|
Post by gyroflyer on Nov 9, 2012 3:22:54 GMT -5
Could somebody give an idea of which turnouts would be the most compatible with the Peco Z flex track?
Thanks.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by Rob Albritton on Nov 9, 2012 11:02:38 GMT -5
Marklin? Just a guess because MTL and Rokuhan both have built in roadbed.
I know the track tolerances of Rokuhan are more compatible with Marklin and AZL locos and rolling stock than MTL.
|
|
|
Post by markm on Nov 9, 2012 18:23:31 GMT -5
Mark, All track in Z is sort-of compatible with each other and differences varies by brand and to me seem to be about the same effort to make compatible. Rokuhan makes a conversion piece to connect the non-roadbed track to their sections, although you need to provide some sort of roadbed of comparable thickness for the Pecos track. The MTL will also work, again if you build up the roadbed. Expect to need to use a couple strokes of a file on the rails at the joint between two rail types. Hope this helps, Mark
|
|
|
Post by gyroflyer on Nov 10, 2012 5:02:50 GMT -5
Thanks guys. The reason I ask is for some reason I though that the rail height on some were different than others and the joints between the two would have to be filed down some.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by markm on Nov 10, 2012 10:36:32 GMT -5
Mark, Rail heights are significantly difference in the proto world and well as larger scales because in real life the size of a rail depends on the type and size of the intended traffic on the line. That's why in larger scales they talk about Code 55 or Code 70 or Code 110 rails. In Z scale the only rail size is Code 55, but even then there is variation between manufacturers. So the "target" rail height of 0.0550" varies from 0.0545" for MTL rails to 0.0635 " for Peco and Rokuhan rails. The total range is just 9/1000 of an inch, so the differences can be fixed with just a couple of passes of a file. I'd like to point you to Garth Hamiliton's nn3.ca site which has an excellent summary of all the track dimensions, but his site is currently in upgrade and not availlable.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by ztrack on Nov 10, 2012 10:53:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gyroflyer on Nov 10, 2012 13:18:35 GMT -5
Mark and Rob, thank you very much. Problem now solved and understood.
Also, great link on the tutorial video Rob. Thanks.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by Ztrains on Nov 10, 2012 15:35:55 GMT -5
Mail and deliveries were slowed greatly by our recent storm but today I received additional turnout building supplies from Fast Tracks. I'll be adding new articles to the turnout section on Ztrains.com. While they are some work to build, it's just amazing how well trains move through these Fast Tracks turnouts. John www.ztrains.com
|
|
|
Post by gyroflyer on Nov 11, 2012 2:06:42 GMT -5
John, it's very impressive to see this kind of work in Z scale. This has actually got me interested. Having the jig you use, I think it would be a great experience and accomplishment to build my own turnouts.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by subwayaz on Jan 14, 2013 0:31:52 GMT -5
Marklin? Just a guess because MTL and Rokuhan both have built in roadbed. I know the track tolerances of Rokuhan are more compatible with Marklin and AZL locos and rolling stock than MTL. That's a drag; I purchased MTL track but AZL Locos and mostly AZL Rollingstock. Well guess I'll chalk that up to another Rookie Lesson. Thank goodness track is cheaper than Locos
|
|
|
Post by nscaler711 on Feb 3, 2013 8:45:08 GMT -5
Actually my AZL GP38 and some AZL boxcars have no trouble going through MTL turnouts once you file the points... (this is a necessity in most scales to have reliable track work.) my only problem is my Geep is having pick up issues, but I'm working on that. Forgot to mention test ran a AZL F59PHi set around a loop and turnouts a couple days ago, a few wheel sets were out of gauge so i quickly fixed that too.
|
|