Combining streamline and setrack

[NittenDormer]

Planning my first mid-life (as opposed to childhood) layout so stand by to be bombarded with questions...

 

One day, I might know enough to be able to provide answers.

 

Space limitations mean that I will need to use setrack curves (Hornby rather than Peco, but I don't think that makes a difference) with 67mm centre-to-centre spacing at the ends, but would like a more realistic-looking 'six foot' on the straights (the streamline standard of 50mm sounds ideal). Has anyone mixed the two spacings already, how easy is it to transition between them and any pitfalls I need to look out for?

 

Also, since the genuine centre-to-centre equivalent would be around 11 feet or 44/45mm, has anyone gone closer than 50mm?  Again, does it work, and hazards to look out for?

 

There are things I know I don't know, but there are also probably things I don't know that I don't know (as Donald Rumsfeld also knows)

 

OO gauge, nearly forgot to add. I know it is not accurate gauge, which is why I am asking about centre-to-centre rather than pure six-foot.

 

And most importantly of all, should 'setrack' have 1 't' or 2?

[Spitfire2865]

If this is going to be a more proper layout, why not use Peco streamline fully?

The flexi can be bent down to quite a radius unmodified. Cutting the webbing between sleepers, even more.

 

 

The code 75 will look better overall, and as long as you dont use curved points, you shouldnt have any issue.

 

But if you really insist on settrack, as long as both systems are the same code of rail, you shouldnt have much problem.

Peco do produce special fishplates to link code 75 to code 100

[Joseph_Pestell]

If you must have Setrack (I think Peco spell it with just 1 t) on visible curves, you are probably better retaining that 67mm spacing throughout. Peco sell a plastic gauge to help you with that.

 

It's a bit different if the Setrack is confined to such things as hidden loops, then you might find it worthwhile to go to the standard 50mm centres on the visible parts of the layout. There are scenic devices that you can use such as twin single-track tunnels or bridge arches to justify a transition between the two.

 

Finescale 00 standards (discussed on many threads here) have centres at 45mm. But you need wide curves (at least 4' radius or even 5' radius for modern stock) for that to work.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Joseph_Pestell

[28XX]

I have done this and it works fine. Just make sure you have a couple of full length coaches to test track laying before you even approach electrics or scenery.

 

And keep the questions coming. The silliest question is the one you should have asked but didn't. To assume makes an ASS out of U and ME.

[imt]

I have mixed Setrack and Streamline Code 100 on my layouts.  They both link together fine, the fixed nature of the straights and curves helps me plan layouts and the Streamline Code 100 points look fine, give a closer centre to centre spacing and are good enough for me anyway.   The spacing of tight curves could become problematical if you use flexi track so I only use Setrack for "hidden" bits and never less than 3rd radius. I have not found a problem with putting them at 50 mm spacing.  You can "butcher" Streamline points to make the spacing closer or build complex point configurations if you wish.  I'm too clumsy to try it, but there are lots who have on this site - sorry cannot remember who/where.

[DCB]

I habitually mix streamline with settrack.  I have a sort of transition around 2 ft radius, over 2ft I use code 100 setramline, below set track,I used to cut the sleeper webs on set track curves and ease them out, 2nd radius will go to 19" and 3rd almost to 2 ft

 

On small layouts I find absolute precision in laying straight track pays dividends so I use set track long straights.

 

On big layouts you cannot beat the long sweeping curves possible with streamline flexi

 

Set track points are pretty useless, as standard they give ridiculous track spacing and lousy running as they are actually only 15" radius in places.    A standard 2ft streamline point is no longer than a set track point but gives the streamline a much closer track spacing. Best space saving point is the streamline small Y.

The set track geometry is a left over from the 1960s with 14" radius curves pacifics and scale length MK 1 coaches.  I find around 55mm is about right for 2nd and 3rd radius curves and 50mm is a bit wide for straight track so I trim streamline points.  

I squeeze marshalling storage and carriage sidings down so trains just clear, see pic.  It also allows more roads, 6 per foot against 4 or 5 with set track points.

Edited March 18, 2016 by DavidCBroad

[ejstubbs]

My layout is being built with Streamline electrofrog short turnouts (with one exception), with Peco Setrack for everything else.  See photo:

 

 

The track separation in the station platform loop on the right is standard Streamline 50mm.  In the fiddle yard on the left the spacing is Setrack 67mm - the main reason being that it allows more room for 'fiddling' with my pudgy digits.  (The one solitary Setrack turnout is the curved point at the top left - but that could still have given closer to Streamline track separation if I'd wanted, by leaving out the short straight between the curved point and the 11.25° curve which leads on to the straight on the left-hand edge of the photo.)

 

The double track curve near the camera has a track separation of ~60mm.  This is sufficient to allow my longest bogie stock - LMS 57ft coaches - to pass, see below, taken at about the tightest point on the curve:

 

 

As it happens, I don't envisage running trains simultaneously on both tracks, but I could if I wanted to.

 

I have run stock on all  the continuous run paths on the layout as well as the majority of the sidings.  Trains ranged from Duchess of Hamilton plus four coaches (!) through a 4F 0-6-0 with half a dozen or so wagons, a 2-6-4T with two coaches, and a couple of Jinties with a mish-mash of anything that came to hand.  All have run smoothly and without problems once the track had been de-bugged; both hauling and propelling, and for extended running-in periods.

 

I did have to cut a few sections of Setrack to work with the Streamline turnouts. The curves are cut down from 45° to 33°, so that when combined with the 12° angle of the turnouts they give 45°.  The remainder of the curves are laid with unadulterated Setrack.  The inner curve is second radius Setrack, the outer is third radius (apart from the final 22.5° curve leading in the the fiddle yard which is second radius).  There is also a fourth radius curve cut down from 22.5° to 12° just in front of the signal box.

 

There are numerous non-standard lengths of Setrack straight in there, to accommodate the difference between standard Setrack geometry and Streamline.  The trickiest bits were the ones nearest the camera, which have four and five sleepers respectively.  You need to be careful cutting Setrack because the sleeper configuration is not uniform along the length of a straight, so you have to make sure not to end up cutting in a place which leaves the sleepers disconnected.  Cutting short sections from long straights you also need to beware the fact that the Setrack sleeper base is not continuous along the full length of the straight - they use multiple sections of the sleeper base from the shorter straights.

 

Streamline turnouts don't like the fishplates fitted to Setrack.  Setrack fishplates have a rolled lip at the end which won't fit in the gap between the rail and the sleeper base on Streamline turnouts.  Unadulterated Setrack, in contrast, has gaping holes under the rail to accommodate the lip.  So where you are making connections from un-modified Setrack to a Streamline turnout you need to swap the Setrack fishplates for standard Peco code 100 rail joiners .  When doing this you will often find that the Setrack fishplate is ridiculously hard to remove: I once had to resort to filing the edge of a fishplate down until it was thin enough to tear apart!  Most of the time the Setrack fishplate will not be re-usable (and why would you want to anyway?)

 

With straight sections of Setrack especially, pulling on the fishplate while holding the track can sometimes lead to the whole track section flexing, or even the rail pulling out altogether.  Gripping the rail itself with pliers risks damaging the rail head.  Basically: care is required.

 

To accommodate a fishplate on a cut end of Setrack you need to trim away part or all of the moulded chairs on the first sleeper, and it also helps to skim off a thin sliver of the sleeper from immediately under the rail.

 

As others have said, the main advantage of using Setrack is that you don't have to worry about mucking up tight curves.  I could have laid all the straight sections using Streamline flexi, but as I had a fair amount of straight Setrack I decided to be a cheapskate in this instance.  A significant drawback of the Setrack straights is fairly obvious in the first photo: the sleeper base at the ends of the track sections just looks ugly.  Hopefully it won't look so bad once I get to the point of ballasting.  (I'm not inclined to be too precious about details like that, given that both Setrack and Sreamline are compromised anyway in terms of gauge, sleeper spacing etc.  At the end of the day the objective is to run trains.)

 

The layout was designed using AnyRail, and then "tweaked" as I did the trial laying of track.  The only bit that was significantly 'out' from the AnyRail plan was the short straight at the far end of the layout.  This was supposed to be an ST-202 79mm straight, but turned out to need to be quite a bit shorter.  I still don't know why.  The two sides of the layout do seem to be parallel.  I'm not stressing about it, though.

 

I've still got a few decisions to make about what is finally going to go where, in terms of buildings and sidings.  I have found the process of trial track laying very useful to see what works, and what should end up looking acceptable when the layout starts to get properly populated with stock and buildings.

 

HTH

Edited March 18, 2016 by ejstubbs

[DCB]

ejstubbs makes some good points I had forgotten, like wresting the fishplates off set track, some appear to be spot welded on to steel set track, as he says bin them and use standard streamline joiners.    

 

I am far more cavallier than ejstubbs.  I happily separate both set track (Peco and Hornby) and streamline into sleeper base and individual rails, or even individual sleepers. For a filler section I cut the rails to length and slip on the required number of sleepers slip on the fishplates and sort out the sleeper spacing when its in place.  I sometimes shorten the fishplate and use a dummy sleeper, one with a groove to take the fishplate instead of a rail fixing under the fishplate.

 

I prefer the Hornby set track if I am not altering it as the sleepers at the fishplate end are cut away more neatly than Peco.

 

The crucial clearance is end throw on locos to the centre of the coach, 4-4-0s are particularly bad and some Pacifics and 4-6-0s not much better.  The old crude Triang L1 and M7 are particularly bad but with tweaks to provide side play on the rear drivers on the L1 and restrict bogie sideplay they can be tamed.  T9s and the like with traction tyres are hopeless as they derail and foul.

 

The picture of two coaches suggests that the clearance could come down to 55mm quite easily, the coaches need to clear, by a couple of mm no more.   If you cannot run two trains past each other or past a stationary train there is no need for clearance.  I have three feet or so of station throat with negative clearance but you cannot park or run 2 trains there simultaneously so it does not matter.  Equally if you dont use both tracks of double track at the same time you don't need the clearance.

 

00 is supposed to be 1;76th scale locos and stock on H0 1;87th scale track, and I try to work to H0 clearances and "Just" clearances for which I use an old Hornby "King" for end throw and a Hornby MK1 for the centre

Edited August 15, 2017 by DavidCBroad

[NittenDormer]

Thanks EJ and DavidC for your detailed comments. My tablet thing is mot allowing me to suitably rate your replies. Follow on question: what is the difference between Hornby fishplates snd Peco railjoiners? I thought they were basically the same thing?

[JimHearne]

Thanks EJ and DavidC for your detailed comments. My tablet thing is mot allowing me to suitably rate your replies. Follow on question: what is the difference between Hornby fishplates snd Peco railjoiners? I thought they were basically the same thing?

 

I've just built a test track using Peco 4th and Hornby 3rd radius curves, Peco code 100 medium radius electrofrog points and peco flexytrack.

I had no problems connecting the set track fishplates onto the Peco points, or Peco rail joiners onto the set track.

Maybe it depends on the age ?, the set track was all new, the points slightly older.

 

Try it first, if it doesn't work then you can always pull the set track fishplates off.

 

I used the set track curves just to save time bending flexy track to the correct radius.

Also, all the track was held down with 2 strips of 12mm double sided tape, this might not have worked on tight radius flexy track.

 

Jim

[rhouse]

Streamline turnouts don't like the fishplates fitted to Setrack.  Setrack fishplates have a rolled lip at the end which won't fit in the gap between the rail and the sleeper base on Streamline turnouts.  Unadulterated Setrack, in contrast, has gaping holes under the rail to accommodate the lip.  So where you are making connections from un-modified Setrack to a Streamline turnout you need to swap the Setrack fishplates for standard Peco code 100 rail joiners .  When doing this you will often find that the Setrack fishplate is ridiculously hard to remove: I once had to resort to filing the edge of a fishplate down until it was thin enough to tear apart!  Most of the time the Setrack fishplate will not be re-usable (and why would you want to anyway?)

 

A bit late, but I hope this reply helps.

 

You can connect setrack fishplates to flexible track if you carefully snip off the curled lip with fine snips, being careful not to crush the end of the fishplate.

 

It is extremely easy to remove a setrack fishplate. Turn the track piece over. You will see a dimple where the fishplate has been mechanically pincered into the bottom of the rail. With a sharp 1.5mm metal drill in a hand-held chuck, sit it on the dimple and give it about 6 turns. You will shortly see the fishplate wobble slightly. Another five or six turns and you should be able to easily pull it off with pointed pliers.

 

(And yes, it's good enough to re-use!)

[The Johnster]

My blt uses streamline code 100 on the visible sections and setrack in the fiddle yard.  I work to the principle that if you are going to use curvature sharper than 2' then fixed setrack sections are the best way to do it, and will avoid the tendency of flexible track forced that far to deform or spring to transition curves which can mean that the curvature is very sharp indeed in the centre of the section.  My points are all Peco streamline insulfrog or Peco setrack in the fiddle yard, with one Hornby 4th to 3rd radius curved point, apart from which my minimum radius is setrack 4th.  Track is laid with some care to ensure level, smooth joints, and pointwork away from baseboard joins which tend to form peaks if the baseboard sags; I have also been particular in packing baseboards where they have started to sag and the layout is not suitable for taking down to exhibit, but as that was never intended anyway it doesn't matter.  Track is glued direct to the boards with pva, and noise is not an issue on my slow running branch line.  Pins are only used to hold it in position while the pva goes off, and not driven hard home in case they pull the gauge in.  Running is effectively 100% perfect.

 

Clearance for vehicles on curves can be determined in the following way.  1) Lay your track in the position you think it is going to be ultimately, and lightly pin it down.  2) Using your longest coach, or vehicle with the longest distance between bogies and longest overhang, tape felt tip pens resting tip down on the boards to the centre points between the bogies and the corner points at the ends.  Use different colours if you like.  3) Push the vehicle around the layout, with the pens drawing lines on the baseboard.  You will have to lift the vehicle over any pointwork.

 

You will now have a series of felt tip lines on each side of the track you just pushed the coach along.  Where these lines intersect with those from another track, vehicles will foul and hit each other, and you will need to adjust the position of the track until they clear; glad you only lightly pinned it down, now, aren't you?  A safety margin of half the thickness of the pen is built in to this system from each side, so vehicles will clear even if they wobble or rock a bit in the course of running.  I think I read this over 50 years ago in one of Cyril Freezer's books.

 

I have an opposite approach to DavidCBroad's tight use of space in fiddle yards, and leave about an inch and a half between track centres so as to have room to get my chubby fat little sausage fingers down in there to lift vehicles out when necessary; if you use fixed rakes with permanent or semi-permanently coupled locos you will not need to do this, but on an end to end blt it is essential.

 

I have never noticed an issue connecting streamline code 100 to setrack from Peco or Hornby, though some fishplates (or rail joiners if you prefer to call them that) are a little loose and can be tightened with a judiciously applied amount of brutality from a pair of pliers.  If any are bent upwards or downwards, it is best to pull them out and bin them and replace them with new ones.  I prefer to use rtr rail joiners (or fishplates if you prefer to call them that) as they ensure that the alignment between rail ends is kept in a way that soldered connections don't; I have also found them to be 100% reliable in terms of electrical contact, and effectively invisible once the sides of the rails are painted.

 

My Hornby curved point seems to me to be less robustly and finely constructed than the Pecos, but this is purely subjective and it has proved perfectly reliable in service; it just feels a little fragile to me!

 

If this is going to be a more proper layout, why not use Peco streamline fully?
The flexi can be bent down to quite a radius unmodified. Cutting the webbing between sleepers, even more.


The code 75 will look better overall, and as long as you dont use curved points, you shouldnt have any issue.

But if you really insist on settrack, as long as both systems are the same code of rail, you shouldnt have much problem.
Peco do produce special fishplates to link code 75 to code 100

Personally, I would advise against this.  The flexi track will tend to not curve uniformly and be much sharper at the middle of the curve, and in a way difficult to measure, and code 75 is less robustly constructed and more likely to warp, or burst it's chairs and run out of gauge and if you are talking about cutting the sleeper webbing you are obviously pushing things beyond design limits and asking for trouble unless you know a lot about what you are doing!  

 

If you are using rtr stock with tension lock or Kaydee couplers then properly laid setrack out of sight provides no running problems so long as the stock is not being used on a radius sharper than it is 'rated' for, even if propelled at all but the most insane speeds; the sharpest on my layout is a 3rd radius section of one curved point, and I know this to be an absolute fact, not having to measure overstressed flexible track pushed too close to or beyond it's design limits.  IMHO bending code 100 flexi sharper than 2 feet is pushing it, and I try not to go below 30" with it; of course, this leaves a gap between 30" and 4th radius that I cannot use, but on my current layout this is not an issue.  I would be very reluctant to consider using code 75 flexi below 36" radius, though fixed radius pointwork of less than this is of course entirely acceptable.  All the Peco Streamline pointwork on the visible section is 'medium' radius except for the engine release crossover which is 'small' radius, IIRC 30" and 24". respectively but fixed in formation.  

 

None of the plain track sections are curved to anything like this, the aim being to show a station laid out following the gentle curve of a contour along a hillside; I have no idea what the minimum is here, but probably 4 or 5 feet.  I have not bothered with clearances and laid the track in the way that it naturally lay if I connected it to the pointwork at each end of the run around loop; there are no clearance issues with 60' stock, GW auto trailers, or between them and my 64' Hawkworth BG.  

Edited August 16, 2017 by The Johnster

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... I would be very reluctant to consider using code 75 flexi below 36" radius...

Actually much easier to use at smaller radii than are easily obtained with code 100. The railjoiners alone prevent 'doglegging' at anything down to 18" radius, R2 equivalent, which is the smallest I have tested. This in a 'bespoke section' of a friend's layout to get the 'quarry line' around an awkward piece of roof structure, and it has been in use for five years now.