dcc help

"Ian Pugh" wrote

Use whichever you prefer, both types are DCC compatible, although some people suggest that you may need to rewire 'Electrofrog' points when used with DCC but I've not found that to be the case.

It depends upon your skill and ability to be able to adapt N-scale locos to accept DCC decoders. If you're using British outline and Farish locos be prepared to do some serious modifications to loco chassis to isolate the motor brush gear and accomodate the decoders, otherwise you should have no problem using DCC.

John.

John.

The choice between electrofrog and insulfrog is a matter of two factors:

- can you cope with the slightly more complex wiring required of powered frogs or do you just want to bang down insulfrogs.

- do you run only bogie Diesel locos at high speed or do you run 0-6-0 steam and Diesel shunters? If you run rigid framed locos then you will need electrofrogs as they will never operate satisfactorily at scale speeds over dead frogs.

Regards, Greg.P.

Ian Pugh wrote:

In message , Greg Procter writes

They do on my garden railway.

You run N gauge in the garden? This I've gotta see!!! =8^)

Regards, Greg.P.

Its really a case of doing your layout track wiring properly. Wire it assuming its DC control and "live-frog" turnouts and you don't go wrong. If the layout is wired without any insulators its possible to get short circuits from turnout crossings (frogs) where fat wheels touch the wrong rail. If the layout had been wired the way I suggest, then that cannot happen.

Steam outline and the 08 have these problems, and though there are solutions, its worth reseaching before committing too much money. The Farish diesel bogie types are simpler to fit decoders inside.

There isn't a decoder space problem, if anyone says there is, they've not been looking properly for small decoders. However, in many the owner may have to carve material away from chassis blocks or inside die-cast bodies. For some people this is easy, for others they find such work terrifying.

- Nigel

On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:02:31 -0000, "John Turner" said in :

No, I haven't either. You need insulated joiners on the frog rails, of course, but in my experience an electrofrog in good condition will not even need separate power to the frog rails, the in-built contacts work just fine. When they get a bit old and skanky the contacts need cleaning sometimes, and if they get bent they are the very devil to reset.

If shorting was a problem I think I'd know by now. We have a lot of points bought for between 1/3 and 1/2 price on eBay, some fairly well-used, and the only significant problem we have is with new Hornby ones with insulated frogs! Peco electrofrogs seem fine.

To answer the OP, I find the electrofrogs work better with short-wheelbase engines. Tender engines with loads of pickups don't care at all (so I use insulfrogs for my express points on the main line because I think metal joiners are more stable). My N2 has a bit of difficulty with one point, which I think is down to one blade being set very slightly low, and it gets caught every time on one crossing, because the dead spots *exactly* match the wheel spacings!

I am coming to the conclusion that getting the trackwork properly aligned in the vertical plane may well make more difference than electro versus insul frog. But what do I know? I'm a newbie :-)

Guy

Phil: My answer is primarily from my experience (OO), but the same questions should be considered in any gauge.

1/ WHEELS - standard -TREAD WIDTH - are you using old coarse standard wheels which could bridge across the gap of a (peco) insulfrog and cause a short circuit? (Airfix, in early MTC days recommended varnish on the frog rails to minimise this) The effect of a short on a dcc circuit/track is more noticeable than on a conventional dc section, because, if the controller trips, it will stop ALL traffic, and, possibly your point control (if you use the track as its bus - a separate bus is better, for this and other reasons)

(BY comparison to OO, aren't all N gauge wheels coarse?? or just old GF?

(An option here, is to place insulating fishplates beyond the frog - but then you might as well use insulfrog, because you are relying on the contact of the point switch blade to the running rail for power)

2/ WHEELS - BACK TO BACK Do you use metal or plastic wheels for your rolling stock? Is it only loco wheels that conduct on your trains?

Earlier OO Peco Electrofrog points connected the 2 switch rails together - and to the common (electrically live) frog - therefore a rail of opposite polarity is placed alongside the running rail, but not in intended contact (the switch rail on the other side touching to also pick up power)

(Insulating fishplates required beyond the frog*)

Any metal wheels (loco or rolling stock) passing through that gap might bridge the 2, depending on back-to back tolerances, and cause a short circuit here.

LATER electrofog production allows you to easily isolate the moving ends of the switch rails from the frog, to avoid this problem, but then you MUST switch the frog polarity independantly.

Personally, I would opt for Fleischmann points and motors rather than Peco. - except where I am now uising slow-motion point motors - which can also switch the frog integrally. (I think the Peco point motor to be extremely crude and inefficient - from the dark ages)

*the insulating fishplates do not need to be /immediately/ beyond the frog, but could be say 10cm away to help prevent running onto a point set the wrong way!

In message , Greg Procter writes

No, I run OO 0-6-0 steam and diesel shunters at scale speeds over dead frogs.

Whatever turns you on! But don't you get fed-up with cleaning out the gungey green mess from the underside of the locos?

Cheers, Steve

So do I, but all my future turnout purchases will be live frog. The original poster was asking about N gauge, where slow running 0-6-0ts are more in the imagination than reality.

Regards, Greg.P.

In message , Steve W writes

Oh very droll :-)