I am looking for those who might know of some blogs or web pages of hobbyists engaged in the building of a Z scale layout. I have been developing a blog dedicated to us that are doing so (a kind of list of zlayouts). However I am not finding many Z scale blogs or web pages of this nature to list. I started out thinking I would easily find Z layouts with work in progress blogs and or websites like I have found in N scale. You see for the past year I have been maintaining a blog about N scale layout nlayout builders and it continues to grow. So I was hoping to follow the same formula and thats why I started the Zlayout blog. At this point I am posting some layout concepts in hopes to help kick things off while I look for some on line layout building activity being reported in blog or website fashion. With the help of some Z scale TrainBoard members who provided information on my minimum radius question I have been able get some very basic designs posted. So thank you for the help and here I am again looking for your sugestions for the new blog. If your interested it is at zlayout.blogspot.com and again thank you so much for your help.
Personally I have not known of any Z scale blog sites. You might be the first. Maybe try some European web sites since Z is big over there. Although I don't model in Z, I appreciate the detail work that goes into making a Z layout. I read the blogs / posts of z scalers (as well as the other scales) because no matter the scale, we all encounter the same challenges. If you do start your Z scale blog, I am sure it will be successfull.
JoeW, I wish you sucess with you blog. I'm afraid I'm not aware of any active blogs other than David's http://27squaresof220ing.blogspot.com/ . I can also point you to some valuable sites (which may or may not pass the editorial board here): www.zscale.org, www.ztrains.com, www.morop.org. While I'm building my first big layout and am documenting some of the work, I'm afraid that with the time I allocate to the hobby if I have to choose between working on the layout and writing about working on the layout, I end up choosing the former. Also, I really don't want to create yet another online id to blog. Personally, I tend toward the various message boards. I'm more than willing to answer and ask questions and I find, like your minimum radius question that the best answers end up coming from the group. Regarding your minimumm radius double oval. While either of the ovals will work fine for the <60' rolling stock, the double oval will be rather limited. The problem is that the standard 25mm track spacing is really a bit too tight for rolling stock to pass on the curves. I would suggest using 2 R030 (50mm total length) on the inner loop and an R024 (55 mm) on the outer loop to fix that issue. Mark
There are only a few blogs I can think of. David K Smith has A few: James River Branch. http://jamesriverbranch.net/ Geordie & Daphne http://ganddinz.blogspot.com/ Z 220 Blog http://1-220.blogspot.com/ American Z Scale http://americanzscale.org/index.asp Svein-Martin Holt also has one. http://www.platelayer.com/project-blog.aspx Many of us simply post updates on this forum, or have build logs as a new thread. Here are a few threads that I recall. Many of them may not be considered "Active" What's on your workbench http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?62392-What-s-on-your-workbench What's new on your layout/modual http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?124094-What-is-new-on-your-layout-module(s) Show us your layout http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?112216-Show-us-your-Z-scale-layouts! Alex's shadow box layout by John http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?119862-Alex-s-shadow-box-layout Donor Pass in Z http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?128543-The-Donner-Pass-in-Z Long Island RailRoad in Z http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?124780-Long-Island-Rail-Road-in-Z-Scale JoeS's 18” round Layout http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?120352-18-inch-roundy-round Torja Christmas Project http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine...small-diorama-is-in-the-making-this-Christmas Curn's Case Layout http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?117036-My-Z-Scale-Case-Layout
have you actually got experienced these crashes with this 25mm spacing using any of the commercially available sectional track systems? The reason I ask is that it is not my experience. My show layout has 5 loops of roadbed sectional track starting at R220mm radius going down to R195mm to R170mm to R145mm to R 120mm. as you can see they are all on 25mm spacing and I have no crashes. Now I must admit I do not have any auto racks, but my heavy weight passenger cars s are longer than the Micro Trains passenger cars. My Heavy weights are 75 ft and Micro Trains are 73 scale feet long and they do no hit on adjacent curves of R220 and R195, do they look better or R245 and R270 you bet but they still do not hit in the curves on my layout. Is a greater spacing more desirable probably but it is not available in sectional track from any manufacturer currently. I can be achieved with flex track from either micro Trains, Peco, Rokuhan or Marklin. My heavy weights will not run on R195 but the Micro Trains passenger cars will so I ran 2 trains in opposite directions to see if this would happen and no it didn't. The heavy weights 8 of them were pulled by a pair of PA's on the R220mm loop and the 10 car train of Micro Trains passenger cars was pulled by a pair of SD40-2's on the R 195mm loop Do these trains look better on larger radius track yes, definitely but spacing does not have to be increased to more than 25mm in my experience. I do not know what mainline track spacing is in North America, so can't say what is best when you are laying flex. but 25mm seems to most common that I have seen on show layouts around the USA. On my home layout my double track main line the minimum radius I use is is R220mm and I use it with R245mm on double track main line and R270mm outside of that in a few places where I have a passing siding in-between the 2 main lines. Marks reference to R 30 and R24 are referring to radii measured in inches rather than metric MM of most sectional track. for quick reference R270mm = 10.6 inches R245 = 9.6 inches R 220mm = 8.6 inches and R 195mm = 7.6 inches 25mm = .98 inches regards Garth regards Garth
Garth, As always, thanks for the input. My comment comes a bit out of theory and a bit from recent experience. My comment was meant primarily for the double track loop Joe has on his blog page using the Rokuhan curves R005 (145mm) and and R011 (120 mm) curves. First to clarify my suggestion, the R024 & R030 refer to the Rokuhan part numbers. What I was trying to express is that by using 2 of the R024 pieces one the straight line on the inner loop (total of 50mm) and a piece of the R030 (55mm) on the outer loop, you get an additional clearance of 2.5mm on the curves. You hit the nail on the head regarding autoracks. I started playing with my autoracks and 60' high cube boxcars (the biggest things I own) on the smaller radius ( <145 mm) track. What I found was that I would catch on corners when the cars were in certain positions in the curves. Not a problem with the narrower classic cars or shorter cars. BTW: the truck/coupler combination on the autoracks allows them to run on absurdly tight curves. So in trying to understand the issue, I went back to some of the NRMA documents did some calculations and (assuming my math is right) found that depending on coupler and truck mounting and car length and width, in theory there is a need for a >25mm center to center clearance on 120mm radius curves and smaller. I'd love to discuss this with you (and anyone else) further, but I think it best not to hyjack Joe's thread any furture. Mark
Thank you both Garth and Mark for your comments. Your experience and consideration are well taken. I should probably include some of this in the blog particularly the consideration of some of the more modern American prototype equipment. Since I have not yet built one of these layouts it is my understanding that all of the designs would accommodate the GP and F units that I had mentioned in my post regarding the minimum radius factor. The layouts were really emphasizing compact design so it does kind of challenge the tolerances you have mentioned. I will probably build the No Parallels design first as it is the most compact of all the designs. In the case of the Stage Pass and Return I had planned to make a 16X48 inch version in which I would then be able to utilize a more accommodating radius. So your comments are really helpful and I will try to put them to good use on the blog.
Joe, Feel free to use any of my technical comments. The GP and F units will work on any of the layouts you posted, it's more a matter of what you'll be pulling behind them. If you're an NMRA member, you might want to check out the S-7 spec and the d3 series and d5g datasheets. I may be on the conservative side on layouts, but since I'm design my first big layout, I'm trying to avoid making some of the types of mistakes that made some of my earlier layouts less than successful. Mark
Thanks David!, and JoeW, any way to make the pictures on your website enlarge when clicked on? It is difficult to see the list of track sections, especially on the bigger plan.
Thanks Curn..... JoeW I don't have a Blog but I did start a YouTube Page that I will be posting more video's. The project will turn 1 year old this Saturday so it's time for a update....... http://www.youtube.com/user/UPMikes
I dont have a website as such but all 6 of my z gauge layouts past and present are featured on my youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/kevsmiththai?feature=mhum There is also coverage of the last few years Zedex shows and my 'How to build a Z scale Berkshire' partwork The only problem is you'll have to scroll through all the U.K, Thai and U.S railroad films to find them all! KEV
