Standard Turnout vs. High Speed Turnout

The Fleischmann standard turnouts are designed according to NEM standards. The gap between frog and closure rail is quite large. European wheels run on their flanges through this gap. The flange height of these wheels is up to 0.05'' compared to RP25 with 0.025''.

RP25 wheels can drop into this gap. The angle between straight and diverging track is 18°, the radius 25.5''.

Than there is the high speed turnout. It has a movable frog that closes the gap between closure rail and frog. Angle and radius a with the standard turnout.

I have used both on a switching layout with RP25 wheels. At slow speed the standard turnout let the cars stagger but not derail. The high speed turnout work good even at higher speeds.

You should test the standard turnout with RP25 wheels and see if you can live with the staggering and if you get derailments at higher speeds.
Regards, Volker

Disappointed

I did quite a bit of searching this evening and discovered this discussion,
https://www.anyrail.com/forum_en/index.php?topic=476.0

I'm really disappointed, as when I inspected these turnouts at a train show, they looked to be very well constructed,...up to German standards.

I have a considerable collection of these, including lots of variety of types. I guess I will have to investigated methods to raise that base area in the frog region to keep small flanged wheels from dropping in.

Inlays are possible

The problem was realized by Roco years ago, another European manufacturer of track and turnouts as well as models.

The offered etched metal inlays to make their turnouts RP25 compatible.
https://www.ebay.at/itm/Roco-Spur-H0-98019-Atzbogen-RP25-Herzstuckeinsatze-fur-10-Weichen-NEU-Line-/352248759467?hash=item5203a984ab

These Roco parts show that it can be done. They wouldn't fit Fleischmann turnouts because of different geometries.

I know of only two European track systems that are RP25 code 110 compatible: Peco Streamline code 75, 83, and 100; and Tillig Elite. On all others the wheels fall into the gap. RP25 code 88 I don't know.

The different European and American standards lead to this problem.
Regards, Volker

Etched Metal Inlays

In this modern computer age I wonder how difficult it would be to develop some of those for the Fleischmann profi-track turnouts?

Who exactly owns Fleischmann now? Wonder if I might contact them and ask?

Inlays

So we have 2 candidate materials suggested thus far to use in shimming up the height of those 'canyons' between the rails preceding the frog points,.....styrene and metal:

1) Metal,...I think would present too many arcing and shorting problems, particularly with DCC operation

2) Styrene,...perhaps too soft to resist excess wear by those sometimes too-sharp wheel flanges

3) Alternatives?

And the Peco code 83 is

Don't Compromise

This sounds like another penny-wise, pound-foolish compromise on track of the type that Joe regularly cautions against. It would be better to sell off these items on eBay to European modelers, and acquire or build new turnouts that are inherently compatible with North American wheel standards. Turnouts are a leading cause of derailments and frustration in the hobby and simply something you ought to "get right" in the first place. Any of the "fixes" you've mentioned sound time-consuming (do you want to spend your hobby time doing this?), hard to get exactly right, and prone to new problems over time.

Good Point

If I could get a decent price for them, and then reinvest in Pecos, that sounds like good advice. Otherwise it would be an expensive proposition for me.

I also have some concerns about shipping items to foreign countries as I have heard nighmares about problems with recipients claiming they never receive product, then seller loses all of is money and product. Certain not a pleasing scenario.

Gaps and photo

...I copied this posting that was submitted on another 'Peco' subject thread so as to keep this primarily  Fleischmann material in this one singular subject thread dealing with the Fleischmann subject

...a few other postings from

...a few other postings from that other subject thread..

Choosing Peco's

This past Sunday I did an inventory of my turnout inventory. As it turns out it appears as thought I have plenty of Peco turnouts to build my new pike with,....maybe supplemented with a few nice Roco and Atlas customline.
 

So I will likely sell off these nice Fleischmann ones, rather than try to modify them.

In most of my reading and research it appears as though the depth of the flangeways in turnouts is NOT a big controlling factor of derailments. It is more of a question of the widths (excessive) of the flangeways that causes problems. And these wide flangeways would be even more problematic with those thin scale wheels that I have NO intention of utilizing

Update

Selling off Fleischmanns, or trading

I've decided to sell off the extensive inventory of Fleischmann turnouts I have due to the large flangeways , and the tight turn radi of their turnouts....just doesn't fit with most modern HO in USA. Sad as it is nicely made, and quite easy to set up on a temporary basis, (or even permanent one with double back tape mounting to subroadbed board)
 

I had thought I might be able to make use of a few of their double-slips, etc, but the radi were too tight.

Trade for Peco or Roco?