Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Second and third ratio set curves - what size of curved points required to fit into the remaining three curves? (four curves equal one half circle). I am hoping to join two continuous loop - one continuous loop with second radius and outer loop with third ratio curves!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,497 Posts
Hornby and Peco say that their 'curved points' (set-track for Peco) can be used to join 2nd and 3rd radius parallel tracks but needs a 2nd Rad half-curve between the two points. An additional 2nd rad half-curve is needed next to the point to make it equate to a full curve section. The point in the 3rd radius curve needs a 3rd-rad half curve as well. The resultant 3rd rad curve is not a perfect half-circle - see the diagram on page 17 of the current Peco catalogue; this is rather better than the similar but much smaller diagram in the Hornby catalogue.

Hope this helps,
Regards,
John Webb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
John Webb, many thanks for your informative reply.
Am I correct in thinking that you require a curve point for the 2nd radius curve and another one for the 3rd radius curve. As with other points, require a left hand and a right hand (Set track) curved point?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,497 Posts
No, you just need either two right-hand or two left-hand points. I'm not certain quite how they do it but withe the extra half curves it all works out. Hornby R8074 and R8075 or Peco ST-244 or ST-245 or Bachmann36-874 or 36-875 are the relevant part numbers.

If you can find the space to get larger radii, the Peco Curved double radius turnouts SL-86 and 87 look better and trains much prefer them - I've had some problems with some locos not being happy running over the Hornby/Set-track curved points due to their smaller radius.

Regards,
John W.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
QUOTE I've had some problems with some locos not being happy running over the Hornby/Set-track curved points due to their smaller radius.

is it anything to do with the length of the plastic frog area?

especially the length of the actual gap?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,497 Posts
It probably is, Alisterq. Not helped either by variations in wheel back-to-back measurements on RTR items. Often adjusting the latter helps considerably.

Regards,
John Webb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Sorry for further question" The outer larger loop runs locomotives "anti clockwise" while the inner smaller loop runs locomotives "clockwise". It is my intention, to run locomotives from "inner" to "outer" loop. Which points would you suggest?
Using four of each radii curves in each loop and the fact that space between each loop is at a premium. It is hoped to remove one of each (loop) curve joined at present to the last "straight" set track and replace the curve with a curved point together with curves as mentioned by you.
Can this be carried out with the current layout.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,497 Posts
Sorry, my post #4 was wrong. You need one left-hand and one right-hand curved point. If you want to run locos or trains straight across in the direction of travel then you need a 'facing crossover', LH point in the inner track and RH point in the outer (as per the Peco catalogue diagram). If you are detaching locos and reversing them across to the other track (Trailing crossover) then you need the RH point in the inner track and the LH point in the outer.

This latter arrangement is better - locos and rolling stock seem to find the 'trailing direction' easier to negotiate without any problems.

Are you aware of Hornby's quarter-scale track planning symbols pack (R619) for around £9? This is a set of miniature clip-together plastic track section replicas and can be used to experiment with potential rail layouts.

Regards,
John Webb
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top