Loco 1:20.3 Track

[llimhoff]

I have a new Loco 1:20.3 and I have purchased 322 track.  Will this work well.

[Dave]

Some more info will help a lot, ie, Brand and type of Loco and also is the track Brass, Stainless Steel, Aluminium or what?  It all helps the members of the forum give you the right information.

       Cheers

             Dave 

[JerryB]

I have a new Loco 1:20.3 and I have purchased 322 track.  Will this work well.

All the "332" specifies is that the rail used is 0.332 inches tall. Any real limitations are in the materials used (aluminum, brass, nickel plated material, steel, stainless steel, etc.), the type of plastic in the ties, and the radius of the curved track.

Code 332 rail height will accommodate operation by all commercially available 1:20.3 locomotives and rolling stock. Scale-wise, it represents a prototype rail height of ~6 3/4 inches in 1:20 scale. That is very heavy rail, mostly found on more modern standard gauge mainlines.

Since 1:20.3 scale equipment is mostly focused on older narrow gauge prototypes, smaller rail (code 250 and smaller for example) would be more appropriate. That is if you are trying to build something that represents a prototype railroad.

To emphasize the point: What is the curve radius of your track? What is the material used in the rails and ties? That is likely where any limitations will be found.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

[llimhoff]

Thanks for the info, I guess you can tell, I'm new at this.  The Loco is a Bachmann
Spectrum 1:20.3 Scale 2-6-0 Mogul Steam Locomotive.  The track is Aristocraft
Aluminum 322, and the curve diameter should be 8'.  Somewhere I read that I should use 322 track???  I have the straight track purchased and looking for the curved track and I will need two turnouts.  The train is for indoors.

[Loco Bill Canelos]

Don't feel too bad about the size difference.  If you paint he sides of the rail a blackish brown color and add ballast it will be hard to tell the size difference!! 

When I started the smaller size was not available, but I would not be willing to do it over just to put in smaller rail!!

Have fun!

[Kevin Strong]

I replied over at MLS, so I won't repeat what I posted there, here. However, you mention here that the track is aluminum, and to be used indoors...

I'm not a huge fan of aluminum for track power. Yes, it can be done--I've done it--but the negatives outweigh the positives. If you haven't bought a whole bunch yet, then I'd consider switching to brass or stainless steel. More expensive, but I think for a track-powered environment, it will prove easier to work with. Aluminum has electrolysis issues with dissimilar metals--particularly copper and brass, so if you're going to use rail clamps (recommended) then you'll need either aluminum or stainless steel rail joiners and clamps.

How are you looking to use the track indoors? Is this going to be an "around the ceiling" kind of display or more of a "typical" indoor model railroad with scenery and all that? If the former, then you'll be fine with sectional code 332 brass track. Around the ceiling, you're not really going to see the rails anyway, so they could be 4" tall for all you care. If it's going to be on a "traditional" indoor model railroad with scenery and all that stuff, then you'll be much better served by the smaller code 250 rail. Outdoors, the code 332 rail often blends in to the plants and scenery, but indoors, it sticks out like a sore thumb.

Later,

K