Custom 9V tracks

[coaster]

Why 312? It certainly fits the R = X*16+8 stud requirement, but I don't see it fitting nicely into any particular pattern (though admittedly, I haven't looked that closely at it). I think if I were to do something that wide, it'd probably be 360, which fits the pattern and is an even 9x standard.

I'm not discounting it, just trying to understand it. At worst, I could have some printed for you; you'd just have to sand and finish them yourself.

[Aaron]

360 would probably work. What material would they be printed in? I don't mind sanding and finishing them. ;)

When I have the chance later today, I'm going to measure the space to see if an r360 setup would fit, but an r240 might possibly work if there isn't enough room. You'd probably be able to sell a lot more r240 than r360 anyway.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Aaron

[codefox421]

One question might be, is it possible to metalize ME plastic track (and PF track for that matter) using something more durable than the conducting tape?

Conducting tape is durable if you get the right kind. I was talking to someone at Bricks bt the Bay last weekend who has been running an electrified crossover for about 8 years now, and he hasn't changed out the tape even once. The trick is to find copper tape that has been plated with tin. This is something you could find at a stained glass window supply shop. Copper alone is not durable (and also looks visibly different from the 9V track). Aluminum oxidizes when you run electricity through it, and aluminum oxide is non-conductive. Tin oxidizes to a lesser degree, but tin oxide is both conductive and easier to clean off.

[zephyr1934]

Conducting tape is durable if you get the right kind. I was talking to someone at Bricks bt the Bay last weekend who has been running an electrified crossover for about 8 years now, and he hasn't changed out the tape even once. The trick is to find copper tape that has been plated with tin. This is something you could find at a stained glass window supply shop. Copper alone is not durable (and also looks visibly different from the 9V track). Aluminum oxidizes when you run electricity through it, and aluminum oxide is non-conductive. Tin oxidizes to a lesser degree, but tin oxide is both conductive and easier to clean off.

Good to hear... well... not so good as it now sends me off on experimentation (grin). In all seriousness thanks for the information and if indeed it works that would be a handy piece of track to have in my layout. I'll post back if it works for me (probably in a few months).

[legoman666]

Good to hear... well... not so good as it now sends me off on experimentation (grin). In all seriousness thanks for the information and if indeed it works that would be a handy piece of track to have in my layout. I'll post back if it works for me (probably in a few months).

https://www.tapecase.com/pd/cn/tapes-die-cuts/1034/1000754/3m-1183-tin-plated-copper-foil-conductive-acrylic-adhesive-linered.aspx ? Minimum is 10 rolls. I'd go in for 1 or 2.

[zephyr1934]

Indeed, I ordered a roll of that tape (3M 1183) but I figured I'd wait to see how well it worked for me before going into details, just in case it was a different product that worked so well for the person at Bricks by the Bay. Google around and you should be able to find it elsewhere in smaller quantities. I decided to try the 1/4 inch and got a single roll (18 yards) for about $21 with shipping from http://www.mouser.com/

[legoman666]

Indeed, I ordered a roll of that tape (3M 1183) but I figured I'd wait to see how well it worked for me before going into details, just in case it was a different product that worked so well for the person at Bricks by the Bay. Google around and you should be able to find it elsewhere in smaller quantities. I decided to try the 1/4 inch and got a single roll (18 yards) for about $21 with shipping from http://www.mouser.com/

1/4" is perfect too. I just ordered a roll myself. I've tried stainless steel tape in the past, but it was so rigid that it didn't like bending 90 degrees from the side of the rail to the top. It also came in 1" widths and I had to cut it myself. Copper will be nice and soft.

[CrispyBassist]

Longterm, I very much intend to do the other track geometries, especially the corresponding R120 switches. However, this is a good example of walking before running, so R120 curves first, then if that's successful, I'll do a half length straight (that should go quick), then the switches. Switches will certainly take some time to develop, but it'll be worth it.

I will most likely get a kickstarter going, but I'm going to make sure all my ducks are in a row first. I don't want to suddenly find myself $20k+ short on funds and not able to deliver as promised. When I hit kickstarter, it'll be go-time.

There would probably be a good amount of us (myself included) who are interested in larger radius curves (R120+) even without the metal rails for 9v, and especially larger switches. My 65 stud passenger car looks very wrong going through an R40 switch, as do the rest of the long cars and locomotives. When you start a Kickstarter for the project you could probably offer options for 9v- and PF-compatible track and perhaps make fabrication a bit easier, compared to all 9v. I would certainly be interested.

[JCForsythe]

I just started following this thread. My understanding is that people like yourselves want new track geometries that look like the existing Lego 9v track? Not track that is compatible and all metal like a G scale track?

With that said, does anyone have any old non working 9v and 12v motors? I'd like to buy a couple of each.

[THERIZE]

I just started following this thread. My understanding is that people like yourselves want new track geometries that look like the existing Lego 9v track? Not track that is compatible and all metal like a G scale track?

With that said, does anyone have any old non working 9v and 12v motors? I'd like to buy a couple of each.

for buying motors I think you should go to the bazaar (http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showforum=16).

[coaster]

I just started following this thread. My understanding is that people like yourselves want new track geometries that look like the existing Lego 9v track? Not track that is compatible and all metal like a G scale track?

That's the idea, but really, anything that is compatible with the existing 9V track. However, I've seen the ME metal track, and I can't say I'm a huge fan of it. The extruded aluminum design is nice since extrusion molds are cheap, but all the machining that has to be done afterwards...ugh. I sadly find it unlikely they'll be able to get it to work well and do it cheaply.

I'm quite familiar with the G scale design, and that would work, and in fact I don't want to discount it altogether. For those not familiar, it looks like this:

The issue though is transitioning from existing tracks to whatever new ones we make. Although, that does beg the question:

What if we simply do-away with everything we currently have and implemented a new G-Scale type track design? It could still be made compatible within the Lego stud system (i.e., crossties would still be 2x8 with studs and receptacles on top and bottom) and stand-off height would still be the same. Track segments would still assemble in a similar manner, It just wouldn't connect to existing track pieces, though we could still make it compatible with the 9V contacts. If it meant wider radius curves and switches are readily available, would you guys pull up all your existing straights as well? Thoughts?

[fred67]

^^^ YES, YES, and YES....

If someone could just produce 1x8 cross ties that are compatible with G-Scale track, then we can make large sections of flex track that can have any radius we want, and all the flexibility you could possibly want between straight and curves. The only trick becomes switches and crossings.

I have a LOT invested in 9V track, but to make a system as flexible as other model railroads have had forever? That would be all I need to ditch the vast majority of my 9V and move on to G track in LEGO gauge.

EDIT: AH HA! I found it: "Ken's Flex Track for LEGO Trains." He uses O-Gauge and modifies 2x8 plates and uses rail joiners to make sleepers. Relevant Image.

Edited August 21, 2015 by fred67

[coaster]

Well, typically, the G scale track isn't flexible, at least, not the ones I'm familiar with (I do a bunch with LGB, and that's all rigid). However, from a manufacturability standpoint, it's a piece of cake to make different lengths and radii, so in that sense, it's super flexible. Switches and crosses, I can figure out, shouldn't be a problem. And I hear you about being heavily invested in 9V.

I've got a number of Lionel and LGB tracks lying around at home. I'll pull some stuff out and model something up this weekend if I get a chance.

[JCForsythe]

That's the idea, but really, anything that is compatible with the existing 9V track. However, I've seen the ME metal track, and I can't say I'm a huge fan of it. The extruded aluminum design is nice since extrusion molds are cheap, but all the machining that has to be done afterwards...ugh. I sadly find it unlikely they'll be able to get it to work well and do it cheaply.

I'm quite familiar with the G scale design, and that would work, and in fact I don't want to discount it altogether. For those not familiar, it looks like this:

The issue though is transitioning from existing tracks to whatever new ones we make. Although, that does beg the question:

What if we simply do-away with everything we currently have and implemented a new G-Scale type track design? It could still be made compatible within the Lego stud system (i.e., crossties would still be 2x8 with studs and receptacles on top and bottom) and stand-off height would still be the same. Track segments would still assemble in a similar manner, It just wouldn't connect to existing track pieces, though we could still make it compatible with the 9V contacts. If it meant wider radius curves and switches are readily available, would you guys pull up all your existing straights as well? Thoughts?

Why aluminum? The conductivity is terrible.

Also, why are there no proposals for turnouts based on frog angle instead of radius? The NMRA standards have tons of information on it and with a little math a compromise could be found.

[dr_spock]

You can probably 3D print a transition track piece from LEGO to G gauge to join the two. Local libraries may have 3D printers to use. Mine does and it is cheaper than using Shapeways.

[fred67]

Well, typically, the G scale track isn't flexible, at least, not the ones I'm familiar with (I do a bunch with LGB, and that's all rigid). However, from a manufacturability standpoint, it's a piece of cake to make different lengths and radii, so in that sense, it's super flexible. Switches and crosses, I can figure out, shouldn't be a problem. And I hear you about being heavily invested in 9V.

I've got a number of Lionel and LGB tracks lying around at home. I'll pull some stuff out and model something up this weekend if I get a chance.

OK, and so what's wrong with O-Gauge, then?

[coaster]

Why aluminum? The conductivity is terrible.

Also, why are there no proposals for turnouts based on frog angle instead of radius? The NMRA standards have tons of information on it and with a little math a compromise could be found.

I wasn't going to use aluminum; I was commenting on the ME design. Extrusion tooling, whether it's Al, Brass, or something else, is generally pretty cheap. I'd probably use something like a grade 260 Bronze and then nickel plate it. Not entirely sure, I'd have to look into it a bit.

As for the radii, since we're locked into a defined 8mm grid system, it makes sense to stay within those parameters. The standard curves are R40 (40 studs/320mm), and it's pretty well decided that any additional curves should be R=40+16*N. Also, there's not really a consensus as to what scale Lego actually is, so it's hard to say what a #4 turnout would even be.

You can probably 3D print a transition track piece from LEGO to G gauge to join the two. Local libraries may have 3D printers to use. Mine does and it is cheaper than using Shapeways.

The problem isn't so much the physical connection, rather also getting the electrical connection. Probably could have an adapter of sorts punched out, but I'd have to look at it.

OK, and so what's wrong with O-Gauge, then?

Sorry, not sure what you mean. I have an o-gauge track here too, but it's much the same way: pretty rigid.

[monai]

Please take a look at :

http://www.bigbenbricks.com/track/track.html

unfortunately He doesn't produce them.

regards

[fred67]

Of course they make flex track in both G and O gauge. I just looked it up on several different sites. So you take the rail out and put it in a modified LEGO compatible sleeper... I don't see what the problem is.

I suggest, again, that all someone needs to do is make nice, LEGO compatible sleepers that can hold O or G gauge rail. If you look at the blog link I posted, you can clearly see the results of the O gauge rail used to make LEGO flex track:

[coaster]

Please take a look at :

http://www.bigbenbri...rack/track.html

unfortunately He doesn't produce them.

regards

Well, that's pretty close to what I'm trying to put together right now. Give me a few more days to work out some of the finer details. I don't mind printing some prototype pieces, but production units would be traditionally injection molded.

Of course they make flex track in both G and O gauge. I just looked it up on several different sites. So you take the rail out and put it in a modified LEGO compatible sleeper... I don't see what the problem is.

I suggest, again, that all someone needs to do is make nice, LEGO compatible sleepers that can hold O or G gauge rail. If you look at the blog link I posted, you can clearly see the results of the O gauge rail used to make LEGO flex track:

Honestly, I've never actually seen flex O-gauge or G-gauge track. Smallest flex tracks I was aware of was HO, I just figured the rails were too thick on the bigger ones to be practically flexible enough. But even so, and this may just be a difference of opinion, I've never cared for the flex track designs. I don't like that you have to cut the rails once in position. If you're building a permanent layout, then sure, no problem there, but a lot of us build a layout, tear it down, and build something else. Of course, no reason we couldn't then do rigid and flex options, but like I said earlier, let's walk before running.

Give me 2 or 3 days, and I'll post what I've got in mind, and we can discuss further from there.

[Lego Dino 500]

It's not the smallest flex track. I did a bit of research, and they have it even in TT scale. Anyways, Coaster, if it's possible, what are the odds of you resin casting some O rail compatible Lego track ties, the large radius track, or possibly those turnouts? I'd love to own some of this awesome track, but I lack the capabilities or time to produce it on my own.

[JCForsythe]

Coaster, the price you mentioned of $180 for a half a loop is not totally out of the ball park compared to what LGB, Ross Custom Switches, Gargraves, Piko, etc charge. RCS and Gargraves produce O-Scale track that is tinplate steel that is extruded. LGB is solid brass.

Let's be honest, the track everyone wants isn't for kids, it's for adults with jobs and disposable income.

Thoughts?

[coaster]

It's not the smallest flex track. I did a bit of research, and they have it even in TT scale. Anyways, Coaster, if it's possible, what are the odds of you resin casting some O rail compatible Lego track ties, the large radius track, or possibly those turnouts? I'd love to own some of this awesome track, but I lack the capabilities or time to produce it on my own.

That's the real objective. I need a ton myself, and I'm obviously not alone in that. Short of this turning into a truly insurmountable task, I plan to fully manufacture straights, curves, turnouts, crosses, etc. However, there's quite a bit of work to do between here and there.

Coaster, the price you mentioned of $180 for a half a loop is not totally out of the ball park compared to what LGB, Ross Custom Switches, Gargraves, Piko, etc charge. RCS and Gargraves produce O-Scale track that is tinplate steel that is extruded. LGB is solid brass.

Let's be honest, the track everyone wants isn't for kids, it's for adults with jobs and disposable income.

Thoughts?

I agree; I don't think it's that bad. The problem is, because of the complexity of duplicating the Lego rails (thin-gauge stamping), most of the stamping places that are capable of working with material that thin want progressive tooling, the cost of which is, frankly, soul-crushing. At Lego's volumes, I doubt they'd bat an eye at it, but in our terms, at $180 for a half-loop, we'd have to produce over 8000 curve pieces to break even. Possibly doable for the curves, but I doubt that's realistic for the turnouts. I don't think I'd have much luck pitching $2k for a left-hand switch.

In other news, I drew this:

Base is a single solid piece, end rail connectors lock into the base and are crimped to the rails, holding the assembly together (much like your typical O-gauge track). Tracks are 16 studs long like standard, however, the rails overhang by a 1/2 stud on each end, that way we get the correct crosstie spacing on assembly, like this:

I'll work on curves next, but they take a bit longer to model, so wanted to get these out there first.

Thoughts?

[supertruper1988]

Is that just O Gauge rail?

I would think you could have more luck for production value by making something more like this:

Then produce the clips to join the rails. This way you are just bending rails into different radii for the curves but using readily available rail. The turnouts will be harder but I think instead that those could be purchased for 3D printing and then adding rails that would be cut to fit the turnouts. I know that there would be some concerns to get the track to be powered but with the cost of 9V motors rising then the need for that will be less and less overtime. I am more interested in having big turnouts for my yard and the "real" looking metal rails.

Im sure we could find someone on alibaba or similar to make a batch of a few thousand for a decent price. If people are wanting to have this system interface with the regular LEGO rails, then a base would need to be made and the rails would need to be filed so that they have tabs that are able to touch the tabs from the LEGO rails. This will transfer the power to the rails.

[JCForsythe]

Those renderings are pretty but it looks like you lose Lego compatibility.

I think a compromise of keeping the Lego compatibility which is pretty good at maintaining a tight connection to the next piece of trackage and moving to a solid rail is pretty good. A solid piece of brass for the rail like LGB removes the need for stamping. Also the solid rail is far more durable.

What is the review of the current connecting pieces that ME Models is selling?

I'll repeat myself and say that in order to make Lego compatible track be economically viable compromises need to be made and looking at LGB track and how "prototype" modeling has compromised this is doable.