Hi -- Dave is absolutely correct about this. I build almost all of my turnouts in place because then the track “flows” as it is not being forced into a standard geometry. With our sharper than prototypical curves, this makes a big difference in looks and operation.
FYI, I have a curved turnout on a 75 / 78” pair of curves, and from the tip of the points to the heel of the frog is about two feet. It takes at least another two feet to gain full separation of the tracks. Generally, it’s easier to stick a bit of something less curved on the outer leg and then tighten up the curve a bit after the frog if you need rapid divergence. You can see this in the photo (I hope you can see it) in the track just behind the caboose on the right. The left hand caboose is sitting on a constant 75” radius, and the area behind the right hand caboose is probably a bit less than 72” radius leading to the 78” radius. The turnout joining the two tracks is curved just after the narrow gauge frog, though between the points and that frog it is straight on the right side. (This is kind of the other side of the coin relative to Dave’s straight through the frog...) In any case, I can recommend trying to build a turnout from scratch. It might take a couple of tries, and a large capacity soldering gun, but you can build whatever you want whenever you want once you get some skill. Good luck and have fun! Bill Winans --------------------------------- Curved turnouts can be tricky to lay out. I've found it easier to draw the routes I want the track to take then just see what kind of turnout is needed to fit them instead of trying to place a stock turnout into the track plan. Going from inside to outside tracks usually is easier if you use a straight section thru the frog to increase the rate of separation, a completely curved turnout can take a lot of space to diverge the 3 inches necessary for S scale double tracks. ...DaveBranum
