Hand-built Z-Scale Turnouts using FastTracks tools and parts (WIP)

[ednadolski]

Here are a few quick snaps of a current project to construct a couple of #8 turnouts in Z scale.   I am using ME code 40 rail soldered to the FastTracks PCB ties (which I am really liking for this sort of work).  As you can see, this is actually two turnouts constructed together as one piece, to reduce the number of rail joints.  I used a couple of prototype photocopy templates (I don't remember which RR)  taped to an MDF board on the bench, and then double-sided scotch tape to hold the ties in place while working.

I went with flexible point rails rather than hinged (which I usually prefer), as the ME rail joiners that I usually use as heel blocks in larger scales look too big for Z scale (in my view), and also can contact the wheel flanges.   I found the FastTracks rail filing tool helped improve speed and accuracy, tho I don't use the full-sized turnout jigs.  I used a small, rechargeable Dremel-ish tool with a grinding bit to help shape the rail, which worked out well (other than generating a bit of a mess from ground metal particles).

The main construction is finished, so the remaining steps at this point are to clean/paint the turnouts, and cut the rail gaps at the frogs before installing them (along with the wood ties, which are currently soaking in stain)  onto the layout.

Overall I have to say that despite the small size of Z scale, this really was not any more difficult than building turnouts the same way in larger scales.   With N, for example, the rail gauge is wider, but not much else is different.

(Pics are a bit large, so be sure to zoom in for detail).  😉


PCB ties laid out, gapped, and tinned:




Stock rails and frog rails (Note how the frog rail of the left turnout becomes the stock rail of the next turnout, so no rail joint there.):




Outer stock rail added:




Closure/Point/Guard rails added,  throwbars in place, and ready for cleaning/installation:




Thanks for looking!  I will be following up with some more pics as this project completes.


Cheers,
Ed

[Sokramiketes]

Nice!

The Atlas Z scale joiners are great if you need them in the future.  I've started using them in N scale too as they're shorter and less obtrusive.  AND you have to remove fewer ties at a standard joint.

[ednadolski]

A bit of progress. Here is the assembly primed and located onto the layout:





Locating some of the stained wood ties into place on the templates:




The rest of the wood ties, plus wiring for the rails:




Back onto the layout, wires thru the feeder holes (not glued down just yet, to allow for adjustments):





Thanks for looking, more to come soon  😉

Ed

[nkalanaga]

No, a Z code 40 turnout really isn't any different than an N version, except the gauge.  Marklin's wheel and track standards actually work very well with the N NMRA gage.

[robert3985]

@ednadolski - Really nice work Ed! Looks pretty convincing even with oversized (for Z-scale) Code40 rails.

BUT, and please don't be offended because this is something I noticed on my own hand-built turnouts when I was making them to strictly NMRA standards and proportions back in the 1980's...it appears that for a UP Common Standard #8 turnout, your guard rails and your frogs' wing rails are quite a bit too long.  UP #9 turnouts (I can't find any Common Standard UP #8 turnout diagrams in my hundreds of official drawings) frog lengths were 12' long...sitting on 6 ties, with the guardrails being either 8' 3" long...spanning 5 ties, or 10' long...spanning 6 ties.

Photo (1) - Showing UP Common Standards for #9 Turnout with 8' 3" Guardrails:


However, the guardrails for an A.R.E.A. #8 look to be about the right length at 16' 6" long...spanning 11 ties.  A.R.E.A. Switch Data indicates the frog length for a #8 turnout is 13'...sitting on 11 ties also...which looks to be quite a bit shorter than yours.  The ends of the frog are extended as compared to the UP Common Standard's, but the wing rail lengths look to be very close to being the same.

Photo (2) - Showing A.R.E.A. Standards for #8 Turnout with 16' 6" Guardrails:


The main reason I chose to shorten up my N-scale turnouts as opposed to the NMRA standard was because with the longer NMRA frog length and guardrail lengths, it appeared to me that they looked more like HOn3 turnouts than standard gauge N-scale ones.  Looking at yours, I kinda get the same impression looking more like Nn3 turnouts than standard gauge Z scale ones.

I'm pretty sure (having never made a Z-scale turnout before, but having made plenty of Code40 N-scale ones) that shortening the guardrails and the frog wing rails won't affect performance reliability on any future Z-scale turnouts.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[ednadolski]

@robert3985  no worries,  you are quite right.  I make them longer just as a matter of preference - to my eye, there is something about it that makes the turnouts feel 'longer' overall, rather than like most 'compressed' model turnouts of say #6 or so.  As you mention, there are already a lot of inevitable trade-offs in model/NMRA turnouts anyways (I don't think I'm ready to take on Proto:220 ).

Any chance you might have some drawings of a #12 turnout?   I'm thinking of doing that next, but have not been able to find proto turnouts in that length (other than the FT templates, but I'd prefer to start with a proto drawing).

Ed

[samusi01]

A ways down the page is a #12 (also #14, but right up top):

https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Union-Pacific/CS-Book

[robert3985]

@robert3985  no worries,  you are quite right.  I make them longer just as a matter of preference - to my eye, there is something about it that makes the turnouts feel 'longer' overall, rather than like most 'compressed' model turnouts of say #6 or so.  As you mention, there are already a lot of inevitable trade-offs in model/NMRA turnouts anyways (I don't think I'm ready to take on Proto:220 ).

Any chance you might have some drawings of a #12 turnout?   I'm thinking of doing that next, but have not been able to find proto turnouts in that length (other than the FT templates, but I'd prefer to start with a proto drawing).

Ed

@ednadolski - Ed, I copied this from the previously mentioned UP Common Standards scans at utahrails.net.  This #12 has a "spring frog" rather than a "rigid frog", but it's the only #12 on the site.  UP would rather use #14's than #12's, just like they use #9's instead of #8's.

Photo (1) - UP CS #12 Turnout with "Spring Frog" Official Drawing:


EDIT: Thought I'd upload enlargements of the frog area and switch point/throwbar area with much sharper resolution...



Somewhere I have modern turnout diagrams from the UP site.  I'll see if I can dig out a diagram.

Have FUN!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[nkalanaga]

Interesting.  I don't think I've ever seen a turnout with only one headblock tie.  Certainly all of them in Pasco in the 1970s had two.

[wazzou]

Also, as someone that sells a lot of ties, I'm pretty confident in saying that outside of the common mainline tie at 8'6", no other ties today are sold at 6" increments.

Some 8' ties are still purchased for track.

Switch ties today are 9' - 17'.