ONLINE
STORE
"ASK THE BACH MAN"
FORUM
PARTS, SERVICE,
& INFORMATION
CATALOGS AND
BROCHURES

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 16, 2018, 11:25:40 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Check out the photo gallery link above or >click here< to see photos of recently announced products!
+  Bachmann Message Board
|-+  Discussion Boards
| |-+  Large
| | |-+  Is it time for Bachmann to introduce new track items?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Is it time for Bachmann to introduce new track items?  (Read 9834 times)
the Bach-man
Administrator


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2010, 10:55:01 PM »

Dear All,
Our track is fine for indoor use, contrary to Kevin's opinion which is, I think, a little rude. It makes it possible to keep the price of starter sets lower, which will hopefully bring more folks into the hobby.  As for outdoor track, unless we can make it at considerably less expense, or significantly better, why would we develop a line of track to mirror Aristo's?
Have fun!
the Bach-man
Logged
Sleeping Bear

A genuine ALCOholic


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: November 18, 2010, 01:44:56 AM »

  to get back to one of the original questions.... could a rail bender be used to straighten the curves a bit as to make a wider radius? I mean if it can be used to make curves out of straight then why wouldn't it work the other way?....Later all         S.B.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2010, 12:34:36 PM by Sleeping Bear » Logged

"If at first you don't succeed....Get a bigger hammer"
Kevin Strong


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 18, 2010, 03:22:15 AM »

Maybe describing Bachmann's track as "lousy" without proper context for the criteria for making that assessment wasn't the clearest way to put forth an argument. My apologies for any ruffled feathers. Bachmann's track is certainly capable of running trains within the confines of the product line's capabilities. But when you consider what you get for what you pay, compared to what you get with other track products for the same money, it completely pales by comparison. In my opinion; dollar for dollar, function for function, Bachmann's track is, well, how about we call it "inferior in terms of overall value." That's the point I was trying to make. Both lines of track are very similar in price, so there's virtually no advantage there. If you're going to spend $6 - $7/foot for track, buy the stuff that already gives you what you want, instead of waiting--and waiting--for Bachmann to do something they've stated--and demonstrated--they're not going to do (i.e., add to their line of track). Instead, do what they suggest you do, and buy the other guys' stuff.

Later,

K

(edit for clarity)
« Last Edit: November 18, 2010, 12:30:47 PM by Kevin Strong » Logged

mudhen


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 18, 2010, 08:32:47 AM »

Well said by The Bach man, couldn't have said it any better.
Logged
Joe Satnik


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 18, 2010, 03:55:27 PM »

Dear S.B. and All,

Just a little math for "unbending" G-curves.   Rails first, ties on another post:

The inner rail would stay the same length, the outer rail would be cut down.  

Bachmann large scale curve track imitates LGB R1 sectional curves.  

(12 sections/circle = 30 degrees each section, Radius = 600mm to center-line of track.)

Assuming you want to still be able to turn 90 degrees with "unbent" curve track,

you would have to add 4 sections per circle each step larger,  which would give 16, 20, 24 etc. sections per circle, or

4, 5, 6 etc. sections per 90 degree corner.

Sections per circle, Radius (mm):

12s, 600 mm  (LGB R1 = 600 mm Radius)
                      (LGB R2 = 780 mm R)
16s, 792 mm

20s, 984 mm

24s, 1176 mm
                        (LGB R3 = 1195 mm R) (Bachmann LS Spectrum locos and rolling stock (1:20.3) can all run on R3.)
28s, 1368 mm

32s, 1560 mm

36s, 1752 mm

40s, 1944 mm

44s, 2136 mm
                          (LGB R5 = 2320 mm R)
48s, 2328 mm

Double the radius to get the diameter.

Divide mm by 25.4 to get inches.

Aristo-Craft uses circle diameters measured in feet to describe their sectional curves.

http://www.aristocraft.com/catalog/index.html  (Click ahead to page 11.)

Hope this helps.  

Sincerely,

Joe Satnik

Edit: added "Rails first, ties on another post:" , "(1:20.3)" 


  
« Last Edit: November 18, 2010, 04:03:29 PM by Joe Satnik » Logged

If your loco is too heavy to lift, you'd better be able to ride in, on or behind it.
Sleeping Bear

A genuine ALCOholic


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: November 18, 2010, 07:56:49 PM »

 Thanks for the info there Joe, kinda thought that it would work. later all....S.B.
Logged

"If at first you don't succeed....Get a bigger hammer"
Joe Satnik


View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 19, 2010, 12:54:28 PM »

Dear S.B.,

You'd have to use a little finesse unbending them to not put a kink in them.

The plastic "webbing" between the ties under the outer rail could be cut, trimmed and re-glued to the proper distance to accommodate the shorter outer rail. 

The inner rail webbing might have to be cut in spots to allow for the shallower bend. 

The (between) track section clips will probably not work as well with the webbing cut. 

You could cut and trim the webbing every other tie, alternating between inner and outer rail webs. 

w w w etc. outer rail
 w w w etc, inner rail

This would give an accordion like effect to the ties/webbing.  The bend of the rails would be the only thing holding the radius of the curve, then.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,

Joe Satnik
Logged

If your loco is too heavy to lift, you'd better be able to ride in, on or behind it.
Mr. T.


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2010, 12:04:53 AM »

Well...  to deal with my particular trackage problems, the experimentation begins.

On the E-Place, I got high bid of a dozen sections (37") of used Gargraves Flextrack. They'll become the sacrificial lambs for this endeavor. If things work out, I'll be looking for some more of this stuff.

The first problem seems to be home construction of mating pins; pulling the pin from one end of the transitioning  Bachmann section, and replacing it with an adaptor pin to Gargraves.

Looks to be a matter of attaching round rod (to fit the Gargraves) to a blade (to fit the Bachmann). I suspect the best way to fabricate it is "hard soldering", even tho I DO INDEED hate torch work, especially with the tiny flame required to join items this small!  Angry

As for the Bachmann track stash that I already have...  rethinking this whole thing, it seems to me that the most practical plan for using it is to set up a fairly elaborate yard, and, assuming the Gargraves track grafting is successfully accomplished; completely banish Bachmann track from the main line.


BTW, in case anybody's interested...  still in the planning and practicality determining stages as yet, but I'm thinking along the lines of roughly modeling the Chicago & Northwestern's last narrow gauge operation in southwestern Wisconsin, locally known as "The Dinky", or less commonly "The Ridge Runner". It was about a 17 mile long short line railroad that carried passengers, milk & cheese, livestock, and assorted freight down the Green River valley between Fennimore (where it met the standard guage C&NW) and Woodman, Wisconsin (on the Wisconsin River), with two intermediate small town stops (Werley and Anderson's Mill). The Dinky was a line so small and simple that the ENTIRE RAILROAD had only ten turnouts!  Shocked

That's the basis of the road...   but then, Modeler's License kicks in!  Grin

The Dinky was a single track road; I wanna make it a double track.

The Dinky, as far as I can tell, never had any block signals, mainly because only one train at a time ever operated on it at a given time! I'm toying with the idea of lower quadrant semaphores.

The Dinky went belly up and was abandoned in January, 1926; Henry Ford's Model T and better roads made her unnecessary after about 50 years.

I want to take The Dinky 15 - 20 years beyond that, still operating into the 1940s.


While trying to sort out trackage issues...  I'm working over a basket case White Pass 4-6-0 Big Hauler, trying to shorten it and make it into a 2-6-0, Class D11 Mogul! The razor saw will be descending on that boiler very soon now!

If I get hold of another basket case Big Hauler loco, even MORE drastic surgery may be undertaken; conversion to a 4-4-0!  Shocked


Mr. T.

Logged

Rule #1 - There's no such thing as owning too many sections of straight track!

Owner & Operator of the Mahon Loomis Memorial Radio Monitoring Station & Irish Setter Retirement Home

Afficionado of Women's Flat Track Roller Derby, Kilts,  Sidecar Motorcycles, and other eclectic effluvia
Sleeping Bear

A genuine ALCOholic


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2010, 12:44:33 AM »

  MR.T , sounds like you got a pretty good start at it, you know you'll have to post pictures from time to time once construction begins. As for the round peg in the flat hole......an anvil, hammer and maybe a little heat followed by the touch of a file or small grinding wheel would get you close. From there I'd solder the blade side in with a butane pocket torch or a quick touch with a propane torch, but that's me. I don't care much for the little soldering either. Going to rewire an RS-3 soon....not looking forward to it but at the same time I can't wait.......later all....   S.B.      PS .......I use an old piece of full scale track for an anvil.....Dad got it when they replaced the tracks in our back yard about 20 years ago      again....Later all   S.B.
Logged

"If at first you don't succeed....Get a bigger hammer"
on30gn15


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2011, 06:38:06 AM »

There are enough other companies marketing track and few enough consumer dollars to spread around, that I'd think the case would be that Bachmann would be better off spending their money on producing locos and rolling stock instead of redundant production of track.
Logged

When all esle fials, go run trains
Screw the Rivets, I'm building for Atmosphere!
later, Forrest
jsmvmd

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 12, 2011, 11:02:27 AM »

Dear Guys,

Thank you for the quick reply !  However, sorry, this is not it.  Joe had a nice description about removing Bachmann plastic rail connectors and mating with Aristo or USA Rail.

I will get to this sometime, when the work clears, but was wondering if Joe could look it up for me ?  My search engine thinking is kaput.   Had the same trouble in grad school.  Not too sure how I would have gotten through it without compassionate reference librarians, in the old days when the literature searches were cumbersome.  Anyone remember those days in the 1970's. 

To paraphrase the line from an old Sesame Street song, "Now I just stay out of the way... J" in reference to the letter "J."   The number "10" was a "good'un," too !   Smiley

Best Wishes,

Jack
Logged
Joe Satnik


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 12, 2011, 11:34:33 AM »

Dear Jack,

The blades are black metal of some kind. 

I searched using "blade satnik" to find the following: [edits in brackets]

" To remove the blades, turn the Bachmann track over, and look for the bent up tabs cut from the rails near the center tie.  Gently bend the tabs up to match the profile of the rail, then slide the rail away from the blade.  When the rail clears the blade, lift the blade out. 

Save the blade for future use.  (I store mine under the tie, with a piece of black electrical tape wrapped around the tie.)

Slide the rail back and gently bend the rail tabs to hold it in place. 

You will need some other method to hold the tracks together, as the Bachmann plastic clips will not work with the [non-Bachmann, solid rail track piece].  I use 2 rubber bands per joint, though there is probably a more elegant way to do it. " [e.g. black tie-wraps]

Hope this helps. 

Sincerely,

Joe Satnik

 
Logged

If your loco is too heavy to lift, you'd better be able to ride in, on or behind it.
jsmvmd

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 12, 2011, 12:53:23 PM »

Dear Joe,

As always, thank you !

Best Wishes,

Jack
Logged
armorsmith


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 12, 2011, 11:38:43 PM »

Joe, et al,

Yes, Aristo-Craft does refer to their track in feet diameter. However, their track is metric like everyone else's. Here is a link that was posted on the Aristo-Craft forum in response to my question regarding the 'exact' measurements of Aristo track.

http://members.westnet.com.au/susprog/AristoTrack.htm

I am developing a fixture to manufacture my elevated roadbed and was looking for the precise centerline radii for design.  I know this does not really help with back bending B'mann track, but I would hope it to be good information for all.

Bob C.
Logged
doug c

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2011, 07:29:12 PM »

"... calling Bachmann's track "lousy "   In context  re: cost,  and if considered beyond indoors app. ---- Yepper ! 

BUT if you can buy the tunrouts cheap  {$15cdn, L p/n94351 or R p/n94352 }  strip off the turnouts mech's do some weathering  build some support blocking  . . . .  would make excellent gondola loads just like at least one Class 1 does up here for shipping to their regional track upgrade projects, this past summer  !   albeit they are using  gondolas longer than the base 40'  we only have R-T-R access to.    R1 sized turnouts though would fit and look good perspective-wise !     IMHO

doug c

p.s. 90deg crossing p/n 94358  $? forgot to note sorry,   and they also used to have the  A frame bridge p/n96229 $10cdn     
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!