or #8 turnout in the curve with the straight part of the turnout pointing out of the curve.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

There are three types of turnouts of the type that one would want out on higher speed tracks: N. American conventional with tangent paths through the frog and beyond to the ends of the frog rails; British and European standards where the curve from the points rails continues through the frog and beyond until the next tangent rail must be met; and curved turnouts, used everywhere, where the through route and the diverging route are BOTH curved. 

It seems you want the second type I describe above...a curved route through the frog and beyond. This allows you to maintain a curved route and 'substitute' the turnout into your greater curve properly. If you elect to use a N. American prototype, you must consider the 'substitution' radius which is hardly anything useful at all, especially for modelers.

A #6 turnout of the N. American convention, if it's a true #6, has a substitution radius upwards of 42". That's way more than what you need for your curve radius. A curved Code 100 Atlas 'snap' type #4 is about all you would need for your radius, but it's tighter than you'd like. A curved #5 would be almost ideal, but you'll have to look at PECO or have one made for you using Fast Tracks method...as far as I know.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

peco C100 small radius will be closest to 24", no further discussion needed on this. Atlas products can be safely disregarded for anything serious.

the question that remains is whether that is something you actually need. how about post your layout plans in progress?


----------



## Shdwdrgn (Dec 23, 2014)

Honestly this is one of the reasons why I took the time to learn how to build handlaid turnouts... when working in tight spaces you *need* those curved legs to match the rest of the curve sometimes, plus I found if I wasn't restricted to common turnouts that I could get a lot more creative with my track work.

If you can work a soldering iron and have a good eye for the mechanical nature of turnouts, building them by hand turns out to be quite easy, although time-consuming. You can build them with or without jigs (and since all of mine are freestyle a jig wouldn't match my plans anyway). It cost me around $100 to get started, the bulk of which was the package of bare rail and the various track gauges. Since I build in dual-gauge (HO plus HOn3) I had to buy twice as many track gauges to get started, but now I have enough hardware to put together any shape of turnout I desire, and I really enjoy building them.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

tankist said:


> peco C100 small radius will be closest to 24", no further discussion needed on this. Atlas products can be safely disregarded for anything serious...


Really...?


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Yep So took the advice and started a new thread on my layout plans. So we can close this one. You'll see its already progressed to the point where I'm still dealing with the turnouts and making it work...

https://www.modeltrainforum.com/showthread.php?t=173366


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

The problem with switching threads is that we lose all this history for what we've already covered on the topic. Oh well. It's done now.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

CTValleyRR said:


> The problem with switching threads is that we lose all this history for what we've already covered on the topic. Oh well. It's done now.


 Oops sorry about that. Thought that was better and someone suggested it. Oh well. sorry.


----------



## Murv2 (Nov 5, 2017)

I have a passenger train that derails on alternating #4 switches, which means it has to stay on the outer loops of the layout. BUT, I needed a siding to put it on, so I added one, but I remember that running through the turn on a switch isn't so great an idea on a curve so I put the straights just before the last pair of curves and it gave me the curve without trains running through the turn on the turnout. If that makes no sense, I agree. Hopefully this pic will help explain.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

Murv's example above is cleanly done (with Kato unitrack).


----------



## flyboy2610 (Jan 20, 2010)

tankist said:


> Atlas products can be safely disregarded for anything serious.


I've used Atlas turnouts for years and have had 0 problems with them.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

MichaelE said:


> Really...?


I didn't spot one In both local clubs I visited



flyboy2610 said:


> I've used Atlas turnouts for years and have had 0 problems with them.


I will leave the issues with aesthetics aside for a moment. Functionality wise I'm guessing you don't see rolling stock shuddering while jumping over the slopy cast frog as a problem then? Did you really never ever had a derail on that switch?

They can be modified to look better and work smooth, but for the amount of effort required if I'm already spending the time I'd much rather convert an old shinohara. Half the effort , comparable if not better cost and much better end result product. Aside of availability I fail to find advantages. 


For the discussion and the way the question was asked the best answer is- peco streamline short radius. resembles the desired geometry closer then any other product. I do realize conversation moved past that and there I are bigger issues to resolve with that project.


----------



## JNXT 7707 (May 5, 2013)

MichaelE said:


> Really...?


You heard the man - if you're using Atlas products, you're just not serious. Now run along and play, discussion over! :laugh:


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Well I guess I'll have to tear out all of my working Custom Line turnouts and start over to be serious. 

Thanks for all that extra work. Just when the railroad was running 100% reliably. Then I hear this...:rippedhand:


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

All emotion and no substance. If you feel like defending whatever product you chose to use your argument should go something like this: "I evaluated X,Y and Z products and chose product X based on ____(insert strong point/desirable property) " optionally you can add: "despite the shortcomings such as ____." So others can see your evaluation is objective. 

As far as turnouts I evaluated all readily available brands short of micro engineering, I have Atlas streamline (got rid of snaps I had), old shinohara, new walthers and peco (setrack and streamline) at hand as of writing this. I can put them side by side. If some one wants to mention reasons to pick Atlas over the competition I will gladly hear it out.


Michael, I will almost take your word as to 100% reliability, after all you are running European engines with big sharp flanges and that might just do it. But with nmra RP-25 wheels sported by modern North American models Atlas streamline requires heavy modification to run smiothly and 100% reliably - fact. 

Whether to rip track out or not it's your call, I did however. And then I had to do it again when I decided I do want remote switch machines after all. Chances are good that you will eventually too.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Tankist, thanks for sharing your evaluation, based on your own independent research.

Fact is, however good your data or your analysis, a prescriptive "do not do this" approach just isn't helpful. Whatever your own research may show, the other clear fact remains that many hobbyists do use Atlas turnouts without problems, and you putting them down for doing so adds nothing to the discussion.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

CTValleyRR said:


> Tankist, thanks for sharing your evaluation, based on your own independent research.
> 
> Fact is, however good your data or your analysis, a prescriptive "do not do this" approach just isn't helpful. Whatever your own research may show, the other clear fact remains that many hobbyists do use Atlas turnouts without problems, and you putting them down for doing so adds nothing to the discussion.


i'm not putting down anyone. i'm heavily critiquing choice of material. there is quite a difference.

"do not do this" approach indeed isn't helpful. "do not do this because product in question has serious design flaws and does not offer a single meaningful advantage over competition" should be more helpful.

i have no doubt in my mind that many people use custom-line and there is a very explainable reason as to why. but i've yet to see a serious layout (home or club) that after evaluating their options knowingly decided to use that product on their mainlines. nor i ever heard recommendations to use custom-line over competition from reputable modelers.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

tankist said:


> All emotion and no substance. If you feel like defending whatever product you chose to use your argument should go something like this: "I evaluated X,Y and Z products and chose product X based on ____(insert strong point/desirable property) " optionally you can add: "despite the shortcomings such as ____." So others can see your evaluation is objective.
> 
> As far as turnouts I evaluated all readily available brands short of micro engineering, I have Atlas streamline (got rid of snaps I had), old shinohara, new walthers and peco (setrack and streamline) at hand as of writing this. I can put them side by side. If some one wants to mention reasons to pick Atlas over the competition I will gladly hear it out.
> 
> ...



You needn't take my word at all. I know they are 100% reliable and that is really all that matters. And I'll not be ripping up track to replace turnouts on someone else's 'word'.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Atlas turnouts and other products*

Confessions of an Atlas turnout critic.

I have been quite critical of one type of Atlas turnout, their HO "Snap Switches." The reasons are their flawed design, the weak switch machine, and the 18" radius curve substitution that drive that design, and the flimsy materials they are made of. Those are all physical things that may cause problems. "MAY", not "must", "inevitably will", or "always do." Also if a problem arises, it may well be fixable.

Atlas custom line numbered turnouts are reputed to be better. They don't have the 18"r curved leg, and don't come with Atlas's twin-coil switch machine attached. However, since I have not used Atlas Custom Line turnouts, I'm not going to try to comment on them. I have used the "Snap Switches in both HO and N scales. I have had problems with them and I no longer use them.

Most of my criticism of Atlas snap switches come when a "newbie" asks for advice on what turnouts to buy, or relates a problem he's experiencing with his Atlas turnouts. I usually suggest going with another brand, Peco, if the guy hasn't already committed himself by buying, and installing, a whole bunch of Atlas snap switches. In the latter case I usually suggest that he read my post "Improving Atlas turnouts" to help him identify and fix the problem, while still keeping his Atlas turnouts.

I disagree with the statement that "Atlas PRODUCTS can be safely disregarded for anything serious." Atlas makes a heck of a lot of products besides the one Atlas product that I've criticized, their HO snap switch. They make, and sell, a whole range of good products. Also I suspect that Atlas turnouts may well be the most widely used brand of commercial turnouts in the U.S. Maybe even in the world. All those hundreds of people who use, and like, the Atlas turnouts and have had few, if any, problems with them shouldn't be arbitrarily dismissed, as "not serious." For that matter what is "serious" about model railroading anyway? I thought it was a hobby, and supposed to be fun.

Also, just who determines (presumably for all the rest of us, here on earth) what is "serious", or "not serious?" 

I also disagree strongly with, and frankly am insulted by, the statement that, "No further discussion on this (topic) is required." That's not something that any one individual has any right whatever to decide for anyone, or everyone, else. It's a free country, and a free forum. Each of us has a right to express their opinion, but none of us has a right to decide that others may not continue to express theirs.

Traction Fan


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

context of the conversation is switches. 

Diverging line of Peco streamline C100 small radius switch (SL-91, SL-92) being a British profile resembles a curve of 24"R more then any other product offered short of hand-laid. this means best solution to OP request is identified. there is no better solution. conversation about the application (the bigger picture) moved to a new thread. 

attached 1: 
for reference side by side comparison in high-ish resolution. Peco has 1999 stamped, old Shinohara of original Japanese production (green boxed) isolated, and Atlas custom-line mark 2. 
later development mark-3 lost rivets from throw bar, current gen mark-4 is rivet-less resolving the issue of wheels catching on inconsistent rivets. 

attached 2. 
let's grab a straight edge, you don't even need to blow up the image to see it is seriously out of gauge. coupled with wheel dipping frog (unchanged through generations) i do not see how this possibly can be 100% reliable. modification in form of rail bending, point rail filing and polishing, shimming the frog with polystyrene strips to close the oversized gap (that can send the wheel right into the sharp part) can be done to make it usable. in my opinion the end result still does not justify the effort. 

i still don't hear from product users here as to advantages over competition. i can only think of upfront cost. 

PS
i guess we indeed can attribute different meaning as to what "serious" means.

PSS
Fun fact, MB Klein (modeltrainstuff) on Atlas mark-4 product page has picture of riveted Mark3. I almost wonder what they actually ship :laugh:


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

None of my Atlas Custom Line look like what you have pictured. There are no rivets and a there is an arrow-straight edge into the point.

I will post photos tomorrow. It's late.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)




----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

MichaelE said:


> None of my Atlas Custom Line look like what you have pictured. There are no rivets and a there is an arrow-straight edge into the point.
> 
> I will post photos tomorrow. It's late.


Clearly Tankist is showing us the way things used to be. By his own statement, none of the items shown in his demonstration are current production units. Be interesting to see if he has any analysis for how the current stuff stacks up.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

tankist said:


> context of the conversation is switches.
> 
> Diverging line of Peco streamline C100 small radius switch (SL-91, SL-92) being a British profile resembles a curve of 24"R more then any other product offered short of hand-laid. this means best solution to OP request is identified. there is no better solution. conversation about the application (the bigger picture) moved to a new thread.
> 
> ...


 The word you used was products, not switches, or turnouts, but products. "Wheel dipping frogs" are not unique to Atlas turnouts. Peco and Shinohara turnouts let wheels fall into their frogs too.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

> Clearly Tankist is showing us the way things used to be.


i did notice the pictures, i was guessing Michael didn't have time to post his take on the the points i brought up. 
as i said mark 4 is a rivet-less design. while the cosmetics did change for the better it is the same very mold and the same geometry I take it no one aside of me sees the perfectly flat diverging point rail (pic2) as an issue? on pic1, is this due to angle of the camera that it looks like gauge is inconsistent ?

. i've yet to read reports that other manufacturers products decreased in quality.


traction fan said:


> The word you used was products, not switches, or turnouts, but products.


context is everything. if it makes you feel any better i can add that their master series locomotives are superb and silver not far behind (as far as i can tell by the specimens i have).


> "Wheel dipping frogs" are not unique to Atlas turnouts. Peco and Shinohara turnouts let wheels fall into their frogs too.


the degree to which it dips is quite unique . not an issue for older stuff, it just rides on the over-sized flange. a RP-25 profiled wheel of modern north american models deeps considerably when the wheel hits the frog just right. on P and S switches things are smooth.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

When you're in a hole, the best course is usually to put down the shovel.

This isn't a discussion that's benefiting anyone. Your analysis of (older) turnouts of different designs and extensive presentstions of your case aside, you have yet to account for the fact that large numbers of hobbyists use these products without trouble. You're just pissing people off. We get it: your personal opinion, backed by plenty of your own experience and observation is that the products are no good. Fine. Quit trying to convince the world that you have achieved the one true path to wisdom.

Let it go, Indiana.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

CTValleyRR said:


> When you're in a hole, the best course is usually to put down the shovel.
> 
> This isn't a discussion that's benefiting anyone. Your analysis of (older) turnouts of different designs and extensive presentstions of your case aside, you have yet to account for the fact that large numbers of hobbyists use these products without trouble. You're just pissing people off. We get it: your personal opinion, backed by plenty of your own experience and observation is that the products are no good. Fine. Quit trying to convince the world that you have achieved the one true path to wisdom.
> 
> Let it go, Indiana.


hmmm.. yes i did: "_i have no doubt in my mind that many people use custom-line and there is a very explainable reason as to why._" i didn't realize it is not self explanatory, let me elaborate: due to the beauty of capitalism products of different price points and quality exist on free market. true for pretty much any commodity. indestructible brand name tools coexist with properly marketed disposables that barely last through work-session. the question is whether the consumer aware what he purchases exactly. more important yet is definition of "*without trouble*". when my brand new cheapo ~50$ grinder smoked from the trigger after i only went trough half of garage floor it was not a problem - i just went back to harbor freight and exchanged it right away. second unit finished the job albeit smoking from motor on the home stretch (got returned as well). 
likewise with turnouts, i mean is shaking, the occasional derail and possibility of trip to the floor when conditions are just right really a trouble ? :laugh: 
hopefully this addresses your point of vast user base. 

now it is your turn. feel free to showcase a MRR club that chose atlas over competitors, hopefully with their reasons. recommendations to use this product over over other brands in crucial areas such as hard to reach staging. or at something that demonstrates that gauge inconsistency is not really detrimental to switch performance. maybe we are looking at different things and i keep missing, but all i find searching for the same is instruction oh how to improve the shortcomings.


here is what really not helpful however - you trying to guess my motives (to the best of your imagination) instead of addressing points that i brought up. trust me, your (or anyone else) opinion of my level of wisdom and other qualities concerns me not at all 

all the best!

PS
me making people mad? why? if they purchased exactly the amount of quality they demanded and happy with why would they be concerned/mad at all? and if they got misled into purchasing something that doesn't, that's a question not to me but to manufacturer who didn't deliver on advertised, or themselves for not doing homework.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

So......anyhoo, can I use a WYE to turn out of a curve? Right now I have an oval using all 24" radius curves and a straight piece on either side. I was going to have it turnout of the straight section with a #8 turnout. But then I thought another option would be to use this Wye below instead. 

https://www.trainworld.com/manufact...accessories/code-100-mark-iv-wye-turnout-280/


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

Sure you can use a wye turnout out of a curve provided you don't have a nasty and sharp S-curve as a result. If your radius is upwards of 28", and the wye is a #5 or higher, you might be able to get some longer cars and locomotives through there without uncoupling or derailments. Mebbe...you'll have to mock it up temporarily on a sheet of ply and run some rolling stock, coupled, through it. Do it trailing and shoving.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

ok. thanks. I think I'll wind up sticking with the #8 turnout from a straight side then.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Wye or #8*



bryher said:


> ok. thanks. I think I'll wind up sticking with the #8 turnout from a straight side then.


 Your decision above makes good sense. The wye turnout on your link appears to be a #4-#5 just looking at it. On some layouts that would be OK, but it is a lot tighter than the 24" radius curve you are using, or a #8 turnout. For what it's worth, I think you made the right choice.

have fun;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------

