# Aluminum: a viable option?



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

I was just reading over the "What's the deal with aristo brass... " thread and it got me thinking. 

It'll be a year or so before I break ground on my next venture into garden railroading, but as we all know, we never stop planning. I'll have plenty of room on my next pike (acres, not square feet) so I'm planing on a fairly large and modreately complex arrangement consisting of one main line railroad with interchanges with at least two other lines. 

That being said, there's just no way I want to have to deal with connectivity and continunity issues associated with track power. I may run one track power segment for visitors, but all else will be battery/RC. Running all battery I'm having a hard time seeing the downside of using aluminum track. At roughly 1/3 the cost of brass and 1/4 the cost of stainless and better availablity it seems to make sense. 

But I know there alre always some pitfalls. What's the word on the streets with aluminum trackage? Have any of you had experience with it? I'd like to get your feedback. 

Thanks.


----------



## Paul Burch (Jan 2, 2008)

Are you planning code 332 or code 250? The type of roadbed you use with aluminum will be a bigger issue than with brass or stainless.


----------



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

Planning on 332. Most likely I'll use a "floating" roadbed similar to the last ones I had on the old LP&W. We had extreme temp swings in Utah (well below 0 in the winters, 100+ days in the summers) so even brass had issues if it was tacked down. I know aluminum has a greater capacity for movement with temp changes and I'll engineer for that.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I've used both code 250 and code 332 aluminum rail. Give yourself a solid foundation of crusher fines and you can walk on either one. On my dad's railroad, his code 332 aluminum has been down for 32 years. Where the roadbed is packed in and solid year round, the track is very stable. In places where the roadbed is prone to washing out, he's gotten some kinks from occasional missteps. I had code 250 aluminum on my railroad in upstate NY for 6 years, and likewise had no major issues, despite my best efforts to trip on it, pull it up with a garden hose or extension cord, etc. The only time I ever got an irreparable kink on that line was during an ice storm when a 6" branch fell onto my railroad. I would have used it on my current railroad as well, but Accucraft had just brought out their brass code 250, and I could get it cheaper than the pre-assembled Llagas Creek stuff. 

Later, 

K


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Dave, 

Good Morning to Ya!! And Welcome to the 'World of Large Layouts' for LS! 

Do you have a sate-lite view of your proposed layout area?!! 

Maybe consideration should be given to a 'Large Layout Club' someday........ 

Any thoughts on a test track or a small starter loop,,, something I now can see I wish I had done a few years ago!! Some-thin' about having 'blinders on for tooo long...ha! 

Even just 100 - 200 feet in size, pretty fast to get going and can be incorporated as just a test track or a stand alone loop, yet part of the overall scheme of things!! Easier to add track power also, tho I will not be here. But still,...........mmmm? 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

but then, are you going on the ground or raised - for those old knees and feet..!! ? 

And Back some day... 

Dirk


----------



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks Kevin, good to know that you've had positive experiences with aluminum. 

No solid designs as of yet Dirk. In my head I have a pretty good idea of what i'd like to do. I'll see if I can get a few things laied out and post them. 
Regarding a "starter loop", or something with track power, what I envision is a long mainline railroad (Illinois Central) with interchanges with other railroads (Chicago & Northwestern on the 'Chicago end' and CSX on the 'Memphis end' and maybe UP in the 'St Louis middle' ) I could easily make one of the other lines (C&NW, CSX or UP) powered. Just spitballing ideas for now though.


----------



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks Kevin, good to know that you've had positive experiences with aluminum. 

No solid designs as of yet Dirk. In my head I have a pretty good idea of what i'd like to do. I'll see if I can get a few things laied out and post them. 
Regarding a "starter loop", or something with track power, what I envision is a long mainline railroad (Illinois Central) with interchanges with other railroads (Chicago & Northwestern on the 'Chicago end' and CSX on the 'Memphis end' and maybe UP in the 'St Louis middle' ) I could easily make one of the other lines (C&NW, CSX or UP) powered. Just spitballing ideas for now though.


----------



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

With regard to track elevation Dirk. I really liked my last layout in a raised bed. You build it like it was on the ground, but you walk up to it about about 2' high. Based on the ground contours of the property I can see maintaining a level roadbed by accomodating the ground contours with raised beds in certain places and just running at ground level elsewhere. When I get to the point where back issues and age prevent me from crawling around on the ground any more I'll either a) access the track at the raised bed points where I don't need to bend over or b) just have John Bible come over and do all the crawling around .... I hear he works for bacon..


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

AS you mention, such a large layout does offer both track - on the ground - and in a - raised planter effect. I have the same situ. going on here also!! So Hoping some of the 'planter' timber or block work planters can be built next year, to keep up with My track efforts also! 

One good idea will be to clear the ground as much as possible before you get too far along on design work to 'see' where the heck your going!!!, and it's much easier to check early grades to be sure you know what you are creating along the way.. 

Dirk - good luck as usual and carry on!!!


----------

