Thanks everyone. And especially thanks to Don for chiming in. I have been able to locate 75 pieces of SHS Flex. That’s the good news. The bad news (for me) is that I checked with Tom about getting some turnouts built and he is very backed up (good for Tom) and won’t be taking any new orders for a while. So since I want to be able to run both scale wheels and modern Flyonel flanges I think my only option is going to be hand-laying my own and experimenting with the flangeways until I get a good compromise. I have hand-laid turnouts in O scale before, but obviously I’ve never tried to build anything to support two types of flanges. I have thought about possibly using the Fast tracks jigs to get the outer stock rails and frog in the correct position and then adjust the wing and guard rails by hand. If anybody has any tips I am all ears.
Jonathan From: Don Thompson Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 9:43 AM To: [email protected] Subject: {S-Scale List} Re: Height of SHS rail... I think I answer this question on this group every 6 months of so. When we first started to produce track we were aware of several things. We had been told for years that code 125 rail with small spike heads would support AF wheels. We knew that prototype 8" rail was the same as height as PRR 155# rail (lbs. per yard or rail). We also knew that 155# rail was tried on lots of large railroads, but was most popular with the PRR on the Northeast Corridor. We decided not to go with the NMRA rail profile, but go back to the prototype and use PRR drawings. We NEVER called our rail code 125, but would refer to our rail as PRR 155# as that it was we were modeling. When they started the tooling to roll the rail, we felt the worse case scenario is if AF wheels would not run on our track (snap track, not flex as we had not considered flex at that time). Not being a machinist and not really knowing the possible range of a rail rolling tool, we requested 0.128" +0.003" We explained to the design team that the rail could NEVER be lower than 0.126". Of course they went and rolled it at 0.131", the largest extreme within our specs. We have made many runs of flex track. I guess the dimension could increase as the tool wears. I do not remember having to replace or repair this tool. I do not think it is that hard to distort the rail joiner by adding a thin brass shim to one side and then recrimping the foil on the side and top of the railjoiner. As long as the the top of the railheads are the same (level) and the inside aspect is also flush, I believe you should have no problems with operations. My only regret is that we do not have more flex track in stock, I am sure I could sell another 1000 of cases.... Don PS If we ever get our tooling moved, that will be the first product produced. I have had people in all scale use our flex track agree that it maybe the best in any scale... On Sep 25, 2011, at 2:03 PM, up148 wrote: > I agree Bill. Maybe Don will chime in. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Regards, Jonathan Blogs: http://RailfanX.blogspot.com and http://cloudvirt.blogspot.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/jonnyspeed Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhatfield [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
