Set Track Curves or Flexitrack

[Jonboy]

Ok - i have decided (again...) to rip up and start again. I am now wanting to go for a 4' x 2', 2 track roundy roundy (in N) and try to actually finish something this time.

 

I have decided to give up on the Kato unitrack (despite having a fair amount) for now because the large radius is what has pushed me over the 2' width in the past and onto modules. I now plan to go for Peco track, but can't decide whether to use set track or Flexi-track for the parallel curves at both ends of the board. Does anyone have any thoughts or can they point me to prior discussion on the merits of each option?

 

Thanks

 

Jon

[Adrian Wintle]

You should be able to do it with Unitrack - the three smallest radius curves (282mm, 248mm, 216mm) should all fit in 2' width.

 

Adrian

[Chimer]

I'm sure many will disagree, but for curves at settrack radii I use settrack - I'm not clever enough to get smooth tight curves with flexitrack (and that's in OO, so can't imagine trying it at 10"" or thereabouts in N).

[Kenton]

Settrack is ugly all that braced webbing and thick rail. On top of that many locos will not traverse R1 and even some R2 curves. If you are trying to do a layout with too sharp a curve then just don't. Sort out the track plan - simplify it. It just looks wrong. With flexitrack you can get the curves to flow "ease" in and out of a straight Settrack just suddenly bends - so looks like what it is - toy-like.

[Donw]

A tight radius settrack is better than an atempt to squeeze flexitrack to the same radius when you often get dog legs. Use a larger radius if you can but if it has to be that tight go for flexitrack.

Don

[Gwiwer]

I would always use flexi over fixed geometry in any scale.

 

It allows you to create transition curves rather than have your trains lurch from straight to sharp curve and back to straight again and looks a whole lot more realistic. It allows you to create track geometry to suit yourself and not be stuck with what someone else thinks is good for you. It allows you to test the coupler swing and check there is no over-ride of couplers or buffers on curves before commiting to a specific layout or curve radius. And it allows you to cut the track to any length you require more readily than with fixed gemoetry stuff.

 

Ultimately it's your choice but that's my six-penn'orth

[Adrian Wintle]

Trying to do a 2-track roundy-round in 2' width (the OPs stated requirements) involves some compromises - lack of transition curves tends to be one of them. I would usually use set track (probably Unitrack) for something that small, although a have done a folded figure 8 (over-under) using Atlas C55 flex (but it was on set-track geometry).

 

Adrian

[rodshaw]

Your choice may be influenced by how much of the curves will be on view. If they are mostly going to be hidden under hills etc., the toylike look of setrack won't matter too much.

 

 

Having said that, Peco flextrack bends so easily that getting the right curve shouldn't be such a big deal. The way to avoid dog-legs is to take the sleepers off the last couple of inches of rail and pre-bend it to the required curve.

[Jonboy]

Thank you for the comments so far - they are giving me food for thought.

 

AW - the other reason I am looking to move away from unitrack (bought over 10 years ago) is the faff of trying to make the plastic base blend into the surrounding scenery, building kits etc. that are not designed to work together look just right ( I have seen it done fantastically elsewhere, I just dont have the patience...).

[Budgie]

You could use a combination of both; first lay the curve in setrak, then replace the last piece at each end of the curve with flextrack to make a transition into the sharp setrack curve.

[Jonboy]

I am liking that suggestion - thank you.

[Ray H]

SIlly question? On a 4x2 board with (almost) 2ft radius curves, is there any transition? Surely all you get is a circle?

[Jonboy]

Well you get 2'of straight line in the middle - as this is N it just fits the three coach + tank engine trains I seem to have built a collection of...having been thinking about this I may stretch the width by 3 or 4" to give myself a scenic front edge but need to keep it to something I can lift around.

[justin1985]

Having just ripped up a very similar attempt, where I had used Settrack (R1 and R2) for the curves and code 55 flex track for the visible sections, I would advise against mixing them! With packing under the flex track sleepers to bring the fishplates up to level, the rail tops were actually too high, and needed quite a lot of filing to get good running. Even worse, in my eyes, was the geometry of the Settrack, with very wide track spacing needing some quite ugly transitions to match up with streamline crossovers etc. 

 

Using settrack throughout would be so ugly as not to warrant consideration, so all streamline\flex should be the only option. To escape the corner clearance issues, I've now decided to go with double-track modules, but with "balloon" modules on the ends to get a continuous run, with code 55 streamline laid using a 12" tracksetta.  

[Joseph_Pestell]

On 4'x2', setrack really is the only option for double-track.

 

If it really has to be "roundy-roundy" - 8' x 1' would give so much better a layout in the same area - you should seriously look at single-track options.

[Class 108]

I recently created a 4X2 double track roundy round using peco set track. It was ok, curves worked fine with my little train. However for my next project I am going to use code 80 flexitrack for long straights and code 80 points as I believe the turnouts are less acute than with the set track. Had the occasional derail with them.

[Pete 75C]

Flexi track for anything on view and the transition into a curve, then Setrack or Hornby for hidden loops etc. I only need to get the alignment spot-on for the "on-view" section, and I let the Setrack take care of the geometry of everything else. I don't use Setrack on view, but I have to say, I've seen plenty of layouts where it's been ballasted and weathered beautifully and it looks fine to me. Guess I don't have ocd about trackwork perfection (no offence to those that do!) - if it looks right to you, then it must be right! Enjoy. Pete.

[Black Sheep]

SIlly question? On a 4x2 board with (almost) 2ft radius curves, is there any transition? Surely all you get is a circle?

if you've got the length between the curve ends to avoid having straight track between them you can create, what from above, looks like a squashed oval, with the lines curving into the centre slightly.

 

I've used this on my current coffee table layout:

 

curving the line across the top, hopefully makes the transition in and out of the curve less abrupt and the bottom right, being in a cutting and the approach to a station it is a little abrupt, but not much worse than prototypes I have seen.

 

due to space constraints, compromises do have to be made and perhaps my plan would be a bit better using just 3 ST-15 (radius 2) curves and then using flexi-track to continue the curve and ease it into the rest of the layout.

 

 

 

obviously, if you've got a large flowing layout, such as 'Vale of Oxbury' then set track is going to look wrong and at odds with the flowing scenic countryside.

[trisonic]

Strictly speaking that's a reverse curve - which can make it even more toy-like because the length is short. What Ray is referring to is spiral easements - I think your layout is rather small for that.

 

Enjoy what you've got!

 

Best, Pete.