do you have any first hand experience with PECO code 55 3-way turnouts?

[glakedylan]

I recently purchased some PECO code 55 3-way turnouts.
Inserting them in a software plan for the potential model railroad, I was warned by one not to use them.
His reasoning was based on both (1) how un-prototypical they are, and (2) they would not work too well based on their complexity in terms of reliable service (i.e. be a constant cause of derailing and maintenance issues). In his thinking, which seems to make sense, is that the un-prototypical reality has to do with how in 1:1 scale they would be causes of both derailing and maintenance problems.

Does any one have 1st hand experience with the 1:160 N Scale PECO 3-ways? I have designed my passenger station throat using four (4) of them, two (2) on each side of the platform tracks.

I wanted to do some research here before deciding what to do with them.

TIA for any replies.

Best regards,
Gary

[Coxy]

3 ways turnouts are kinda rare. More common in the UK. Sorry, I have no experience with PECO c55 3ways. Peco makes sorta okay turnouts but generally they need some filing and styrene strips to bring them into better tolerances for smooth reliable operation.

When I went looking for pics of three-way turnouts I found this...a five-way! http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=1880&

Cheers,
Coxy

[DKS]

...I was warned by one not to use them.
His reasoning was based on both (1) how un-prototypical they are, and (2) they would not work too well based on their complexity in terms of reliable service...

The warning is sound. They are quite rare in the real world; I've only ever seen one in real life. They're more common overseas than the US. Model-wise, I've not worked with the Peco 3-way, but I have had experience with others (Atlas and Trix), and they can be problematic. Reliability is an issue as not all equipment likes their complex geometry. My recommendation is to avoid using them if at all possible.

[nstars]

We have a Peco 3 way turnout installed on a module and our experience is, that it works flawless, even with long wheelbased brass steam engines. There are only points I should like to mention. You could power the frogs with a frogjuicer, but this could cause problems with short wheelbase locomotives. I would recommend to use a normal switch to power the frogs. The second point is more cosmetical, but there are two versions of the 3 way turnout. They work exactly the same, but Peco has changed the geometry of one of the points to improve looks.

Marc

[ljudice]

I'd stay away from them in your application, although in an industrial/street trackage type scenario I think a prototype railroad would
build whatever is required...

I would say that using Peco Code 55 turnouts (not the 3 way) - I have never had a single issue - ever - even after gluing them down,
ripping them back up and cleaning them - and then re-using them.  They are indestructible and the only derailments I have ever had
are from low coupler pins sticking down.


- Lou

[mplsjct]

I would say that using Peco Code 55 turnouts (not the 3 way) - I have never had a single issue - ever - even after gluing them down,
ripping them back up and cleaning them - and then re-using them.  They are indestructible and the only derailments I have ever had
are from low coupler pins sticking down.


- Lou

This is my experience also, it's really too bad the tie spacing isn't closer to North American standards, but, I guess you can't have everything.

[glakedylan]

thank you, each of you, for your reply
very appreciated
kind regards
Gary

[nkalanaga]

For industrial or street trackage the ties may not be an issue.  Bury or pave over the track and no one will ever see them.

[robert3985]

This is my experience also, it's really too bad the tie spacing isn't closer to North American standards, but, I guess you can't have everything.

Sure you can.  Just learn to make your own...low price, never have to worry about availability, whatever prototype look you want, reliability and pride of making it yourself in an a couple of hours or less (although the three-way took me about the same amount of time to build as two regular turnouts).

Here's a pic at the Echo Coaling Station on my portable layout:



Prototypically at this spot at Echo, there were two turnouts but I didn't have room for them and my three-way solved the space problem.

Here's a photo of my friend Gregg Cudworth's hand-laid code 30 Nn3 three-way stub switch turnout in Rico on his basement-filling RGS:


Contrary to my application, Gregg's three-way is prototypically correct.

[glakedylan]

Robert
I admire your talent, skill and ability. I am thankful you are able to do such fantastic work with hand laying track and constructing all sorts of turnouts. Your's is a gift to be grateful for and acknowledged as fantastic. Unfortunately, I have neither the skill or ability to learn how to do these things. I have spent several years wishing that things were different and that it would be something I would be able to do. Nonetheless, reality is reality. I will not be able to do such things as build my own turnouts and be free of the need to purchase those made by manufacturers and a friend who makes a Fast Track turnout for me every now and again (depending on my budget). So be it. What will be will be, I suppose.
Thankful for what you are able to do.
Accepting the inability to do the same.

Kindest regards
Gary

[robert3985]

Gary,

I don't know what your physical limitations are, but the reason I post photos of turnouts that I and my friends build is to illustrate that it's a lot easier than most modelers think.  It is in no way rocket science and the vast majority of model railroaders could build their own if they weren't intimidated.

Thanks for the compliments, but what I'm after is to encourage those who are on the fence to jump off and give building their own a try.  For me, this part of model railroading has probably been the best part.

[nkalanaga]

3-way stub turnouts were common, both on standard and narrow gauge.  With no points, it was just as easy to build a 3-way (typo corrected 7-14 0114 EDT) as a regular, and the Harp switchstands could easily be set up to throw them, saving considerable space.  I built one in Nn3 code 40, years ago, but never found a use for it.  It did work when tested, and was easier to build than a standard point-style turnout.

Gregg's looks nice.  Mine is on a block of wood, with no attempt to make it look pretty.  Basically it was a proof-of-concept, just to see if I could build one.

[glakedylan]

what I'm after is to encourage those who are on the fence to jump off and give building their own a try.  For me, this part of model railroading has probably been the best part.

Robert, yes...exactly...your intent and actual sharing is spot on for such a purpose, and is most assuredly appreciated.
Please continue to do so! It serves a great need and is not only useful but inspirational.
Kindest regards
Gary

[glakedylan]

For industrial or street trackage the ties may not be an issue.  Bury or pave over the track and no one will ever see them.

you seem to have missed the whole point of my OP
are PECo 3-ways turnouts prototypical in use and are the problematic with operation?
nothing to do with tie spacing and the UK prototype they represent.

[peteski]

you seem to have missed the whole point of my OP
are PECo 3-ways turnouts prototypical in use and are the problematic with operation?
nothing to do with tie spacing and the UK prototype they represent.

From what I read in several earlier posts: they are very rare in prototype (most likely you wouldn't find them at a throat of a passenger terminal, and they can be problematic in use (on your layout).  Now I'm beginning to question whether I really seen that info in this thread, or did I just imagine that I saw it?