Hello Are the Peco Electrofrog Large turnouts used on large layouts only? Would they be used in a yard configuration or just main line ? What is Electrofrog and is it supposed to Real DCC friendly? See ya Ron
The Peco Electrofrog means the frog is electrified based on the direction the points on the switch are set. In other words power routed. I was looking at a "Similar Thread" as can be seen below this thread: http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?134090-Peco-Electrofrog-mysteries There's no need to cut these switches or rewire them. Simply cut in isolation gaps on the diverging end of the switch, Ie., Both sets of rails in the track that leaves the switch. Yes, you will need to add drop wires in the track that follows. This will serve both Analog DC and DCC. No problem...no big deal. Does that help?
Ron, Peco's Electrofrog means that the frog is solid metal and conducts voltage directly from whichever point rail is against its stock rail through to both rails beyond the frog. Peco's Insulfrog has a plastic frog that isolates the point rails from the rails beyond the frog. Each point rail has a jumper under the frog that connects with its corresponding rail beyond the frog. Also each point/rail combination is isolated for the other so you don't need to isolate the turnout by gapping the rails beyond the frog. I use Peco's large turnouts, both straight and curved, in as many locations as I have room because they look the best. Over the years, I've reduced my layout ambitions from spaghetti bowls to now having two branchlines that run through rural scenery like many small lines in Alabama and Mississippi. This gives more room for using large turnouts without looking crowded. I can't address DCC because I run DC, but I'm sure you'll get lots of advice from those who have DCC.
"Large" refers to the turnout angle (or "number"); the large turnouts are roughly the equivalent of a No. 7 in Code 80; in Code 55, all the frogs are technically No. 6, but the diverging route radius is larger for the "large" turnout. On my old bedroom layout with Peco Code 55, I used "large" turnouts for crossovers on the main line and "medium" turnouts for the yards/switching areas. You certainly could use "large" turnouts for a yard, but they would take up a lot of space. "Electrofrog" means that the frog is metal and is powered (as opposed to the "insulfrog" design, where the frog is made of plastic). As they come from the factory, Electrofrogs are wired internally so that the frog gets power from the point rails. When you "flip" the points one way, one point rail snugs up against the corresponding stock rail, picking up power from the stock rail and powering the frog. This means that Peco Electrofrog turnouts are a bit more difficult to wire than some others (e.g., Atlas Code 55). In general, you must feed power from behind the points, and then use insulating rail joiners at the frog; in practice, I insulated all 4 rails on the "exit" end of the turnout just to make things consistent. If you didn't insulate the rails coming out of the frog, you would get a perpetual short, since rails of different polarity would both be feeding the frog from the "exit" end of the turnout, conflicting with each other and also potentially with the feed from the points. Insulated-frog turnouts don't have this issue, but then you also either don't have a powered frog (e.g., the plastic Insulfrog design), which can cause stalls on short-wheelbase engines, or else you need to separately power the frog (as with Atlas Code 55). As for DCC compatibility: While some folks recommend isolating the frog in the Electrofrog design (you can do this by cutting some wires underneath the frog that connect to the point rails) and separately powering it to avoid potential shorts, I never, ever had a problem with Electrofrogs "as is" using DCC for over 10 years. The only complication was remembering to use insulated rail joiners on the rails exiting the frog, and feeding power from behind the point rails (e.g., before you enter the switch). Because the Electrofrog design depends on electrical contact between the point and stock rails, occasionally that contact would fail because of dirt, etc. and I'd have to clean the contact area between the point and stock rails (wire brush, 600-grit sandpaper, whatever). But we have 20-year-old Electrofrog turnouts on N-Trak modules that have seen all kinds of abuse and are still working and going strong. If Peco came out with a track that used North American prototype tie spacing, I'd use it in a heartbeat. The stuff was nearly indestructible. But I switched to Atlas Code 55 for my current layout due to its more-prototypical appearance (Micro Engineering is even better, but Atlas has a much wider range of turnouts and crossings). I still miss the elegant Peco turnout spring that allowed you to "flick" the points without external switch machines or linkage, though. Especially in switching areas, it was much more intuitive to simply flick the points as you worked the area, rather than throwing a DPDT switch on the fascia to operate a switch machine (there are ways to use manual linkages with Atlas Code 55, but none of them end up looking all that great, IMHO). John C.
One thing about Peco turnouts that noone has mentioned is that they come in both Code 80 and Code 55. Do NOT use the Code 80. Use the Code 55. The Code 80 was designed to early European standards before the NMRA standards were refined. The Code 55 are NMRA compliant. Also, Peco makes a large curved turnout. Use these to save space as the turnout can be located on a curve rather than using a straight turnout after the curve. It also eliminates a potential "S" curve. If running long cars such as auto racks and passenger cars you will find that they will track better and look better on large dianeter curves and larger numbered turnouts. It was mentioned that the Peco Electro frog line has a live [powered] frog and is power routing. The power is routed from whichever stock rail the points are in contact with. So the electrical path is from the stock rails to the points to the closure rails to the frog and to both frog rails. Becuse of potential problems with connectivity along this path it is a recommended practice that auxilliary contacts be used to also supply the frog por frog rails with a power feed.
Switchman wrote: "Hello, Are the Peco Electrofrog Large turnouts used on large layouts only? Are you being funny? I read that this morning and thought wait, wait, this has to be a joke. Yes, Switchman there is a Santa Claus. Sorry, wrong season. Yes, There is a Headless Horseman. AND large turnouts ($#!+ when are they going to learn they're SWITCHES and he calls himself a "Switchman") are to be used ONLY on LARGE Layouts. Gosh, now we are going to have to define what a large layout is. Dang, switchman.
Incorrect, in this case. Peco sells "turnouts," not "switches." http://www.peco-uk.com/product.asp?strParents=3309,3310&CAT_ID=3315&P_ID=17100
Good luck with that and Rick...LMAO. Been trying for years to explain to him that the 'switch' is the part of the whole 'turnout' that actually moves...LOL. *Quit cussin me Rick...I can hear ya before ya even type...all the way over here in Arizona....roflmao
Incorrect depends on location.... When in England, they are "Turnouts". When in America, they are "Switches". And Most USA types can't get that right. George, What? What? Did you see a mushroom cloud over Big Bear this morning. Grrrrrrr! Hell, you've succumbed to peer pressure calling them "Turnouts" from the get go. Darn purist, holier then thou stinkers that know nothing of railroading. What am I going to have to do, beat this drum again? Were's the turnout crew, who's the turnout man and at what point did the fireman turnout, in his turnout? Did you ever hear of throwing a "Turnout"? Darn MR's that think they know railroading. LOL
How about those darn railroaders who think they know something about model railroading? Actually the use of the term 'turnout' was popularized by Model Railroader magazine back in the 60's to avoid confusion with the term 'switch' as it was used to denote an electrical switch. I recall reading the article. It went on to explain that the term 'turnout' was deemed a better alternative to the more descriptive term 'track switch'.
Beating the drum! "Switches". In all the years my family of "Rails" worked for the Moffat Line later known as the Rio Grande, Santa Fe, and Alaskan Railroads... friends who worked for the Southern Pacific and Union Pacific and my short time as a UP agent. Did we ever refer to those thing a majigs as "Turnouts". We called them "Switches". Only once did I hear "Turnout" used, when a distant cousin who worked for the engineering department called them Turnouts. I won't repeat word for word what was said between the two relatives. One from the engineering department and the other a "Yard Super". Quoting the yard supper, "Why the hell can't you use railroad lingo like the crews use?", going on to explain it would make it easier to communicate between the two departments. So, allow me to ask the same question. There was an article written in Model Railroader, by one of our leading authors, after doing some research in the engineering departments of the Rio Grande railroad, started referring to them as "Turnouts. I knew when I read it... that times were about to change and they did. Correct usage of Turnout should always be from the engineering perspective. From the railroaders perspective aka "Rails" (railroad employees) they are "Switches". Throw the switch, align the switch, switchman, switch crew, switch move, move through the switch to spot cars Ie., At an industrial spur. Inkanneer went on to write: ""How about those darn railroaders who think they know something about model railroading?"" Funny Inkaneer. Going on: ""Actually the use of the term 'turnout' was popularized by Model Railroader magazine back in the 60's to avoid confusion with the term 'switch' as it was used to denote an electrical switch. I recall reading the article. It went on to explain that the term 'turnout' was deemed a better alternative to the more descriptive term 'track switch'."" That's true it did...in reference to yet other articles that followed. Don't even think I'ma going to buy into the fact that it's less confusion. One is a toggled switch, a slider switch and/or it could be a rotator type switch... the other is a "Switch". Having been referred to by "Rail's" as per American tradition for generations. We modelers want to change it? Ahh...excuse me you have changed it. Don't even start with me as to what's correct and what isn't unless you are a "Rail". LMAOAWBMR's
OHhhhhhhhhh how I love getting Ricks blood boiling....keeps him healthy !! Here for your enjoyment Rick....from an actual "Rail" company... http://www.lbfoster-railproducts.com/Turnouts.asp Do notice that the only part of a 'turnout' that is actually refered to as a 'switch' is the moveable portion in the small top left area (switch length). I agree...you do "Throw the switch, align the switch, switchman, switch crew, switch move, move through the switch to spot cars Ie., At an industrial spur." But it is only a small part of the whole mechanism that the 'Rails' themselves refer to as a turnout. Put that in your Santa pipe and smoke it....ROFLMAO !!!
You guys are " two " much. I'd " switch " channels to see a turnover .... no, that's a turnout switching tracks...
Yea...Rick and I are good friends. Same bullheadedness...arrogance...and belief that we are right no matter what the other one says...LOL. Trading jabs is mostly in fun...but at the end of the day...we are still good buds
Popcorn???? Time to sit back, this is gonna be fun! Nah! Into the DEEP end of the pool....engineering wise (my working world) the thingys that flop trains from track to another would be referred to as turnouts BUT in the railroad world that most of my family worked in...they were always called ....switches!
SWITCHES would be the only term I ever heard working on the railroad!! Yet, I even find myself incorrectly using the #@%#$ term 'turnout' when talking to modelers, grrrr! It must be a contagion!! Go Rick, GO!!:wink:
George, Some day, I'ma going to knock on your door. Someday. Aw gee whiz you silly foamers. Now I don't care what you want to call them switching thing a majigs. However, I can assure you if you use "Turnout" you aren't in keeping with the traditions of the "Rails". May I suggest showing our ignorance. We've established a model railroad culture that is far and away from the actual 1X1 foot scale traditions. My thinking is if you want to model an American railroad then we need to use the lingo, diction, verbage and definitions of the "Rails". Just food for thought. LOL
Hey Rick....mi casa es su casa...doors always open My thinking is if you want to model an American railroad then we need to use the lingo, diction, verbage and definitions of the "Rails". Just food for thought. Yup...that link is from a company full of "rails"....so the verbage and definition is correct...its a turnout....so its all good Be it known however...I will always say...as I always have.. "Throw the switch." or "Align the switch" *on the switch portion of the turnout*....hehehehehe. P.S. For those that need it from a "Higher Authority" they worship... http://www.nmra.org/standards/sandrp/rp12_3.html ** of particular interest...it was last revised in Feb 1961 !!!
Idiotic Foamers Dang George, and of course everyone else tuned in here. I got my breakfast and I'ma ready for a days discussion. Heck, you didn't even use "Rails" appropriately. NMRA is not a bunch of "Rails" I doubt there is a retired "Rail" at the helm or in the bunch of them. They are idiotic foamers like yourself. LOL Now don't get me started on NMRA. As much as I appreciate what they've done for model railroading they aren't bullet proof. Remember or not, they are the ones that gave us HO Horn Hook Couplers and N Rapido. No realistic knuckle couplers DURING THE 60's. Used as they do in your now infamous link, they are correct but strictly from the engineering perspective. Crazy foamers. The other day I came up the mountain on Hwy. #330. I thought for a minute I was driving a Stanley Steamer. I pulled into a "Turnout" to see what the problem was. Everything looked ok so I continue on until the car finally died. A good samaritan was kind enough to push me into a "Turnout". Called a toe truck for me and made sure I had plenty of water. The toe truck pulled into the "Turnout" and within minutes had my car sitting on the hoist and off we went. Now that's a fricking "Turnout". It's not ah my job to tell you what to call them. However, I do feel it's my place and responsibility to point out that...you are a bunch of idiotic foamers. What? What? What did he call us? Yeah, I can hear you. You ought to hear the rails laugh after talking to a bunch of you foamers. And these are those who want to model the railroads? Ok George, It's time to go head to toe or is that toe to toe? I'ma loading the car up....but...not going anywhere yet. To show we are ok, I short sheeted the bed and my casa is always open to you and your engineer any time of the day or night. Love what you are doing with your railroad. I don't know of two many engineers that can get away with kissing the switchman. Unless it's the crew that used to run out to Lucerene Valley's Mitsubishi Cement Plant. The engineer, she was a looker. Heck, I forgot I was out there to watch trains. Never mind what I was thinking about. Heeheeheehawhawhaw George wrote: "Be it known however...I will always say...as I always have.. "Throw the switch." or "Align the switch" *on the switch portion of the turnout*....hehehehehe." My response: Dang, he's got that right. Amazed there is still some sanity left. LOL What? I expect you IF's to change? Hell no. Damage is done and damage control was lost along time ago. Now get back to work on your "Turnouts". Sheez, what a bunch of.................col.
