Help with designing your track work
The Sligo Rover
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:32 pm
Location: Chandlers Ford, Hampshire.



Post by The Sligo Rover » Fri Apr 17, 2020 11:38 pm

Good evening all, I seem to remember reading something in the past on here about steering clear of curved points as the can be troublesome. Can you please enlighten me with any thoughts or experiences, thank you.
I am hoping to use Peco code 100 electro frog curved points.

User avatar
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:07 pm
Location: 9C but now near to 9D



Post by dtb » Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:45 am

I had one on the 'up' main but caused problems with some steam loco's so I removed it. Could never understand why when it was lined up correctly

Though I still have one going into the siding but no issues with this with all entry / exits lined up correctly. Thanks for jogging my memory as this is possibly the last insulfrog points on my layout that need changing before ballasting, something i need to check.

User avatar
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 8:37 pm
Location: York



Post by LC&DR » Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:48 am

The gap at the crossing of a curved point tends to be wider than that at a 'normal' point. The older Hornby ones being particularly bad in this respect. The wheel flange is already at angle as the train crosses it in a facing direction and there is greater risk of it striking the crossing nose or passing the wrong side. Finer flanges may indeed be more at risk of this, especially as check rail clearances will be a compromise, slacker, to allow older wheel standards to pass.

Personally I tend to avoid them.
LC&DR says South for Sunshine

User avatar
Posts: 2531
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 5:51 pm



Post by Walkingthedog » Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:54 am

I had some on my OO layout on the main line and never had any problems, but avoid the Hornby version.
Nurse, the screens!

User avatar
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:33 am
Location: Dereham, Norfolk, UK



Post by RAF96 » Sat Apr 18, 2020 10:48 am

I had a Hornby pair (LH and RH) on an old layout. One of them (can’t remember which) was a persistent derailer but only in one direction from only ever from one leg. Never did suss it out, so when the layout was replaced they went to the bottom of the spares box and there they have stayed.

User avatar
Posts: 964
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 6:30 pm
Location: Basingstoke, Hants



Post by bulleidboy » Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:13 am

I have no problems with Peco curved points - I use Code 75.
Tomorrow will be a good day. - Capt.Sir Tom Moore

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1337
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:49 pm
Location: SE Kent



Post by Brian » Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:24 pm

Peco Streamline curved points in code 100 or 75 are fine as they are to a large radius. They are 60" and 30" inch radius (1524mm and 762mm).
Hornby and Peco Setrack are somewhat a different animal, as they are much tighter radius and are radius 2 (438mm) in both directions. Hence the frequently reported running/derailment problems occurring with these as they are exceptionally tight curves.
Image << Click the Icon to go to my website

Hound Dog
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:46 pm
Location: Ayrshire



Post by Hound Dog » Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:03 pm

I have several Peco curved set track points on my Montgreenan layout as due to space constraints I needed the tighter radius to fulfil my track plan....... most of the time they are fine and any problems I have tend to be with my Class 40 diesel locos, which have a 1-CO-CO-1 bogie arrangement and that is a lot to get around a tight curve, never mind thru points...... doesn’t derail all the time and I keep a close eye of wheel spacing, however I think there is a modification that can be done to the lead wheel set ( I am sure there is a technical name for them), as I feel they are the main source of problems....... strangely enough my Peak diesels don’t seem to suffer to the same degree.

Anyway, larger radius is always best if you have the space available.

cheshire lines
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:40 pm



Post by cheshire lines » Sat Apr 18, 2020 6:15 pm

I've got a crossover made from two Peco settrack curved points on Lostock Junction and haven't noticed any particular problems with derailments.
I also have another crossovers made from settrack ST240 or ST241 points and they are more prone to derailments. If I had more space available I would definitely use larger radius points.

The same is true of the curves on my layout. The two mainline tracks are 2nd and 3rd radius, which most of my locos, including 8Fs code with OK.
The branch line is 1st radius and really only suitable for smaller locos (eg. Ivatt Class 2 2-6-2T for the single coach push-pull passenger and Ivatt Class 2 2-6-0 or Fowler 3F tender or tank locos for freight). In some ways that is prototypical, as branch lines often had axle weight restrictions.

Carl L
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 6:05 pm



Post by Carl L » Sun Apr 19, 2020 8:05 pm

A question I wish I'd asked before installing a Peco set-track curved point in a shed yard area due to a lack of space. I note Brian's comments.

Bachmann A2, K3 and crab will simply not run through the point, all derail. I can only get a class 20 to negotiate it. I wish I'd never installed it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests