Cutting n scale ties/scale wood

[TinyTurner]

Just a few questions/ramblings from a budget contentious FiNe modelers obsession passion

Getting hold of Fast Tracks goods is proving difficult both physically and financially. 
I can get wood and birch ply easy enough.  I think I could use my proxxon bandsaw to slice a block of pine into sheets, but probably needs to be cut oversize and planed.  A thicknesser would be another project (from a treadmill) or a large outlay for a proxxon one.   

Ply doesn't need finishing, and from what I've seen others do is sand stuck down commercial ties to PCB level.
PCB is available in .8mm and 1mm in fr2 phenolic resin, but more common in glass fiber.

I got hold of a well used Proxxon fetsaw missing it's fence for very little money.  With a fine blade fitted and some hackery I think I can come up with something that will cut wood ties.  The main problem is the tie 'strip' getting mangled on the other side of the blade.  If there is some way to press down on the strip to stop it riding up...like a .8mm featherboad? Piano wire spring?  A type writer style bail bar from printer parts?
I found the Fast Trax video showing scale wood production and it doesn't look to dissimilar to how I thought to do it though they do  use an auto feeder.

A subsequent idea is to laser cut my own tie bases, which is a pretty bold move from someone who still has to learn how to make track in the first place and buy a laser cutter.  Assuming it works, I don't mind spending on a tool I can use again and again, and also for structures.  I already have Co2 bottles from welding/brewing.  And for that matter, a fire extinguisher  

I have seen some N roof trusses cut with a SCULPFUN S9/S10 90W effect Laser Engraver from Aliexpress.  It can't be to dissimilar? 
Will this do the job?  Has anyone tried to laser there own wood ties and parts?

[rodsup9000]

I think I could use my proxxon bandsaw to slice a block of pine into sheets, but probably needs to be cut oversize and planed.  A thicknesser would be another project (from a treadmill) or a large outlay for a proxxon one.   

I got hold of a well used Proxxon fetsaw missing it's fence for very little money.  With a fine blade fitted and some hackery I think I can come up with something that will cut wood ties.  The main problem is the tie 'strip' getting mangled on the other side of the blade.  If there is some way to press down on the strip to stop it riding up...like a .8mm featherboad? Piano wire spring?  A type writer style bail bar from printer parts?

 Use .040" X .060" basswood strips and cut to tie length.
 Use your saw and cut a basswood block into strips for ties.

A subsequent idea is to laser cut my own tie bases, which is a pretty bold move from someone who still has to learn how to make track in the first place and buy a laser cutter.  Assuming it works, I don't mind spending on a tool I can use again and again, and also for structures.  I already have Co2 bottles from welding/brewing.  And for that matter, a fire extinguisher  

I have seen some N roof trusses cut with a SCULPFUN S9/S10 90W effect Laser Engraver from Aliexpress.  It can't be to dissimilar? 
Will this do the job?  Has anyone tried to laser there own wood ties and parts?

 I built my 100 watt laser and it will cut birch plywood ties very well. I've cut some tie strips for turnouts with it as well. If you get one, be ready to rebuild it as most lower end from Aliexpress are "parts just thrown together into a cabinet" and called it a laser cutter. Most will not have any costumer support ether.
 Do some research on China made lasers before buying one.

 BTW, I learned how to use a laser when I got a $325 China made laser for my birthday 6 or 7 years ago. I made a some modifications to get it to work well. 
Here is the thread I have on it https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=40117.0
 

[dem34]

In the worst part of the pandemic I used .040x.060 styrene as ties since I could grab that locally. My suggestion is if you choose to do the tie plates, make a web of them for set lengths. Lot easier to position a strip of material instead of dozens of individual squares, when done you can always trim underneath if your bench assembling.

You can also go the opposite way and do the DKS method of making every tie a PCB tie and creating tie plates by scraping the cladding off the tops except where the tie plates would be with an exacto chisel blade.

[nkalanaga]

You can buy N scale ties from Kappler Mill & Lumber:
https://www.kapplerusa.com/y2k/p-n-ties.htm

I've used some of their lumber, but not their ties.  I have plenty of old MicroEngineering ties left!

[robert3985]

From a financial standpoint, you can buy a helluva lot of wooden ties from Kappler for the cost of a LASER cutter, and since they're not burned out of a sheet of wood, they won't have any charring. 

On the other hand, you can buy a helluva lot of properly sized Styrene strips for the cost of a LASER cutter, or even the cost of a used Proxxon saw. 

If you're wanting a new tool, then by all means buy that LASER cutter!...or that Proxxon band saw... 

Since I paint my hand-laid track rather than stain it, I've been using Styrene strips for my turnout ties, texturing them with an old file card and not worrying about tie plates or spikehead details.  Works very well actually, and frankly I can't see any difference between my newer Styrene-tied turnouts and my older wooden-tied versions.

As for tie plates and spikeheads...in N-scale...I've had this ongoing debate in my head for decades, and have purchased several frets of N-scale code40 tie plates for track and turnouts from Proto87Stores. But, I've never used them because they are so effing small, and after paint & weathering, they disappear, and don't make that much of a difference in my track's appearance. 

When looking at my handlaid code40 branchline trackage, my brain doesn't register that there are no tieplates or spikehead details there unless I consciously tell myself they're missing, even in my closeup photos.  But, on my turnouts for some reason, I don't have to be reminded that they're missing.

I have one Micro Engineering #6 at my Echo Yard layout section, and I don't see that it has spikehead & switch-style tieplates and details as compared to other hand-laid turnouts around it which do not, after painting, weathering and ballasting, even in close-up photos.

My new 3D printer is going to take care of this problem once and for all, but it has been literally decades since this inner debate began in my head, and evidently, I didn't think it was so much of a problem visually that I "needed" to include these details in my hand-laid track & turnouts.

Here are some photos of Styrene ties vs wood ties, and handlaid Code40 track with no tieplate/spikehead details....

Photo (1) - Handlaid turnouts with Styrene ties (unpainted & unweathered) at Emory Siding in Code55 with Rail Craft Code55 and ME Code40 flex in the siding....


Photo (2) - Handlaid #8 Code40 Park City Branch Turntable Spur turnout with Styrene Ties Painted:


Photo (3) - Handlaid #7 Code40 turnout at Park City Yard Using Wooden ME Ties between PCB Ties:


Photo (4) - Handlaid Code40 Branchline track diverging to Park City from Echo, with Rail Craft Code55 in the background:


Photo (5) - Handlaid Code40 Closeup Under a CA-8 UP Caboose...What? Yup, no tieplates or spikeheads.  I don't miss 'em very much:


So, I'm pretty sure that I'll continue to use Styrene ties for my turnouts since I don't see a difference in the finished or near-finished end result, but I'll continue to use wooden ties for my handlaid Code40 track because of my track-laying technique, which involves sanding the wooden ties down so they're the same height as the PCB ties every fifth tie, at least until I get my new 3D printer!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[nkalanaga]

At least in photos, to me, the lack of tieplates is more noticeable than the lack of spikes.  Not surprising, as a tieplate is considerably bigger, and covers more of the tie.

Ties without some kind of tieplate look too "flat".  On the other hand, I agree that adding N scale tieplates is probably too much work, and too expensive, for anything other than a photo diorama, and I certainly wouldn't do it with a layout full of handlaid track.

[Dwight in Toronto]

Mr. Gilmore, thank you very much for so eloquently explaining a thought process and attitude of “good enough” acceptance that so closely reflects my own sentiments with respect to level of N scale track detailing (or lack thereof). 

It’s only been three months since I started exploring and experimenting with handmade N scale turnouts.  As much as I admire the quality and utility of all of the Fast Tracks jigs, filing and rail-bending tools, the initial acquisition costs made me consider alternative approaches.  To this end, I ended up buying a 1” belt/5” disk sander to handle frog, point and stock rail “grinding” (at less cost than any one of the above mentioned Fast Tracks tools). 

I have been stripping rail from an abundance of used Atlas flex track (salvaged from a previous layout).  I’ve been building the ‘turnout skeletons’ using Fast Tracks #10 paper templates.  Similarly, I have been cleaning up and re-using the black flex track tie segments to fill in the rest of the turnout, and then paint the copper pc board ties to blend in.   As such, there are no plates, spike heads nor any other tiny prototype details on my turnouts, and the absence thereof never registers with me. 

As for Fast Tracks, the good folks there still got some business from me … I ordered things like pc ties, Pliobond adhesive, jeweller’s saw blades, pin vice, track gauges, flexible points file etc., and will be a repeat customer as/when materials need replenished. 

Fwiw, I’ve vowed to try a ‘KISS’ approach to my next build - minimal tunnels/hidden track, a single elevated segment with 1% grade, nothing less than 18” radius curves, manual ‘reach in’ slide-switch-operated turnouts (with powered frogs) wherever possible. 

I’m also determined to try to keep all “utilities” top-side on the layout.  Hence the focus on slide-switch turnouts (avoiding the need for, and cost of, below-deck switch machines, frog juicers etc).  To this end, I’m also experimenting with adhesive-backed copper tape for the DCC buss, running parallel to the main trackwork, stuck directly to the high density foam substructure.  Various feeders, frog wires, jumpers, lighting wires etc are placed within shallow “trenches” excavated into the foam substrate, essentially mimicking what construction crews do in the real world.  Scenic finishes, of course, cover everything.  Not sure how the copper tape will pan out … as I say, it’s all experimental at this point.

Coming back to hand-built track & turnout detailing, I have to say that the N scale modelers who have the keen eyesight, patience, perseverance and determination to pull it off have my awestruck admiration, and the results are magnificent.  For me, it’s just not the sort of thing where I want to spend the time.

[robert3985]

Y'know...I might have been a bit hasty about choosing to forego N-scale tie plates & spike heads.

Our own Ed Nadolski @ednadolski has created some 3D printed Code40 tie strips that blow me away...yes, with tie plates, spike heads and wood grain...

Take a look here if you haven't already seen this.... https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=55440.0

If Ed chooses to not make this file for sale or to share it with interested N-scalers...I'll create my own file to print when my 3D printer arrives.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Dwight in Toronto]

Yes, it was clear from your writing that your preference was to HAVE the microdetails, and that you would, in time, in all likelihood, be moving that way.  But for me, you also managed to strike a chord by explaining how a lot of that detail gets lost, not only by the paint, but even by its minuscule size, leaving the dilemma around “is it worth all the work”.  For those that tackle it, the result satisfies their quest for pure realism.  For folks like me, there IS such a thing as “good enough”. 

Who knows, in time, and with 3D printing overcoming the need for tedious, microscopic squint work, I too might decide to pursue the more prototypical aspects.  Looking forward to seeing how your upcoming ventures pan out!

[nkalanaga]

One factor in deciding what is "good enough" is what the track is to be used for.  If one's interest tends toward photography, or superdetailed scenes, or show dioramas, the minute details will be noticed.

If ones goal is to run trains, either for prototype operations or for "railfanning", attention will probably be on the train, and the track won't be noticed nearly as much.  In that case, it needs to be functionally perfect, but the little details don't much matter.

[pedro]

It bears repeating that even code 40 hand laid track WITHOUT any spike detail can handle *almost* all wheel flanges. If your interest is in building an operating layout full of hand laid code 40 track, that is an advantage.

I’m also using .040 x .060 styrene for ties, “distressed” with a file card. The .040 x .060 styrene closely matches Fasttracks “quick sticks” laser cut ties, their PE ties, as well as ME flex ties. If you go that route, Evergreen styrene can be ordered direct in bulk packs of 50 or 100 for a considerable savings. https://evergreenscalemodels.com/products/143-040-x-060. There is also savings to be had by buying Fasttracks PE turnout length ties and cutting them in half (approximately) for crossties vs. buying the frets of crossties. I find their double-gapped crossties objectionable, personally.

[robert3985]

I think it's great to have a choice.  Even though I considered it too much work for the perceived (meaning, "being able to see the details") benefits, adding the Proto87Stores tie plates and turnout tie plates & details wasn't right for me.
This was because the details were too shallow, and the tie plates weren't the kind of tie plates that UP used on their mainline and branchline trackage...meaning they weren't large enough from side to side.

Ed has added extra height to his tie plates so they'll be visible after paint & weathering...so prototype thickness in N-scale isn't optimal, which is not a case of "good enough", but a case of "If you can't see it, then why add it?"

I also really like the difference seen between Code55 rails for mainlines and heavy use trackage, and smaller Code40 for branchlines, sidings, spurs, yards, & industries where medium to lightly used trackage is used.

For the UP, this means that their mainline trackage has 9' long ties that are 9" wide and 8" tall (Standard #1), with 24 ties every 39'.  For the most lightly used sidings and industrial trackage, the ties are 8' long, 8" wide by 6" thick, with 18 ties every 39' (Standard #5).

This means that in N-scale, mainline ties (for UP, which I model) should be .075" longer than any other trackage's ties, which all use 8' long ties in track Standards #2, #3, and #4.

Thicknesses also vary, but since my trackage will be ballasted or have the bottoms of the ties buried in dirt I'm not going to worry about it.

Just to illustrate the point, here's a little section of hand laid Code55 mainline track and Code40 lightly used siding track that I put together a while back that shows that there is a distinct, very visible difference between mainline and lightly used, and neglected track that adds a lot of character and prototype looks to even 1/160th track...and that's without any tie plates, spike heads and rail joiners (which for my era would be there every 39'.)  For this photo, I did it before I had found actual track Standards so I guessed at it from photos and the siding ties are only 15 ties per 39'.

Photo (1) - Hand laid Code55 Mainline vs Hand laid Code40 Lightly Used Siding, showing difference in track height, size of ties, tie spacing & coloration:


Now that larger format 8K 3D Resin printers are available for decent prices, when I get mine I definitely am going to build my next layout sections using printed ties with appropriate sizes and furniture...just for the helluvit and because I can do it without any more effort than hand laying track if I used the PCB every fifth tie method as I have in the past with my branchline trackage.

And, I have a strong tendency to take a lot of detailed close-ups, so the details will be seen.

@pedro In the past, when I was designing 18' of our club's modular mainline, I wanted to incorporate Code40 hand laid trackage.  Some of the club members protested because they wanted to run their deep-flanged equipment on the club layout.  So, I built a test section that had both Rail Craft Code40 flex (remember that brand?) and hand laid Code40 soldered on to widely spaced PCB ties for club members to bring their deepest-flanged, oldest, non-USA, Japanese or Eastern European equipment to test on it...or anything else that had extra-deep flanges. 

Not much that had large flanges would run on the Rail Craft Code40 Flex, but...everything ran without any flange interference on the hand laid Code40 trackage.  During that build, I decided to measure the height of the Code40 Rail Craft rail I was using, and it measured .043" tall, so it's a bit higher than actually being .040" tall...which makes it near perfect for A.R.E.A. 131lb rail...only .0016" too short.  ME Code40 comes in at .043" tall too...at least what I have does.

Now, if somebody would think it worth their time to make some Code35 rail.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore