Tooling rail

[narrowminded]

If you really want it contact Micro Engineering and ask them what it would cost to tool it up. Perhaps part or parts of it are already part of their current rail codes. Just guessing. But they make their own stuff here in the US.

That actually makes sense.  And when you look on their site they say they are always two weeks away even if inventory shows none in stock.  That means they've got a guy and it's not several oceans away.  That also means that guy's been there and done that so he has the best shot at doing what you need with the least pain (cost).  Get some idea of a quantity that you could commit to.  ME will have some sense of a market as well and maybe this effort is just what they need to tip the scale and get the dies going.  And if they're rolling it, it may not even take a whole new set of dies but maybe just one or two with adjustments on the rest. And if it's somebody with ALL of the rest of the process machine just sitting there ready for the next new set of rollers and the next shape, it may not be so expensive.  Think of it like buying a whole CNC machine to make a few cuts vs: changing the cutter in somebody's existing machine, sitting there all wired up, leveled up, and ready to do the brass bash boogie.

The remarks from Cory are enlightening and add confirmation to what I was saying about the complexity of rolling this (not to the world of all things rolled or drawn but as compared to a simple one pass roll) and about several passes needed.  The messiness is about the liberal amounts of oil needed as the material passes through the roller/ die, and then the space needed as the product passes through the rolls completed.  The straightening rolls are several more stands/ passes and each one taking up more space.  I only answered from the hip but given the twenty foot estimate that sounds very reasonable for this.  It does sound like they aren't annealing which would be a huge additional step if it was required and that too makes a little sense.  Copper and its alloys are very forgiving when tortured through various shapes but at a glance, thinking about rail shapes, that still strikes me as asking an awful lot of that good characteristic without an anneal step in the sequence to relax some of those internal stresses.  But maybe I'd learn something if I did that (there IS an element of art work to these processes).  The same something that the guy who's already doing it already knows. The knowledge that somebody MicroEngineering knows, already has... and the tools already sitting there, ready to make the next little wire shape that comes along.  

If this is really viable I'm not sure that it couldn't be extruded but it may be a bit small for that and some of the profile corners may be a little too sharp and delicate for the dies, too.  But it would also only take a phone call to find out.

[nkalanaga]

Peteski:  If they don't do custom work that ends that idea. 

Milling it might not be so bad, as they still make 36 inch lengths, and their prices aren't that bad.  If it's the only way to get small rail, let the milling begin.

[CNscale]

As for code 30, while it would likely be great if some were available to be honest we probably wouldn't want it since even some of the finest flanges might have problems with it... not that it is ever likely to happen.

Pizza cutter flanges are only a problem when you have small rail held in place by molded spikes, e.g. commercial code 55 and code 40 track. If the rail is glued to the ties (as is typically done for N-scale handlaid track) you have the full height of the rail for flange clearance. There aren't many flanges that are higher than 0.040", and I suspect only the worst pizza cutters are actually higher than 0030".

[nkalanaga]

The only pizza cutters I have that won't run on ME code 55 are the old Arnold/Rapido stuff.  My FA-whatever bounces nicely on the spikes.  On the other hand, it also RUNS nicely on the spikes, which is more than I can say for many of the models of that era with better wheels!  Put it on the track, turn the power on, and off it goes.  Even my RP-25 flangeways don't bother it, but it doesn't like "small" rail.

I have laid some Nn3 track, simply as a test, using soldered 1/64 x 1/32 brass strip, which would be code 31-32, and modern N scale wheels ran on it.  I wouldn't recommend it, though, because it simply looks too narrow.  0.020 x 0.030 strip wouldn't look bad, but I haven't found any, and common brass rail wouldn't be a good idea in N scale anyway.  It didn't work that well in HO.

[robert3985]

Code 40 rail really is Code 44 if you get out your mike and measure it, which makes it nearly perfect from a rail-height standpoint for my era and location on my layout.  However, I don't use it for that...I use ME C55 for mainlines and ME C40 for sidings and spurs...and hand-laid C40 for my Park City Branchline trackage.

In my 30 years or so of experience hand-laying track and also using Railcraft/Micro-Engineering flex in code 70, 55 and 40, both me, and the club I belonged to (now defunct) found that:
(1) Everything ran just fine on PCB hand-laid C40 track, with PCB ties every fifth tie, with no kinking problems ever,
(2) Both Railcraft and Micro-Engineering C40 flex will allow only true low-profile wheeled engines and cars to run on it, meaning that the original  MT lo-pro wheels run fine and the new ones don't, that many engines such as Kato, Atlas & Life-Like, bounce and stop running on ME C40 flex,
(3) ME C55 flex will allow even pizza cutter flanges to run without interference because of the lower "spikehead" detailing as compared to Atlas C55
(4) Properly painted and weathered ME C70 flex is nearly indiscernible from their C55 if you're really worried about flange clearance problems, and their C70 #6 turnouts work well and are properly proportioned as opposed to everybody else's code 70 and above.

After a certain point...around C35, I've discovered that the "rail profile" becomes virtually unnoticeable, and "ribbon rail" or flattened wire used as rail, looks very good, even when closely photographed.

What makes the most difference in the way rail "looks" when differentiating between heavy-use-mainlines, medium-use-branchlines, and light-use-industrial spurs/sidings are the patterns, colors and sizes of the ties. "Heavy" use trackage uses heavy rail AND ties that are longer, more closely spaced and are better maintained.  "Medium" use trackage uses lighter rail, AND ties that are spaced further apart, are shorter and not as well maintained.  "Light" use trackage has light rail and ties that are even further apart and crooked, not well maintained.

Spurs and sidings are almost always lower than the mainline also, with a lower ballast profile, and possibly even ballast that is a different kind/color of rock, or no ballast at all...just dirt and weeds.

Rail color also is different.  On the UP that I model (1947-1956) the mainline rails are a light gray, sidings, spurs and branchlines have a browner look, and industrial sidings...not controlled by UP track crews...get a little rusty.

Also, mainline rail is the straightest.  Spurs, sidings, yards, branchlines and industrial trackage are much less straight, and making them less straight on your layout will give them a more prototypical look.

Lastly, let's talk about code 30 "ribbon rail".  Although I haven't laid any, I know a fellow "crazy" (Gregg Cudworth) who is constructing the entire RGS in Nn3, double-decked in his basement...the WHOLE basement!  He is hand-laying all of his trackage using C30 "ribbon rail" that he purchased from The 2MM Society...it comes in rolls.  Gregg lays it on wooden and PCB ties, with the PCB ties spaced every 7th tie.  Lately, after ten years or so, he's discovered that his track is kinking...badly...probably due to his benchwork drying and shrinking.  He is now going to go back, and insert PCB ties in-between his present PCB ties to see if that will take care of the problem.  Maybe it will, maybe it won't.

Since C30 "ribbon rail" does not have a "rail contour" and is just a squashed round wire with flats on either side with rounded top and bottom, there is no stiffening structure to them like C40/44 actual "rail", and C30 WILL bend from side to side much easier than "rail" with a head, web and foot.

If I were going to lay any C30 ribbon rail, I would use a PCB tie every fourth tie, which I think would eliminate the kinking problem.

Here are some photos to illustrate my points:
Photo (1)-Railcraft C70 mainline trackage on my old Ntrak modules...excessive rail height doesn't exactly jump out and punch you in the nose....


Photo (2)-Gregg's C30 ribbon rail hand laid track on his unfinished Nn3 RGS...lack of a "rail profile" is not extremely evident, even on unweathered, unballasted trackwork...


Photo (3) More of Gregg's C30 ribbon rail work...


Photo (4)-UP laid their Park City Branch and Yard using the same ties (sizes and spacing) as their "Big Boy ready" mainlines, so rail height isn't very evident from normal viewing distance as this photo illustrates having both C55 and C40 trackwork side by side in it...


Photo (5)-Closer view of Park City C40 trackage vs C55 mainline trackage...


After much rivet-counter/a$$hat contorting about rail height over the years, I finally decided that C55 and C40 were sufficient for the vast majority of my needs, even if they both are too high and/or too wide for their respective applications on my layout.  I appreciate the visual difference in rail height more than the actual "scale" measurement of their height.  Their respective tie treatments and ballast color/material differences are something that I can easily manipulate, and in my experience, fiddling with ties and ballast is exponentially more visually effective than the height of the rails when attempting to replicate prototype trackwork in N-scale.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore




 
 

[daniel_leavitt2000]

Love that Nn3 track but it clearly needed more PC ties.

This is primarily for my Thai Boston and Maine shelf layout. If it was just a matter of rolling pins to ribon wire, then it would make sense to bug someone with a lathe but this is clearly more complex.

The 2mm ribbon rail should work for the dilapidated mid century industrial trackage look I was going for. Anyone have experience with scratch building stub switches?

[nkalanaga]

Building stub switches is easy.  If you can build a point-type, you're ready to start.  Basically, you cut the turnout at the heel of the points, then attach the stock rails to a throwbar.  The frog is identical, and there's no need to file points.

Throwing it is a little harder, because there's nothing to keep the rails in place.  I put pins on both sides of mine, but another option is to solder small bits of wire to the outside fixed rails, either way the throw has something to hold the rail against.

3-way stub switches aren't hard to lay, but very hard to operate, at least in N scale.  I built one, as a test, and it worked fine, but I never did figure out how to throw and wire it to look presentable.

[Sokramiketes]

That actually makes sense.  And when you look on their site they say they are always two weeks away even if inventory shows none in stock.  That means they've got a guy and it's not several oceans away.  That also means that guy's been there and done that so he has the best shot at doing what you need with the least pain (cost).  Get some idea of a quantity that you could commit to.  ME will have some sense of a market as well and maybe this effort is just what they need to tip the scale and get the dies going.  And if they're rolling it, it may not even take a whole new set of dies but maybe just one or two with adjustments on the rest. And if it's somebody with ALL of the rest of the process machine just sitting there ready for the next new set of rollers and the next shape, it may not be so expensive.  Think of it like buying a whole CNC machine to make a few cuts vs: changing the cutter in somebody's existing machine, sitting there all wired up, leveled up, and ready to do the brass bash boogie.

Micro Engineering imports their rail too. They do not roll it in house or have the machines to do it.

[loyalton]

The weathered c30 looks superb. Still, if you still want a rail profile with c30 ... cut the sides with a CO2 laser(?) For those who might demand it, the proto profile for the head is around a couple of mils. I'll give brownie points for the experiment, but will say it's not practical, just to fan the flames to make someone actually try it.