[markoles]

Ward from the Golddawg Railroad in New Jersey paid us a visit during the open house event two Sundays ago. He went to all 9 of the open houses in the area, took pictures, and posted them on his webpage.
Ward's Pictures of the RR Museum of PA Garden RR Open house
I was surprised to see how many of the railroads are using R1 curves (the 4' diameter curves that come with starter sets). So it got me to thinking, I wonder how many on MLS are using tight curves, too.

The follow up question to the initial poll is "Why do you use tight curves?" Is it space? Money? Both?
Where do you use the tight curves/switches?

I'm just curious, I guess.

For me, the tightest I have on the line are the 8' diameter curves. I am using these in my storage yard because:
1. I already had them
2. I have space limitations in the storage yard.

 

[East Broad Top]

Space limitations kept me to 5' radius (10' diameter) on my one reverse loop. I would love to have gone wider, but it would have eaten up too much of the yard.

Later,

K

 

[aceinspp]

The only reason I ended up with some 8ft is that I did not think at the time I would need anything larger. As the new additions where added I than choose 10ft. Eventually I may be able to increase the diameter of my curves . Later RJD

 

[DKRickman]

I had to respond ">10'" beause the only railroad I have access to at the moment is 12" to the foot.

 

[Ward H]

When started I knew I wanted to run long passenger cars so my "not so local" train store, Nicholas Smith Trains suggested I stay with 10' dia. As I gained experance and expanded by putting in an upper level loop, I knew I would be running shorter equipment on that level so I went with 8' dia. May have a 6.5' thrown in here and there.
When I redid my trackbed in the spring on the mainline, I have 10'dia or greater. Now I run my Blue Comet heavyweights a lot and I am glad I went with 10' and larger curves.

My buddy went with the smaller dia curves and was able to fit in a lot more track in the same size space I have. For the trains he runs, short equpment pulling one or two cars, it works really well.

 

[vsmith]

R1, and proudly anachronistic, the last of the mighty tighties...

 

[Greg Elmassian]

10' because I read for years and determined that 8' was the absolute minimum for what I would run. I figured 10' would make things run better. It did.

Regards, Greg

 

[eatrains]

R1, mostly due to space. I've recently added a few R3s where I can.

 

[Dan Pierce]

I did not respond as inside I have 4 foot diameter and outdoors I have 8 foot diameter.

It is difficult to set up a poll for all variations.

PS, I do use R1 switches for the freight sidings, R3 for passing sidings outdoors.

 

[lurch]

Mine is a logging line so I really have not had too much trouble with 8ft min. Does slow some of my engines due to it is also on a grade. My Climax engine walks around it like it is nothing at all!

 

[Warbonnet]

My tightest curve is 12' Radius. It is ok for what I run. Jake

 

[jebouck]

My tightest curves are 15' diameter up to around 19' for the largest.
jb

 

[Trains]

4 foot radius on old layout, 10 radius on new layout.

 

[Bret W Tesson]

I started with an indoor ceiling layout using 8 ft diameter curves which worked pretty well. My outdoor layout also started with 8 ft diameter which I eventually replaced with minimum 10 ft. The USA streamliners and heavyweights like the bigger curves. I recently installed some 20 ft curves on a new section of layout and what a difference. The longer cars "look" much more realistic going around curves and are much less likely to derail. For my next loop I'm going to start each curve with a 20 ft section and then transition to a 15ft piece and finally 10 ft piece(s). I've read that "easing" a train into curves works much better than going straight to the planned minimum radius. It also doesn't take up as much space as a 20 ft diameter curve.

 

[work4fil]

I am not that smart, I went for four foot diameter right off the bat, then found out it was too small. I then bought eight foot diameter, but am thinking 10 has to be my next minimum.

 

[Greg Elmassian]

Mark, if you are still monitoring this thread, you should share the results with Lewis, he seems to believe that he needs to make locos for 4' diameter curves still. The poll is not huge, but interesting results, pretty much 3 to 1 on "large" curves...

Regards, Greg

 

[Dennis Paulson]

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 11/09/2008 10:01 PM
Mark, if you are still monitoring this thread, you should share the results with Lewis, he seems to believe that he needs to make locos for 4' diameter curves still. The poll is not huge, but interesting results, pretty much 3 to 1 on "large" curves...

Regards, Greg


Yes by all means , with 52 people in the poll , its obvious that this reflects the large scale hobby needs for larger locomotives

 

[Semper Vaporo]

Making an engine that runs on small radius curves does not preclude running that engine on large radius curves... but making an engine that only runs on large radius curves certainly excludes SALES to those that have small radius curves.

 

[6323]

Using 8 foot diameter curves. Fits the equipment I currently have.
Not sure if I'll go larger equipment, other than MAYBE an SD70MAC.
I MIGHT also be able to go up to a 9 foot diameter curve, but I'd be pushing my clearance limits.
And anything larger would require going completely around the house!
Not sure the folks would appreciate that! Neighborhoods kids might though, if they saw train(s) running.
My 2 cents worth. If that!

 

[Greg Elmassian]

Yep Dennis, it's a small sample... no doubt. But the view by some is that it's completely the other way around... so maybe this would "spur" someone to investigate more deeply, and get some really good data.

Regards, Greg