# Wye for Kato unitrack



## swimmer_spe (May 3, 2016)

I have been thinking about my layout, and something I want is a few 3 way triangle wyes.

Does anyone know if Kato makes them, or do you know if there are any other makers that could be compatible?


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

A three way wye? Don't think I've ever seen those from Unitrak. You've hit on one of the problems with sectional track, if the system doesn't have the configuration you're after you're stuck.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

If you are referring to a 3-way switch, no Kato does not make them. You can, however, splice regular track with Kato Unitrack. This may be easier in N than HO since the Unijoiner is the same size in both scales.
The HO rail on regular track has to be trimmed down to accept the joiner but I suspect N does not, or maybe not as much. There are various threads and articles on this.
The other considerations are using the same code rail and getting the height adjusted properly using roadbed under standard track. 
A challenge but not impossible.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

A wye is a track design that gives the ability to turn a
train around and go in the opposite direction on the same
track.

If that's what you want it would seem you could create
one using 3 turnouts...a right and a left across the top
and a Y turnout or a left or right at the bottom of the wye.

This creates a wiring situation, however. You can get
automatic reverse loop controllers that will let you
run through it smoothly without having to throw switches.
Or, you can set up a circuit of 2 DPDT switches to operate
it.

Why would you want three?

Don


----------



## swimmer_spe (May 3, 2016)

DonR said:


> A wye is a track design that gives the ability to turn a
> train around and go in the opposite direction on the same
> track.
> 
> ...


I now only want 2. ... for now. Basically it is to allow the train to go from one track to the other, but be able to go both directions on it.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Can you post a drawing of your proposed (or actual)
layout? It's always fun to see what the members
create. And, of course, gives us something to
write words of praise, or the other kind.

Don


----------



## swimmer_spe (May 3, 2016)

DonR said:


> Can you post a drawing of your proposed (or actual)
> layout? It's always fun to see what the members
> create. And, of course, gives us something to
> write words of praise, or the other kind.
> ...


I am working on one. When I do, I will post it and wait for the detractors telling me how horrible it is.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

swimmer_spe said:


> I am working on one. When I do, I will post it and wait for the detractors telling me how horrible it is.


You know they won't do that. You will probably get some good feedback. 
I like Unitrack (HO) for portability and flexibility. The layout gets changed every so often and if we move it just gets boxed up. 
You have a greater selection of Unitrack components in N than we have in HO. Homemade sections can be created but may not blend well with the factory pieces without some detailing work. 
I look forward to seeing your plan. 
Please remember that the only one you have to please is yourself.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Wye?*



swimmer_spe said:


> I now only want 2. ... for now. Basically it is to allow the train to go from one track to the other, but be able to go both directions on it.


swimmer_spe;

From your description of what you want to have the trains do, it sounds more like the function of two crossovers than a wye. The exact terminology is not important, except for understanding what you want, without a diagram. I look forward to seeing your track plan. Don;t worry about someone "telling you how horrible it is." First off, we are a pretty loose and polite group here. It's not likely that anyone on this forum is going to call your plan "horrible." 
Secondly, even if some yayhoo did say something of the sort, just ignore him and do what you want. It's your railroad; your rules.

regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## swimmer_spe (May 3, 2016)

traction fan said:


> swimmer_spe;
> 
> From your description of what you want to have the trains do, it sounds more like the function of two crossovers than a wye. The exact terminology is not important, except for understanding what you want, without a diagram. I look forward to seeing your track plan. Don;t worry about someone "telling you how horrible it is." First off, we are a pretty loose and polite group here. It's not likely that anyone on this forum is going to call your plan "horrible."
> Secondly, even if some yayhoo did say something of the sort, just ignore him and do what you want. It's your railroad; your rules.
> ...


https://www.google.ca/search?q=tria...8oHTAhVC5YMKHfHZDMoQ_AUIBigB&biw=1467&bih=664

That is what I want.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

There is no doubt. Those are wyes. 

The usual way to build one is to use
a Y turnout plus a left and a right turnout.

Incidentally, Kato does make an N Y turnout.

http://www.katousa.com/images/unitrack/20-222.jpg

But the specifics of the layout will sometimes
require you to use a left or a right turnout 
instead of the Y.

Don


----------



## swimmer_spe (May 3, 2016)

DonR said:


> There is no doubt. Those are wyes.
> 
> The usual way to build one is to use
> a Y turnout plus a left and a right turnout.
> ...


So, the solution is a L and R turnout and the Y? Works for me.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

DonR said:


> There is no doubt. Those are wyes.
> 
> The usual way to build one is to use
> a Y turnout plus a left and a right turnout.
> ...


Right. A wye turnout, not to be confused with a three way turnout, which also can form a wye.


----------



## prrfan (Dec 19, 2014)

*But more importantly....*

Yeah, terminology sometimes can be confusing. It's really only important when we are ordering something. Making sure it's the right thing. 
Swimmer, I wanted to say I liked your layout drawing in the other thread. Will be interested to see how it progresses. 
This thread also gave me the chance to ask myself if I ever get the opportunity to build another larger layout, would I use Unitrack?
The answer is yes. (And this is where a lot of folks on here smack their heads lol). 
Reliability is the prime reason. It comes down to how do you want to spend your modeling time. For me, trying to work out flex track problems in a cold/ hot basement was not fun. Maybe next time the room will be climate controlled. 
Doesn't matter. I respect the art of laying track. I just don't want to do it. I just want to run trains. Keep on having fun and keep us posted. :smilie_daumenpos:
Dan


----------



## swimmer_spe (May 3, 2016)

prrfan said:


> Yeah, terminology sometimes can be confusing. It's really only important when we are ordering something. Making sure it's the right thing.
> Swimmer, I wanted to say I liked your layout drawing in the other thread. Will be interested to see how it progresses.
> This thread also gave me the chance to ask myself if I ever get the opportunity to build another larger layout, would I use Unitrack?
> The answer is yes. (And this is where a lot of folks on here smack their heads lol).
> ...


I have noticed in most circles, terminology is key. I try, but sometime those who are really into stuff do not think I kow what I am talking about. I have news for this forum, even though you may know model railroads, I know the real things. My father worked for one, and now a friend of mine does too. They tell me the proper things. One of my favorite things from my childhood was riding in an engine in a yard.

I want to get my track down as fast as possible and run trains.


----------

