Colorado Midland in N scale 2.0

[Dave V]

Walthers lists both the code 55 and the code 70 ME N scale bridge track as in stock, so any shop should be able to get it from them if they don't have it already.
From whom are you trying to order it?
https://www.walthers.com/bridge-flex-track-tm-w-wide-ties-guard-rail-code-55-main-rail-nonweathered-3-91-4cm-section
https://www.walthers.com/bridge-flex-track-tm-w-wide-ties-guard-rail-3-91-4cm-long-section-code-70-main-rail-nonweathered

Ah, I always forget Walthers.  I looked at the usual suspects:  Trainworld, MB Klein, N Scale Supply, Fifer, etc.  One guy on eBay has it but wants over $20 on shipping for a single piece.

Thanks for the tip!!!

[Dave V]

I haven't been able to find a template for Midland trestle bents, but they're similar to RGS bents in some ways.  Might scale down the RGS plans and modify the lower stories to have the additional posts vertical rather than canted like the RGS.  The Midland's Dolomite trestle is below:



I've seen the abutments to this bridge along the Arkansas river where the Midland paralleled the D&RGW north of Buena Vista on the way to Leadville:



...and it's a contender for the upper level bridge that crosses the lower track on the new plan.  Although...I might also consider the iconic steel bridge:



...and I'd even letter it with the roadname this time.

So many possibilities!

[garethashenden]

Wow, thanks for all the inputs!

Yep I can probably grind off the lower web on the Peco rail.  That does require that in a curve I have the rails lined up exactly how I want them to connect at the bridge, but that's not the end of the world.  I can get it all lined up, pin the hell out of it, CA the rails so they don't slide back out of position within the tie bed, mark it, and then grind it with a Dremel.  Easier for the straight bridge but doable in all applications.

Thanks guys!

I would be inclined to work outwards from the bridge. Cut the bridge track to length, then solder a length of plain flex on either end. Then form the curves and cut the far end square at a convenient place.

[davefoxx]

What @garethashenden said.  That's pretty much how I did the trestle on my layout.  I formed the curve with a Tracksetta to get the proper radius, flipped the bridge track upside down to begin building the bridge from the ties down, cut the bridge track to length once I knew its proper length, and soldered flextrack to each end.  In fact, my bridge is still not permanently installed, because I haven't finished the scenery around it.  I can (and will) remove the trestle when I get around to that, but it's now about five feet long, including the adjoining tracks. 

DFF

[Dave V]

What @garethashenden said.  That's pretty much how I did the trestle on my layout.  I formed the curve with a Tracksetta to get the proper radius, flipped the bridge track upside down to begin building the bridge from the ties down, cut the bridge track to length once I knew its proper length, and soldered flextrack to each end.  In fact, my bridge is still not permanently installed, because I haven't finished the scenery around it.  I can (and will) remove the trestle when I get around to that, but it's now about five feet long, including the adjoining tracks. 

DFF

That's how I did the current bridges on the CMRy and it wasn't without some issues.  The ME track mostly...but not completely...holds its shape.  So I had inconsistent curvature on the two trestles nearest Basalt by the time I was done getting the bridges built.  However, that was before I started using Sweepsticks from Fast Tracks.  They made laying ME code 70 on the HOn3 RGS so much easier and the results were near perfect.  So thins time I'll have a means to keep the curvature when I do it, which means I can probably do it this way again.

[Dave V]

Since the N scale Colorado Midland 2.0 will use Peco code 55, I was curious about how it would look with the smaller old-timey equipment.  My local hobby shop, Roy's Model Trains, sells lots of used stuff (and he's always getting new old stock in...there's a lot of digging to do but quite often you'll find treasure) so I picked up a few assorted bits of used Peco 55 to play with until the big shipment of new Peco 55 arrives.

I built a quick test piece this morning since in Colorado, everything dries almost instantly.  The Midland used "local materials" for ballast (i.e., dirt, gravel, and cinders...much like the RGS) but I used Scenic Express fine dark gray ballast, which is what I used for cinder on the RGS.  Ground cover materials for the test piece are likewise part of my RGS scenery palette.  And, since the CMRy 2.0 is but a dream at the moment, I photographed the test piece on the RGS layout.



I like how the cinders look here.  I may end up just doing that for much of the layout.  Although I'm not building grades, photos of the prototype show significant cinder coverage where the engines are working hardest...especially the climb to Hagerman Pass.



So no, I have no regrets whatsoever about choosing Peco code 55 for this next adventure.  It really only looks too coarse if I view it in the same frame as the Atlas code 55 on the old layout...something that won't be an issue going forward.

[MDW]

Dave-
Looks great & totally appropriate for the scene.   I switched over to Peco with zero regrets....I get that it’s not US prototypical but it looks just fine when it’s ballasted & weathered.
Really enjoy following your progress on both layouts.

Michel

[Missaberoad]

I haven't been able to find a template for Midland trestle bents...

This doesn't show a full trestle but hopefully they are helpful... I believe they are from an old issue of Colorado Midland Quarterly.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

You've also caused me to order a copy of The Midland Route, by Edward McFarland. 
Excited to dig into the history...

Sample section is looking Hawt!! 

[Dave V]

This doesn't show a full trestle but hopefully they are helpful... I believe they are from an old issue of Colorado Midland Quarterly.


You've also caused me to order a copy of The Midland Route, by Edward McFarland. 
Excited to dig into the history...

Sample section is looking Hawt!! 

Actually, that's really helpful!  I could see what the overall bent design was and I was guessing they were the usual 12 x 12s, but this adds the missing pieces from deck and cap width to story height and bent spacing.  This fills in all the gaps.  Thanks!!!

[CRL]

Actually, I think any “coarseness” the Code 55 Peco track has compared to Atlas track isn’t due to the tie spacing so much as the fact you can’t see daylight under the rail due to the buried web rail. If you model with the track sunk well into the dirt & ballast, this shouldn’t be a problem.

[eric220]

That Peco track looks right at home on a Colorado layout!

[GimpLizard]

I like how the cinders look here.
 

Quite stunning, actually.

[Dave V]

Quite stunning, actually.

Thanks!  Yeah, I don't know about "stunning."  Adequate for my purposes anyway.

Although the appearance of the code 80 track on the Juniata Division was bothersome to me in photographs, the JD ran almost flawlessly when I took it to shows.  That's something you can't put a price on.  I have similar faith in Peco code 55, and the bonus is that at least at photography angles, the rail profile is much less offensive than standard code 80.  Not quite as pretty as Atlas 55 but sufficient for my purposes.

[johnb]

How do Tomix chassis do with Peco Code 55?

[Dave V]

How do Tomix chassis do with Peco Code 55?

Couldn't tell ya, sorry...  I don't have any Tomix on hand.

In other news, I just placed an order with Fast Tracks for the relevant SweepSticks plus the dimensional lumber for the trestles.

EDIT:  I'm also wondering about how to handle that little overpass over the road in DKS' plan.  I could do a simple beam bridge, another trestle without girts, a through plate girder (with the girders set wide), or a wide A-frame truss.  The trestle and the through plate girder have photographic evidence to support them but the beam bridge is super simple and the A-frame truss would be unique.  Then again, a wooden A-frame truss is a bit model-railroady and probably too light for the Midland, especially given how many steel and iron bridges were built for it.