|
|||
| author | remove search highlighting | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
posted: 23 Jul 2016 21:17 from: DerekStuart
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Sorry- another question. I'm really not trying to hijack the forum. I have asked this question of a few people to get a broad range of opinions and can think of no better place to ask than here where the experts gather. Solderless common crossings: Good idea or bad idea? As there are so many different methods, I mean making the vee as normal- bend, file, bend, solder as described by Martin and others throughout the internet (preferably with a bend from vertical to inclined rail- easy after practice). Then the wing rails are added using functional chairs- on the A timber a cut down check rail chair can be used and then these are secured using glue or solvent as normal. I have been warned against this for reasons of longevity. But I have tried alternately baking and freezing a turnout for several days and no sign of deformation or breaking. I have dropped it from a reasonable height etc. It seems to me that if we are relying on a solvent/glue system for the rest of the turnout that the common crossing is subjected to no more force (in model form) and thus will last just as long. I have built several silky smooth running in P4 and S4 that don't look too bad (if I may say so). But can anyone foresee any long term implications of building this way? Is this the un-skilled cheating method or a natural evolution of production using parts (C&L chairs) that were not available before? As ever, any opinions welcome. Thanks Derek |
||
|
posted: 24 Jul 2016 00:58 from: Nigel Brown click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
I have no problems with using a solderless crossing. When I first started building track using individual plastic chairs glued to plastic sleepers, I was aware that the common view was that it was essential to use copperclad sleepers, or something like that, at critical points "for strength". Seemed to me that that complicated things unduly. So decided to use the plastic approach throughout. This was in 3mm/ft finescale 14.2mm gauge, and there was just one type of basic chair available, plus slide chairs; other chairs were made by butchering basic chairs. It worked fine. The first turnouts were built 12 years ago and are still going strong. I would do the same again. There is nothing delicate about the track; it will stand up to my less than gentle approach to modelling. I'll add one qualification. The layout stays at home, so isn't subject to environmental variation. I have given thoughts to constructing crossings as units and might try that at some point, but constructing them as part of the whole turnout hasn't been a problem. Nigel |
||
|
posted: 24 Jul 2016 01:31 from: DerekStuart
click the date to link to this post click member name to view archived images |
Hello Nigel Many thanks for your reply. Based upon your observation of 12 years and similar comments I have received from other experienced people, I think I will stick with my "solderless" method. It works for me and if a few others look down their noses at this system then so be it. Again, my thanks for taking the time to reply. Derek |
||
| Please read this important note about copyright: Unless stated otherwise, all the files submitted to this web site are copyright and the property of the respective contributor. You are welcome to use them for your own personal non-commercial purposes, and in your messages on this web site. If you want to publish any of this material elsewhere or use it commercially, you must first obtain the owner's permission to do so. |