I have a question on minimume radious on curves. Me being a former HOer know what minimume radius curves to use on the layout. I know the broader the better. But what is it in N scale terms. I usually was using 22 in minimume radious in HO but what would it be in N scale? I wish to run the longer locomotives on my layout. I am talking modern power and rolling stock. SD90MAC's, AC4400CW's plus the auto max and concor regular autoracks and 89 foot flatcars. I have made up my mind i am going to use the Atlas Code 55 #7 turnouts that should be plenty for running these loco's and rolling stock in yards and sidings. Thanks
Minimum Radius on curves??
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
I run SD70's, SD90's, SD40's, etc on my layout, i have 11" curves...the rough, scaled down equilivent of an HO 22...shows how much better N is then HO...we can run an SD90 through an 11, while in HO you can't run an SD90 through 22 with anything behind it!
How much room do you have for your layout? Tell me that, i'll give you some guesses at radai, etc
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
Jack, I would say the minimum radius for modern equipment is 12in,But I would only use this in hidden areas. You could probably go less on industrial spurs, But most models won't operate on less than 9 3/4in radius. Hope this helps you out. :)
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
Jack;
HO 22 inch would approximate to 11-12 inch in N scale. Atlas still produces N sectional track in 9.75" (9 3/4) inch. :?
To reduce HO to N multiply HO by 0.54375 (54.375%).
Generally in N scale, radii less than 12 inches would most likely be found in use for streetcars, switchers (e.g. SW1200's), short freightcars (not longer than 50'), etc. :)
For modern diesels and cars longer that 65' I would suggest a minimum radius of 15-16 inches. :D
Hope this helps. :wink:
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
I addition to what has already been said, you roughly cut dimensions in half going from HO to N, so a 4x8 layout roughly equates to a 2x4, and 22" radius in HO roughly equates to 11" in N-scale.
But it doesn't always work out that neatly. Minimum radius for alot of small-to-medium mass-produced engines in N-scale is 9 3/4", versus 18" in HO scale. And commercial No. 4 switches are appox. 18" radius, whether in N or HO scale. So you have to adjust for those differences when "downscaling" a small layout plan from HO to N.
---jps
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
Right Now i don't have a space for a layout just yet. I am trying to get a look and feel of N scale. That the problem is I have dabbled so much in HO. It is like I am relearning everything all over again with N scale. I knew what i wanted in HO and with N scale I could not tell you a grape from a hole in the Ground.
All I do know is that I want an around the wall layout with pennisulas along the way to give me a longer mainline run. But what mainline radius to run if at all possible. I want my trains to look like they are flowing through the curves. I just don't want them to look like they are curving around and binding on themselves, I guess I am trying to say chasing there tails. I am planing a layout with probably a 30 inch wide shelf in some places and possibaly a 48 inch to go around in the pennisula.
Most of my track is going to to be Atlas code 55 #7 turnouts and Flextrak. Also any advice and jigs can used to keep track straight as as i am laying it with ther flextrack as I wanting to stay away from sectional track if at all possible.
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
I would say go with a radius of 15" and up. My tightest are 12" (3/4?), and I am not even sure I will be running my SD40-2 much. To me it looks horrible on a curve with the overhang, and it pulls the trailing cars couplers way out to the edges. I have a 70', or 73' centerbeam that I might be selling because it looks horrible on the curves. My SD90 will pull any car behind it off unless it is extremely overweight. When I build another layout I am going to try to go for a 20" radius minumum and maybe 16" hidden. hope this helps
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
Jack,if you have room for 22" in HO use it in N scale.Just because your locos and rolling stock will take a smaller raduis curve is no reason to use one.If you can go bigger than 22" do it.
My minimum mainline curve is 22" set with ATLAS HO snap trap to maintain size while doing the roadbed.(always knew that brass track would be useful someday).
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
WOW! Are you sure that you don't have a binding coupler or something on the SD90???!!! I run mine with STOCK WEIGHT M/T boxcars directly behind my SD90 in 11" curves, and everything stays on the track, no problems...and i'm sure the coupler on it is a 1015-1, the stock M/T conversion. Even my SD90, with it's overhang, i would not call it "horrible"...the SD40 (-2) is acceptabe, as is the SD70 and SD90.
Oh well, each to his own, i guess...
avel wrote:
I would say go with a radius of 15" and up. My tightest are 12" (3/4?), and I am not even sure I will be running my SD40-2 much. To me it looks horrible on a curve with the overhang, and it pulls the trailing cars couplers way out to the edges. I have a 70', or 73' centerbeam that I might be selling because it looks horrible on the curves. My SD90 will pull any car behind it off unless it is extremely overweight. When I build another layout I am going to try to go for a 20" radius minumum and maybe 16" hidden. hope this helps
Minimum radius
The minimum radius used depends on any number of things. Most all N-scale equipment can negotiate 9-3/4 radius curves but longer equipment may de-rail, especially when backing or pushing a string of empties into a yard ladder. Personally I use whatever fits comfortably in the situation. I like to keep at 13-3/4 minimum on the mainline, but if 12-1/2 is necessary to fit a passing siding inside the main, I'll use it. Also, special situations can be found to require 9-3/4 radius, such as in a wye leg where there just isn't enough room. In this case operation can be limited to light engines only for turn-around. I have 2 helixes of 13-3/4 radius using Kato track and have not had any derailment problems.
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
siderod wrote:
Staying on the track is only part of the problem. visual appearance can be just as important. Also, you can't compare a 50' boxcar to an 89' autorack.
I personally don't recommend anyone use curves less than 15" with long cars/locomotives, just because they look silly. Also, body mounted couplers don't work very well on tight radius curves.
WOW! Are you sure that you don't have a binding coupler or something on the SD90???!!! I run mine with STOCK WEIGHT M/T boxcars directly behind my SD90 in 11" curves, and everything stays on the track, no problems...and i'm sure the coupler on it
Quote:
I hate to even look at an SD40-2 over a 15" curve. I think I agree with the horrible overhang classification here.
BTW, according to some Frisco documentation I have, on the prototype, an SD40-2 can negotiate a 193' radius curve by it self. If my calculations are correct, that works out to 14.475" radius for the equivilent N-scale curve.
Similarly, two units coupled can negotiate a 230' radius curve (this would be 17.25"), and a unit coupled to a single 50' car can negotiate a 359' radius curve (26.925").
Just for comparison sake, the smallest radius listed in the book I have is 100'. That's for some of the switchers, and since no other information is given, I have to assume that's for a light switcher.
The smallest radius for any road unit in the book was for the GP15-1, and it is listed at 120' radius alone, 170' for two coupled, and 245' coupled to a single car.
Paulis a 1015-1, the stock M/T conversion. Even my SD90, with it's overhang, i would not call it "horrible"...the SD40 (-2) is acceptabe, as is the SD70 and SD90.
Re:Minimum Radius on curves??
Thanks Catt. I will probably use the 22 inch radius curve then. I did not see it that way. Another question if I did it that way though would that take care of the problems people are having with the Kato bethgons and the kato locomotives? I know that it would be simpler to just go with LBF or another make of coalporter to counter this problem but what if I wanted to do this idea though. would it still bind the kato bethgon off the kato loco?
Joined: 2004-03-09