Ok, next question..... Given that I am (primarily) modeling a branchline in the coal fields of West Virginia in the mid-late 40's to very early 50's, and will interchange with the L&N & Clinchfield on a shortish mainline going to and from staging, what size rail would be recommended for a "correct" look? I am leaning towards code 55 for the yards, branch, interchange and siding track and code 70 for the mainline track. Good idea or not? Oh, all will be handlaid.... Cheers
I think you are on the right track (no pun intended) Bruce. Code 55 is a little harder to work with than code 70, but it sure has a prototypical look to it.
Thanks Guys, I'll go that way then. I am aiming for a prototypical look, that's why I have also been researching tie spacing for different areas. Now all I have to do is put all this information together and do a reasonable job of it Cheers
I bought a pack of ME code 55 rail today - whoa! is code 55 REALLY small or what?! My code 70 looks really big next to it. This is gonna be real interesting laying and making turnouts out of this stuff. Cheers
Good luck with the code 55 and such. Keep in mind that during the timeframe you chose, derailments were a daily nuisance for the railroad workers. They were almost always minor since a lot of low speed switching was in order.
ha, that's exactly what I thought when I opened my first package of C40, couldn't see which side was up.
forgot to mention that I would also go with C55. Looking forward to some pictures of the hot glue method
Why code 55 and code 70? Why bother even spending the time to have both code 55 and code 70? You don't save that much money buying code 55 as you do in buying code 70! Another thing you will have trouble with some of the wheels with code 70! Why not go for code 83 or 100? That way you will not be so likely to have trouble with the wheels? Besides Code 83 is the most prototypical look you can get! I am surprised no one mentioned it! [ 12. December 2004, 00:27: Message edited by: thebullroars ]
Do code 55 and code 70 relate to actual rail sizes in 1:1 scale? Definitely will be very fine looking trackage
Not so bad in HO scale. It is .055 inches tall and .070 inches tall. So, for HO scale at 1/87...code 55 is 4.785 inches tall (12.15 cm) and code 70 is 6.09 inches tall (15.47 cm). That is probably heavy rail, but not unreasonable. You can see why N scale rails at 1/160, code 55 rail is 9 inches tall. That is very, very heavy rail. I am not sure how these translate to pounds per yard on the rail. I think that is how it was measured. 155 pound rail, (heavy!) is 155 pounds per yard. That is about 75 kg per 91 cm. Some of the heaviest rail in the USA was West Virginia coal lines (C&O) at 210 pounds. Very light trackage would be 40 pounds. I am certainly not positive about this. As usual, the narrow guage guys study it all. I am sure there is a chart somewhere.
Alan: Here is some definitive info from Rick Blanchard, an N scaler who went over to the narrow guages. Scroll down to the bottom. http://www.urbaneagle.com/data/RRrailsizes.html Rick's Urban Eagle website has lots of useful information, and not just on conversions.
Code 83 in 'HO' is 140 lb.+ rail. This is not common rail, save on heavy duty mainlines even today. Code 70 is around 100lb. rail and repesentative for the initial questioners purposes. So code 55 makes good repesentative branch line trackage. Good-Luck
