Need input from Athearn length passenger car users

rmathos Apr 17, 2003

  1. rmathos

    rmathos TrainBoard Member

    130
    0
    20
    I'm in a bit of a quandry and would like some input from those of you who are using the "shorty" length passenger cars like Athearn makes. Due to some design limitations on the new RR i am building, i will be forced to use a minimum radius of 30 or 32" on my curves. I have collected about eighty IHC brand modern passenger cars over the last several years that look rather "klunky" to me on this tight a radius. what i would like to hear about is experiences from those of you who have switched from the full length cars to the shorty types-do you get over their looking short pretty quickly when that's all you operate? What do you think is the minimum radius they look good running on? What about ideal radius? The main thing is, i love passenger trains, but really want to have them look good operating on my new layout. Feedback from all is appreciated. If you want to wax philosophical/lengthy, feel free to email me at ggonedman@juno.com Thanks, curt

    [ 17. April 2003, 23:48: Message edited by: rmathos ]
     
  2. Martyn Read

    Martyn Read TrainBoard Supporter

    1,990
    0
    33
    My personal take is that with that size of minimum radius I would be using scale length cars, but it isn't going to look like a "high speed" bit of railway....

    Depends on a lot of things, but if you can get most curves as wide as possible, and build in some transition between the curves and straights then you could treat the sharpest as "speed restricted" maybe and still have the rest looking like you could open the train up on...don't know if that will work on your layout or not?

    The transition curve is important and can help the look of long cars a lot, as it reduces the sudden lurch into the corner, this does make the long cars look better entering and leaving a sharper curve.

    Having said that, a decent length train of Athearn shorties doesn't look too bad IMHO, my eye tends to see the long train rather than short cars, so it could work...
     
  3. rmathos

    rmathos TrainBoard Member

    130
    0
    20
    Thanks for the response Martyn. The curve radius limitations i'm talking about is based on a layout design that will allow several walk-in scenes-kind of complicated to describe, but something i want to do. I made up a mock-up of a 32" radius curve, and i just don't like the way the car ends jutt out from the edge of the track-i know they will operate, but there would be several loops like this and i just don't like how they look. Besides, if an HO cow stuck his head over a fence near one of these curves he could be injured! I tend to think like you, that my eyes will adjust to the shorter length with time. Still like some input from others. Looks like i'll have to find me a model RR swap meet to get rid of my present cars and get some new Athearn ones! Thanks, curt
     
  4. ChrisDante

    ChrisDante TrainBoard Member

    579
    2
    24
    rmathos,
    A question for you, have you tried 'easements' at either end of your curves? This makes the car 'ease' into the curve and transitions look a lot smoother.
    As you know this starts the curve at a much wider radius then tightens up to your final dimension, then opens back up again when you leave the curve.
    Unless your cars are stationary, or running very slowly, a tight radius is not that noticable to 60yr olds.(me).
    My 6 wheel passenger trucks have to move through some #6 code 70 rail, when negociating part of my industrial section of town and if they're stopped on a curve, they really cut the corners, but that happens very rarely.
    The easements really do help.
     
  5. Martyn Read

    Martyn Read TrainBoard Supporter

    1,990
    0
    33
    Hiya Chris, I must have been in UK-English mode not US-English mode :rolleyes: , easements is exactly what I meant by transition curves. [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Sorry, my fault!
     
  6. ChrisDante

    ChrisDante TrainBoard Member

    579
    2
    24
    [​IMG] Fagedaboutit

    That's NYC-English mode, sometimes, it bears no resemblance to any-english mode.
    :D :D :D
     
  7. rmathos

    rmathos TrainBoard Member

    130
    0
    20
    I got you both-you ease[ment] into the transition from straight to curve, no problem! I'm still worried about those cows looking over the fence, though. There will be five seperate areas where there"ll be peninsulas requiring these 32" radius loops be delt with. I'd still like to find out what is a comfortable curve radius for the shorty Athearn passenger cars? Thanks, curt
     
  8. Mike Robertson

    Mike Robertson TrainBoard Member

    83
    0
    17
    It's still going to come down to what YOU perceive as looking ok, as far as a radius for the Athearns.
    I think they look ok on 28" to 30" curves, especially eased curves, but that's just my opinion.

    In your collection of scale-length cars, don't you have any RPO cars ?...these are scale length 72' cars that are the same length as the shortened Athearns...why not try these on your mockup ?
    regards / Mike
     
  9. rmathos

    rmathos TrainBoard Member

    130
    0
    20
    Mike, your wisdom is truely great, both on the issue of what i think looks good being of ultimate importance and on using RPO type cars to test out on a curve. I like the idea of using 28 or 30"r as i'd like to run a two track mainline-28"r inside and 32"r outside track would be worth testing. I have a big chunk of foamboard i use to make temporary curves, so i can put in both radius curves to see both how they look and if trains passing each other on the curves would scrape each other. Everyone seems to agree on the importance of transition curves-is there a formula to follow? What do you suggest the transition radius should be if the actual radius is 30"s? Thanks for the info and interest, curt
     
  10. rmathos

    rmathos TrainBoard Member

    130
    0
    20
    I decided to email Athearn on my subject, and got a very prompt and curteous reply. They suggest trying between 22" and 26"r. Someone said the Athearn "shortys" are the same length as my IHC combines. That measures out to 10 1/4". Could someone measure an Athearn "shorty" and tell me if that checks out exactly? I can then lay down some curves on a piece of blue foamboard and see what i like. If the 26"r looks good, i'll be able to lay a two track mainline with outer track about 30"r. I'd love to be able to go two track on the mainline. Never did hear from anyone on the radius formulas to figure easement radius. Thanks for the continued input. curt
     
  11. friscobob

    friscobob Staff Member

    10,534
    707
    129
    Obviously, the larger the radius, the better it looks, but IMO a 30" radius will work just fine. I would definitely go for some transition curves (say, about 36") either side of the 30" radius, but it'll work.
     
  12. Mike Robertson

    Mike Robertson TrainBoard Member

    83
    0
    17
    rmathos:
    Yes, Athearn shortys are about 10 1/4" over the couplers, same as a Rivarossi RPO. ( I don't have any IHC cars, and my Rivarossi combines are full length ).

    If you have room for an outer radius of 30", you won't need to come down to 26"R for the inside radius......an inside radius of 27 1/2" with that outer of 30" will provide plenty of clearance for these cars. In fact if you lay out these on your test board, you'll find your full-length IHC cars will probably not sideswipe either.

    There are many ways to lay out an easement, all difficult ( for me ) to describe without a sketch. There have been many articles in the model press on this. The bottom line is this....if you only just have room for a 30" radius to turn 90 degrees, you DON'T have room for an easement. To produce an EASED 30"R curve of 90 degrees, it takes a space roughly the same as what a regular 33-34"R curve would take.

    I use spline roadbed, and easements are made automatically with this. Check out the NMRA website and see what it has for easement info, if no luck, email me and maybe I can help.
    regards / Mike
     
  13. rmathos

    rmathos TrainBoard Member

    130
    0
    20
    Okay, i was ready to put all this to rest and just decide what radius to run new Athearn cars on, however... Perhaps i need to look at my IHC cars on these same curves with a less critical eye and remember this is model RRing. Perhaps i need to keep my fences a little farther from the track so nosey cows don't get their heads bumped. Many life lessons in our hobby about achieving balance and making comprimises. Thanks guys. I'll let you know if i can come to peace with my IHC cars on tighter curves. 32"r is still a long way from 18"r, and lots of guys get along well with 18"r. Perhaps there is a book here: "Zen and the art of Model RRing"?! curt
     
  14. pjb

    pjb E-Mail Bounces

    184
    0
    19
    Treat as design problem, and build passenger terminal/station/storage yard on side where tight radiai is required. Or have trains enter it coming out of passenger terminal, if you do not have space for clearance for platforms and other facilities on curves. This is not all that uncommon in real world and allows for some fancy trackwork, which always impresses visiiting firemen,and looks good to owner/operator as well.

    Basically, you do not want to linehaul 80 ft. long rolling stock around tight curves, because in addition to problems it will have tracking (even with body mount couplers,or Roco or similar, sharp radius gear), it looks terrible.
     
  15. Gary Pfeil

    Gary Pfeil TrainBoard Member

    211
    0
    19
    For what its worth, my double track main uses 30 and 32" radius, I run full length passenger equipment and have no sideswipe problems.

    Gary
     

Share This Page