# Accucraft - need for perfect track?



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi,

Based on forum feedback, I have decided to go 1/20 scale. I would therefore like to save up for an Accucraft train. However, I've been told by reliable sources that Accucraft wheel flanges are also to scale and therefore won't run on track that is not well laid. My LGB Mogul and USA diesels don't seem to have a problem but I have seen the leading wheels on my Bachman Connie go off track from time to time. I just assumed it needed more weight over the leading wheels but perhaps it's a sign of poor track laying skills. I guess the only way for sure is to have a member bring over an Accucraft to test my track but before I trouble someone I would like to know if they are just slightly more sensitive or is it night and day.

Sorry for the strange question but when you guys pointed me towards 1:20 it's like a light went on but now I'm afraid I will need to re-lay 300 feet of track. Thanks again for keeping me going in this hobby....


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Accucraft's flanges are shorter than LGB, but they're still on the order of 0.100" or so, which is not "scale." (Scale would be .050"). By comparison, LGB's flanges are in the neighborhood of 0.125" or so. That's really not that significant of a difference. Where Accucraft gets into "trouble" is in the suspension of their trucks. They use springs to hold the trucks firm to the frame of the car. Sometimes this is a bit too effective, and the trucks can't rock side to side or up and down. LGB's (and others') trucks are rather loose on the cars, and can adjust much easier to the undulating track. That's the key. The trucks need to be loose enough on the car so that they can adjust to changes in the track. So long as they can do that, they'll track very well through even moderately rough track. If they can't adjust to changes in the track, they'll derail every time. If you've got a car whose trucks are fairly rigid, then you need to loosen the screw holding the truck onto the frame so that it can have a little more flexibility. Note: Don't rely on the springs on the trucks themselves to provide any equalization. By and large, those springs are cosmetic, being too stiff to serve any prototypical function. (The only ones I've seen that are soft enough to do so are the springs on the EBT steel hoppers.) 

Having said that, there's no excuse for shoddy trackwork. Track needn't be laser-smooth, but you do want to keep twists and kinks to a minimum. And it's not hard to do so, really, even if just floating your track in the ballast. Every spring, bring the level out and make sure there are no twists in your track. Watch your trains run, and if there's a spot where things do tend to jump regularly, sight down the line, check it with a level, and make adjustments. A little ballast tamped under the ties in the right places makes a world of difference. As the season wears on, the track will invariably shift with expansion/contraction. If you again notice things getting wonky (technical term), grab the level and check things again. This is just an inherent part of garden railroading. I've got 300' in my back yard, and usually I have to go over things once in the Spring, then possibly one or two spots mid-summer, and that's it. In the grand scheme of things, it's pretty low maintenance. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

and can adjust much easier to the undulating track. That's the key. The trucks need to be loose enough on the car so that they can adjust to changes in the track. So long as they can do that, they'll track very well 
Kevin said it very well, and I'd like to add my practical experience. I have no track (condo living) so I rely on the hospitality of my friends, and my trains get to run on a variety of track. 

As Kevin mentions, the EBT hoppers are loose - so loose that Geoff tightened them up so they wouldn't wobble! (I have seen no sign of a wobble and I left mine alone.) With my EBT #12 on the front and an Accucraft coach on the back I have had no problems running this heavy train. It even tracks on the RGSEast, which we had just reballasted and was in rather undulating shape! [Video on the Scranton 2012 Live Steam thread.] 

My C-19 and my other Accucraft cars give no trouble. One of my electric engines has problematic springing/equalisation, and tends to derail - but it wasn't made by Accucraft. 

The issue, as Kevin notes, is that each wheel must be free to rise and fall without affecting the other wheels. The bachmann 4-6-0 has a notoriously rigid front truck, which will derail if one wheel lifts because the rest can't stay on the track. Take a look at this article from the Scalefour Society "The principles of model locomotive suspension": http://clag.org.uk/41-0rev.html [clag.org.uk/41-0rev.html if the link doesn't work.] 
If one of your cars or locos gives you trouble, put it on a flat piece of test track and start lifting the wheels with a spatula or toothpick. Check that no other wheel lifts at the same time.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

So what I'm hearing is that the problem is not the wheel flange but the suspension. May I assume that I can have the suspension fixed so that it will run like my other trains? I assume my track isn't too bad bad because my USA trains seem to work fine. I do have the problem with the from wheels on my Bachman Connie but perhaps that is suspension as well?


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Are we talking about Accucraft locomotives or AMS cars? From my own personal experience, a Bachmann Connie or K27 will "hit the ties" quicker than an AMS car will. Some of the original cars had some funky problems with the trucks that kind of made them impersonate sleds, with really really stiff wheels, but that problem was corrected long ago. 

Robert


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi, 

I was asking about the engines and not the cars. However, if I have a 1/20 scale engine I will at some point need 1/20 scale cars. 

I spoke with cliff at Accucraft who seems to be quite knowledgeable on trains. He confirmed that Accucraft will not run on some RRs and will not be as reliable as my LGB Mogul (given little maintenance). He said that was the sacrifice required to move from toy trains to something more realistic. 

This may not be a fit for me. It’s seems that with Accucraft I would spend $3K on an engine and get something not quite as good as I could have by upgrading a Bachman. Of course, when it comes to craftsmanship and retaining value, the Accucraft seems to be great but if it’s going to be trouble to operate, then it’s not for me. Just when I was getting excited about 1/20 I’m not sure what path to take. I guess I’ll see what is available in Spectrum. 

I still may have someone come by and run an Accucraft just as a test but.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

I'm not even sure my Bachman Connie is 1/20. When I look on the Bachman web site I can't find a 1/20 Connie. I also can't find any Bachmann passenger cars in 1/20.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Locomotives are a slightly different animal, but the core issue is the same--the springs on the suspension. If the springs are too stiff, the wheels of the locomotive can't adjust to undulations in the track, and you've essentially got a rigid frame over the length of all the drivers. The longer the wheelbase, the more susceptible to derailments due to uneven track. Shallower flanges mean the track doesn't have to twist as much for the locomotive to derail. Any locomotive with a rigid wheelbase will have this issue. I did a refit of an old Barry's Big Trains 2-8-0 chassis onto a loco for my dad last summer. It's got a rigid wheelbase. It found every last twist and turn on my railroad. When we ran it on his line back east, it did the same thing. But once we got those twists ironed out, _everything_ ran fine. 

The check for a locomotive's suspension is the same as what Pete mentions--put a small toothpick or flat screwdriver under each wheel. If the wheel lifts up and the rest of the wheels stay in firm contact with the rail, then the springs are okay. If the entire side of the locomotive lifts up, then they're too stiff. Fixing them requres replacing the springs with softer ones, or sometimes cutting a few rings off the spring so they're not quite as long. The ease of this task would be dictated by the locomotive itself. It may also be possible to add some weight to the locomotive to compress the springs. Depends on the loco. 

As for the Bachmann 2-8-0, it's definitely 1:20. Its prototype is a 30" gauge loco that used to run up in Montana or thereabouts. The front trucks on any model locomotive are typically quite problematic and susceptible to derailments. The nice thing about Bachmann's trucks is that they don't rely solely on weight to hold the pilot truck to the rails. They've got a spring plunger arrangement that presses up against the bottom of the deck of the pilot. For "best" operation, you want the the spring to be somewhat compressed when the loco's on flat track. that way there's downward pressure holding the pilot wheels to the rail. The more pressure, the better the chance the pilot not derailing. 

There are two ways of "fixing" the front pilot so it's less prone to derailment. First, pull the plunger assembly out, pull the spring, and stretch it out a bit. This will make it a bit stronger. The next trick would be to add a shim to the bottom of the deck against which the plunger rubs. That, too, puts a bit more pressure on the front pilot. 

I've got double reverse loops on my railroad, and I rely on the front pilots of my locos to push the points over as the loco rounds the loop. If the pilot trucks aren't in firm contact with the rails, they'll walk up and over the switch points rather than push them over. I've gone through and tweaked all my front pilots so they now push the points over about 99% of the time. I still have trouble with the front pilot on my K-27, but I rarely run that on my own railroad because it's so flippin' large. 

Later, 

K


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

My track work is less than ideal. The minimum curve is 10' diameter. I have three Accucraft engines: K-27, K-28, and C-19. The K-27 and C-19 ran out of the box without problems, but my K-28 wouldn't go around once without derailing. Someone suggested working on the suspension. There are three springs where each end of the axle goes through the frame. I removed two springs on each wheel. I left the center spring and removed the outside ones. Since doing that I haven't had any problems.

If your curves are larger than 10' diameter, you probably won't have any problems. The K-28 had very stiff springs. That is the only 1:20.3 engine that has given me problems. My Bachmann K-27, Connie, and Climax run flawlessly.


Chuck


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

cfra7,

I have an Accucraft C19 #346 and a Bachmann Connie with the BBT drive. I have had my engines on ONLY two layouts. I have a friend with an elevated layout with 15 foot diameter curves (90 inch radius) and code 250 aluminum rail. This layout is dead flat with NO twists in the trackage-just like running on a table top! The Accucraft has NEVER derailed on this layout. I've also run at the Fairplex layout in Pomona, CA. with code 332 rail. This layout is on the ground has some grades. The Accucraft has never derailed there, in three separate runs. They have excellent trackwork!

I have removed a couple of springs from the C19 and added a little weight to the frond end of the pilot truck. Much smoother now going thorough frogs. This was Tommy Mejia's idea. You might want to contact him about some of the things he did to his Accucraft C19 and his own layout, to improve the engines performance.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I also can't find any Bachmann passenger cars in 1/20. 
They don't make any. Accucraft has the only r-t-r 1:20 passenger cars. They're not terribly cheap; current price is c. $200 per car, but take solace in the fact that most narrow gauge passenger trains were two, maybe three cars long. 

Later, 

K


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

You mention that you have 300 feet of track down. What is your minimum radius? If it is less than 5 feet (10' diameter) you might have problems with the longer wheel base engines. I don't know what the minimum radius is for Accucraft engines.


Cllhuck


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

They state it to be 4 foot minimum radius for their 1:20 stuff. I've gotten their K-37 around it. It's by no means pretty (I'll leave the visual comparison to your imaginations) but it does squeeze around. 

Later, 

K


----------



## jfrank (Jan 2, 2008)

Accucraft advertises a minimum radius of 4 ft, but that is very sharp for their engines and rolling stock. I use a 6ft radius as my minimum and have had no problems with it. If you are worried about one of their locomotives negotiating your track, you might want to worry more about one of their 50ft passenger cars. The longer the car, the more likely it will find that special spot to derail. Going back to our original question.......I don't know why you would not want to have good track no matter what you plan on running. Track is the foundation of any railroad. Sloppy track begets sloppy operations.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi, 

All my track is 10' radius or 5' diameter. I hope that will be close enough.

I still want to go 1/20 scale but I'll start with baby steps and see how far I get. I already have the 1/20 Connie from Bachmann, so my first step will be to get it into good running shape with the upgrade kit from the guy in Arizona. 

Ill also try and fix the spring at the Front wheels so that they wont come off the rails as easy.

I'll then order an Accucraft passenger car and see how that works out. If that works, then I will have someone bring over an Accucraft engine and see how bad my track is. Your advice has encouraged me not to give up but perhaps proceed with caution.

Thanks


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

It bears mentioning that the issues with suspensions and rough trackage aren't limited to 1:20.3. You'll face the same issues regardless of scale. It's the nature of front pilot trucks to look for any and all opportunities to derail unless properly held down to the rails, and rigid loco frames don't care how big the loco is over the wheels. It's the physics between the wheels and the rails that's key. The deeper the flange, the more twists a rigid frame can tolerate. 

Unless there's a specific Accucraft loco you're looking at, there's no need to forgo 1:20 simply because their locos may or may not run well over your track. Many in 1:20 don't have Accucraft locos simply because they don't want to fork over 4 figures for them. (My only Accucraft locos are my live steamers.) But I really think you'll find it quite simple to tweak your track here and there if there are issues. It's a great scale to work in, and there's plenty available. (Except an inexpensive inside-frame 2-8-0. Sheesh, Bachmann... what's it gonna take???) 

Later, 

K


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 01 Mar 2012 09:32 AM 
It bears mentioning that the issues with suspensions and rough trackage aren't limited to 1:20.3. You'll face the same issues regardless of scale. It's the nature of front pilot trucks to look for any and all opportunities to derail unless properly held down to the rails, and rigid loco frames don't care how big the loco is over the wheels. It's the physics between the wheels and the rails that's key. The deeper the flange, the more twists a rigid frame can tolerate. 

Unless there's a specific Accucraft loco you're looking at, there's no need to forgo 1:20 simply because their locos may or may not run well over your track. Many in 1:20 don't have Accucraft locos simply because they don't want to fork over 4 figures for them. (My only Accucraft locos are my live steamers.) But I really think you'll find it quite simple to tweak your track here and there if there are issues. It's a great scale to work in, and there's plenty available. (Except an inexpensive inside-frame 2-8-0. Sheesh, Bachmann... what's it gonna take???) 

Later, 

K 

Regarding locomotives with two-wheel pilot trucks, Kevin is correct......it doesn't matter WHAT scale, they are always trouble. Our 1/8 scale Gene Allen 2-6-0 live steamer had many derailments when we got it. We finally rigged up an equalized system and changed the suspension a little. The drivers are actually equalized WITH the pilot truck. Quite a bit more work, but well worth it.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi,

I called Barry's Big Trains and will make my order tomorrow to get his upgrade kit for the Bachmann Connie. He said he won't have anymore until April. I'll also see if I can find someone around here to bring over an Accucraft EBT just to see how my track deals with an Accucraft. If I can run an Accucraft without a total re-do, then I'll buy an EBT.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 01 Mar 2012 09:32 AM 
It's a great scale to work in, and there's plenty available. (Except an inexpensive inside-frame 2-8-0. Sheesh, Bachmann... what's it gonna take???) 

Later, 

K 

The consolidation that interests me is one like the Nevada Nothern Consolidation. It's not a narrow gage but it's the only one I've been on. Is that an inside or outside frame? Who makes a 1/20 that is closest to that consolidation?


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Who makes a 1/20 that is closest to that consolidation? 
Well, if you want an accurate answer, it's "no one." That's a standard gauge loco, and to do that in 1:20 would require 70mm track. Overlooking that, the 2-8-0s from Accucraft are rather lightweight c. 1880 locomotives, but they're the only commercially available inside-frame 2-8-0s on the market. If you overlook the fact that the Bachmann 2-8-0 is outside frame, it's probaby far more contemporary both in terms of age and fittings. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Cfra7 (?name?) 

If you look at my videos on youtube ('fred2179') you will find several of my C-19 2-8-0 and my EBT #12 2-8-2 running on a variety of layouts - with no derailments. 

An LGB 2-6-0 is a short loco with big coarse toy-like wheels. It will stay on any kind of track. A scale 1/20th loco should have nicer wheels and will need a little more careful track laying. Accucraft has economies of scale as they make both electric and live steam versions of their engines, but that means the electrics are brass and stainless steel so they are not as cheap as plastic trains. 

I'll then order an Accucraft passenger car 
Be warned that making the Accucraft coach (the only game in town) into a smooth runner needs a little research. Acccucraft fitted lights and have wipers on the wheels. Most of us install a battery and remove the wipers. See "Battery Box for Accucraft Coach" at http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/afv/topic/aff/8/aft/118381/Default.aspx [www dot mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/afv/topic/aff/8/aft/118381/Default.aspx if the link doesn't work]


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 01 Mar 2012 09:45 PM 
Who makes a 1/20 that is closest to that consolidation? 
Well, if you want an accurate answer, it's "no one." That's a standard gauge loco, and to do that in 1:20 would require 70mm track. Overlooking that, the 2-8-0s from Accucraft are rather lightweight c. 1880 locomotives, but they're the only commercially available inside-frame 2-8-0s on the market. If you overlook the fact that the Bachmann 2-8-0 is outside frame, it's probaby far more contemporary both in terms of age and fittings. 

Later, 

K 

So in short, are you saying that the Bachmann Connie is closer to the Navada Northern Connie than the Accucraft?


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Well, in reality, the three locos are probably at three points of a triangle. Likely the side between the B'mann loco and the Nevada Northern loco is shorter than that between the Accucraft loco and the prototype based on era and the look of all the fittings on the boiler (steel cab, round domes, etc), but it's probably not closer by too much. 

Later, 

K


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 02 Mar 2012 09:54 AM 
Cfra7 (?name?) 

If you look at my videos on youtube ('fred2179') you will find several of my C-19 2-8-0 and my EBT


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By East Broad Top on 02 Mar 2012 07:28 PM 
Well, in reality, the three locos are probably at three points of a triangle. Likely the side between the B'mann loco and the Nevada Northern loco is shorter than that between the Accucraft loco and the prototype based on era and the look of all the fittings on the boiler (steel cab, round domes, etc), but it's probably not closer by too much. 

Later, 

K 

I'll take that as a yes..... I really want the EBT electric if I can get this 1/20 thing going....


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

I have sent $210 to Barry's. Big Trains for the conversion kit. I have also bought a 2nd Bachmann Connie $300 to be converted. It's will be battery powered with Airwire. I'll also set it up so that it can pull Accucraft cars.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

The Accucraft 1:20 couplers will bolt right onto the tender of the 2-8-0 very nicely. (Also the pilot, if I recall. I don't think I had to do any major surgery.) 










Later, 

K


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi, My name is Ed. I did look at every video you posted with C19 in the title. It's a good looking engine. The guy who works on my trains said he would loan me some Accucraft flat cars as a test. He doesn't have any passenger cars. If it works, he will wire LED lights from the engine battery through each of the cars. Ed,

The nearest thing to a full size (not narrow gauge) 2-8-0 is probably the Bachmann 4-6-0 with one of Barry's 2-8-0 conversions. 
I found this pic in the thread "Barrys 2-8-0" at http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/afv/topic/aff/14/aft/122644/Default.aspx [www dot mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/afv/topic/aff/14/aft/122644/Default.aspx if that link doesn't work] where there are a couple more pics.













He doesn't have any passenger cars. If it works, he will wire LED lights from the engine battery through each of the cars. However, I don't often run late enough to get much value from lights so I may just skip any lighting. I'm going to guess that the "wipers" that you mention are used for picking up electricity for the track. My track is not electric.
I don't run very often at night, which is why my passenger cars all use a 9V battery to power them (the Accu coaches lights work/light up on anything more than 5V.) And yes, the wipers are for power and can be removed or bent if your track is not electrified.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

The Gracie looks great but is it 1/20? I looked on the Bachmann site and couldn't find something in 1/20 that looked like it. Either way, it's too late for me now as I went and paid $300 for a Connie today.


----------



## tmejia (Jan 2, 2008)

The 2-8-0 Rio Gracie is mine. I also have an Accucraft C-19.

Here are some comparison pictures




















Here is the Rio Gracie directly in front of the C-19. I lined up the front of the cabs for reference





















The Rio Gracie is track power the C-19 is battery.

When I first got the C-19 my track was temporary and just on dirt and the C-19 had trouble with it as did the 2-8-0 Rio Gracie. For 1-1/2 years the C-19 was a shelf queen. Ran the C-19 a few time at the Pomona Fairplex and had some trouble with the pilot wheels and a couple of their switches. Jonathan (Electric Steam Modelworks) suggested tinkering with the pilots suspension screws. Took a couple of times of trial and error to figure it out. I finally ballasted my track and now they both run great on my layout. My track has some 8 foot diameter semi-circles. 

Tommy








Rio Gracie


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

The Gracie looks great but is it 1/20? 
Ed, 
No, it is a 1/22.5 model of the ET&WNC's tourist loco (which is still running in NC.) You can see the differences from the comparison photos. Barry offers a 4-6-0 and a 2-8-0 conversion. 

However, there are many folk here who have converted them to 1/20th scale. The usual approach is to enlarge the cab vertically and add a taller stack. Here's Jack Thompson's lovely engine and here's the link to the page describing the conversion: http://4largescale.com/Thompson/10.htm [4largescale.com/Thompson/10.htm if the link doesn't work.]











The 'Connie' 2-8-0 is also a fine locomotive and I'm sure you'll be very pleased with it. The guys here can help with any issues or questions!


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Wow! I would be thrilled to have number 12 above. Perhaps that is the smartest move. I can just stay with the Bachmann line and have someone covert their 1/22 10 wheeler into a 1/20. 

I will still have to go with Accucraft passenger cars because they seem to be the only ones. I trust that getting an Accucraft passenger car to work is easier than their engines. 

The other issue is switches. Any modifications required to switches for the Accucraft cars? I remember Cliff at Accucraft saying something about switches. I'll only have one or two on my main line but can't avoid them in the yard.


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By cfra7 on 04 Mar 2012 11:46 AM 
Wow! I would be thrilled to have number 12 above. Perhaps that is the smartest move. I can just stay with the Bachmann line and have someone covert their 1/22 10 wheeler into a 1/20. I will still have to go with Accucraft passenger cars because they seem to be the only ones. I trust that getting an Accucraft passenger car to work is easier than their engines. The other issue is switches. Any modifications required to switches for the Accucraft cars? I remember Cliff at Accucraft saying something about switches. I'll only have one or two on my main line but can't avoid them in the yard. Ed,

In your very first post, you said you were concerbed about having to re-lay 300 feet of track. What kind of track do you have laid now? What kind of switches? I have three Accucraft Jackson&Sharp passenger cars. Two are stock and one is a reworked coach made into D&RGW #212 Combine using Rio Grande Models UK replacement sides kits. These cars are BIG and heavy. You definitely need to rework the stock trucks. All of the wheel sets on mine have been reolaced with ball bearings, wipers removed and batteries installed for lights. They are over 26 1/2 inches long. They CAN go through 4 foot radius curves, but it's not pretty. My layout is minimum 90 inch radius with #6 Sunset Valley turnouts. The passenger cars roll very nicely through these. If you are using Aritcraft turnouts with roughly an eight foot diameter curve, you might have a problem with your Accucraft engine and Accucraft passenger cars. That might be what Cliff had mentioned. Just remember that 1:20.3 is all big stuff and you have to build accordingly.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

My track only uses 5' curves so I'm a little better than minimum. I beleave my switches are USA (yellow box). They are also 5'.


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By cfra7 on 04 Mar 2012 01:16 PM 
My track only uses 5' curves so I'm a little better than minimum. I beleave my switches are USA (yellow box). They are also 5'. 
5 foot DIAMETER or 5 doot RADIUS?


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

5' R / 10' D


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ed:

According to the USA web site, they make two switches. One looks like it is similar to the LGB R1 switches and the other is a #6. In all likely hood the J&S 1:20.3 coaches will not go through R1 switches (2' R,4'D). If they do, they won't be very happy or look good. If you have the #6 switches you will be fine. What is the USAt product number of the switch on the box? Telling us that it is a yellow box isn't a lot of help.

My layout has 10' diameter curves, but the switches are LGB 18000 series. That is about 16' diameter curve. All of my Accucraft engines and J&S cars handle this combination of curves and switches without any problems. For many years I had Aristocraft 10' diameter (wide radius) switches. They gave some of my longer engines and cars problems, so that is why I went to the LGB 18000s.


As an aside, I can run the USAt streamliners through the LGB 18000 switches with out any problems and they are considerably longer than the J&S cars from Accucraft. 


Chuck


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

It turns out I'm using 10' D Aristo switches. Is that good enough?


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

They'll work, but watch them on passing sidings. You'll want to have some straight track right after the switch to avoid a sharp "S" curve. I've got them on my workshop switching layout, on which they're back-to-back with no straights between. I can pull my freight cars through them without issue, but not my passenger cars. The couplers don't have enough side-to-side play. 

Later, 

K


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

It sounds like the switch that will lead away from my mainline will be fine. I plan to add a 10' D aristo right hand switch which will allow the train to head for the rail yard. The first section of track after the switch will be an opposite curve to bring the track parallel with the main line for about 30'.

My concern is for my rail yard. My plan was to build a ladder switch system (I think that's what it's called) where you have one switch and then the turn out of that switch links to another switch and then to a 3rd.

Once again I'm in an area that I dont fully understand. Once agin this discussion is only concerning my rail yard. My goal for the yard is to have 4 parallel tracks where I will park my trains. The yard tracks will be 8" appart center to center. There will be one track leading to the rail yard. That track wil get to a right hand switch. The train will continue forward or if the switch is thrown, it will go off ot the right, and then be directed parallel with the track from the first switch. At some point it it will hit a 2nd switch and once again be able to proceed straight or if the switch is thrown to the right and then the process repeats. 

The first track I must buy to make this happen is a switch. Is my Aristo 10' D fine or do I need something larger? Assuming the train is directed off to the right (right handed switch) the next section of track it will hit is a curved one with the opposite curve of the switch so that you now have two parallel tracks. Do I now add the 2nd switch or put a 2' straight section before adding the 2nd switch?


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Ed:

My only suggestion is to set up a couple of switches and some track on your floor or driveway and see how several of the longest cars work through various combinations. As Kevin said you will need some straight between the switches. Based upon my experience the Aristocraft 10'ers may cause you problems with the Accucraft J&S cars. 


Chuck


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I plan to add a 10' D aristo right hand switch which will allow the train to head for the rail yard. The first section of track after the switch will be an opposite curve to bring the track parallel with the main line for about 30'. My concern is for my rail yard. My plan was to build a ladder switch system (I think that's what it's called) where you have one switch and then the turn out of that switch links to another switch and then to a 3rd. 

This is one of those situations where a picture is worth a thousand words. 











This is a ladder-style yard (ignore the third rail for now.) 










I assume you are planning something like the top half of the bottom drawing?


----------



## jfrank (Jan 2, 2008)

@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css); I use a compound ladder in my yard as it takes less room to do the same thing.

http://www.nklj.se/xtracks/documents/CompoundLadders.htm


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

You'll want a length of straight track between each switch, then, maybe 12" or so. In reality, you're going to need that anyway, because just two curves back to back doesn't give you a lot of space between the tracks. With 1:20.3, you're going to want probably 8" or so between the tracks. In a yard, maybe more so you can get your hands in between the rows of cars if needed. Using the passenger cars as a litmus test is a good idea, if there's someone local you can borrow some from. Otherwise, get yourself a plank of cedar fence board, and cut two pieces about 28" long. Mount trucks and couplers on them and use that as a guide. 

Later, 

K


----------



## jfrank (Jan 2, 2008)

@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css); Posted By East Broad Top on 06 Mar 2012 12:24 PM 
you're going to want probably 8" or so between the tracks. In a yard, maybe more so you can get your hands in between the rows of cars if needed. Using the passenger cars as a litmus test is a good idea, if there's someone local you can borrow some from. Otherwise, get yourself a plank of cedar fence board, and cut two pieces about 28" long. Mount trucks and couplers on them and use that as a guide. 

Later, 

K 
I generally use tracks on 9" centers. Also 9" vertical clearance is necessary if you have any tunnels or through truss bridges.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 06 Mar 2012 09:49 AM 
I plan to add a 10' D aristo right hand switch which will allow the train to head for the rail yard. The first section of track after the switch will be an opposite curve to bring the track parallel with the main line for about 30'. My concern is for my rail yard. My plan was to build a ladder switch system (I think that's what it's called) where you have one switch and then the turn out of that switch links to another switch and then to a 3rd. 

This is one of those situations where a picture is worth a thousand words. 
 








 
 
This is a ladder-style yard (ignore the third rail for now.)  








 
 
I assume you are planning something like the top half of the bottom drawing?
 

 


The photo perfectly represents what I would like to do. As the train arrives at the yard it can go straight or to the right if the switch is thrown. The pattern is repeated with two additional switches. I don't see any straight Track in the photo between the first and second switch. However, this is exactly what I want to do.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By jfrank on 06 Mar 2012 10:16 AM 
@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css); I use a compound ladder in my yard as it takes less room to do the same thing.

http://www.nklj.se/xtracks/documents/CompoundLadders.htm



I'm getting an error when I try to link.


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Let me know if this is an option. It seems that the only 1/20 product that I must buy from Accucraft is their passenger cars as no one else makes any. Can I take the small flange wheels off the Accucraft cars and replace them with 1/20 Bachmann wheels with a larger flange? Perhaps an aftermarket wheel with a larger flange?


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

The flanges on the Accucraft J&S cars are fine. Your problem, if it is a problem will be the length of the cars going through switches. They track very nicely on 10' D curves. I have never had any problems with these cars on my layout. If you have a 12" piece of straight between each switch you will probably be OK. You might be able to get by with a shorter piece.


Our concern, Ks and mine, is that if you have two switches connected directly with the first curve going right and the second going left, you will more than likely have a problem. The cars are too long for that short of a transition. Under that configuration it is the length of the cars, not the depth of the flanges. You can swap out the wheels, but that won't solve your problem of too short of a transition. 


Just lay out some track and try it out. Try to find someone in your region of the country that has two J&S coaches, three would be better. There has to be a large scale group, or individual, near where your live. Let us know your city or town and I'm sure someone will be able to help. There are a lot of Accucraft J&S cars out there.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Your problem, if it is a problem will be the length of the cars going through switches. 
Shawn, 

Maybe what we didn't explain is that Accucraft and other 1:20.3 scale cars have body-mounted couplers. Most of the Bachmann Spectrum series also have body mounts - but Bachmann doesn't assume you have a 5' radius curve - they allow a lot more movement of the coupler from side to side. 

On a long car like the Accucraft coach, the couplers are mounted on the ends and don't have a lot of sideways swing - so on a reverse curve (right then left, like the stoarge sidings discussed above,) you'll find the couplers bind as one coach end goes one way and the other is still going the other way, and the cars either derail due to sideways pressure or they fall over. 

Of course, you could change the couplers so they have a lot more sideways motion. Not easy, but doable.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I don't see any straight Track in the photo between the first and second switch. However, this is exactly what I want to do. 
Shawn, 

The prototype doesn't use sectional track, so of course you don't see any straight track. But, as you said you'll need to space the tracks at about 8" center-to-center, (and that's our recommendation too,) you will need a piece of straight track between the exit of one switch and the base of the next, otherwise your track wil lbe spaced at 5" and nothing will get past! 

I found a whole intersting thread in the track forum "Distance between reversing curves" mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/9/aft/121800/afv/topic/Default.aspx [ www dot mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/9/aft/121800/afv/topic/Default.aspx if that link doesn't work.]
The thread has a beautiful photo of Greg's ladder track sidings - just like you plan to build.

Greg has a page on his website " Tips & Information on Designing a Yard" at http://www.elmassian.com/trains/planning-aamp-design/designing-a-yard [ www dot elmassian.com/trains/planning-aamp-design/designing-a-yard if that link doesn't work.]

It seems that the only 1/20 product that I must buy from Accucraft is their passenger cars There is one other passenger car available in 1:20.3. The Masterclass here built a Carter brothers coach and combine from wood (or styrene), thanks to the work of David Fletcher, who prepared the kit and the plans. Doug Bronson still makes them - but I hear he is phasing them out. Chek out his website at Bronson-Tate: http://www.bronson-tate.com/index.shtml [bronson-tate.com] 
A lot of folk run the Bachmann and LGB coaches with their smaller 1:20.3 locos. Narrow gauge equipment came in all shapes and sizes.

edit: I hate this stupid website forum software which corrupts links. Why oh why can't they fix it.


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

"edit: I hate this stupid website forum software which corrupts links. Why oh why can't they fix it." 

Pete; 

I'm beginning to think that that barn door will only get fixed AFTER enough horses run away. 

Many of us older members also feel your pain. 

Best, 
David Meashey


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi,

I just had to report back that after receiving my first 1/20 scale car, I can't go back to the smaller scale. I'm hooked even if I need to fix a large amount of track. 

As of today I have 4 J&S coaches and a combine. Once we have a sunny weekend I will hook them all together and pull them with my LGB Mogal just to see they will stay on the track. I will need to tie the first car to the Mogal with string as my Mogal is hook and loop but that should be good enough to test for track problems. I'm not sure when the Connie will be ready to perform the real test.

Now to see if my wallet can handle 1/20 scale...


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By cfra7 on 20 Mar 2012 07:45 PM 
Hi, I just had to report back that after receiving my first 1/20 scale car, I can't go back to the smaller scale. I'm hooked even if I need to fix a large amount of track. As of today I have 4 J&S coaches and a combine. Once we have a sunny weekend I will hook them all together and pull them with my LGB Mogal just to see they will stay on the track. I will need to tie the first car to the Mogal with string as my Mogal is hook and loop but that should be good enough to test for track problems. I'm not sure when the Connie will be ready to perform the real test. Now to see if my wallet can handle 1/20 scale... 
Those of us in 1:20.3, knew you would be "hooked" when you got your J&S cars. At almost seven pounds a piece on those J&S cars, your LGB MIGHT have a problem pulling five cars. Will be a good test all right!


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

At almost seven pounds a piece on those J&S cars 
As we noted before, there are a few things about the Accucraft J&S coaches that you need to consider. 

The wipers on the back of the wheels add a lot of drag. If you don't need lights bend them back off the wheel. If you need occasional lights, convert to 9V battery, as previously mentioned. 

The weight is another issue. The cars have a large steel plate under the seats - it basically holds the trucks in place. With brass trucks, there is quite enough weight without it - I removed it in all my coaches. Some have styrene or wood floors to keep the seats from falling through the floor. Most have an aluminum sheet the same size as the Accu one replacing the steel. (I find the alum sheets at True Value hardware and cut them slowly on my table saw.)


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 21 Mar 2012 09:50 AM 
At almost seven pounds a piece on those J&S cars
As we noted before, there are a few things about the Accucraft J&S coaches that you need to consider. 

The wipers on the back of the wheels add a lot of drag. If you don't need lights bend them back off the wheel. If you need occasional lights, convert to 9V battery, as previously mentioned. 

The weight is another issue. The cars have a large steel plate under the seats - it basically holds the trucks in place. With brass trucks, there is quite enough weight without it - I removed it in all my coaches. Some have styrene or wood floors to keep the seats from falling through the floor. Most have an aluminum sheet the same size as the Accu one replacing the steel. (I find the alum sheets at True Value hardware and cut them slowly on my table saw.) Pete,

Great idea with using wood, styrene or aluminum sheet for the floors. That steel plate IS heavy!


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

At almost seven pounds a piece on those J&S cars, your LGB MIGHT have a problem pulling five cars. Will be a good test all right 
While we're on the subject, all my coaches also have ball bearings. Phils narrow gauge sells a set of SV wheels and special bearings that pop right in - once you unscrew the tiny screws holding the axleboxes in, and try not to lose the springs! 

Shawn - take it slow and check your LGB Mogul isn't struggling or overheating. I would expect it to get them moving on flat straight track, but have a problem on hills.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

I would expect it to get them moving on flat straight track, but have a problem on hills. 
Hmm, sounds prototypical.  

Seriously, 7 passenger cars is probably the absolute limit--if not over it--for a loco the size of the LGB mogul. A loco of that size would probably be limited to three or four passenger cars for a typical train. 

Later, 

K


----------



## cfra7 (Jan 2, 2008)

Ok, I'll use my GP-9


----------

