A friend and myself was having a bit of a disagreement and was wondering if someone here could help.He doesn't believe that n scale could run on a radius as tight as 7 3/4".I told him it could as long as it was a small switch engine and short cars such as "beer can"tank cars and 2 bay hoppers.He thinks they need atleast 9" to run. Whose right?
Halfpint, Instead of worrying over the tightest radius perhaps you should consider pushing the curves out to HO equivalents. In other words try using 15 inch radius curves, 18 radius curves and so on. for example a 15 inch in N gauge is equal to a 30 inch in HO. N gauge half the size of HO (roughly speaking). Indidently the small switch engine and beer can tank cars will negotiate the 7 3/4 " but they won't like it. Sorry about that.
Minitrix/Aurora sets from the 60's came with 7 1/2(3/4?) radius track along with a F7(9) and 40' boxcar, flat car, gondola and regular 8 wheel caboose. They ran well. I have a spiral helix with a 5" radius on the last circle. I run 0-4-0's and 24' ore cars with a 4 wheel bobber caboose. No problems. Al
Cars that are short will probably run on even tighter radius curves than you mention. Take a piece of flex track and bend it in a curve to see just how tight a radius the cars and engine can negotiate!
Thanks for the replies.I should mention that this was just a discussion on how small of a radius one could run,not one that either of were incorporating on out layouts.
Sure those super short cars and engines will negotiate a 7" radius, but biger is always better, operations-wise...
The whole 9 3/4 inch min radius is crap .. if we continue to insist that we use this as the minimum, then N scale will always be in the "toy" category ...
I have seven inch radius curves on my N scale layout. I find that many four axle Diesels negotiate this without problems. Also, I have no trouble with my MDC Consolidations or Mogul. The railroad is only 2 ft. by 4 ft. and was originally designed to be a trolley line. Sorry, acsxfan1, but I don't consider it in the "toy" category!
I didnt say your layout was in the toy category .. there is more to making a good looking layout than the track alone .. I ran a 2x4 for the longtest time .. but as long as we continue to insist that 9 3/4 be the radious that manuf have to develop for, then the quality of locomotives will not improve .. it looks very odd for an 86 foot box car, or an SD90 negotiating a tight curve like that ... There is a place for tight curves, such as the trolley line you mention, logging railroads, etc .. but for mainline running, I would rather do without than have to go back to that tight a curve.
well .. if you use the old bachman 0-4-0 and a bobber cabooose , you could probably get down to 4-5 inches ...
I once saw a photo of a circular track where the inner "rail" was the rim of a silver dollar (Eisenhower-class, not Susan B.). An N-scale Bachmann Docksider (0-4-0T) was running in circles around it.
Many of the early trainsets from Arnold and trix had 7 and change radius curves. Then 9 3/4 became the std when atlas brought out its snap track line. With that said - The samllest radius i use and only in tight areas or spurs is 11" The best advice has always been use the largest radius possible to fit in your space. Easments also help make a smooth transition into tight radius's and help to improve the looks and performance when tight radius must be used. It is also good practice to use easements on all curves really since this is a proto practice. This is especially important when running 6 axles, long cars like autoracks or passenger eqmt or long wheelbase steam.
This is a pretty simple question between two friends. Some very early train sets came with radiae in the 7-inch plus range. They ran, though not very well. Old publications, IIRC, said 7 1/2 inches without much qualification. I think Linn Wescott's original book of track plans had layouts of "very sharp" curves of 7 1/2 inches--though that doesn't mean engines would negotiate them. I don't recall ever buying track of that radius--or even 9-3/4 inches, although I know that latter size was always available. On earlier layouts in the 70s and 80s, I bent flextrack on branch lines well below 7 inches--probably to about 5 inches. Tiny engines and small cars made it through fine. Anything bigger, forget it. I no longer have a Peco "shorty" switch, but I think they were in the 8-inch range. They certainly weren't No. 4s, which are in the 11-inch range, again IIRC.
You can still find some 7-1/2" radius Roco curves. I researched them when considering doing an N scale version of that Illinois Electric line that RMC covered sometime last year. It had a trolley loop about 300' across. Of course the locomotive was a Plymouth "critter" and sometimes they had to uncouple the car from the loco and lash the knuckles together with chain to get it around that one...
We're quite happy designing our layout for short equipment only. 6" min radius works just fine, with easements for performance and improved looks. We think our little engines and cars like it very much! We certainly do. For visual effect though, passenger cars on the secondaery lines are 36', and all freight cars are 22'-36'. On the mainline where the big 45' passenger cars are run, we keep visible minimum radius to 7.5". The 45'ers can take the 6"r corners, but we don't like the look of the overhang. For bonus points, the cars are also shorter in height, so the grades don't have to climb as high to make clearance for a cross-over. By thinking small, rather than big, we're able to pack a lot more operation into the space we have, and have a greater number of scenes, since short total length of trains means less distance between them while still avoiding having your caboose in one town while the engine is pulling into the next. Our choice has improved our operations tremendously for our tastes. N Scale is superb for running industrial switching shortlines on tight radii, as well as huge unit trains on luxurious curves. If you must compromise on any design aspect, giving up big engines and 86' cars is just as valid an option as giving up tight radii. Cheers, Maureen
Many interesting 2x4' track plans can be developed using tight radii. The equipment you use is limited to small loco's such as a 2-6-0 or an MDC 2-8-0. Some small diesels like the VO-1000 could also be used or other small 4 axle diesels. Many of the old time cars made by MDC can be used on such a trackplan. I imagine 36' boxcars can also be used. Stay cool and run steam.....
