|
|
Post by bmoore765 on Oct 7, 2024 8:23:04 GMT -8
I'm going to build a small, portable layout made up of a pair of 4x8 tables. This will be for my father who has neither the space or interest in a permanent layout, but wants something he can set up in the garage and occasionally run his trains that otherwise sit on shelves. I've done something similar with Bachmann EZ track, but this time wanted to use Kato Unitrack. However, being metric, the closest that have to 22" radius that fit nicely on a 4x8 is 21 5/8" and 24". 24" will be too wide and I'm worried that 21 5/8" will be too tight given that most rolling stock and locomotives these days suggest a 22" minimum radius. Is 21 5/8" close enough or should I rethink my strategy?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Oct 7, 2024 8:32:44 GMT -8
What equipment are you planning to run? That will weigh heavily into if it'll be an issue for you. Kato Unitrack is used as the basis for the "WGH Trackplan", which i think is designed for a 4x8 sheet.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 7, 2024 8:50:11 GMT -8
I don't see 3/8" reduction making a problem.
I suppose SOME of your father's equipment might not work on either radius. Maybe. But most will. I'm going to insist that ALL B-B truck diesels will fit, and almost all 60' and shorter freight cars will fit.
So he'll be able to run most of his equipment, I think. Which is far better than NONE of his equipment, as it is now.
But. As noted in the previous post, it would be wise to first catalog the equipment, "just in case".
I think I'll add a recommendation:
Buy a circle of the track, a few straights, and a "terminal" section; and build a loop. You'll be needing it anyway, if you do build the layout. Set it up on the floor at your father's place, and test any equipment that looks suspicious. Like that gorgeous Athearn Centennial, or the brass business car he bought because it "spoke to him".
Then you guys can figure out if it's gonna work. And if it doesn't, there's only the cost of the (reusable) track you bought.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Oct 7, 2024 8:56:43 GMT -8
What equipment are you planning to run? That will weigh heavily into if it'll be an issue for you. Kato Unitrack is used as the basis for the "WGH Trackplan", which i think is designed for a 4x8 sheet. The curves on that plan are 19.25". 4X8 belongs to history, blue box locomotives, and Varney rolling stock. Most, not all, locomotives and rolling stock made in the past 20 years needs broader curves. Even 4 axle locomotives are now longer a safe choice. A standard folding ping pong table is 5 feet by 9 feet. You could use 24" radius and be safe with most modern equipment. When not in use, the table can be folded and rolled away. Yes, it costs more than a sheet of 4X8 ply which is going to restrict what can be operated. By the time you get done with finding good ply, framing it, and building up horses/legs to get to a comfortable height the additional cost isn't that much. Plus rollers of some sort - horsing a 4X8 sheet to store it is going to be less possible as Dad moves on. |
|
|
|
Post by crblue on Oct 7, 2024 10:19:28 GMT -8
4x8 may belong to history, but it is still very relevant. Most stuff will run on well laid track. I'm personally running Walthers Amfleets and PRR cars on a 4x8 / 22" radius without any trouble.
bmoore765, I think that as long as you stay away from those F89 flatcars and the like with the body mounted couplers and a long overhang between the truck and coupler, you should be fine. Walthers and MTH/ScaleTrains passenger cars may need long shank couplers on one end, but I wouldn't worry about it. Many engines suggest 22" radius (Scale Trains SD40-2, MTH Class J, Bachmann Acela...), but as long as the car behind them isn't too long they work on 18" radius just fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Oct 7, 2024 10:52:31 GMT -8
Have the box store cut your 4x8 into 2x4 panels and arrange it in a 6x6 square. Box frame each section and it becomes a layout that can be taken apart and moved as needed, expanded, etc. 24" radius is no issue then.
|
|
|
|
Post by wjstix on Oct 7, 2024 13:17:19 GMT -8
I've done something similar with Bachmann EZ track, but this time wanted to use Kato Unitrack. However, being metric, the closest that have to 22" radius that fit nicely on a 4x8 is 21 5/8" and 24". First, you're a bit misinformed. Kato Unitrack is not 'metric'. In HO it starts with 24" radius, and then has three curves that are sharper and three that are more broad. All are 2-3/8" apart. So you have 21-5/8", 24" and then 26-3/8" radius curves for example. Anyway, for all practical purposes, 21-5/8" radius is 22" radius. I use a 21-5/8" radius circle of track as a break-in / programming track. I can run my Athearn Challenger or old Life-Like Proto 2-8-8-2 on there with no problem. The many advantages of Unitrack - reliability, ease of construction, near scale-width rail, etc. - far outweigh using some other system just to get an unnoticeably broader curve. One 'heads up' I would give is when buying turnouts, be aware that Kato make "number 4" turnouts in two different sizes - one to match their 21-5/8" curves, and another to match their 19-3/8" radius curves. Be sure to use the larger ones - or use their No.6 when you can. |
|
|
|
Post by bmoore765 on Oct 7, 2024 13:23:02 GMT -8
I'm sure most of what he has would run fine on 22" I know there are some 6 axle diesels and full length passenger cars, but in my experience 22" is designed minimum radius for most manufacturers. I've still got some 22" on a portion of my own layout that was first constructed in the mid 1980's back when 22" was considered wide. All of my equipment both steam and diesel are able to squeak through. So would the 3/8" reduction make a difference? I have no idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Oct 7, 2024 13:37:34 GMT -8
I've done something similar with Bachmann EZ track, but this time wanted to use Kato Unitrack. However, being metric, the closest that have to 22" radius that fit nicely on a 4x8 is 21 5/8" and 24". First, you're a bit misinformed. Kato Unitrack is not 'metric'. In HO it starts with 24" radius, and then has three curves that are sharper and three that are more broad. All are 2-3/8" apart. So you have 21-5/8", 24" and then 26-3/8" radius curves for example. Anyway, for all practical purposes, 21-5/8" radius is 22" radius. I use a 21-5/8" radius circle of track as a break-in / programming track. I can run my Athearn Challenger or old Life-Like Proto 2-8-8-2 on there with no problem. The many advantages of Unitrack - reliability, ease of construction, near scale-width rail, etc. - far outweigh using some other system just to get an unnoticeably broader curve. One 'heads up' I would give is when buying turnouts, be aware that Kato make "number 4" turnouts in two different sizes - one to match their 21-5/8" curves, and another to match their 19-3/8" radius curves. Be sure to use the larger ones - or use their No.6 when you can. It is 100% a metric system as Kato is based in Japan. It's based on 60mm track centers. katousa.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/HO-Unitrack.pdfkatousa.com/PDF/plans/HO-plan-6-manual.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Oct 7, 2024 17:45:48 GMT -8
Some long cars will not run 22" radius, for instance Atlas 89' flat cars. They may handle a short bit of it, through a curved turnout, but I played around testing them and ended up relaying several curves to make them work. Same with some of the Walthers passenger cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by wjstix on Oct 9, 2024 7:37:02 GMT -8
Interesting that it's "100 percent metric", yet chose as it's base / middle radius, 24" exactly - what has traditionally been used as "Conventional" curves in HO scale. (18"R = "sharp", 24"R = "conventional", 30"R = "broad"). The packaging and literature uses both metric and inches as measurements, but that doesn't mean the whole system is metric based.
I believe the larger distance between tracks - 2-3/8" rather than 2" - is because in Japan layouts have to be smaller and use tighter radius curves then we do in the US, so more clearance is needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Oct 9, 2024 9:28:02 GMT -8
Interesting that it's "100 percent metric", yet chose as it's base / middle radius, 24" exactly - what has traditionally been used as "Conventional" curves in HO scale. (18"R = "sharp", 24"R = "conventional", 30"R = "broad"). The packaging and literature uses both metric and inches as measurements, but that doesn't mean the whole system is metric based. I believe the larger distance between tracks - 2-3/8" rather than 2" - is because in Japan layouts have to be smaller and use tighter radius curves then we do in the US, so more clearance is needed.
Kato does not offer a "24" exactly" curve. They do offer a 610mm curve. 24" is exactly 609.6mm, which is not 610mm. This is because 1 inch = EXACTLY 25.4 milimeters so Metric system measurements can be easily converted to USCS (American) collection measurements.
Scroll down to "Curve Track". 7 different curves are available from 430mm to 790mm in EXACTLY 60mm increments. Approximate USCS measurements are also listed secondarily in parenthesis. About the distance between tracks- 60mm is approximately 2.3622...". Which is not 2 3/8", or expressed as a decimal 2.375".
Kato's Unitrak is 100% metric-based. It's right there on Kato's website.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 9, 2024 11:32:41 GMT -8
Nice to see the US system of measure "named" properly.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by carolinanorthern on Oct 10, 2024 6:13:32 GMT -8
If you ever have any doubt that Kato track is metric, just turn it over. The measurements in metric is moulded into every piece.
Don
|
|
|
|
Post by NCC42768 on Oct 11, 2024 22:38:16 GMT -8
And I write the radius in black sharpie underneath every piece of curved track, because it's often hard to read the molded numbers and I don't like to struggle to figure out if I've got a piece of 24" or 26" in my hand.  |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 12, 2024 6:05:40 GMT -8
Asking of people who have had the experience:
How many times can you assemble and disassemble Unitrack and still have reliable electrical connections?
I have intent to set some up on the floor for temporary test purposes. Repeatedly. And it would be swell if the connections worked. Reliably.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by prr 4467 on Oct 12, 2024 8:34:03 GMT -8
Ed-
MANY. Kato Unitrack can be separated and re-attached many times. They typically give you a little plastic doo-hickey that enables you to remove the Kato rail joiners. IF any ever go bad, they are very easily replaced. Most likely they get bent when I tear up a section of track that was glued down with Liquid Nails. If needed you can actually pinch the metal part of the rail joiner. They are infinitely better than Atlas rail joiners.
I've had a primarily Unitrack, and now back to 100% ALL Unitrack, Kato HO layout in operation for about 18 years.
When younger, and house under construction etc. I often operated trains on Kato Unitrack on the floor, with no issues, other than you have to vacuum the area often. You will see some track dirt and carbon--not ideal to have Kato Unitrack on a light-colored carpet.
I'm not sure that I like Kato #6 turnouts as for me there was voltage drop across them, which caused loco stalling between them and on them, until I removed one turnout of a pair. Then operation was much more reliable.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 12, 2024 11:10:34 GMT -8
Thanks.
I'm expecting to put a loop on the floor for speed matching. Someday. All my trackage is "point-to-point".
I even bought one of those speedometers, to help out. Still in the box.
Generally, most everything matches quite well, anyway. I usually run Tsunami and Loksound separately (if you have way too many locomotives, it's pretty easy to arrange). I recently put Loksound into an Atlas SD24 and a BLI RSD, and they matched PERFECTLY, out of the box. Very nice.
Anyway, the loop can't live on the floor, so......
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Oct 14, 2024 6:28:48 GMT -8
Guys do those T-track layouts with the Kato Unitrack and seem to be okay, they must get taken apart dozens of times depending how active the members are.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Oct 14, 2024 9:16:30 GMT -8
The unitrack system is one of more robust for connections / disconnection. Definitely more robust than the EZ track product (which is still really good). EZ track tends to wear out the rail joiners faster.
Remember space is extremely limited in Japan. A large portion of modelers over there will setup track in their living room floor, run trains, then tear it all down again. Worst case you loosen up a unijoiner that can be easily replaced.
I haven't seen any damage to my n scale ones, and they get assembled quite a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by wjstix on Oct 14, 2024 13:03:17 GMT -8
"Kato does not offer a "24" exactly" curve. They do offer a 610mm curve. 24" is exactly 609.6mm, which is not 610mm."
Or they do offer a 24" curve, and rounded off the 609.6 millimeters to 610. The difference of.4mm = 1/64th". The curve difference of 2-3/8" = 60.325mm and 60mm exactly is an even smaller difference. So we're almost literally splitting hairs!
I'm very familiar with Kato's HO Unitrack, having used it for a couple of decades. Some people avoid it because it's "metric". But all the pieces are labelled in both systems. Once you get used to it, it's very easy to use - and very reliable.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Oct 14, 2024 13:33:33 GMT -8
I have some Kato Unitrack for some test loops and it says right on the package what the US equivalents are. I just looked at one package and it says 28 3/4 radius. The largest radius that would fit on a 4x8 sheet would be: Kato HO 2210 Unitrack R550mm 21-5/8" Radius Curve 22.5-Degree (4) SKU: KAT-2210
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Oct 14, 2024 15:52:30 GMT -8
"Kato does not offer a "24" exactly" curve. They do offer a 610mm curve. 24" is exactly 609.6mm, which is not 610mm." Or they do offer a 24" curve, and rounded off the 609.6 millimeters to 610. The difference of.4mm = 1/64th". The curve difference of 2-3/8" = 60.325mm and 60mm exactly is an even smaller difference. So we're almost literally splitting hairs! I'm very familiar with Kato's HO Unitrack, having used it for a couple of decades. Some people avoid it because it's "metric". But all the pieces are labelled in both systems. Once you get used to it, it's very easy to use - and very reliable.
Sure.. a Japanese company is making their products in USCS measurements. Because 'murica. Even though their website says otherwise.
Why wouldn't it be metric?
Many Americans still think in terms of American exceptionalalism, that the world revolves around them. But in reality a lot of Americans are just stupid and can't or won't understand the metric system (Most can't even find Ukraine or Iran on a map)
National Review: "Americans successfully defeated Communism and Nazism and the metric system."
It's not hard to find Americans saying metric is a communist plot.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 14, 2024 16:43:08 GMT -8
It's not hard to find Americans saying metric is a communist plot. Nope, it's a French plot. Still waiting for metric time, Ed |
|
|
|
Post by prr 4467 on Oct 15, 2024 8:00:07 GMT -8
I work in engineering. TWICE since 1970 Pennsylvania DOT has attempted to go all metric, first time after Hurricane Agnes circa 1973 and second time in the 1990's. Going all metric means that every single dimension on a right-of-way plan must legally be in dual units english and metric. Also, NO property owner in the state of Pennsylvania wants to see their areas expressed in terms of hectares. They want to see ACRES. In both instances, private property owners sued PennDOT and after investing lots of money in changing over to metric, they reverted to English system. Then they got smarter and said "we don't want to discriminate against any contractor that wants to use metric units, so we'll make all our standard drawings in dual units". That was good for many years, but now they've tacitly acknowledged, at least in heavy highway and bridge construction, NOBODY is actually working in metric system at all. They have reverted to full on English dimension standard drawings.
Also, one other major problem in America with adoption of metric system is that we have over 400 years of property deeds in English units, and rods, perches, chains, etc. but ultimately in feet. NO government entity is willing to allocate state or federal money to re-write 400 years of recorded property deeds from English to Metric. Even if you did it would take a lot of staff and many many years to do it. Then legally every single property would need to be re-surveyed, as well, which government cannot pay for.
So, like many things in model railroading as well as school (they live in the ideal world where pie in the sky ideas are golden), it's easy to say we need to do something, change to metric units or whatever, but practically speaking impossible to actually DO because the practical implications make it too difficult or too expensive.
In Pennsylvania, we aren't even allowed to use the term "guard rail" that some other states still use, because it actually guards you from nothing but is supposed to guide you back to where you are supposed to be. If you hit it your vehicle is still damaged. PennDOT was sued many years ago, lost millions and millions of dollars, and now if you are in any meeting with PennDOT officials and use the term "guard rail" instead of "guide rail" they will yell at you and tell you that you are not allowed to use that term, due to the legal settlement. The lawyers have ruined...
|
|
|
|
Post by Baikal on Oct 15, 2024 10:09:27 GMT -8
I work in engineering. TWICE since 1970 Pennsylvania DOT has attempted to go all metric, first time after Hurricane Agnes circa 1973 and second time in the 1990's. Going all metric means that every single dimension on a right-of-way plan must legally be in dual units english and metric. Also, NO property owner in the state of Pennsylvania wants to see their areas expressed in terms of hectares. They want to see ACRES. In both instances, private property owners sued PennDOT and after investing lots of money in changing over to metric, they reverted to English system. Then they got smarter and said "we don't want to discriminate against any contractor that wants to use metric units, so we'll make all our standard drawings in dual units". That was good for many years, but now they've tacitly acknowledged, at least in heavy highway and bridge construction, NOBODY is actually working in metric system at all. They have reverted to full on English dimension standard drawings. Also, one other major problem in America with adoption of metric system is that we have over 400 years of property deeds in English units, and rods, perches, chains, etc. but ultimately in feet. NO government entity is willing to allocate state or federal money to re-write 400 years of recorded property deeds from English to Metric. Even if you did it would take a lot of staff and many many years to do it. Then legally every single property would need to be re-surveyed, as well, which government cannot pay for. So, like many things in model railroading as well as school (they live in the ideal world where pie in the sky ideas are golden), it's easy to say we need to do something, change to metric units or whatever, but practically speaking impossible to actually DO because the practical implications make it too difficult or too expensive. In Pennsylvania, we aren't even allowed to use the term "guard rail" that some other states still use, because it actually guards you from nothing but is supposed to guide you back to where you are supposed to be. If you hit it your vehicle is still damaged. PennDOT was sued many years ago, lost millions and millions of dollars, and now if you are in any meeting with PennDOT officials and use the term "guard rail" instead of "guide rail" they will yell at you and tell you that you are not allowed to use that term, due to the legal settlement. The lawyers have ruined...
I agree. Changing to metric is beyond the ability of the average American. It literally can't happen, even if people wanted it. It's too late. No real need anyway since calculators are built-in to smartphones, making conversions easy for most men. The rest of the world will someday have to bend to our will, lol. While I worked for Calif Dept of Transportation they instituted a metrification program (E 90s?) It went nowhere except some drawings and a few highway signs. Quietly disappeared although there's probably some staff in a corner on the 9th floor of a nondescript building still producing memos. Changing railroad measurements would have been expensive and dangerous in the short term.
Interstate 19 between Tucson and Mexico is signed with distances in km because.
Just look who uses metric- Russia, China, North Korea... Real Americans use cubits & chains.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 15, 2024 11:20:47 GMT -8
Metrication went in the toilet around here (SF Bay Area) with the liter gas pumps--about 1979. No one would use them. Well, I guess if you were desperate. I remember one station that did it (a Standard, as I recall)--PLENTY of time to sweep off the apron and polish up the windows.
Then they changed back.
Only thing since then has been the NEC "recently" started introducing metric dimensions. Drumroll, please!
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by prr 4467 on Oct 15, 2024 12:57:20 GMT -8
Well since out country is full of Spanish speaking peoples, legal or otherwise, making highway signs in dual languages isn't that big of a deal, and it is happening elsewhere. Doesn't mean the sign can't be measured, built and paid for in square feet.
One day we may get to the point where we say...remember when Americans spoke English?
Just like my traffic engineering professor said "So many people run stop signals, a hundred years from now they will ask if anybody remembers when red meant stop and green meant go" because it will have flipped.
|
|
|
|
Post by wjstix on Oct 16, 2024 8:35:56 GMT -8
Baikal - I never said Kato used "USCS" measurements, someone else brought that in. Inches and Feet aren't American per se, they were developed and used for centuries in Europe before the US even existed. Japan uses a mix of metric, feet/inches, and traditional Japanese measuring systems.
Even before WW2, Japan was making products for the American market. If you buy a Japanese car in America, the speedometer doesn't just have KPH. Similarly, the Kato website lists dimensions in both inches and metric. I'm very familiar with Kato and it's website, having used their products for many decades. I don't see anything where they say "We are a Japanese company, so only use metric measurements". They use both.
Yes it could just be a wacky coincidence that their middle/base radius curve just happens to be 24" - long referred to as "conventional" radius in HO scale in North America, and still used a minimum radius for some company's products (like Walthers passenger cars with body mounted couplers). Or it could be they chose it recognizing that America could be a big market for them, so set up a system appealing to both countries.
If nothing else, please stop referring to me as some kind of know-nothing "Merica First" yahoo. I have no problem with the metric system, I grew up with grandparents where were immigrants from Europe, and studied European history (esp. British history) in University. I've even been to Europe twice. The only point I was making is that I've heard people say they won't try Kato Unitrack because it's too confusing because it's "metric". It's not - it's all labelled both in inches and mm. Middle radius is 24", three sizes larger and three smaller, each 2-3/8" part. That's what it is says in the Kato website and on their brochures, catalogs, and packaging. It also has metric measurements if you're more familiar with those.
|
|
|
|
Post by prr 4467 on Oct 16, 2024 9:11:47 GMT -8
I used the Kato HO Unitrack 18 years ago to build my current layout because at the time it offered some advantages to me:
1. NO cutting of flex track and then having to deal with potentially uneven track joints and/or radii that were not precise (which can result in kinks that negatively affect
operation)
2. With the exact dimensions labeled on the bottom, it was very easy to layout the track plan in cadd to make sure everything fit. There was no guesswork (see #1).
3. For me, since I have ballasted HO track in the past, and I hate doing it, and the end result imo sucked, Kato track looks very good right out of the box and eliminated those
concerns.
4. Even though it is basically using all sectional track, the wider variety of available Kato track curves make it much easier to add transition curves into the track plan. It was easy to use one piece of larger radius track at the beginning of any curve. Good enough for model railroad transition curve in lieu of actual spiral curve.
So I made the tradeoff (visible track section joints) and used the Kato Unitrack.
|
|
