# Peco #8 Turnout



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

The other day I found that one of my locomotives, a TRIX Br.187 is shorting out just before the frog on a PECO turnout.

This locomotive doesn't short any other turnouts anywhere be it an Atlas or a Peco turnout.

After slowing approaching the turnout it stopped and shorts the entire layout at the converging rails of the frog. Makes no difference which direction the locomotive is traveling through the turnout or which way the locomotive is facing.

I ended up using a piece of gaffer's tape on about 1/16" of the converging rails.

The wheels are in gauge and in spec. The only thing I can gather is that these are British turnouts running German trains and the two are not 101% compatible with all brands. None of my other Roco or A.C.M.E. locomotives gives me any trouble on this turnout.










This is the locomotive:


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

Interesting. I have a Bachmann 2-10-0 that does the _exact_ same thing on two turnouts. Only two. Every other loco traverses them without issue. I'll have to try the tape.


----------



## Tom_C (Jan 8, 2016)

hm. I guess you could extend your insulfrog by one more tie using a dremel tool


----------



## Cab1 (Jul 26, 2009)

How long has this been going on? Have you done any mods to the turnout? Was this a new or used turnout? A lot of people rework PECO turnouts to make them more DCC friendly. It usually involves cutting away factory contact points and soldering new ones to manipulate the flow of polarity. You can see the process and reasons for doing it on Youtube. Most turnouts will work fine right out of the package, depending on what model you buy and how you intend to use it, but no turnout is perfect; that's why they give you options. If it's a used turnout that you picked up somewhere and was modifies without your knowledge, it could have been done incorrectly, one of the wires may have a cold solder joint, or just fell off. You most likely will have to pull out the turnout and trace the polarity for each rail.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

This is a brand new Peco #8 turnout installed two weeks ago.

I'll just stick with the gaffer's tape. There's nothing wrong with the turnout. Five other locomotives traverse this turnout without even a flicker.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

Tom_C said:


> hm. I guess you could extend your insulfrog by one more tie using a dremel tool


This was my cure for a W/S curved #7 turnout I used on my layout years ago. It was 'DCC-friendly', but the metal tires of some of my longer steamers (BLI T1 Duplex with it's blind inner drivers) would migrate across the frog on the curve, even on the through route, and make contact with the wrong polarity on the far frog rail. That meant an instant short. I used a jeweler's saw with a hair filament in it for the blade, and sawed one of the two rails, just past the insulator, in two. I added perhaps 5 mm to the dead frog, but only on one rail. It didn't affect any of my locomotives, not even a SW-8.

Instead of gaffer's tape, may I recommend a dab of clear nail polish? Let it cure for an hour, then repeat for an overcoat. An hour later, you should be able to run your trains with impunity.

That aside, I just noticed that the guard rails on that otherwise very nice Peco turnout (I use their Code 83 #6 turnouts a lot) has guards against the stock rails that are either misplaced or simply too short by about one tie's span. A sliding axle whose closure rail-riding-wheel flange might pick the frog point is meant to have its opposite flange meet the stock rail guard and be snugged over into alignment. The picture shows that, at best, this can only happen simultaneously. Not very good IMO.

Even so, I never have that problem, so what do I know? It must be that our models are so well engineered, with such good standardization across the industry, that almost no problems of this nature seem to take place except with axles at least a mm out of gauge.

And yet, people report all the time that some Peco's need a thin styrene shim between the guards and the stock rail....?


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Wheel tread width and isolated ? frog.*



MichaelE said:


> The other day I found that one of my locomotives, a TRIX Br.187 is shorting out just before the frog on a PECO turnout.
> 
> This locomotive doesn't short any other turnouts anywhere be it an Atlas or a Peco turnout.
> 
> ...




MichaelE;

The tape solution you are using is very similar to an old problem (and temporary solution) people have had with Atlas Snap Switch turnouts over the years. That turnout has a plastic frog. Over time,( and sometimes with inadvertent help from the modeler*) the plastic would wear (or be filed) away, exposing the two short rails leading out of the frog. Along comes a metal wheel, it shorts across the two rails, which are of opposite electrical polarities, and bingo, a short circuit happens. The traditional solution was to paint some clear nail polish over the ends of those rails. Like your gaffer's tape, the nail polish formed an insulator between the rail tips and any passing metal wheels.

What, if anything, you decide to do beyond tape, I leave up to you, of course.
However, I find your problem with one particular locomotive crossing one particular turnout intriguing. I hope you will forgive a little nosiness on my part, but I'd like to find out what's causing this unusual problem. I think you are right about the German loco not getting along well with the British turnout. (After all, those two countries have been bitter enemies throughout two world wars! )

I know you have checked the wheel gage on this locomotive, but have you also checked the width of the wheel "tread?" (The tread is the part of the wheel that actually rides along the top of the rail.) You can check the tread width using your NMRA gage. If you look at the "wheels" side of the gage, that you used to check the wheels before, you should see, right next to the two small wheel gage notches, a bigger notch.
That notch is used to measure tread width. The wheel should fit into this notch. I suspect you will find that the wheels on your problem locomotive, not only don't fit into it, but they will be less close to fitting, (a.k.a. wider) than the wheel tread of some of your other locomotives. 

If that's true, you could turn down the wheels to get the tread narrower, but there is an easier fix.
I can see one insulated gap, just before the frog, in your turnout photo. I'm assuming the other gap is under your tape. I don't own any electrofrogs so I'll ask if the entire frog is all-metal, or is it plastic, with metal rails on the outside? I'd also like to ask if you are using DCC?
In any case, you can put insulated rail joiners on the two short rails exiting the frog. If the frog is all-metal, then you can create one "giant frog" by soldering jumpers from those two short rails to the frog. Putting the insulated rail joiners in may possibly leave these two short rails unpowered, unless you jumper both of them to the frog, but quite possibly not. I hope DonR will chime in on this point since he has been recommending insulated rail joiners on both frog rails of Electrofrog turnouts for some time. It's possible that some internal factory jumper will power these rails, making it unnecessary for you to add jumpers at all. 
Electrically, installing these insulated joiners simply puts the point where the "rails of opposite polarity", beguin out further apart from each other than even a very wide wheel could ever span. 

Regards;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:

* Some modelers have mistakenly tried to "cure" "frog drop" By filing down the frog, "Frog drop" is my name for the effect where the wheels drop down into the frog of nearly all commercial turnouts, and then get jerked back up again when they hit the frog point. This causes some fairly obvious bouncing, both up and down, and side to side, of cars as they travel through the turnout. What the modeler should do is shim the frog floor up, instead of filing the top of the frog at all. If the floor is high enough to reach the "flangeways" tab on an NMRA gage, the bounce will largely disappear. Filing frogs only causes problems, it doesn't cure any.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Thanks Mesenteria. I'll pick up a bottle of that and make use of it tonight.

TF, that's what I meant about "in spec" in my first post. Wheel tread is fine as is wheel track.

I'm just going to call it 'one of those things' and proceed with the nail polish. Maybe something in Traffic Red or Deutsch Bahn red....


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

I had a similar problem with a Peco curved turnout, only my PA would short.
A little nail polish fixed the problem.
It's a little used turnout so the temp fix should last a long time.

Magic


----------



## Theamazingswal (Dec 14, 2017)

I had one of these Peco turnouts do the same thing. I compared it with some others and noticed the insulated area was slightly different then the others. Maybe caused by the manufacturing process. I applied some nail polish to expand the insulated area and had no problem since. 

George


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

The nail polish is working as well as the gaffer's tape.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

A tried 'n true remedy for shorts at the frog. The polish should last many hours of run time which, for most of us, amounts to a few months. 

Don't be alarmed if it migrates a bit along the rails as a black streak. It's just normal arcing which carbonizes the organic material nearby left on the rails and some of the polish layer at the same time. You can clean it with alcohol, but every time you clean it you'll be removing some of the polish, so be aware of that. 

To apply a new layer of polish, wipe the frog with acetone (just dampened, no dripping or you'll possibly destroy the plastic ties below the frog!!!!) Let it air-dry a few minutes, then apply the new layers.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Thanks!


----------



## WIrailfan (Mar 6, 2016)

Having the same problem with the Peco turnouts on my layout. Sometimes the trains will run for hours with no shorts, other times they wont go a minute without stopping and starting again. I've seen the tiny little sparks at the frog if you turn the lights off. Does someone have a pic of properly applied nail polish?


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*photo*



WIrailfan said:


> Having the same problem with the Peco turnouts on my layout. Sometimes the trains will run for hours with no shorts, other times they wont go a minute without stopping and starting again. I've seen the tiny little sparks at the frog if you turn the lights off. Does someone have a pic of properly applied nail polish?


WIrailfan;

If you go back to MichaelE's original post at the beginning of this thread, you will see a photo of his turnout with a bit of silver tape over the point area inside the frog, right where the two rails almost meet, and where you saw sparks. Painting that small area with nail polish will temporarily insulate a bit more of the frog. The two opposite polarity rails that come so close to each other there, won't be shorted by metal wheels passing over that spot. 
The nail polish "solution" is very easy to do, but will wear out in time, requiring adding a new layer of nail polish. From what I've read in this thread, the nail polish may last months, or even years. 
I don't know, since I use the different, more difficult, but "once, and forever" permanent solution I proposed in my reply. That involves extending the "frog" electrically, through the length of the two short rails that feed out of the frog, and installing insulated rail joiners at the far end of those rails. That puts the possible, "two rails that can be shorted by a whee" point" out far enough that a wheel can't possibly bridge that wide a gap. Reading through this thread, apparently I am the only one who thinks this is a better solution, and worth the effort, oh well, that's life! hwell:

good luck, have fun;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## WIrailfan (Mar 6, 2016)

traction fan said:


> WIrailfan;
> 
> If you go back to MichaelE's original post at the beginning of this thread, you will see a photo of his turnout with a bit of silver tape over the point area inside the frog, right where the two rails almost meet, and where you saw sparks. Painting that small area with nail polish will temporarily insulate a bit more of the frog. The two opposite polarity rails that come so close to each other there, won't be shorted by metal wheels passing over that spot.
> The nail polish "solution" is very easy to do, but will wear out in time, requiring adding a new layer of nail polish. From what I've read in this thread, the nail polish may last months, or even years.
> ...


I'm definitely interested in a more permanent solution than the nail polish. You'd be pulling the turnouts out to get the insulated joiners in, and especially to cut the factory jumpers on the bottom. I'm ok with that. I think the insulated joiners and cutting the jumpers would be all you had to do to isolate those rails. What do you think? Here's some pics of an insulfrog to help...


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Maybe you wont have to pull up the turnout? Or maybe you will.*



WIrailfan said:


> I'm definitely interested in a more permanent solution than the nail polish. You'd be pulling the turnouts out to get the insulated joiners in, and especially to cut the factory jumpers on the bottom. I'm ok with that. I think the insulated joiners and cutting the jumpers would be all you had to do to isolate those rails. What do you think? Here's some pics of an insulfrog to help...


WIrailfan;

Your second photo shows the jumpers giong from the closure rails out to the very beginning of those short frog rails. TomC's suggestion of simply cutting the frog rails further out could work if the jumpers could be extended out toward the other end of the frog rails. However, the dead area of rail near the frog would be a little bit longer. This would not bother an all wheel pickup locomotive, but short wheelbase switchers, or locos that only pickup power from a few wheels, might stall on the frog. It's unfortunate that those factory jumpers didn't extend further out. Since they don't, you're right, the turnout would have to be pulled up. The jumpers would need to be cut, and then extended, and an insulating gap cut in both frog rails.

I have to adjust my thinking a bit when dealing with questions about commercial turnouts. I make my own turnouts with all-metal, isolated, frogs. The frogs have gaps at both ends, with the exit side gap far enough out to prevent a wheel from spanning the two frog rails. There are jumpers between the point and stock rails on each side, and the two point rails are insulated from each other. This results in the "DCC friendly" configuration that is now showing up on newer commercial turnouts. The frog is powered by its own feeder wire from a microswitch that changes the frog's polarity when the points are thrown. This system is foolproof, and works with any locomotive, including those with very few wheels picking up power.

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:

View attachment How I scratch build turnouts new(8).pdf


View attachment All AboutTurnouts rev 5.pdf


View attachment Improving Atlas turnouts pdf version.pdf


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

You could do a little filing and then glue a thin piece of stylene on top. That would insulate the place where the two rails almost meet. Only needs to be a thin strip across the top.


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

Stumpy said:


> Interesting. I have a Bachmann 2-10-0 that does the _exact_ same thing on two turnouts. Only two. Every other loco traverses them without issue. I'll have to try the tape.


So I finally got around to trying the tape (to see if it worked before applying nail polish). Worked like a champ. The Decapod traversed the two problem turnouts with nary a blip.

However, the radius of some of my curves is too small for a loco with five sets of driving wheels.  So off to the auction block.


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

That 'Russian' decapod by Bachmann is known to be a very forgiving engine, and purposefully designed to take curves slightly shy of 18" radius. The prototype was a tiny engine, about the same size as a large 2-8-0, and had tiny drivers for maximum tractive effort. Unless you have curves in the 16.5" range and below, it should negotiate them. Is it possibly you have something else going on? Are the drivers in gauge? Do the drivers derail, or the engine truck? Does the locomotive sit evenly on all axles, no daylight under one of the flanges, when you sit it on a clean countertop?

Sometimes it's the turnout yet again. It might have high or low rails pressed too much into the soft plastic ties at time of manufacture, or the guards might also fail the NMRA gauge flange-path test. Points rails move a bit as more of the drivers get onto them and they might shift or torsion. Are the points rails in gauge? Both positions, starting at the throwbar and sliding the gauge along the points rails to the closure rails, and beyond?

Is one of the points tips low? Will it succumb to the weight of the first driver axle and let the following axle ride its flanges over the point rail? Instant ooops!!


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

It navigates the turnouts fine after the "tape". Drive wheels are binding in the curves. Everything else appears to be in spec.


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

I can see from the photo that the Peco #8 is the insulfrog versoin. Some report wheel treads on some loco's can short out the two rails of opposing polarity when crossing from the plastic part of the frog to the rail. This is one of the reasons I'm going with electrofrog. The reported fix is to paint some black nail polish on the rails or put tape over the metal rails.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

That's what we've been talking about for the last 21 posts.


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

I didn't bother reading most of them - as we often don't.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

That's why I like Atlas !..Leave alone that I've always thought Peco switches don't look like American switches, where Atlas definitely does..Further, why buy more expensive switches if they're still going to cause the same continuity problems ? 
May have been said above: Put tape or enamel paint on/between the closure rails on other end of the frog. Your wheels'/drivers' thickness may be bridging the 2 opposite polarities there.. 
While on the subject, might want to get a tiny bottle of chrome enamel paint and paint the frog and the 4 surrounding insulators so as to match the rest of the rails; Peco or Atlas...And It doesn't wear away...


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Why would I want them to look like American turnouts?

What continuity problems are you referring to? Other that bridging the converging rails?


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Oh. All of a sudden, this thread is getting touchy. Lmao. (Just made some popcorn-chomping away now) 
"You guys. Sometimes."


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

MichaelE said:


> Why would I want them to look like American turnouts?
> 
> What continuity problems are you referring to? Other that bridging the converging rails?


Mea culpa. I'd forgotten that you were the OPer...And since you have Euro trains, then yeah, I can see the use of Peco..

No 'continuity' is an 'open' or incomplete circuit. When an electrical device unexpectedly stops, people can confuse a 'short' with an 'open'..'Open' is a continuity concern, causing 0 volts to the device, and no heat or sparks. A 'short' is a clash of polarities and causes heat and sparks. 'Power-routing' switches sometimes have continuity probs due to their points not making firm contact with the stock [or running] rails. 'All live' Pecos and Atlas have more potential for shorts due to metal wheels bridging the convergence of the stock rails and closure rails on each end of the frog...
riogrande above has gone with 'electrofrog', the power-routing type, choosing loss of continuity potential over short-out potential..[though power-routing does have short-out potential too, but not at the frog] 
Sorry if this is old news to you...M


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

I know, necropost. 



traction fan said:


> I don't know, since I use the different, more difficult, but "once, and forever" permanent solution I proposed in my reply. That involves extending the "frog" electrically, through the length of the two short rails that feed out of the frog, and installing insulated rail joiners at the far end of those rails. That puts the possible, "two rails that can be shorted by a whee" point" out far enough that a wheel can't possibly bridge that wide a gap. Reading through this thread, *apparently I am the only one who thinks this is a better solution*, and worth the effort, oh well, that's life!


No, you're not.

See the teal colored arrows in the third pic/graphic on this page... https://dccwiki.com/Peco_Insulfrog


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

riogrande said:


> I didn't bother reading most of them - as we often don't.


So why even bother then.....


----------



## LateStarter (Mar 12, 2016)

MichaelE said:


> This is the locomotive:


That's one beautiful piece of equipment.


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

Chiming back in, sorry in advance !

I discovered only a couple months ago that Peco has discontinued the two lines of Insul and Electro frog code 83, #6 turnouts and replaced them with a Unifrog #6. The bad news is the Unifrog has the same design weakness for shorting that the Insulfrog has.

So hobbyists no longer have a choice to buy the Electro frog #6. When that news hit, I new I didn't have enough Electro frog #6 so I went on the hunt and tracked down hopefully enough for my layout.

For now at least, we still have the choice for Peco Electrofrog #5, #7 curved and #8 turnouts.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

riogrande said:


> The original poster had run afoul of a design weakness or flaw in the Peco Insulfrog frog design. Because this shorting problem is fairly common, I have chosen to only purchase Peco Electro frog turnouts.
> 
> I discovered only a couple months ago that Peco has discontinued the two lines of Insul and Electro frog code 83, #6 turnouts and replaced them with a Unifrog #6. The bad news is the Unifrog has the same design weakness for shorting that the Insulfrog has.
> 
> ...


riogrande;

I'm not sure what "design weakness for shorting you saw in the Unifrog. It comes out of the box set up as an insulfrog, but is designed to be easily converted to an electrofrog. The Unifrog has a composite frog, mostly plastic, but with a metal tip. The tip can be powered. Like the electrofrog, it has a wire for powering the frog. The frog is also "isolated" electrically from all the other rails in the turnout and the stock & point rails are jumpered in the "DCC friendly configuration" That should eliminate any possibility of shorts.

Traction Fan


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

When I'm on a real computer tomorrow, I'll post some photo comparisons. It's pretty clear. And I've already read of reports of shorting on Unifrogs which is no surprise. Disappointing really because I planned to go all Peco going forward. I think I have enough Electrofrog but Walthers should have their new line of turnouts available soon as an alternative.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

riogrande said:


> When I'm on a real computer tomorrow, I'll post some photo comparisons. It's pretty clear. And I've already read of reports of shorting on Unifrogs which is no surprise. Disappointing really because I planned to go all Peco going forward. I think I have enough Electrofrog but Walthers should have their new line of turnouts available soon as an alternative.


riogrande;

I'll be interested to see your photo comparisons. I really don't understand what the problem is and would welcome more information.

Traction Fan


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

traction fan said:


> riogrande;
> 
> I'll be interested to see your photo comparisons. I really don't understand what the problem is and would welcome more information.
> 
> Traction Fan


Sure, hopefully these photo's will show clearly what I am describing.

Insulfrog










Unifrog.










As you can see, the Unifrog is basically the same as the insulfrog except a short metal part replaces the plastic tip. The area where the two rails of opposing polarity are close to the frog are basically the same in both, and that is the area where metal wheel tread can sometimes bridge the rails and cause a short. As evidence, I have already read reports of Unifrog turnouts causing shorts, just like the Insulfrog.

Of course you can paint the area of those rails near the frog with finger nail polish to mitigate the problem, but hey, if I had a layout full of insulfrog turnouts, should I have to paint them all? Maybe not, maybe only those where I experience shorts. My solution is to avoid the problem as much as possible and buy only electrofrog turnouts, which going forward will be difficult with the #6 electrofrog turnouts beiing discontinued.

Now I have seen a few other Peco Uni or Insul frog turnouts where the rails of opposing polarity were designed further back from the frog point, so they are far enough apart as to make bridging them basically impossible. This is how Peco should have engineered the code 83 Unifrogs, but they didn't which is unfortunate.


----------



## Murv2 (Nov 5, 2017)

I had one engine that the pilot truck wheel would touch the cylinder head when passing number six switches, shorting out the layout. I had another that the cow catcher would touch down on specific switches, same effect. Old engines are fun.


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

Murv2 said:


> I had one engine that the pilot truck wheel would touch the cylinder head when passing number six switches, shorting out the layout. I had another that the cow catcher would touch down on specific switches, same effect. Old engines are fun.


And it isn't just older engines that are shorting out these Peco insulfrog or unifrog turnouts. It's modern day manufactured HO trains. There is a video on Youtube of a guy experiencing shorts on his Unifrog code 83 Peco's and his train is all Athearn/ExactRail/Intermountain/Atlas etc. trains.

My conclusion is Peco has made a poor engineering design and it's going to hurt their reputation. Everyone having to put a Band-Aid on it (finger nail polish) really is unacceptable from a design stand point.


----------



## Stumpy (Mar 19, 2013)

See the link in post #29 for a permanent solution.


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

Stumpy said:


> See the link in post #29 for a permanent solution.


What I read in post #29 sound like you are essentially turnout an Insulfrog turnout into an Electrofrog. That is a permanent solution for those who already have them installed, although how much work would it be to modify say 30 or 40 such turnouts vs fingernail polish or something longer lasting

In my case, since I am working on a new layout, I got wind of this Insulfrog shorting issue while in the planning phase and chose to go Electrofrog from the start. They can be made DCC compatible by insulating the rails that lead to the frog, and snipping the connector wire and energizing the frog rails with a Tam Valley Frog Juicer (I believe there are other cheaper methods to energize the frog rails too). The main rails are fed from the toe of the turnout - the end before the points.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

riogrande said:


> Sure, hopefully these photo's will show clearly what I am describing.
> 
> Insulfrog
> 
> ...


riogrande;

Thank you for the photos and information. I see your point, and agree that it could have been designed better.
My Peco Unifrogs are N-scale code 55 ones, and they are a little different in two ways. One slightly better in that the metal frog tip extends a little further back away from the point, and the insulating gap is thus further back. However, the difference in length is not necessarily enough to prevent the possibility of the short.

The other difference is, in my opinion, even worse, in terms of pure dumb design. Peco's notion of "code 55" rail in their turnouts and flex track is quite weird. They use code 78 rail, with some of it buried in a thick plastic tie strip. Though odd, that part's OK, it simply increases the strength of the bond between the rails and tie strip.
However, this Peco rail has two flared bases. One at the normal, bottom position, and another higher up. This higher base was apparently intended to mate with other brands of code 55 track, which use actual code 55 rail that is really 55/1000ths" high. That's OK too, you might even call it "nice of them." The catch is that the good folks in the Peco design department seemed to have forgotten that when joining rails it is normal to use rail joiners. (Duh!) 
No slot is provided to insert a rail joiner onto the upper base. Cutting you own slot, with a Dremel, is possible, but so messy that you end up having to solder the resulting mess together. So why didn't they provide the slot, or not add the upper base? One is useless without the other. While Peco turnouts still remain one of the best on the market, they are not perfect, and Peco, like anyone else can screw up.

Traction Fan 😕


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

traction fan said:


> riogrande;
> 
> Thank you for the photos and information. I see your point, and agree that it could have been designed better.
> My Peco Unifrogs are N-scale code 55 ones, and they are a little different in two ways. One slightly better in that the metal frog tip extends a little further back away from the point, and the insulating gap is thus further back. However, the difference in length is not necessarily enough to prevent the possibility of the short.
> ...


Yes, I'm disappointed Peco had the opportunity to design the new Unifrog turnout better to avoid the shorting issue and failed to do so. 

BTW, from what I understand, Peco plans to discontinue the duel lines of Insulfrog/Electrofrog turnouts as the tooling wears out for each ttype and replace them with Unifrog. So far only the #6 crossover, #6 double slip and #6 turnouts are being manufactured as Unifrog in the code 83 HO turnout line. The rest, #5, #8 and #7 curved are still available in a choice of Insulfrog and Electrofrog. I think all of the code 100 HO is still also available with both types.

However, I haven't bought any Unifrog and unless they correct the Insulfrog design weakness, I don't plan to buy any Unifrog in the future. The good news is Walthers will have a new line of turnouts on the market very soon so we have alternatives.

Are you listening Peco?


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Ria

Any turnout made today is DCC compatible.. A turnout is a turnout. The Insulfrog, Electrofrog and the new Unifrog
are all fully compatible with DCC or even DC. Disregard, as marketing ploys, such claims of DCC compatibility.

This thread has had so much said that many trying to follow would be confused.
So let's look at the facts.

Insulfrog turnouts do NOT require insulated joiners in frog or any other rails. They are
however, power routing and it is suggested that you have drops from track connected to
the frog rails to your bus to avoid power loss..

Electrofrog turnouts MUST have an insulated joiner in BOTH frog rails. Since the frog
changes the polarity of both frog rails the connecting tracks would short circuit 
without the insulators. 

Unifrog turnouts do NOT require insulated joiners in the frog rails since they
do not change polarity. The small metal tip of the frog is 'dead' unless wired
to a polarity changing switch or relay. 

Those running small 4 wheel locos or locos that do not have all wheel
power pickup may need the Electrofrog or Unifrog (with relay) to avoid pauses or
balks...otyerwise most locos run fine on any turnout. 

Don


----------



## riogrande (Apr 28, 2012)

DonR said:


> Ria
> 
> Any turnout made today is DCC compatible.. A turnout is a turnout. The Insulfrog, Electrofrog and the new Unifrog
> are all fully compatible with DCC or even DC. Disregard, as marketing ploys, such claims of DCC compatibility.
> ...


Yes, I think we know all of that. Unifrog are essentially Insulfrog but with a metal tip, which can be energized or not.

I was mainly addressing the shorting issue. Stumpy was offering a permanent solution to that issue which, as far as I can tell, electrically turns an Insulfrog turnout into an Electrofrog turnout, so any changes to the way they are wired would apply for DCC.

Cheers


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

riogrande said:


> Yes, I think we know all of that. Unifrog are essentially Insulfrog but with a metal tip, which can be energized or not.
> 
> I was mainly addressing the shorting issue. Stumpy was offering a permanent solution to that issue which, as far as I can tell, electrically turns an Insulfrog turnout into an Electrofrog turnout, so any changes to the way they are wired would apply for DCC.
> 
> ...


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

DonR said:


> Ria
> 
> Any turnout made today is DCC compatible.. A turnout is a turnout. The Insulfrog, Electrofrog and the new Unifrog
> are all fully compatible with DCC or even DC. Disregard, as marketing ploys, such claims of DCC compatibility.
> ...



DonR;

I disagree with some of your post. My response got messed up by my own digital dummy status. If you want to read it click to expand on riograndes answer to your post. 

Traction Fan


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Insol frog to electro frog conversion. 
Has anyone tried this with the aluminum foil tape used for security systems on glass panels? Comes on a roll about 3/8" wide. Saw a video about it. (Link it later once found). 
Seems that tucking the tape into the grooves, then trimming accordingly and leaving a tab near closure rail side for electrical connection is supposed to do the trick. 
Thoughts?


----------

