Model Railway Forum

Hi Everyone

I recently purchased a pack of code 75 / 100 transition pieces and a code 75 asymmetric turnout which seemed like a good idea as 1 side would allow a slightly longer siding than the others depending on what was being stabled in that particular siding.

The details for wiring on the back of the pack show wiring for dcc but it just gives basic details for wiring on a layout like mine which is standard dc only.

I set up a few pieces of code 75 flexible track at the toe end and off the 3 branches but instantly ran into issues when trying to rest a loco over it. The loco used for the testing was a Bachmann 56XX 0-6-2 tank loco which was serviced sometime prior to my purchase of it.

The loco was started at the toe end, ran upto the 3 way but only went 1/2 the distance over it and would not go any further on all 3 branches. I then tried fitting isolating track connectors on the relative rails where there was direct connection to an opposite powered rail as it is only available as electrofrog turnout ( why peco never made an insulfrog version in code 75 & code 100 I'll never know as it would have been far more easier to fit in place and begin running over it virtually immediately ).

I tried wiring up isolation switches to enable power through where the plastic connectors were fitted, however, despite this the loco would still not run over the 3 way from the switch rails to the relative siding irrespective of which way the switch rails were set. The loco would run once in the sidings after being manually moved by me to the siding ( lifted and placed on the track, not pushed ), it would run in the sidings but no matter what I tried it would still only run 1/2 way over the turnout at which point there would be a brief arc, the loco would stop and would not fully run through it.

I noticed that 1 of the rails to which the switch rails are connected was quite often the source of the arcing but since then this short rail section has gone awol ( possibly from heat retention and melted the plastic sleepers ) and consequently until I find the rail, it is now unusable.

Not sure if I will get another as a replacement for it but its the thing of do I want to waste another £50+ to get another or try to merge 2 medium or long radius turnouts ( 1 left & 1 right ) in order to create 1 of these unique pieces of track.

Any help or advice given will be greatly appreciated and welcome and my thanks are also offered in advance for any replies given.

Spilt from another post to prevent derailing the post. (excuse pun)

If you have the space for the two points, I'd recommend you do that in the first instance.

If you don't have space then I think you are back to the staggered 3 way point. If you find the missing piece, please can you post a picture of both sides of the point, and the point in situ. It would be helpful if you can indicate where your electrical feeds are.

Someone will likely be able to explain the issues you are seeing.

Regards,

Steve D.

This set of guides may help: https://www.dccconceptsforum.com/post/w ... ut-9830623

You don't say what switch/motor you're using but hopefully one of the guides will match enough to help.

Not sure if this will help? It may be on IanS's link - I did not scroll down the whole way to the end.
I have very recently changed the point motors from Peco solenoid to Cobalt Ip's on my two Peco Code 75 asymmetrical 3-way points (electrofrog). I had problems with a loco stopping on the frogs, and after some re-routing of the wires it was sorted. Both of my point motors faced the same way, reading the DCC Concepts blurb, it would appear the normal installation is to have the motors facing one another - if that makes sense. If you can do it without soldering, have you tried changing the power polarity on the point motor?
I assume you are using two point motors and changing frog polarity? If so remember that the frog wire from motor one (at the single track end of the point) goes to the frog furthest from the point motor, and the frog wires from the frogs nearest the single track end of the point are twisted together and attached to point motors no.2.
I'm sure you are aware of this - so not trying to teach you to suck eggs

Hi Everyone

Here are the requested pictures of the asymmetric turnout I purchased, I would like to state for the record at this point that it was brand new when I purchased it and the gap in the rail is entirely my doing and purely accidental with quite possibly no way to fix it. I have not been able to find the missing piece of rail at this time

The piece of copperclad board was supposed to act like a link piece between the 3 respective rails as a way of ensuring that power would still flow even in the event of the switch rails requiring cleaning and based on practice I have seen used on other layouts including Tony Wright's Little Bytham which is a superb layout to see even if only on a dvd. But back to the turnout, I figured that by linking the 3 respective rails on each side ( seperated by a gap to prevent any shorting of power ), that the test loco mentioned in the opening post of this new thread ( thank you Stese ) would pass over the turnout andinto any of the sidngs.

The mess of solder on the rail heads in the 1st picture shows where I had thought of attaching he switches I intended to use for isolation so that all 3 sidings would not be live at the same time. I also was not sure if the middle track would have required double isolation connectors. I found this to be a major puzzle as I was able to wire up switches to a medium radius turnout with 2 exit tracks and only the frog rails isolated but this 3 way is a nightmare to workout, although I have no doubt that it would be more of a nightmare had I been working in dcc ( thankfully not the case, standard dc only for me ). In reference to the wiring instructions on the back of the pack, would it be of any help if I attach a picture of that aswell showing the details for dc layouts ? ( I will add it if requested ).





With my mention in this post of linking the respective running rails together to pass power if the switch rails get dirty,, this is often my 1st action with new turnouts to ensure reliable running can continue with a minimum of fuss and where tracks are linked to allow stock to crossover, both rails and in some cases single rails are isolated to prevent controller / power interference and this has proved to be very reliable.

In the picture showing the underside of the turnout, there should 2 long wires which I removed and used on the running side to link what appeared to be continuing rails together and assist with power flow which was futile so as a result I was definitely in uncharted territory with this track piece.

My wording might seem a bit lame but I cannot think of the best way to describe it given that it is 03:11 as I am typing this post.

Anyway, enough rabbling from me for this post and I hope my details help in describing the issues I had with it and my apologies for the lack of technical terminology given the lateness of this post being written.

Hi Again

I have no idea why the 2nd image is showing as it is bit it's still accessible via post image whatever that is used for, it's srange because in my initial preview before I posted, both images were shown with no problem but now it's gone bonkers, complete mystery to me.

Mod... Image URL corrected and it now shows ok

You appear to have solder on top of the rails which isn’t good.

Linking the three rails either side is common practice with these points. I have done it with my two 3-ways, but used fuse wire rather than copper board - no need to remove any sleepers - you just remove the two shorter linking wires that Peco install and install your own. It looks from your pictures that you have removed the frog wires (the long wires) - these should be connected to your point motor frog switch.
The photo shows the 3-way with the conversion done. As you can see from the picture, you can do this improvement to any Peco point.

IMG_1217 by Barry Clayton, on Flickr

Hi bulliedboy

Many thanks for your reply and pictures, I thought I had gone a cropper by doing the rail link wires on the 3 way. I often remove some sleepers as I am using a 40w soldering iron with a straight tip ( not been able to find a pointed tip for it and using any lower wattage iron results in many applications of the iron but with the 40 watt iron, I try to minimise contact with track pieces being worked on so as not to cause the issue as with my 3 way.

Generally I find it easier working with insulfrog turnouts as electrofrog can often be a pain in the rear end to workout. The solder on the rail heads was the result of it literally going everywhere at the wrong time.

Csn I ask please, in reference to your picture of the 3 way, what is the best way to wire it up so thst a loco will traverse it on a dc only layout and could I also ask, where would I need to install isolating connectors to prevent all 3 track being live at the same time.

Many thanks once again for all advice given for this nightmare track piece.

P.S. I have written to peco to ask if they have ever considered making insulfrog and electrofrog versions of the 3 way for code 100 modellers, hopefully I will get a reply from them about it.