4'x2' fully scenic 'N' gauge layout

[Dad-1]

Ugh why did I suggest it ? I must be mad, not angry mad, but crazy mad !!
Our club has a growing number of members who have 'N' gauge. As club chairman I feel we need to encourage
all scales and gauges and we do have a bare test track that includes 'N' track that can be used for 009, or 'N'
gauge proper.
I thought I have a 9 mm sheet of ply 4'x2', why not use it ? that equates to 8'x4' for '00' and I have St Oval in my
garage that's '00' on a 6'x3' platform. It's well appreciated by many and on the differing scale my spare board offers
a slightly greater scenic space.
The trouble is that everyone has ideas, but nobody wants to take control of the project ..... look for some sucker !!

Knowing nothing about 'N' and being unable to even imagine the possibilities I've bought a 12 ton van, a circle of 2nd
radius track and a single point.

Lots to learn about. I have read somewhere that Peco std point motors don't work well on 'N' ? Is that true or a myth ??
The point I've bought is Insulated, are these as much trouble as they can be on '00' ??
Because the current planned control system is a Piko ? (at club) analogue, we need to either have switched isolation for
a planned siding and loop, or use isolating points, hence some indecision.

I want to build in a CDU and have stud and probe switching from a track plan painted onto the back scenic upstand.

That's the ideas so far. I took and left my board at club, but need to bring back to paint both sides with varnish to seal
in the moisture content for a stable slab. Already the plan is to have the entire trackbed raised at 40 mm above the base
to allow the countryside to fall well below the track. At the rear we will have the track going into a tunnel, for access there
will be aprox 50 mm slots through which I believe we should be able to clean tracks and if necessary sort out any derailments.

Well not much else on this for a while, but interested in any comments regarding point motors.

Geoff T.

[Mountain]

It looks a nice idea. Remember the 00 gauge layout that appeared in the Railway Modeller around 1984-5 which was made from set track? It was a GWR branchline in a small space and yet it looked great. You could make an N gauge version of it?

[Dad-1]

Anyone able to advise on the running quality of Code 80 Peco insulated frog points ?

I have bought one and fancy in preference to live frog as I want to use the points to
isolate a siding. What I don't want to have to do is add in a couple of switched isolated
sections.

Geoff T.

[b308]

Depends on what you are running, Geoff. Bogie locos should have no problems, nor should the larger six coupled ones. The only ones you could have issues with are any four coupled, but they are rare in N so I wouldn't worry. I've used 9" dead frog points on my HOe layouts which use four coupled N gauge mechanisms and had no problems. Just make sure the track is laid flat!

I've never heard of any issues using Peco point motors with their N gauge track and I've used many over the years. The only thing to note is that the motor is offset either one side or the other as it's twice the width of the track. So when you make the hole for the motor you need to decide which side it should be!

[Dad-1]

Thanks b308,

That sounds positive. I don't have any locomotive to run on 'N' track and just
one wagon to try and scale the overall construction.
I can't say I've seen anything less than an 0-6-0 on club nights, several of them
are seen trundling around the big bare test track.

Although planned as a club layout I do have things like Peco point motors and having
built 3 layouts where the tracks are on raisers to allow more sympathetic topography
I'm probably best to design it ?

Geoff T.

[Bufferstop]

Couldn't resist the challenge of another layout. The problem with the Peco solenoids is all down to the lump that sticks out at one side or the other. It can end up carving great holes beneath station or fiddle yard throats. I'm sure an N scale St Oval will be great.

[fourtytwo]

Anyone able to advise on the running quality of Code 80 Peco insulated frog points ?
I have bought one and fancy in preference to live frog as I want to use the points to
isolate a siding. What I don't want to have to do is add in a couple of switched isolated
sections.
Geoff T.

In my early experience with N steam outline insulfrog was a problem so I have always used live frogs from then on.
You don't need to separately switch sidings, just don't insulate the live frog rails leading into the sidings then the "dead" siding has both rails at the same polarity so nothing moves Same applies to a whole siding tree providing no insulated fishplates are used.

[Emettman]

The only thing to note is that the motor is offset either one side or the other as it's twice the width of the track. So when you make the hole for the motor you need to decide which side it should be!

Alternate, keep them above the baseboard in any building or removable piece of scenery that is handy or can be made to be so. The push-pull rod can be a LOT longer than the little plastic one Peco supply with their "top-mounting" clip.

But if operating from the back of a 4ft by 2ft, wire in tube might be a very viable option.
(Yes, I noted the probe and stud method was described: just thinking.)

Chris.

[Bufferstop]

From your general description of the topography of the layout I gather parts of it are to be on an embankment above board level. it does make it difficult to connect motors to points in those sections. The point motor being about the width of a single track embankment. A pair of angle cranks connected by a 2mm or so rod might be an answer this would allow -
- a motor in line with the track beneath the running surface connecting via a short rod.
- a motor beneath the main surface with a somewhat longer rod.
If you didn't have a supply of Peco or Seep solenoids, then old H&Ms which had a removable spindle through the motor which could be used to drive a crank a any height above or below the motor.
Emettman will probably point out if you used vertical rods and cranks you could have pushrods below the baseboard without any motors.

[b308]

TBH rather than complicate things I'd just stick to the "under point mounted" motor myself, it's designed for that and is easy enough to accommodate, easier than wire in tube, etc.

[Bufferstop]

On a single track embankment, motor connected directly to point will involve a slot almost the full width of the running surface. Attachment to the underside of the trackbed would be best done with the point mounted on an insert which can be dropped into place with the point and motor already set up.

[Dad-1]

I agree b308,

All the track will have 45 mm clear underneath down to base board level. I will have to introduce access
holes in the base for any long term serviceability problems.

The back upstand will be around 12" (300+ mm) high and this back needs to be kept as clear as possible
as in transit it'll probably have to stand on it. Hence no protruding levers or switches, even when I recess a
panel for probe attachment and location, luckily the studs can be countersunk.

One not resolved item is that IF I include any livefrog points I would fancy using electronic polarity switching
due to the Peco switches being rather unreliable. That comment based on years of use where it's been the
weakest link in any of my trackwork.

Geoff T.

[Byegad]

One reason that, over the last 40+ years, I've gone from Peco to Fleischmann and then to Kato track was the search for good running over pointwork. While Kato #4 points have a bad name, I've found them much more forgiving, and reliable, than either of the other two brands. I had, in my Peco layouts, all my 0-4-0s and 0-6-0s permanently coupled to wagons or coaches able to pick up current and supply it to the loco, just to get over that dead-spot!

Now I have removed those vehicles and all my Short Wheel Base locos run as nature intended on all three of my layouts.