# Rail Joiners versus Clamps at the start?



## eroc731 (Aug 4, 2010)

Greetings all, after a couple of years of collecting some equipment and running my custom indoor soffit layout, I have taken the plunge to outside. As a licensed landscape architetct it's only natural to take the hobby outside! I recently had the opportunity to purchase a "complete" garden railroad from someone who is regrettably leaving the hobby. I have about 220' of aristo track, 10' and 8' curves, buildings, locos, rolling stock and a trainmaster controller to play with in addition to my original roster of equipment.

The track has been used in 2 layouts over the years but is still serviceable, just needs a good cleaning. So here is my question: Should I bother with the traditional rail joiners and screws or go directly to clamps? I live outside of Philly in Bucks County so I will get 4 seasons of weather and all the other fun things mother nature has to offer. If using clamps is there a preferred or better product other than the aristo clamps? Secondary to the joiner clamp question is the use of some sort of anti-corrsion agent...my "layout in a box" came with a half used tin of LGB "graphite grease"...

I have started to use a foam sanding block to take the top layer of grime off the rails, so I'd also be interested in any thoughts on cleaning up the old track or if I am wasting my time?
Has anyone ever power washed old track?

Thanks all!


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Welcome! 

I grew up near Bucks County and we often visited the Mercer Museum. 

In my experience, which may not be the same as others', you can get away with joiners for a quite a while if the joints are clean and you use some antioxidizing compound, like the LGB paste "anti-sieze" compound sold at auto parts stores. The LGB slip-on style joiners will eventually start to fail though. The aristocraft style joiners, which are held in place by a small screw, are much better. I've had a few of those last for years with no trouble, again using the anti-corrosion paste. Clamps are the best solution though. If you've got the dough, buy the clamps upfront and put them on. You'll almost certainly end up putting them on eventually. 

As to cleaning the track, it's probably be a good idea to clean the area around the joints. It's kind of a bear to do. I'd recommend spraying them with CRC 2-26, which you can find at home depot, and maybe working them together or maybe with a wire brush. Once you have good joints set up, it's only a matter of cleaning the tops of the rails, and I've found track cleaning cars to be excellent for that 

The other alternative, which someone will soon mention, is running on batteries and not worrying about cleaning the track, I prefer track power myself, but many people like the battery approach


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Considering the tiny screws in the Aristo joiners I wouldn't want to be stuck on my knees to put them in, loosing every 5th one (or so) and searching for them in the crusher fines









So I recommend rail clamps. And I have had excellent experience with the product NOALOX (to be found at Home depot). This product prevents oxidation for quite some time. 

On old rail I use a polishing wheel and WENOL. That cleans the rail ends 1,2,3. If you want to make it a "Mass-Production" then I suggest a polishing wheel on a bench grinder, rub the end of the rail in Wenol (10 rails at a time) and start the bench grinder - actually at that point in time it doesn't hurt if you quickly go over the rail-head.

For Rail-clamps for code 332 are on the market: Aristocraft, Accucraft (AML), Sliptjaw, Hillmanns, and our own line of ProClamps. (Did I forget any?).


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

If you are wanting to stick to track power the only two options you have are: 
1. Clamps. Can be expensive. 
2. Soldering the joint. Very low cost but hard yakka. 

If you will ultimately be going to battery power, forget about clamps and save the money to put towards your battery R/C equipment. You might end up saving enough money for a decent system.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Cleaning the ends of the rails will be easy enough--a good wire brush will take care of that. The trick will be the insides of the rail joiners. I don't know if dipping them in something like muratic acid (which I use to prep brass for painting) would work or not, but it's an idea. You're not going to get a wire brush inside them, that's for certain. If you can get things clean enough, then the screws should work for you. There are a few guys out here in Denver who just use stainless screws into the railjoiner and base of the rail and swear by it. It's certainly cheaper than clamps, though I agree that losing the screws into the ballast can get old. 

Later, 

K


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Seeing how this track has some age on it I would trash the original rail joiners as they are by now fairly weak and will break when relaying the track. I'd go for the rail clamps now, and do it right the first time. May cost a few bucks more but in the long run it pays for it self. Take your pick on the type of clamps mentioned. If going battery for get the clamps. Later RJD


----------



## Idraw4u (Aug 19, 2008)

Track power = Rail clamps ) but that is just my two cents. 
The aristo joiners with the screws work pretty well, but man they can be tough to get in and if you drop the screw... good luck finding it (lots of tips and tricks regarding thoes small screws on this site). Personally I have mostly split jaw rail joiners (aristo screws on others) and love them but the clamps are not cheap. 
So I keep them on my Birthday and Christmas lists and my kids will pick me up some here and there. Not something they need to know about and not expensive to buy a few at a time. 
Of course if you go the battery route... track joints are not near the issue.


----------



## W3NZL (Jan 2, 2008)

For an outdoor railroad, Battery RC is the way to fly, but if its brass track an Ur going to go the track power 
route, just buy the cheapy AC rail joiners to hold the track in alignment and solder jumpers at the joints... 
Sounds like a big PITA, and it is, but once U've done a few joints and got the hang of it, U can move along 
with it reasonably quickly... I has 2 major advantages over rail joiners, its cheap, an if done right, its permanent...
Paul R...


----------



## cape cod Todd (Jan 3, 2008)

I have about half rail joiners and half clamps on my layout of about 460' of track . So far the LGB railjoiners have held up well after 4 years out side. As my RR grew I started using clamps and a conductive paste from USA trains for the joiners. Some clamps are over the joiner but in retrospect I think the over the rail works best. A real plus to rail clamps is it is very easy to remove a length of track without disturbing the surrounding track and balast. Do make sure to get a good clamp, usually these cost a bit more but in the long run you won't be finding failed ones that split over the winter. 
The clamps keep things tightly aligned so watch out for expansion on those hot summer days and plan accordingly with a system for expansion and contraction. 
Do like most of us and pick up clamps when you find them and install them in your tuff to reach areas like tunnels etc.. 
Happy RR ing


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

It is far better to be "cheap" than "lazy." Soldered jumper cables are probably the best solution to electrically join track sections and are a fraction of the cost of rail clamps. If done like I show, the rail joiners do very little except to hold the track in alignment. Jumpers are also less obtrusive and more prototypical than clamps.

No need to get the track or joiners spotless clean, just clean enough to get good alignment in the joiner. Just scratch away the oxidation from the areas of concern next to the rail joiners with a screwdriver to get a nice shiney surface.

Use a high wattage pencil (preferably >250 watts) or even a higher wattage gun. (I use a 325 watt Weller gun.)

Use solder flux.

You can also use 63/37 solder that has a slightly lower melting point than 60/40.

To save your back, do several sections on the work bench and join these out on the layout.

If installing rail joiner screws out on the layout, slip a piece of paper under the joint so you don't loose the screws if/when dropped.


_*DO NOT SOLDER THE TRACK DIRECTLY TO THE JOINERS AS IS DONE IN SMALLER SCALES!*_ You would never be able to get it apart in the future.


----------



## livesteam53 (Jan 4, 2008)

I have done many over the years. I used the small stock joiners with the small screws.Never do that again. 
I soldered like picture above. Never do that again. 
Finally I used Split Jaw and all my problems went away. I have had them in now for 6 years never a electrical problem. Yes they are not cheap but the best product on the market. 
That is my 2 cents.


----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)

Mark, why would you not solder.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

To me, for brass, it's soldered jumpers vs. clamps. jumpers: cheaper, takes a long time to do, a bit difficult for many, and makes a mess if you have to pull track apart, best conductivity if done right 

clamps, more expensive, easier and faster, no problems to take on and off, great conductivity. 

You have tradeoffs, pick what your priorities are, basically cost vs. time (but remember that if you move track, you will be unsoldering and resoldering, that is a big disadvantage if you are in this situation) 

I have clamps. This is what I recommend unless cost is the biggest issue. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

I'd defiantly stay away from the soldering. Messy and cumbersome to do and makes for a lot of work when you need to make any type changes to RR such as adding a turnout. Later RJD


----------



## eroc731 (Aug 4, 2010)

Thanks to all thus far....many great ideas and suggestions....leaning towards calmps at the moment...with my ADD, I don't know if I have the patience for soldering, and definitley do not want to be chasing all those little screws!
I had a small taste of that this weekend and was quickly losing my will to continue....LOL!...

as we say in my biz there are threee variables to any project: fast, cheap and accurate....you can pick any 2 but not all 3!! ....so if I want fast and accurate....guess I'm gonna be spending some loot on clamps!....


----------



## jimtyp (Jan 2, 2008)

I use a Dremel tool with a wire brush tool like this one to clean the ends of the track:  wire brush  

Once the track is all down I go over it with a drywall sanding pole, that looks like this:  drywall pole . 

Some use a scotch brite pad on the bottom of the sanding pole but I just use the drywall sanding screens, they look like this: sanding screens


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

I would definitely go with rail clamps over screwed joiners. I started with the splitjaws, but I didn't like their high cost ($240ish per 100 for ss) and their installation method (the 2 allen head screws on the sides are a pain to install on some spots and when track is outside on ground) I also don't like the weak allen screws they use the single clamps tend to bend when using a rail bender over them.

I then found out about the Train-li rail clamps from Axel. They cost me about $1.20 per clamp less for the nickel clamps (trust me it adds up fast when you start laying a lot of footage, and brass ones are even cheaper), they are simple to install (have 2 stainless screws that face up and are super strong, have yet to even bend one), AND they are stronger than the splitjaw single clamps. I know that last statement will draw some criticism but the fact is with Axel's clamp I was able to bend the rail with them installed with no problems, and the split jaw singles bent (now to be fair the splitjaw doubles are stronger but also more than 2x the price, and now you have 8 of those allen head screws to install) They also have great conductivity I tested my entire layout using just 1 set of power wires and did not notice any voltage/performance drops anywhere on the layout, even on the inner loop that was not wired directly, just using the track connection from the outer loop. (I do now have power feeders at each end of the layout and on both the outer and inner loops just to be sure down the road)

I did my entire layout using the Train-li pro clamps and couldn't be happier. I highly recommend them.

Ron

Train-Li pro-clamp


----------



## kormsen (Oct 27, 2009)

railclamps make good mecanic and electric connection. but to me they look ugly! 
herebouts i often see pics with very fine modelled locos and cars - on track with giant metallic blocks. 

i use the normal joiners. where they don't give good connection i use either paperclips, solderingwire (for temporal connections) or pieces of wire soldered to the rails. 
.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Only one word of caution in regards to soldering. You must work very quickly and probably use the solder with lower temperature. One bit too long and you melt the ties







. Been there, done that. I had a switch which the extra powering of the 3-way switch drives wasn't installed and I thought is was quick to solder. Ooops and the ties were partially melted.

I found thereafter a solder gun from Sears (craftsman) 500W much quicker in and out - however, long holding time until it is hot enough - you cannot win at that game.


----------



## Dean Whipple (Jan 2, 2008)

I use Aristo track with the joiner that come with the track, when screwing the the tiny screws, just use white wash cloth or a sheet of paper under the joint...I have soldered_* jumper*_ wires on all the rail joints I use a method that a professional model railroad builder had posted on one of the lists (I think it was the old LSOL) it is easy and it works...when you install the jumper wires make sure and_* jump across the switches*_ as the wiring and contacts in the switches are not the best, and if you decide to redo a section it's easy just cut the wire and start again.....























However I do use split jaw rail clamps where there might need to remove the track for maintenance such as switches, bridges, etc. I've had the tracks down over 10 years no trouble..... 
For more information check out my _*Soldering track jumpers*_ web page....


----------



## Pterosaur (May 6, 2008)

Thanks for the link Ron, I'll give those I try...I was not sure how well the "screw from the top" type worked. I am now moving my layout outdoors and using AML track, I do not have the luxury of pre-drilled holes to screw the track together as with Aristo, nor deep joiners like LGB. And while I like the look of the even spaced ties, even at the joints, I find the short factory joiners are not sufficient to hold the sections together.


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Posted By Pterosaur on 16 Aug 2010 05:45 PM 
Thanks for the link Ron, I'll give those I try...I was not sure how well the "screw from the top" type worked. I am now moving my layout outdoors and using AML track, I do not have the luxury of pre-drilled holes to screw the track together as with Aristo, nor deep joiners like LGB. And while I like the look of the even spaced ties, even at the joints, I find the short factory joiners are not sufficient to hold the sections together. 

Great you won't be disapointed. Axel and Joanne are the nicest people you'll ever deal with. Tell the than Ron from Delaware recommened them to you, may even get you a discount (but then again may cost you extra







)
Ron


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 16 Aug 2010 08:05 AM 
Considering the tiny screws in the Aristo joiners I wouldn't want to be stuck on my knees to put them in, loosing every 5th one (or so) and searching for them in the crusher fines









For Rail-clamps for code 332 are on the market: Aristocraft, Accucraft (AML), Sliptjaw, Hillmanns, and our own line of ProClamps. (Did I forget any?).


The only one I can think of are Uncle Herm's out of Indy. I have some, along with several of the other brands listed here. The top screw type and the Split Jaw are my favorites. 

One other problem with the Aristo jointers I had is they split at the folds and shatter over time.

If the costs of clamps put one off, consider fiddling with poor track and poor running. The value of a hobby could and should not be measured in money, but in enjoyment.


----------



## eroc731 (Aug 4, 2010)

Posted By Spule 4 on 16 Aug 2010 06:44 PM 
Posted By Axel Tillmann on 16 Aug 2010 08:05 AM 
Considering the tiny screws in the Aristo joiners I wouldn't want to be stuck on my knees to put them in, loosing every 5th one (or so) and searching for them in the crusher fines









For Rail-clamps for code 332 are on the market: Aristocraft, Accucraft (AML), Sliptjaw, Hillmanns, and our own line of ProClamps. (Did I forget any?).


The only one I can think of are Uncle Herm's out of Indy. I have some, along with several of the other brands listed here. The top screw type and the Split Jaw are my favorites. 

*One other problem with the Aristo jointers I had is they split at the folds and shatter over time.*

If the costs of clamps put one off, consider fiddling with poor track and poor running. The value of a hobby could and should not be measured in money, but in enjoyment.

Amen to this...mnay of the joiners on this batch of track and some other second hand aristo track I bought have this tel-tale sypmtom...especially on curve sections, must be the shear force or somehting....


----------



## 6323 (Jan 17, 2008)

I've been using Split Jaw clamps. However, the last box I got, I got the wrong clamps! 
I ended up with Over Joiner clamps last time. NOT what I wanted, but they do work. 
Need to make sure i order right style next time. 
Back yard is clamped completely, with no problems, except the weeds! Has been in action for 
almost 2 years now. Will continue with clamps, as I eventually connect front and back yard, next year. 
Just gotta figure out how to get track to back.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

In addition rail clamps, there are two other methods that I use. For the most part I used these, before there were such things as rail clamps. Back in Colorado in the 1980s I had trouble with the LGB rail joiners breaking after being outside for several years. My guess is metal fatigue from track flexing with the wide temperature variations throughout the year.

One method is to use #4 stainless steel screws placed into holes drilled through the rail joiner and the track at a 45 degree angle. I believe that I used a 3/32 drill. I dipped the screws in LGB conducting paste and screwed them in. They were self tapping.











The other method was to use 0-80 bolts and nuts. I drill a small hole through the rail joiner and the rail parallel to the top to the rail. I then inserted a 0-80 screws (bolt) from the inside of the rail and attached the nut on the outside of the rail and then tightened it down.












If you look at the rail joiner at the top of the picture below you will see two of the #4 screws coming out the bottom. 




















Both of these have been outside and in constant use for over 25 years. Neither method interfears with the flanges. If you use you imagination, the 0-80 method has a slightly prototypical look.

The 0-80 method works very nicely with Aristo track. All you have to do is extend the holes that are already there through the inside of the rail joiners. I think I had to widen the original hole a little to get 0-80 screw through. I used a 1/16 inch drill for the 0-80 screws.


The electrical conductivity is fine with these methods. It is inexpensive and only requires a little time and a few drill bits. 


Chuck N


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

My 2c... If the expense of the clamps makes you hesitate, do half. The outside rail on all curves, staggered on the straights. Uncle Herm's mostly work pretty good, but you may have to file back the mating surface on some to get them to hold firmly... and it's easy enough to convert them into 'split-jaw' style with a dremel if you mix rail brands.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Chuck: The only problem with the way you did it is that after time these rail Joiners will fail from the elements and will break even in the center so now you start over. Do the clamps and be done with it and only have to do once. Later RJD


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

In over 25 years using this method on Colorado and Virginia I haven't had a failure yet. The breakage was always parallel to the rail at the bend that goes over the base of the rail. Never a failure perpendicular to the rail.

Chuck N


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

In effect you have created a model equivalent of the prototype "angle bars" I believe. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Mik on 17 Aug 2010 01:00 PM 
My 2c... If the expense of the clamps makes you hesitate, do half. The outside rail on all curves, staggered on the straights. Uncle Herm's mostly work pretty good, but you may have to file back the mating surface on some to get them to hold firmly... and it's easy enough to convert them into 'split-jaw' style with a dremel if you mix rail brands. 

Thanks Mik, these are the exact problems I am having. 

With a mix of several brands of 332 rail, the Herm clamps do not clamp the best, and seem to migrate with temperature/expansion problems. They seem to do best on brand A to A, C to C, etc joints. 

Ahhh....where be me Dremel?


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg:

They work, and if they break they break parallel to the track, they still hold.

Chuck N 


I have had several rail clamps that have cracked where they are pulled up against the bottom of the rail. The clamps are milled (ground) to an fairly sharp angle. I think that if there was a flat spot at the end of the notch, the track wouldn't act as a wedge and split the clamp.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Chuck, thanks for posting the photos. The #4 stainless steel screws is the method I was describing as being used by guys in Denver. Didn't know you were part of that movement, but it doesn't surprise me. Byron still swears by it, and still sells jars full of the screws. 

As for the 0-80 screws, that's what dad's used on his railroad for 30 years, except we didin't drill through fishplates, we built prototypical joint bars from hammered flat code 100 rail. We had a jig to drill the holes in the joint bars and rail ends. Four screws per joint (two on each rail). We haven't run electricity through the rails in 25 years for everyday ops, but when we have to for one reason or another, they pass electricity very nicely. (And that's with aluminum rail, too!) We experimented briefly with hammering "regular" fishplates, but we did them out of copper, and electrolysis corroded them within a few years. 

Later, 

K


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Kevin:

Thanks for the comments. The #4 screws were not original with me. It probably came from Byron, as we were both very active in DGRS at the time. I think that at one time he tried #2s. They are smaller diameter, but since I had a thousand #4s and too many holes drilled, I stayed with the 4s.

I think that the 0-80s were my idea, but that was long ago and far away.

Chuck N


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I should add that these two methods work very well on brass code 332 track. The screws might be to big for code 250 and smaller. Also, I don't think that drilling stainless steel would be very easy.

Chuck N


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

I have found that railclamps like split jaws are the only way to go on track and battery powered layouts...........


----------



## Biblegrove RR (Jan 4, 2008)

it's probably too late but I would NOT suggest sanding the rails at all! you are creating little scratches that will hold more build up as time goes on. I use a brass polish I found at Lowe's, simply wipe on and wipe off for a brilliant shine. Forgot the name of it, gold bottle and used on dishes, silver etc. I think


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Cheapo (brass) wire brush and LGB paste works wonder, seconding the sanding comment above.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I strongly agree. Any sandpaper, regardless of grit size, scratches the top of the rail and leads to big problems down the line. Been there, and done that!!! 

Nick, I agree with you that rail clamps are the best solution. BUT, if you are trying to save $ome money for track and rolling stock, the screw methods that I suggested are a very good substitute. As I said earlier, after 25+ years I haven't had a failure.


I'm not saying that the screws are the best, only that they are an excellent option for the frugal. Been there and know about it.


Chuck N


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

BEST solution to get/keep the rails polished? Metal wheels, several sets of skates, a liberal dribbling of LGB smoke fluid at intervals (time and location), and about 8 hours of near continuous running....

Even after just 4 hours you'll be able to see your reflection.


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Posted By chuck n on 19 Aug 2010 04:59 PM 
I strongly agree. Any sandpaper, regardless of grit size, scratches the top of the rail and leads to big problems down the line. Been there, and done that!!! 

Nick, I agree with you that rail clamps are the best solution. BUT, if you are trying to save $ome money for track and rolling stock, the screw methods that I suggested are a very good substitute. As I said earlier, after 25+ years I haven't had a failure.


I'm not saying that the screws are the best, only that they are an excellent option for the frugal. Been there and know about it.


Chuck N 



Chuck,
I hear ya on the saving money thing, your method works well for you over the years and i can respect that. Im just saying what works best for me. In this day and age its getting tougher to keep a train buget and i dont envy the newbies. Im so glad i bought the bulk of my trains back in the good old days when things were alot cheaper


----------



## eroc731 (Aug 4, 2010)

Hey all thanks again for the input, and NO its not too late I only used the extra fine sanding block on a few pieces of track so i will heed your wisdom and quit! I bought a wire brush head for my dremel and a fine wire brush wheel for my bench grinder so I will use those two to get the grit off the rail ends where I will be making my connections...AND on that front I stopped in my local train store and found a box of "used" split jaw clamps! At only a buck a piece I was able to snap up 48 clamps! They too will need a quick cleanup as they have some dirt and grime on them but a little sweat equity never hurt!


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

I would be very careful even with the wire brushes. 


They leave scratches too (much finer I admit, but I only wire brush when I want to solder. I used to wire brush also when I wanted to prime the Brass
They are not cheap either and they don't last as you will quickly find out
You must ware protective glasses, otherwise these fine metal "hairs" might just fly into your eye. At the high rotation you can't predict were they fly.
 I would like to emphasize my suggestion:

Apply a little Wenol to the ends (and really you only need to clean the rail foot) and clean them either with a cloth or a polishing wheel on a bench grinder, or polishing wheel on an angle grinder, or polishing attachment for your drill.









_Wenol polish is infused with a gentle chemical cleaner that reaches deep into metals to remove stains and build a brilliant base shine. Easily clean, polish, and preserve all of your brass, silver, copper, chrome, aluminum, pewter, stainless steel, and enamel with safe, high quality Wenol metal polish.

Special additives help Wenol polish create a water resistant coating that protects metal surfaces against rust and tarnish. Wenol metal polish comes in a convenient 100 mL squeeze tube.
Instructions:http://www.webstaurantstore.com/PDF...0Tips1.pdf


_ This stuff is the best and universal. I can tell you you spend more time wire brushing then starting a serial production with Wenol. Try one piece first if your tarnish level cleans already easily than you are fine, otherwise use some vinegar first as they recommend in the instructions.

Next- don't forget the Antioxidant cream onto the rail if you use clamps, of you use screw in joiners use this cream on the screw.









And for those who are not familiar with ProClamps (offer excellent strength, don't bend when stepped on, screws don't bend either, Screws are stainless steel brass plated for matching color, can be used with our EasyBend DuoTrack so you can bend already connected rails) here is a picture:









For price information go to our website.


----------



## tacfoley (Jan 3, 2008)

When I built my layout, Split-Jaw was the only show in town, and spending a good bit of the year in Oregon, where they are made, meant that I could take advantage of buying them at minimal cost without the hassle of sales tax or transcontinental shipping having to be taken into account across the sales counter. It's a choice I've never regretted either, even though I have only a small track to run on. 

Sure, it can be a mite pricey if you have hundreds of feet of track - in lengths less than eight feet - and a pile of switches, but nobody is forcing you to have a big layout. 

tac 
www.ovgrs.org 
Supporter of the Cape Meares Lighthouse Restoration Fund


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Axel Tillmann on 20 Aug 2010 05:05 AM 
I would be very careful even with the wire brushes. 


They leave scratches too (much finer I admit, but I only wire brush when I want to solder. I used to wire brush also when I wanted to prime the Brass
They are not cheap either and they don't last as you will quickly find out
You must ware protective glasses, otherwise these fine metal "hairs" might just fly into your eye. At the high rotation you can't predict were they fly.
VERY good points Axel, why I am using hand brushes (brass) at $0.25 each. Use them also for cleaning loco wheels too, remove dirt, not metal from the wheels. 

On the track, I do enough to knock the mud/dirt off of the track when I remove the old joints, coat with LGB's conductive paste (any type of conductive paste would work), and add a clamp.


----------



## Tom Bray (Jan 20, 2009)

Throwing in my 2 cents on this: I like the Split Jaws and the Train-Li joiners, although I have only used a few of the Train-Li ones. I still have a bunch of the original Aristo joiners in the layout, my track is SS so soldering isn't an option. What I have found is that over time the Aristo joiner screws get loose ... I need to retighten them about every 6 months. The other problem is that it seems like the newer track doesn't have the holes drilled as carefully as the older track, especially the curves, so the screws won't go into through the joiners into the track - very annoying. 

As far as the tiny screws, I found that if you use a relatively new wrench, it will hold the screws on the wrench if you are careful, and your hands don't shake - then you can stick it into the holes. After a while I found I could just stick the screws in place and they seem to just go, even when I really couldn't see what I was doing. Of course when the holes are where they belong you find you can't get them to start ... I make sure I always have a few Split Jaw clamps to fix that. 

At some point, after I have purchased another box of clamps, I will go and replace any problem joiners first. Also I always use clamps on switches or any area that I may want to take apart. 

I also rotate the clamps at the switches so that they face the same direction and stay out of the way of the switch controllers. I haven't been successful trying to do that with the stock joiners. Just be careful not to short out the track if you are playing with the clamps with the power on. I also find that by having the clamps face the same direction makes it easier to get the track apart by only loosening one side joiners - having them both face out often make it difficult to drop a piece of track back into place unless all 4 screws are loosened, this is particularly the case trying to get a switch back into place after removing it for cleaning, etc. 

Tom


----------



## Casey Jones (Jan 13, 2010)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 16 Aug 2010 08:43 AM 
If you are wanting to stick to track power the only two options you have are: 
1. Clamps. Can be expensive. 
2. Soldering the joint. Very low cost but hard yakka. 

If you will ultimately be going to battery power, forget about clamps and save the money to put towards your battery R/C equipment. You might end up saving enough money for a decent system. 

About a year ago I seen a engine for sale at a train show that was like new in the box that I was interested in so when I was looking at it there was a receipt in the bottom from you and it showed $1,200.00 to be converted to RCS w/batteries...$1,200.00 will buy at least 1000 railclamps say 500 joints and if I use 8' pieces of rail well that's 4,000' of track..so sorry but I don't buy into your battery bs being cheaper.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Casey, First off, no one's making $1,200 just on the installation alone. RCS of New England publishes rates between $150 - $350 for the installation depending on complexity, exclusive of parts. That's very much in line with what other installers I know charge. Believe me, if people were willing to pay $1,200 just for installs, I'd have a new line of work. 

Second, you can't figure installation expense as something associated _only_ with battery power. Any time you go beyond just the basic analog DC track power, you're going to have to go in and install 3rd-party electronics. In many cases, the same products are used with either track or battery power. Either you learn to do the installation yourself, or you pay someone to do it for you. The source of the power is largely irrelevant anymore. 

It is true that the cost of a battery R/C system could buy lots of rail joiners instead, but you've got to look at what you gain in terms of control over a traditional track-powered DC railroad. If you're using any track-power-based advanced control system to get that same level of control, you add the cost of the control systems _on top_ of the cost of the rail joiners. At that level--with control features being equal--the cost differential comes down to the cost of the batteries and charger compared to the cost of the rail joiners and the power supply for the track. That's a lot closer in terms of cost for the average sized railroad. You're looking at perhaps $300 in battery costs (6 batteries plus a charger), which would equate to a good 10-amp power supply around 100 - 150 rail joiners depending on the cost of the power supply and the joiners. That's still sufficient for a small garden railway (c. 300 - 400' of track), so the costs are still overall comparable at that level. Neither has a clear cost advantage. 

Later, 

K


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

Sooner or later (always seems to be sooner for me) you have to replace the batteries and that costs. At that time you may want to upgrade to the newest technology and that will also cost for the new charger. Track power goes on forever on your initial investment.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Yep, but, with track power you can only control one train at a time on any given piece a track. 

....and you still have to clean the rail head and maintain electrical conductivity. 

Oh I forgot Todd. You live in So California, where the weather is always kind to outdoor Large Scalers.


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

I guess some people have more money than time even though they spend so much of their time here complaining about the high cost of everything. 

My railroad ranks right up there with the best of them, has been featured in magazines, newspapers, videos and on tours, and my total outlay is probably less than two big brass Accucraft engines. And with the exception of a few drywall screens and a bit of electricity, my costs are essentually done. Depends where your priorities lie.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Yep, but, with track power you can only control one train at a time on any given piece a track.
Just under analog track power. Command control under track power offers the same flexibility as command control under battery. 

As for replacing batteries, yes, it is an ongoing expense, but if I were to average it out over the years, probably one pack every two years--really not that bad. I spend a lot more replacing shrubs every year, either because they die or I'm relandscaping an area. My point is that there's always something on a railroad to suck money out of your wallet, be it track, batteries, plants, a new loco, rolling stock, whatever. Where you choose to put your money depends entirely on your specific priorities, needs, and wants. If you want the convenience of (insert here), you pay for that convenience one way or the other. The "track v. battery" debate will never be settled because it simply cannot be. 

Later, 

K


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Kevin. 

With respect, Mr Polk seems to think it is settled. He has stated battery powering of Large Scale equipment is the way of the future. 

........and we all know what a visionary he is.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 21 Aug 2010 04:57 PM 
Yep, but, with track power you can only control one train at a time on any given piece a track. 

....and you still have to clean the rail head and maintain electrical conductivity. 

Oh I forgot Todd. You live in So California, where the weather is always kind to outdoor Large Scalers. What a skewed statement!!! It's like saying with Battery Power you cannot control the speed of trains at all







Why I am right with my last statement, because without RF receivers and additional control boards Battery Power is full uncontrollable, and therefore useless. So let's correct all the statements here and put prospective to them:

All Track Power Options:

DC Track power with transformer control
DC Track power with RF control of track power
DC Track power with RF receivers + optional control boards + plus sound
DCC (digital) track power and command control with DCC receivers in the engine (Sound combos, or just regular receivers)
 And Batter Power Options:

Simple RF control with just influence on speed, can be even accomplished with the RF we know from controlling airplanes.
Controlling RF and functions in more complex settings (TE REV, Airwire.....)
 Now that we have this down, we need to understand that with track segmentation you can actually look at the details:

*Track power:*

To 1.
You can have a multi-train operation on pure analog track power. There a simple ways to do this, that give simple results, and more complex ways to do this that even allow for more complex operation, however, this will eventually cross the feasibility line to DCC.

To 2.
Bridgeworks and the old TE comes to mind that allows for remote control of track power.

To 3.
I have a couple of comments. Initially the TE REV wanted to show this as an alternative to DCC (why?-just because). TE REV wasn't pushed into the battery camp until it turned out that the receiver electronic is too sensitive to dirty track and starts resetting itself on a regular basis. Now TE REV becomes the latest "hit" for battery operation







. I can't see the advantage of a RF system with RF receivers in every single engine, over DCC. If it is price, after all with all the add-on boards required there is not much advantage at the end to a good DCC receiver board, and once you add sound to it the equation tilts 100% towards DCC. So that leaves the cost of the handheld. You can get entry level DCC for the same price (HOLD the guns.... I didn't speak about quality - but neither did I judge the RF systems either). So if anyone is to advise clients, the sellable range of RF over track power is very limited - lets say a 1-3 engine setup, no switches....

To 4.
In many posts it has been stated what the advantages of DCC over DC and DC with RF are. I don't need to elaborate on this.


*To Battery power (1+2):*
It is absolutely correct that batteries have a limited live hence this a like a fuel charge, every so often you need to buy this. A recent computer magazine article stated that the later Lithium Cobalt generation of batteries has a life expectancy of 2 years maximum (independent of re-charging cycles). They, however, have a much better run time then previous generations. But I don't think they are easily available in any other format than PC oriented. If you go down to the NiCd then you are looking at pretty old technology with only questionable life. Their life is clearly a function of discharging and recharging, length of discharge, and a few other factors, such as temperature (don't forget them in the garage during a long winter - they are history thereafter







.). In regards to the cost of rechargeable batteries, you are only in the $50 range for a 12V 1500mA/h battery or in other words if your engine uses 1.5 this battery lasts an hour. Ideally you actually want to go to a 24V battery, particularly if you are running engines whose electronics are optimized for 24V. So 24V will easily double the price and the space required., some is true for 2 hours run time versus 1 hour run time. Most of the NIMH batteries I found with 2 hours run time are about $100 and of course are large enough to no longer fit into the engine. This cost has to be added to te RF receiver, and for 6 engines you are now at the cost level of a DCC central station with many more options than any RF solution can offer (including, but not limited to Accessory control, Switch control, PC connection for semi or full automation). 

Some vendors in the RF community tout the control of DCC boards as the endpoint of the RF signal. So DCC is good but we really don't like DCC over track power as a common distribution method? And that is why? The cost of a few rail clamps? Some extra cost for the central station (which by the way buys a lot of extra features).

*Clamp or not to clamp is not the question.*
I would clamp even in a battery operated environment. I want my track joints to be stable, and my track is supposed to move without pulling out of simple rail joiners (heat - cold movement). Also lets standardize the verbiage:
[*]Rail Joiner: Are things that slip on and are typically part of sectional track (They have been electrically stabilized by either soldering or screws through them)[*]Rail Clamps: Are things that get added to the track and some form of screw mechanism hold the rail in place[/list] I have seen in this post the two be used without a clear delineation.

So at the end we can give a recommendation for a winning strategy:
A. Clamp your rails (or screw the joiners, depending on how much work you like)
B. If you will run track power in some shape or another ---- use an anti-oxidant paste to prolong the maintenance cycle)
C. If you have a small layout - discuss and understand all the Analog options available
D. If you plan large - investigate DCC in every single aspect.
E. If you are in between (e.g. 3 engines - no switches) you may want to investigate RF over track power
F. If you have bad track work and don't want to do it right, or you want to use plastic track - investigate Battery operation

That is my seven sense to it. 

Of course the _Church of BatteryPower_ will want to crucify me now (or tar and feather







)


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

OK you got me. 
I forgot to be specific. 
Todd runs only regular DC track power and it was to that situation I meant to refer specifically. 
My argument still stands. 
You can only control one train given that situation. 
If you want to control more than that you opt for a form of Command Control or (very) complicated section and block switching. 
Track power of any sort requires complete reliable electrical bonding of every joint. Never ending rail surface cleaning and never ending electrical maintenance. 
Battery power requires none of that. Plus you can run as many trains on the track that will fit. 

Sure my comments are skewed. Someone has to stand up for the truth. Might as well be me.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

First, rail surface cleaning of dirt and stuff is also true for battery power.... where do you draw the line? twigs, branches, and leaves can derail any train. 

So, I assume you mean "never ending" to really mean takes regular maintenance. 

Well, batteries, by the same logic take "never ending" charging, discharging, conditioning, and replacement... 

Your batteries definitely take never ending electrical maintenance since they always have to be recharged, as opposed to just used like track power. 

So, it's a matter of degrees, not black and white, battery takes no maintenance and track power does... both take maintenance. 

Greg


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, 
I was quite specific about the cleaning. I said never ending *rail surface* cleaning. Removing debris is required for all situations. *Rail Surface* cleaning is not required for battery power. Neither is never ending electrical maintenance. 
Unless you live in So Cal of course. 
I would think a regular plug in and charge is nowhere near as work intensive as *rail surface* cleaning and electrical maintenance. 

When I started 25 years ago I was virtually the only one offering battery R/C equipment designed specifically for trains. Now there are what? 6 or 7 mainstream battery R/C makers. 

There has to be a reason why battery power is becoming more and more popular. 
That reason is Mother Nature. She weaves her ills relentlessly and fortunately provides an ever expanding market place for the battery R/C manufacturers. 
Unless you live in So Cal of course.


----------



## lvmosher (Jan 2, 2008)

Well...I've been running battery power for a very long time, over 20 years and I'd still want rail clamps just as I do now. I float the track so the clamps are nice because they keep the rail ends in constant alignment. And If I were to go back to the track for power I'd still use rail clamps for the same reason as before even if there was no improvement in conductivity. SO for me....always railclamps. 
If Ihad 10 or 20 dismals like my friend Scott and if I were just starting out I'd probably go DCC...and still use railclamps. 

I've never been in a magazine....too lazy...and not really interested anyway...but wouldn't say no If someone else did all the work...and I still have a nice RR...or so I'm told


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Rail surface cleaning is not required for stainless steel rail... so that "zero's out" 

rail surface cleaning = oxidation removal from your description. 

So I don't do that... 

I have not had to change a wire or rail clamp in about 5 years.... I think I have you WAY beat over the number of times you have recharged batteries... I don't have to pick up my locos and take them to electric power to charge them when I am done, I can just put them away anywhere. 

I'm plenty happy and I don't charge batteries, nor have plugs and jacks and extra switches to handle. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

TE REV wasn't pushed into the battery camp until it turned out that the receiver electronic is too sensitive to dirty track and starts resetting itself on a regular basis. Now TE REV becomes the latest "hit" for battery operation . 
Not the case at all. Tony's assessment of Lewis's perspective towards battery power is right on. Lewis firmly believes (and has long before the Revolution was even thought of) that battery power is the ideal means of supplying power to large scale trains. He's often written about that. Whether anyone agrees with Lewis on that point is irrelevant. That's the foundation upon which Aristo's product development is based. The Revolution was always intended to be used with battery power. It was most decidedly _not_ an afterthought--in fact you could make a convincing argument to the exact opposite; that track power was just "assumed" to work; that the need for the capacitor boards didn't come around until after the units had been in service for a bit in that environment. When I got my sample for product review, the capacitor board was not part of the equation. (I also noticed no difficulties in my track-powered tests, though my test track was indoors and very clean.) 

I can't see the advantage of a RF system with RF receivers in every single engine, over DCC. 
In a track-powered DCC environment, I agree wholeheartedly. There's absolutely no reason to put a G-wire receiver at $100+ in each locomotive when you can get the exact same wireless functionality by using NCE's wireless controller/base station combination. If you're energizing the rails for power and have the ability to use them to carry the control signals, by all means do so. Many DCC systems allow for wireless control via a base station. If, for whatever personal reasons, you chose to go with an alternative system, then an RF receiver in the loco is often the only way to get the command control signals to it. But that's a DCC vs. others debate which is--like the track v. battery debate--subject to so much subjectivity that it simply cannot be resolved.

In regards to the cost of rechargeable batteries, you are only in the $50 range for a 12V 1500mA/h battery or in other words if your engine uses 1.5 this battery lasts an hour.


Axel, with respect, you really need to price batteries more often. I get 2200 mAh 14.8 volt Li-Ion batteries for $38. I get anywhere from 3 to 6 hours life from them on each charge depending on speed, load, and whether I'm doing prototype operations or just watching things go around. I can go to Wally-World or Sam's Club and get 8 1.2 volt NiMH batteries for $15. That's $22 for 14.4 volts, also with similar capacities (though for whatever reason, they never lasted near as long as the Li-Ions I'm using now. Go figure.) 

Ideally you actually want to go to a 24V battery, particularly if you are running engines whose electronics are optimized for 24V. So 24V will easily double the price and the space required., some is true for 2 hours run time versus 1 hour run time. Most of the NIMH batteries I found with 2 hours run time are about $100 and of course are large enough to no longer fit into the engine. 
I know you qualified your statement with "...optimized for 24 volts." However, in my 25 years of doing battery power, I have never come across any mainstream control/sound electronics that need such requirements. Phoenix, QSI, Sierra, etc. and so forth have all been long designed to work on very low voltages. The reality is that most common 3rd-party control and sound applications require only 12 volts (some even less). That's why 14.4 volts (14.8 with Li-Ion) is considered the benchmark minimum battery voltage--and has been since the early days of the 7.2 volt NiCad racing packs which really sparked the battery-power movement in the late 80s. Sure, if you're running high-speed trains, you'll want higher voltages so you can reach those speeds. (Or, if you've got an Accucraft West Side Lumber Shay, and want it to actually give a snail a run for its money...) And again, you really owe it to yourself to go to www.all-battery.com or www.batteryspace.com and take a look at what batteries are selling for today. Your cost, size, and life estimates are considerably off the mark to what's currently available. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 22 Aug 2010 08:13 AM 
OK you got me. 
I forgot to be specific. 
Todd runs only regular DC track power and it was to that situation I meant to refer specifically. 
My argument still stands. .....
............Sure my comments are skewed. 
*Someone has to stand up for the truth.* Might as well be me. 









Yes spoken like a true politician.







Ever considered running for office! You would do well.

As I stated correctly before the "complication" of multi train setup is a factor of the desires. You want to run three trains independently of each other, then you do what 80% of poeple do that start in the hobby, three concentric circles, ovals, dog bone and so on with isolated intersection between track through switches. No complication in that. Much less complication than converting an Off-the-shelf engine to battery power for the electrically challenged.....
But if you want to do what I do (three stations 800 feet point to point line) and several trains running on schedule that becomes tricky in Analog and is impossible in Battery Power!


Posted By TonyWalsham on 22 Aug 2010 08:33 AM M
; *There has to be a reason why battery power is becoming more and more popular*. 


Of course, I call this marketing via scare tactics - instead of educating customers, how to do the layout correctly, the battery manufacturer's community tried to create the monster of track cleaning, despite the knowledge that there are already alternatives out there to prevent the alleged power problems. Methods of correct layout work have been posted here and in other threads:

Use rail clamps (actually as Larry correctly states even in his Battery layout he likes the reliability of these rail connections.
Use a feeder wire to circumvent the potential bad joint (I personally don't aim for that but it is a valid method - I just wait until I have a problem, and then maintain that single joint. No debugging required, the engine just stops after the bad joint (Analog, DCC or any other track power).
Use proper rail that prevents oxidation (NI plated brass or stainless steel)
Use of anti-oxidant cream (all rail types that prolongs the maintenance cycle by several years)
 The reality is, for a little extra effort at layout time, you receive a lifetime of benefits, unless you will never migrate to a layout size that I would justify to make the financial investment for DCC, but then I would still suggest track power with control (even RF) instead of Battery Power.

As Greg said before: This subject matter is not Black and White and has many shades of grey. On the applicability scale:
|---------------|--|--------------------|-----------------|
A B C D
A=Analog (via track)
B= Battery Power with RF
C= RF via track power
D= DCC

you can define an area for battery power and conditions under which it makes sense, in my opinion B is a small area compared to A, C, D. How small? That might be a matter of believe - NOT OF TRUTH.


----------



## Chucks_Trains (Jan 2, 2008)

Yep, but, with track power you can only control one train at a time on any given piece a track. 

That's not true at all as our distant o gauge cousins have been running multiple trains on the same track for over 50 years...way before battery or command control came on the scene. They use mechanical power relays wired up to blocks so trains will slow down or stop when the block ahead of it is occupied..I'm sure that many a G scale layout has been configured this way.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 22 Aug 2010 10:46 AM 

Axel, with respect, you really need to price batteries more often. I get 2200 mAh 14.8 volt Li-Ion batteries for $38. I get anywhere from 3 to 6 hours life from them on each charge depending on speed, load, and whether I'm doing prototype operations or just watching things go around. I can go to Wally-World or Sam's Club and get 8 1.2 volt NiMH batteries for $15. That's $22 for 14.4 volts, also with similar capacities (though for whatever reason, they never lasted near as long as the Li-Ions I'm using now. Go figure.) 









It's all a matter of perspective, and Apples and Oranges..........

First You can get in regular batteries Duracells and run-of-the-mill cheapos that are dead in shortest time. The price difference is as much as 10x. So in the old saying you get what you pay for we can safely assume that you Li-IOn 18650 for 37.40 might not be the same quality as your 14.8 Li-Poly battery for 74.46. If there wouldn't what's the point to have such a product on the market. (Ah and before I forget it go to http://www.all-battery.com/ and select the Battery pack zone - Sorry not every body in this hobby wants to assemble AA or AAA recharge-ables from Sam's club an put this together or search for empty cases to put those in. Your 8 NiMH batteries are AAA at 750mAh....... Half of my originally discussed value and bit more than half the voltage level (and by the way I didn't state if DCC/Sound control boards run at 10 or 14 volt, I stated that an engine delivered for analog power is optimized for 24 Volt. So for the ones who consider converting themselves, less to do wrong. This forum has lot's of posts of burned up circuit boards, bulb, etc from mishaps during conversions. (I can convert any engine to run with 5 V bulbs and 12V smoke units- that's not he point)*. *So if you go to to 24V and 1500mAh you are by your own math at $88. In addition, I actually prefer to run a battery at a fraction of it's capacity.

Second I state that you receive at best 80% of of a given AH rating as available power (you can never fully discharge the battery or you can't load her again and full is not equals full) So at 2200 mAh = 2.2Ah you have a usable 1.8Ah- 2.0Ah. If your engine uses 1A on the average (which according to my measurements SD45 with light load and sound) easily require, than you are slightly over 1 hour. If you utilize the SD45 with a strong load, and even have smoke and sound engaged your are quickly reaching 2A so you are down to 1/2 hour or in our $22 solution down to ~ 15-20 Min.


The Revolution was always intended to be used with battery power The Revolution TE receiver is designed to operate between 12 to 24 volts applied either to the track or from on board batteries (Quote of of the TE Revo manual)

Nowhere does it state in this user guide: Battery is the preferable way or we only suggest the usage of Battery Power.

The capacitor board came after the fact (see addendum to user guide) once the reports of the dirty track problem occurred and with the long delay until the receiver can be reached again (re-sync cycle). And then the heavy promotion of Battery Power, because there seems to be a high sensitivity to fluctuating track power. That's the sequence of events.

If you don't like the message - don't kill the messenger


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

we can safely assume that you Li-IOn 18650 for 37.40 might not be the same quality as your 14.8 Li-Poly battery for 74.46. 
No you can't. First off, Li-Ion and Li-Pos are different animals. There's a form factor difference, chemistry difference, packaging, combined with the economies of scale in terms of production. Li-Pos are across the board more expensive than the Li-Ions made up of the 18650 cells. Li-Pos are designed for the absolute most in the power/weight ratio demanded by flyers and other uses down to our cell phones and laptops, and the market dictates that such a convenience comes with a premium price. It's not a quality issue, it's form and application. Even within the Li-Ion packs, you can see substantial differences in cost on the packs just based on how the cells are arranged (4 x 1 or 2 x 2). There's absolutely no difference in the specific cells, chemistry, or the circuitry--simply how they're arranged. (And yes, the cost can be as much as double for the same cells in a different arrangement.) There's no implication that the more expensive pack is superior, it's just a different form factor produced in much smaller numbers. That's where that cost differential lies. Quirky, but that's why I use the 4 x 1 Li-Ions packs. Exact same power and performance at the lowest cost of all the form options. 

Your 8 NiMH batteries are AAA at 750mAh....... 
No they're not, they're AAs rated at 2100 to 2500 depending on what Energizer decides to put on the packaging that particular day. (I swear, it changes every time I buy them.) How much of what Energizer prints on the packaging is real vs. wishful thinking, I don't know, but that holds true for any battery. I know what I bought, and I know I was getting between 2 - 4 hours run time out of them--quite a good trick at 750 mAh you assert them to be. I don't remember if you made it out to my railroad at last year's Denver convention, but I had the Energizer NiMH batteries in the Heisler that was running at various intervals with my Mogul that had Li-Ions in them. I got 4 hours out of the Heisler that day before they went flat, and the Mogul went for 7 hours and still had plenty of life at the end of the day (It has a 4400mAh pack) 

Sorry not every body in this hobby wants to assemble AA or AAA recharge-ables from Sam's club an put this together or search for empty cases to put those in. 
You're right, they don't. They can buy pre-assembled packs at a bit more cost. As I said in an earlier post, if you want the convenience of (insert here,) you're going to pay for it one way or the other. But they have the option of buying batteries from Sam's and using them if they want low cost options that still give them very good life. My point is that even the mainstream packs that most battery-power folks are using are well below your cost estimates. The $38 packs I use were recommended to me by other battery R/C folks, so I know it's not just me. Yes, we could spend $300 on a custom pack, but there's absolutely no reason to do so with so many lower-cost options available that offer us no less performance. 

In addition, I actually prefer to run a battery at a fraction of it's capacity. 
What capacity? Voltage? If you're feeding a board that's regulated to 12 volts with a 24-volt battery, you're burning 12 volts off in the form of heat. What's the purpose of that? You're not using it to boil water to make steam. It is in every sense of the word simply wasted. If the circuit is not regulating the voltage, then you're using the battery at its full voltage. If the board can accept 24 volts, it's not going to say, "oh, but I can run at 14, so I'm just going to take that." Ohm's law dictates that it uses less current to power the circuit, which isn't a capacity thing, it's a longevity thing. When you compare the current draw of the control electronics to that of the motor, lights, smoke, etc., it's a drop in the bucket. The _only_ real advantage to having more voltage to the system comes in terms of using PWM to drive the motor. If you run at say 7 volts, then with a 14 volt supply, you're feeding power to the motor nominally half the time. At 21 volts, you're feeding power to it 1/3 of the time, so you get longer run times. But the extra voltage takes space, which in most installations is a very precious commodity. If you never need the voltage in terms of gaining adequate speed, go for the capacity. What do I gain by putting in 24 volts at 1000 mAh capacity as opposed to 12 volts at 2000mAh? Absolutely nothing. Ohm's law still plays the same tune. My current draw may be double at the lower voltage, but I've got twice the capacity in the same space, so I can handle it without issue. 

As for locos "optimized" for 24 volts, I've come across only 1 locomotive in all my years that didn't run unprototypically fast at 24 volts. (Accucraft's West Side Lumber shay, which plods along at a break-neck 11 mph) Some were a bit above the prototypical maximum speed, some approached warp factor 9. True, many model railroaders suffer from Lionelitis when it comes to speed, but come on. There's typically a large gap between "prototypical maximum" and what locomotives commonly operated at, and what is practical in the garden--especially with the curves we often use. It's very rare that I've ever encountered anyone using batteries at more than 21 volts--even with the ultra-small Li-Ion packs available now. (Cordless Renovation's biggest pack is 22 volts. The NiCad and NiMH packs max out at 19.) I've yet to hear anyone complain that their trains run too slow at full speed. In fact, most users--even track-powered DCC users--set their maximum speed below the operational top end if they have that capability. 

Second I state that you receive at best 80% of of a given AH rating as available power (you can never fully discharge the battery or you can't load her again and full is not equals full) So at 2200 mAh = 2.2Ah you have a usable 1.8Ah- 2.0Ah. If your engine uses 1A on the average (which according to my measurements SD45 with light load and sound) easily require, than you are slightly over 1 hour. If you utilize the SD45 with a strong load, and even have smoke and sound engaged your are quickly reaching 2A so you are down to 1/2 hour or in our $22 solution down to ~ 15-20 Min. 

Throw the theory out the window, Axel. Buy a pack of Li-Ions (or even NiMH, NiCads, or whatever), put them in a locomotive, do the math you show, then explain to me how you're getting two, three, four times the life you'd expect from your equations. I've been running batteries for 25 years. I know exactly what to expect from each and every chemistry I've used over the years. Numerical theory based on ratings does not match their life. Why? Who knows. Perhaps it's because when you're running PWM, you're only feeding the voltage at a percentage of the time, so while you're running for 1 hour, you're actually only putting a drain on battery for perhaps half that if you're running at half throttle. If you're doing prototype operations, you're stopped half the time, not putting any drain on the system beyond the basic sounds/lights. The reality is that even on locos that draw substantial amounts of current, your run times still exceed the mathematical expectancy you get by simply dividing the stated capacity by the current draw. That's the reality that's been proven over and over again through the years with all the technologies I've used. (Li-Ion/Li-Po batteries have circuitry that literally shut the battery down to avoid over-discharging and overcharging, yet I'm still getting tremendous run times out of them. 

Just as you correctly assert that maintaining electrical conductivity between rail joints isn't the bugbear that battery power advocates make it out to be, battery life isn't the limitation on operations that track power advocates make _it_ out to be. _Both_ myths are adequately busted by practical experience. 

Nowhere does it state in this user guide: Battery is the preferable way or we only suggest the usage of Battery Power. 
You _expect_ it to? Lewis wants to sell the product as wide an audience as possible. He's openly said battery power is the way of the future, and he builds his products with that in mind. (Hence the MU pigtails, battery/track switch, etc. included with each locomotive, to say nothing of his line of Li-Ion batteries and chargers.) That doesn't mean he's going to cut the wires, so to speak, on his product line, forcing his customers to use batteries in order to run his trains. He's a businessman, and knows his customer base. It doesn't matter how he sees the future, it's the here and now that pays the bills. The here and now is still predominantly analog track power, to say nothing of any kind of advanced control, be it track or battery powered. He's going to cater to that market. But the underlying foundation of his product development in large scale is compatibility with battery power. It's important to note that he markets the Revolution to the small-scale market as well, which _is_ almost universally track power. 

Axel, I have a tremendous amount of respect for you, which is why it really surprises me that you're basing your arguments on myths and outdated, inaccurate information. You don't need to. It's been very clearly demonstrated that the use of rail clamps has significant merit in the track-powered world _and_ even the battery powered world. It's also been quite adequately proven that cleaning track is something that must be done to some level in both camps, and through choosing proper rail materials can be virtually eliminated for track-power beyond sweeping debris off the track (i.e, no more than the battery folks.) 

Later, 

K


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

woops it posted 2x


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

OMG, Some of these replies are getting so long i thought Jerry was writting them, Im falling asleep again.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By toddalin on 21 Aug 2010 02:24 PM 
Sooner or later (always seems to be sooner for me) you have to replace the batteries and that costs. At that time you may want to upgrade to the newest technology and that will also cost for the new charger. Track power goes on forever on your initial investment.


Now see what you have started Mr Todd.
Attacking battery power can only expose yourself to the ridicule that ensues.


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

I see this thread has way way jumped the track from the original what type of rail connection to use, (Axel's pro-clamps for ease of installation, strength, cost and electrical conectivity for me are a no brainer) to the debate of RC/te rev Battery vs DCC track power/control.


To me its very simple I weighed the initial cost of the system, the amount of work/complexity of installation in the engine, the features and control available, and the cost for each additional engine.


I wanted all my locomotives to have full sound,lights, and smoke, AND be able to run at high speeds for my high speed passenger service ( get 21.5 volts to the drive motors).


Both systems would be using the same track layout so its cost is not applicable as I would build it the same way ( keep in mind I am not figuring in the extra cost of remotely controlling all 10 of my switches using the Batt/TE REV system).


NCE/DCCsystem;


The initial cost for my Wireless 10 amp NCE system was $550, regulated 27 watt/10amp power supply $85, 1 QSI digital sound and motor controller $125. Making the initial start up cost for 1 engine $760. Installation of sound and motor control took about 15 minutes in my Aisto SD45. Nce system installation and set up about 30 mins (that includes programing the engine). So in about an hour I was all set and running with full sound, smoke and motor control.


Now a TE Batt system;

TE REV system $210, smoke board $22.49, Phonix P5 sound board $179.99, 1x 5200 mah bat, $149.99, 1x Smart charger $109.99.(got the prices from St Aubins today) Initial cost for 1 engine $672.46 ($87.54 cheaper) I'm guessing that the installation of the REVO in my SD45 is the same as the QSI board BUT now you also have to hook up the sound board, smoke board, and install the battery in the loco or tender allowing for charging or make a battery car. Then don't forget to charge the battery . All in all a much more complicated endevor than the QSI set-up and sure to take much longer than an hour to do. 


Now the cost for additional locomotives per system (please keep in mind that I want to run the additional engines at the same time)


NCE/DCC;


1x QSI sound and motor controller $125 (for my Aristo yellow box engines which make up 95% of my motive power, this whole post being the main reason for their choice). Installation and setup up 20 mins or so and It's on the layout. 


TOTAL cost for each additional locomotive - $125.


BATT/TE rev;


1x TE REV receiver $79.99, 1x smoke board $22.49, 1x P5 sound board $179.99, 1x 5200 mah batt $149.99, Installation and setup as complicated and time consuming as the first engine and DON'T forget charging time 


TOTAL cost for each additional locomotive $432.46 !!!


When you add up the actual costs, installation, features/functions, and lastly runtimes between NCE/DCC vs BATT TE/REV the difference is amazing. 


It made for a very simple choice for me.


Ron


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Hold on a second, Ron. If you're going to do a cost analysis comparison, you've got to put them in the same environment. Of course the QSI in a track-powered DCC environment is going to be cheaper than the Revolution in a battery environment, because you don't need the battery. When you put the QSI in the battery environment, you add the cost of the battery ($150) _and_ the cost of the G-wire receiver ($115 at St. Aubins) to the cost of the QSI board (for which $125 is a great price. St. Aubins has it for $145.) When you add that up, you're at $390 per loco. For the Revolution, you've got to now take off the cost of the smoke board, because the QSI does not allow you to control the smoke independently as the Revolution does. You must keep functionality as even as possible, and can't add costs for something the other system cannot do. (You only "need" the smoke board if you want to control the smoke via the accessory control board. Otherwise, you wire don't worry about it--it powers directly from the track/battery.) So, that drops that price down to $410. If you go by St. Aubin's price for the QSI board, which adds $20, you're at $410 for _both_ systems in the identical power environment. They are really very comparable in terms of price, the scale tipping pretty much based on who you buy your equipment from. 

Of course, in the Track-powered arena, the QSI system is going to be cheaper because your only expense is the QSI board. You're at $260 for the Revolution/Phoenix combination, exclusive of the Cap board. No contest in that environment on a cost basis. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

"Of course the QSI in a track-powered DCC environment is going to be cheaper than the Revolution in a battery environment, because you don't need the battery" 

Yes, Kevin, that is right. Hasn't this degenerated to track vs. battery again? Hmm... battery not cheaper... oh the horrors of this revelation! 

And the DCC system has way more functionality and it's not proprietary... 

Boy, I guess I better go out and throw away all my DCC stuff and go battery! 

Greg


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 22 Aug 2010 05:09 PM 
Hold on a second, Ron. If you're going to do a cost analysis comparison, you've got to put them in the same environment. Of course the QSI in a track-powered DCC environment is going to be cheaper than the Revolution in a battery environment, because you don't need the battery. When you put the QSI in the battery environment, you add the cost of the battery ($150) _and_ the cost of the G-wire receiver ($115 at St. Aubins) to the cost of the QSI board (for which $125 is a great price. St. Aubins has it for $145.) When you add that up, you're at $390 per loco. For the Revolution, you've got to now take off the cost of the smoke board, because the QSI does not allow you to control the smoke independently as the Revolution does. You must keep functionality as even as possible, and can't add costs for something the other system cannot do. (You only "need" the smoke board if you want to control the smoke via the accessory control board. Otherwise, you wire don't worry about it--it powers directly from the track/battery.) So, that drops that price down to $410. If you go by St. Aubin's price for the QSI board, which adds $20, you're at $410 for _both_ systems in the identical power environment. They are really very comparable in terms of price, the scale tipping pretty much based on who you buy your equipment from. 

Of course, in the Track-powered arena, the QSI system is going to be cheaper because your only expense is the QSI board. You're at $260 for the Revolution/Phoenix combination, exclusive of the Cap board. No contest in that environment on a cost basis. 

Later, 

K 


Well I was referring to selecting a type of power source for my layout not taking it to someone else's layout, so the costs are correct for me to chose 1 type of system over another. 

I didn't know that about the smoke board, I thought that it was needed because it was listed as an option, so you are correct minus the $22.49 per loco. I do think that you need a separate battery for each train you want to run at the same time right? So if I decided on the BATT/TE rev system for my layout I would need one for each train so that brings it back to $409.97 per locomotive if you have the batt in the loco of course. You could do a batt car but you would still need one for each train you want to run, and then of course is the style of the batt car makes a diff to. I wouldn't want a box car hooked up to my USA trains Streamliner set, ect


I never paid more than $125 for any of the 9 QSI boards I have (bought most at the york shows), I just bought one yesterday from Star hobbies for $120 + tax. They really are one of this hobbies great bargain imo. But apples to apples you are coorect at $149 for each extra QSI engine for my layout. It still is much much cheaper than the $409.99 for the TE rev/BATT set-up.


Then on top of all that I figured in the tremendous amount of controll that DCC gives you vs a TE/BaTT and for me and what I wanted is was a no-brainer.


Ron


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 22 Aug 2010 05:38 PM 
"Of course the QSI in a track-powered DCC environment is going to be cheaper than the Revolution in a battery environment, because you don't need the battery" 

Yes, Kevin, that is right. Hasn't this degenerated to track vs. battery again? Hmm... battery not cheaper... oh the horrors of this revelation! 

And the DCC system has way more functionality and it's not proprietary... 

Boy, I guess I better go out and throw away all my DCC stuff and go battery! 

Greg 

Cool I'll take all that junk off your hands, **** I'll even pay for the shipping









Ron


----------



## K27_463 (Jan 2, 2008)

I have been watching this debate with interest. Axel, you stated " do not kill the messenger" However, in Roman times if the messenger relayed information as inaccurately as some of your statements, he would have been run through with a sword. 
First, it is easy to fit 5000 or more mah or even 10,000 in side the loco. No battery cars here. 10,000 is way overkill, but your statement of 2200 or so not fitting in side is way out of touch with reality. We are not talking recycled drill motor packs here. Rather purpose designed to fit proper packs, got big diesels? lets go. 
Second, everybody lives in different climates and runs a different way. Your suggestion to run multiple trains on multiple non intersecting loops is fine, if you are not into realistic track plans, realistic train running, realistic appearance and more. To each his own. Greg is a big booster of track power DCC. Fine, he lives in THE BEST CLIMATE IN AMERICA. Very conducive to what he does. Try it in some other area, sing a different tune. Not all climates of course, everybody needs to evaluate their particular set of conditions. But for someone to transfer their unique and limited set of experiences to all is equivalent to wearing blinders while driving a car. Gee my driveway is smooth and no cars, so all streets must be the same right? 
No one ever considers time in evaluating the equation of cost /benefit. How much do you value time? 10.00/ hour, 15, 20.00??? $40.00 per hour? Add it up some time. As Kevin stated, the hardware costs are really a wash both ways. When you factor in cost of time, the scale tips pretty far in the direction of on board power. Example: Broken wire someplace. It happens, things fail according to Murphy. Which is easier, find the break outside in 98 degree sun and fix in place, or repair the break in the on board rc system from the comfort of your table and chair in shade or or even better, air conditioning? Broken wire on track, all trains stop , including DCC. Broken wire on on board power setup, and cannot fix it right now, just run something else. 
It is impossible to fairly compare track cleaning time to charging time. Track cleaning is an ACTIVE TASK. I have yet to figure out how to clean track and do anything else at the same time, unless you can get your 8 yr old nephew to do a good job for you. 
On the other side, I can do any of 5000 things at the same time as I charge batteries, including custom paint a loco, sip wine, or EVEN RUN TRAINS . Charging is a PASSIVE TASK. The argument that these tasks are equal in some way is completely bogus. 
And yes,I do use clamps. I like the mechanical strength and alignment properties, using code 250 flex track. Railroad is over 20 years old, I do little or no track maintenance of ANY kind, just run stuff with no prep time. 
Hobby time is supposed to be fun time , not necessarily work. 
To me , one of the best things about on board power is the realistic speeds attained. I have viewed and toured layouts from coast to coast and from the south to Tacoma/Seattle. There is a certain region of this land where in it is very fashionable to play Slot trains . Multiple loops, all racing around at breakneck speed. All we need is banked turns and sponsor decals on the side of the locos. Gee, if 18 volts is good, 24 must be better, and 34 is pure heaven. If that is what floats your boat, then go for it, you are not the best candidate for r/c control. Track power is your ideal solution. Track power is conducive to running too fast. More power Scotty, we need to clear that dead spot. I have seen trains breaking the sound barrier in many locales,wires to the track,turn up the knob, and off we go. On the other hand, I come across someone running at scale speed and I find battery r/c because they do not worry about a stall. Run as slowly as you want, switch the yard at scale 2 mph. Plastic switch frogs, no problem. Pulling power is not reduced, just top speed, by choice. When I used to run my R/C stuff at Fairplex, I do not know how many times I was rear ended at speed, because somebody wanted to run their F3 ABBA setup at warp factor 10. If i made my presence on the line known, soon i could get everyone to slow down and hold the entire railroad to sane speed limits. 
Kevin makes a good point about the here and now versus the future. This is the future to those of us that started in 1985 or so. it is very true that for folks starting 2 wire DC to the track is good and easy. In 1985 we were all beginners in Garden Railroading. Most folks mature and develop new higher level interest as they progress, in any hobby, stamps, cars whatever. After you have started, more sophistication is natural. For may, slot trains gets old. Failing to recognize the technological forward movement does not change facts. There is a well known big large scale retailer here in socal that STILL tells his customers, that Battery r/c does not work( less than 1 hour run time, just as the argument notes in this thread, stating 15-20 minutes run time) and the ONLY way to go is 2 wire DC. Pretty good argument in 1985, not so good in 2010. He also tells them DCC is too hard, complex and is a hassle. The common factor is he does not understand either technology, and so does a disservice to his buyers. 
So move forward, learn new things ,and make your choice . But stop inferring one set of standards in a single closed set of experiences to all others. Track power is fine. Been there done that, moved on. Some others will also move on, some will not. The trend is more and more for on board battery - r/c. As Tony said, way more suppliers now, way more experienced railroaders now, than 20 years ago. 

Jonathan/EMw


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

Posted By Chucks_Trains on 22 Aug 2010 12:41 PM 
Yep, but, with track power you can only control one train at a time on any given piece a track. 

That's not true at all as our distant o gauge cousins have been running multiple trains on the same track for over 50 years...way before battery or command control came on the scene. They use mechanical power relays wired up to blocks so trains will slow down or stop when the block ahead of it is occupied..I'm sure that many a G scale layout has been configured this way. 

That's what I do. And I run 7 trains at once over ~600 feet of track separated into 23 electrical blocks.


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Posted By K27_463 on 22 Aug 2010 05:44 PM 
I have been watching this .......
Jonathan/EMw 


Thats all well and good but no matter how many times you say the same thing it doesnt make it true, the costs are not the same. 
$149.99 per locomotive ($125 actually for me) is not the same as $409.99 per locomotive, and that does not even factor in replacing the batteries every couple years at best.

Ron
(and yes I do know about batteries have been racing brushed and brushless 1/10 + 1/8th scale RC cars and trucks for years, I have been using lipo's for 5 years now. I never used a pack for more than a single season because of the drop in performance as they age)


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

Posted By TonyWalsham on 22 Aug 2010 04:31 PM 
Posted By toddalin on 21 Aug 2010 02:24 PM 
Sooner or later (always seems to be sooner for me) you have to replace the batteries and that costs. At that time you may want to upgrade to the newest technology and that will also cost for the new charger. Track power goes on forever on your initial investment.


Now see what you have started Mr Todd.
Attacking battery power can only expose yourself to the ridicule that ensues.










Don't blame it on me. I've still not seen where any other form of control is as cheap as connecting a power pack directly to the track (with soldered jumper wires but no rail clamps) and using a couple dozen toggle switches, some relays, and a few 555 chips to manage everything. And those costs are long done with nothing more to buy in those areas.

And I still say that you could not run our railroad, automated as it runs with 7 trains on 600 feet of track, with trains continually crossing each others paths, for 8 hours on end without a single collision even if you had 7 operators, each with their own RCS control. 

And it seems that you are more exposed than me.


----------



## eroc731 (Aug 4, 2010)

Wow I sure hope my trains don't de-rail as much as this topic! 

As a new comer to the forum, it is interesting and a little sad perhaps to read the under current of hostility between the camps...
Am I any less valued because I chose rail power? 
The initial advice I received here about clamps was awesome, I will be using rail clamps and have even rounded up my first batch of used clamps from my local train store...


Frankly, I am running rail power because its what I purchased as used, equipment , 
striking a balance between having fun and other financial obligations, I buy my equipment used and 
simply enjoy running trains and tinkering indoors and soon to be outside...for fun, isnt that what it's supposed to be about?

I thank all of those who gave me advice and hope I count on you again to answer my questions and to help me pursue this great hobby of ours..

Thanks again and all the best, regardless of how you power your favorite locos...
Be well
Evan


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Evan. 

Don't worry about the banter in the above postings. 
They are generally good natured until someone gets personal when they believe they are not getting their message across. 

The point is you have obtained a lot of information that has enabled you to make an *informed choice*.


----------



## mgilger (Feb 22, 2008)

Axel,
Where did you get your data on the "Applicability Scale" ?

As Greg said before: This subject matter is not Black and White and has many shades of grey. On the applicability scale:
|---------------|--|--------------------|-----------------|
A B C D
A=Analog (via track)
B= Battery Power with RF
C= RF via track power
D= DCC

you can define an area for battery power and conditions under which it makes sense, in my opinion B is a small area compared to A, C, D. How small? That might be a matter of believe - NOT OF TRUTH. 
I suspect in each of our own worlds, we have a different opinion from what we see in our own particular geographical area's. I live in Northern Ohio, so from the 3 or 4 dozen railroads I have visisted, primarily at our NOGRS club members locations, there is a considerable different. In fact, I have never seen a RR using RF Via Track Power or DCC in this area. Absolutly none. That's not to say it's not being used, but none that I have seen. So I was just curious where the data came from. From seeing what your table looks like, verses mine, I would say we are low tech out here. I would venture to say N. Ohio does in fact maybe have some RF via track power or DCC somewhere. 

With that said, in Northern Ohio I would say it's closer to this:

|------------------------------|---------------------|-|-|
A B C D

One other general comment. Some view some of these postings as bickering, one mode verses another, but I view them as informative. I particually enjoyed your comments on the Wenol and Ideal products. I'm curious though, how do you apply them to the rail? When you got 1000+ feet of track, I don't think I want to get down and start buffing it by hand. Do you have an easier method and how long have you been using these products?

Thanks,
Mark


----------



## kormsen (Oct 27, 2009)

Evan, 
to me it seems, that some of the "battery-believers" might have economical interests at stake. 
so don't take them too serious. 

to clamps or joiners - you got enough money, and these big blocks around your rails are not to your dislike? then put clamps. they give better connection. 

if not, use joiners and eventually replace with clamps, where necessary.


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By mgilger on 22 Aug 2010 08:00 PM 
Axel,
Where did you get your data on the "Applicability Scale" ?

As Greg said before: This subject matter is not Black and White and has many shades of grey. On the applicability scale:
|---------------|--|--------------------|-----------------|
A B C D
A=Analog (via track)
B= Battery Power with RF
C= RF via track power
D= DCC

you can define an area for battery power and conditions under which it makes sense, in my opinion B is a small area compared to A, C, D. How small? That might be a matter of believe - NOT OF TRUTH. 
I suspect in each of our own worlds, we have a different opinion from what we see in our own particular geographical area's. I live in Northern Ohio, so from the 3 or 4 dozen railroads I have visisted, primarily at our NOGRS club members locations, there is a considerable different. In fact, I have never seen a RR using RF Via Track Power or DCC in this area. Absolutly none. That's not to say it's not being used, but none that I have seen. So I was just curious where the data came from. From seeing what your table looks like, verses mine, I would say we are low tech out here. I would venture to say N. Ohio does in fact maybe have some RF via track power or DCC somewhere. 

With that said, in Northern Ohio I would say it's closer to this:

|------------------------------|---------------------|-|-|
A B C D

One other general comment. Some view some of these postings as bickering, one mode verses another, but I view them as informative. I particularly enjoyed your comments on the Wenol and Ideal products. I'm curious though, how do you apply them to the rail? When you got 1000+ feet of track, I don't think I want to get down and start buffing it by hand. Do you have an easier method and how long have you been using these products?

Thanks,
Mark

The easy stuff first. My suggestion of Wenol (which I use for metal cleaning purposes for about 5 years) was for the old track that was lifted and was supposed to be put to new purpose. We were discussing the cleaning of the rail ends, so that they can be connected via clamps with reliable conductivity. Same thing is true for the NOALOX which is only going to the road ends when building the rail road.
NO-you don't apply the paste onto the rail head for ever lasting conductivity. Neither do you clean the rail heads with Wenol.

For the later purpose we use in the current millennium track cleaning engines and track cleaning cars (if we have Brass rail) versus 8 year olds (that is so passe....







) I had to throw this in not in response to you but to the previous poster (I wonder if he is just a user or also the president







) (Inverted Hairclub for Men joke







)

Applicability scale is not a reference of actual used product, but an attempt to take all the polemic and religious interests out of the equation, and ask ourselves "how would we advise someone under which condition to use what system?".

There is a huge gap between the applicability scale and the current implementation, for one based on a lot of misinformation, i.e. the previous poster claiming that only SOCAL poeple can run DCC successfully and therefor poeple like Greg have a skewed opinion. I am in the Northeast (brass turns black in 1 month or so) I have run DCC for more than 5 years. And if I would have followed my own advise of today I would do it for probably for 10 years without maintenance in the Northeast. I made a few bad choice then, but I am correcting them now with ease.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Since this has gone on an odd tangent now... 

No one brings up the one matter tho on battery.....either you have to get some loco you can stuff with batteries, or you are hauling around some car behind it at all times full of batteries. The advantage of stuffing them in the loco would be increased weight (and pulling). When I though I would go this route, I had two Bachmann Porters ready to cram full, but I could never get a good answer on how or what way to control speed on them and reverse, and gave up Fn3 modelling for assorted reasons. In fact, Kevin Strong has one of the two Porters now, LOL. 

So, (and back to the original question) what do I do now? 

I run track power on my IIm/1:22.5 Czech-German border railway with Euro prototype LGB equipment. 

I find clamps are well worth the time and money for my use of track power, and would recommend if you wish to go track power Vs. battery for your own matter of choice, track clamps are a worthwhile way to go. I found that even well "pasted" LGB joints and the Aristo screw joints had faults (conduct of electricity) within a year and have been replaced with clamps. 

My choice, others may not have this problem, and enjoy battery operation. I could see advantages to battery even with large railways or railways with very few locos to outfit. 

And heck, my nice green Lego Krok is battery powered come to think of it.......


----------



## Steve Stockham (Jan 2, 2008)

To return to the original topic of this thread, I use Hillman Railclamps. I started with them right from the beginning as I _hated_ those dinky screws that came with the Aristo rail joiners! They provided me with excellent conductivity for five years. This was the point where I was tired of cleaning the track each time in order to get good running from my engines. I had three isolated blocks but I wanted more control and I wanted to be able to reverse loops and cross-overs without worrying about continuity problems! I had the option of going with LocoLinc (which was the method favored by our local club) but I decided to go r/c battery with an RCS system and NiMH batteries. It took five years before I had seven different engines so equipped with an eighth system installed by myself in a "battery boxcar" for the use of my other four smaller engines. I now have gone completely r/c battery and I am happy. I have yet to experience battery failure requiring me to replace the batteries (and yes, they are installed in each engine or it's tender!) My run-times average between 3-4 hours per locomotive with a couple of the newer ones getting as much as 6 hours. I don't clean the top of the rails anymore. In fact, the "rougher" the track the better the engine grips! The only other thing I'll add is that I can run my trains _anywhere!! _You have DCC? I can run there! You have DC? I can run there too! _You don't have any track power? Guess what? Bingo!! _I can run double headers. I can control three engines at one time (although I don't recommend it!) In short, I now can do everything that I wanted to do in the first place! For me, this works and I'm happy!


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Then on top of all that I figured in the tremendous amount of controll that DCC gives you vs a TE/BaTT and for me and what I wanted is was a no-brainer. 
You hit on precisely what should be the driving force in anyone's decision. What do _you_ want to accomplish, and what system will give you the necessary tools to accomplish it? It's not about what I--or anyone else--_thinks_ you should do, which direction the hobby may or may not be going, or whether Jupiter is aligned with Mars. Find what works for you and run with it. That's pretty much all any one of us can tell you--what works for us, individually. (BTW, thanks for the tip about Star Hobbies. Dan's a good guy! I'll definitely check him out when I'm in the market for my next QSI board. )

Boy, I guess I better go out and throw away all my DCC stuff and go battery! 
Not before I can buy up all the real estate east of the San Andreas, you don't!!!  If you're going to do something to make California fall into the Pacific, I want to be ready! (Be my luck, everything east of the San Andreas would fall into the Atlantic...) 

Wow I sure hope my trains don't de-rail as much as this topic! 
LOL!!! Don't worry about thread derails. They're inevitable, and when the topic remotely involves track/battery or RC/DCC, it invariably brings out spirited discussions. In truth I'd rather be worried if it didn't, given some of us here on the forums. (On the other hand, if it didn't, I'd want to find out what each of us was drinking/taking at the time... there's a small fortune to be made.) You'll discover it's very much akin to "Tastes great/Less filling," "Ford/Chevy," "Mac/PC," etc. In the grand scheme of things, it makes not a bit of difference, but it does stir up the passions. Just wait until you get the steam/diesel debate going  

Later, 

K


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

By the way, brass track turns black here in one month too, I am 5,000 feet from the ocean... I tested a loop with brass track, found the environment liked to tarnish LGB, USAT and Aristo brass, so I went to stainless steel. Was not rocket science to see I have a high humidity (at night) environment that rusts and tarnishes everything. If I leave a loco that has steel wheels with the plating worn off out over a few nights, I get rust on the wheels. 

So, I'm not in the "friendliest" track power environment. When I started I was told that DCC could never work outdoors, period, needed perfectly clean track, etc. etc. 

I did what I could to minimize maintenance issues, reliability issues, etc. Now, years later, I just walk outside, pick up any loco and run it. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I had two Bachmann Porters ready to cram full, ... In fact, Kevin Strong has one of the two Porters now, LOL. 

Funny thing about that. I just finished putting power and control in it, using Del's Simple Critter Control and a MyLocoSound card. (A great combination!) The loco runs at a very reasonable speed at 7 volts, so that's what I dropped in - a 7.4 volt, 2200 mAh Li-Ion battery. The battery is so small and lightweight that I'm going to have to add weight to the locomotive just so it pulls its more than its own shadow. After decades of counting on batteries for weight, I'm _totally_ not used to this! I think I'm going to get some of those stick-on Pinewood Derby weight strips to stick to the underside of the saddle tank. Hopefully that will give it enough to move two or three cars around the railroad. The prototype was woefully underpowered, too, and good for just about the same. I put the Critter Control in the cab, so I've got a knob for the speed, a switch for direction, and a switch to blow the whistle on a "control panel" in the back opening of the cab, a la a live steamer. It's going to be one of three "throw something on the track to watch it go around" locos I have. (The others are a B'mann davenport and my wife's Eggliner.) 

Greg, send some of that salt air this way, eh? My AMS brass track is still yellow 5 years later in places. (Notably over the bridges where there's no contact with the ground.) On second thought, perhaps I should be careful what I wish for, given that you converting to battery would make Colorado fall into the Atlantic.  


Later, 

K


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

So to answer the question: 

You can get away with no clamps, but clamps are better than no clamps for track power. 
Soldering is cheaper than clamps but more work. 

Each method of operating a track has advantages and disadvantages


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

I looked at how to run my locos, battery, track, live steam. 

I chose track power as I had many options with this. 
Just analog control to start (Lowest cost of operation and most equipment ran out of the box.) 
Then RF control of track power analog. (year 200 and the TE was chosen). 
Then going to DCC was easy, just change track power feed to DCC. (actually I installed a DPDT switch and can use both systems!!!) 

This was my choice and I am sticking with it. 

I felt live steam was awesome, but run times too short. (I like to run trains while working outdoors and do not want the distraction of refueling). 

I like trains that go round and round (I do not care if the real one are point to point, these are toys not 1 to 1 scale). 

Battery vs DCC, both need conversion tactics, however DCC does not need batteries changed when cells are dead, and they do not need recharging. Engines stored for a year on the shelf run as soon as I put them on the track, no fuss no bother. 

PS, in my club most members are 27 mhz TE users and 3 are digital. None are battery. 2 have tried it but gave up as they were not familiar enough with electronics to do the installs themselves and could not afford to have others do it for them. (They would not go dcc either for the same reason.) 

My opinions, my RR.

So, because I am track powered, clamps are a must for better power distribution long term with a conductive paste. And I use mutiiple feeders from the power source to several points around the RR.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm with Dan, except I went directly from DC analog to DCC... 

Greg


----------

