Kato Track Help

[GameTime]

Hi All,

 

I’m new to the hobby and recently purchased my first Kato starter M1 set. I’m looking for some help to convert the attached picture layout into Kato track/layout.

Is anyone able to to please help me identify which track type/numbers are in the picture so i can recreate it?

Thank you

 

 

 

[Wolf]

Heya,

Image you posted I was not able to absolutely 1:1 redo with Kato track. Assuming the distance numbers are inch, this should come pretty close tho (and uses many parts you can find in the Tracksets)

I hope it helps and suits your need.



 

[GameTime]

Thank you so much, you are amazing. This is exactly what I am after.

[Wolf]

1 minute ago, GameTime said:

Thank you so much, you are amazing. This is exactly what I am after.

You welcome. If you want, we always are happy if ppl introduce themself on our intruduction thread. We would love to have you around for longer than just one track plan ^^

[cteno4]

Yes please do introduce yourself! 
 

you can also reduce or increase the 90 degree corner pieces if needed.

 

Jeff

[Wolf]

4 minutes ago, cteno4 said:

you can also reduce or increase the 90 degree corner pieces if needed.

 

This. My plan just takes into account what one likely has from the "M1 Master Set", and one additional "Outer Oval Set". Just figured its the route ppl go when new.

Otherwise you could also opt for the double track angled curves wich look awsome XD

[GameTime]

I have read that Kato turnout 20-202 & 20-203 are far superior in quality compared to to Kato 20-220 & 20-221.

 

Does anyone have experience with this? Should i try and avoid Kato 20-220 & 20-221 ?

 

Thanks

[Wolf]

I use both and no issue so far, but my layout construction experiences are pretty small. I know about the issue that people tend to say the smaller ones are not good, forgot why tho if I am honest.

[cteno4]

#4 points can be a bit more problematic with derailments as their blades come in at a sharper angle for the tighter radius. There is a method to tune them by sharpening the blades and creating some notches for the blades to fit into the side rails and this seems to fix the issue for those that have it. Some never see issues with picking points. I think it’s a combination of the track layout and trains being run. On our early club layout we used a lot of #4 points as they give more flexible track planning, but we had some issues in a few places mainly using tighter radius curves right near #4 points and some equipment would pick the #4 points a bit, but not horrible. Later setups we just went to all #6 as for shows we wanted to keep things running cleanly and didn’t have the time to get things perfect for temporary setups.
 

We did find the #4 were a bit more fragile than the #6 mechanisms as we had more #4 break than #6 in the days we did temp setups and were constantly tearing things apart and storing in boxes. But the numbers were pretty low so probably not a statistical level to say it’s real.

 

some have found using a cap discharge circuit to fire the points got rid of their issues as the Kato controllers can sometimes provide too big a surge and the blades can sort of bounce back and not rest completely up against the side rails.

 

there’s been lots of discussion on this over the years. Here’s a couple of topics folks have piped in on

https://jnsforum.com/community/topic/9918-sharpening-kato-turnout-blades/

https://jnsforum.com/community/topic/16620-fixing-points-that-cause-derailments/

https://jnsforum.com/community/topic/1182-kato-point-derail-advice/

 

 

in the end it’s sort of one of those how does it work for you things. Might get a couple of #4 to play with your equipment and test some of your layout ideas with them.

 

personally I tend to design for #6 and if needed will use #4 and then if a problem do some tuning.

 

jeff

 

jeff

[brill27mcb]

The Kato #6 turnout design is actually far simplified (which can mean inferior) from the earlier-made #4 design. I remember reading posts by Charlie Vlk, who was a professional in the model railway industry and worked for a while at Kato USA, where he said they wanted a lower price point and a wider radius turnout for the North American market and this was the origin of the #6 design.

 

John Sing wrote an often-quoted tutorial on how to improve the #4 turnout to reduce the possibilities of a derailment, and this article has led people to believe that the #4 design is problematic and has tainted people's opinion of it. However, you must also consider that modelers in North America were running NMRA-profile wheelsets on Japanese Kato track (built to Japanese and metric standards), so that in itself is part of the reported problems, too. I have run 16-car shinkansens and other Japanese-made model trains through #4 turnouts with few issues.

 

Also remember that the #6 turnouts (except for the double crossover) do not permit the standard Kato 33mm spacing between parallel track centers. The end result of all of this has resulted in something of a hodge-podge situation for Kato. Finally, with any turnouts, it is not a good design to have the "main line" (the most-used direction) use the curved diverging track on a turnout. Straight is to be preferred, and of course coming in off the curved track in the merging direction on a turnout does not have the derailment risk that running toward the tapered moving points in the diverging direction does.

 

Rich K.

[James-SNMB]

On 5/14/2023 at 5:42 PM, brill27mcb said:

 

Also remember that the #6 turnouts (except for the double crossover) do not permit the standard Kato 33mm spacing between parallel track centers. 

 

You can actually achieve a 33mm track spacing with the #6 turnouts, but you have to use a tighter radius curve. If I recall, it needs a 20-121 15 degree 315 mm curve.

 

So that's quite a compromise compared to the 718mm radius of the #6 turnout, and may look really tight (depending on what you like to run).

 

Pairing the #6 with a 20-150 15 degree 718 mm curve piece, you get a 49.5 mm track spacing, which is 1.5x the standard 33mm spacing. You can use pieces from the 20-091 and 20-092 short track assortments to make plans work where you have curves you have to fit and maintain (or adjust) track spacing.

 

(For reference, the #4 turnout is 481mm radius and comes with a 15 degree 481 mm curve to give you the 33 mm standard spacing)

 

@GameTime, if you haven't already done so, I'd recommend downloading some track planning software to help you play around and see what works for you. I use Anyrail, which is easy to use and has a free version (limited to 50 pieces of track in a file) with a full unitrack library to let you play around until your heart's content. It also keeps a Bill of Materials list so you can easily see what pieces and quantities you need for your plan. SCARM also has a similar free version. And there are several other software options that others could recommend.

Edited May 25, 2023 by James-SNMB