Time Vs Money

Peco Electrofrog turnouts are very well built and reliable.

Spring-loaded throwbar so you need only your finger to throw the points (spring holds blades in place).

Frog is powered from the stock rails through contacts with the point blades.

While this is pretty reliable with minimal occasional cleaning of contact points (and use NeoLube, not paint, to stain the space between stock rail and points), you can make contact totally foolproof by adding short "jumpers" from stock to point rails above the hinges:

Just tin the short sections of solid wire and then solder them into the spaces provided under the turnouts:

[That's a C83 Insulfrog, BTW, but Electrofrog works same way]

Just remember that you need plastic joiners or an iso cut on the two inner rails coming out of the frog.

Peco turnouts are expensive ($25-$35 each) but easy to use, install and are reliable (Electrofrogs much better than Insulfrogs).
You also do NOT need a switch machine or anything to hold the points (like a Caboose Ground Throw), or separate wiring, slideswitch or juicer to power the frog.

Handlaying produces better turnouts, but takes time and requires BluePoints ($90 per 10-pack) to throw and power frogs.

Hope this helps.

Dear Dave, Assuming

Dear Dave,

Assuming standard levels of installation care and attention, the word "bulletproof" comes to mind...
(seriously, if you were based anywhere other than Nth America, this would not even be a question... )

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Frog is powered from the stock rails through contacts

Hi MC and Prof. Thanks for the input. Without benefit of a tortoise or a blue point controller can you tell me how they internally reverse the frog polarity on code 100 electrofrog turnouts? That would seem to be the part that could cause trouble? ........DaveB

Electrofrog =/= work same way (as an Insulfrog)

Dear Dave, MC,

Um, I fear that MC may not be 100% correct about the "electro-frogs work the same way (as Insulfrogs)",
and this could be the root of your confusion Dave.

In direct answer to the question, PECO turnouts "internally switch the frog polarity" by simple means of which switchrail is making contact with it's adjacent stock rail, (IE the way the turnout is thrown automatically "switches the frog polarity"). 

Firstly, we all get that Electrofrogs are all-metal all the way thru the frog, with both switchrails + frog + both closure-rails + both diverging-rails effectively "electrical bonded together" into one assembly,

and that Insulfrogs use plastic frogs, with the straight/curved switchrails and associated straight/curved-route closure-rails + diverging-rails not "electrically bonded together", yes?

OK, with that in mind, let's look closely at a PECO Electro-frog:

NOTE the little black plastic "insulating" tabs 4 sleepers to the LEFT of the frog point/tip!!!

If we flip the turnout over, we'll see that "ex factory" these built-in "closure rail <> frog insulating gaps" are jumpered with short little wires.

(check the 2nd sleeper in from the Right of the pic)

Now, with the links in place as shown (ex factory), the power path is

stockrail> switchrail> closure rail> frog 
(and back down the other closure/switchrail, as well as to both Diverging rails)

The benefit is that there is no immediate need to "power the frog" from an Aux switch/Juicer of any description,
the "switchrail in contact" will pass power automatically, and the mechanical over-centre spring will "snap" the switchrail hard in contact with the stockrail, thus ensuring good contact under most conditions

NOTE! This PECO factory-stock config also creates what is known as a DCC "un-friendly" turnout, as the open switchrail is of the opposite polarity to its adjacent stockrail. This means an excessively-narrow-in-gauge wheelset could glance between the stock and switchrails, causing a momentary short.

Also, adding MC-style jumpers directly to such a factory-stock turnout (IE with those factory-jumpers in position), will immediately create a hard-wired short.
(as all switchrails/closure rails/frog are electrically continuous, and the frog is common to both rails/routes)

IE stockrail> MC-jumper> closure rail> frog> closure rail> MC-jumper>  stockrail

If you need to, read thru that again, I'll wait here...

SO, what to do?

- If you elect to leave the PECO jumpers in position as they are ex-factory,
Do Not install MC-style jumpers,
and ensure that all wheelsets are perfectly "at-gauge".

- If however, you wish to modify the PECO Electrofrog turnouts to be "DCC Friendly" a la Alan Gartner's "wiring for DCC" website definition (where the pics above have been greatfully lifted from!),

then you will need to snip those jumpers away "open-circuit". This will allow the plastic insulating "tabs" to do their job, and isolate the switchrail/closure-rail assemblies from each other, _and_ from the frog.

You can then either rely on the built-in over-centre spring to "snap" the switchrails up against their associated stockrails to make contact and feed the switch/closure-rail assemblies
(with the "not thrown" switch/closure-rail assembly becoming electrically dead),

or add MC-style jumpers between the stockrails and associated switch/closure rails.
(It's hard to see, but the jumpers have been snipped-thru to isolate them, with what appears to be a Xuron nipper or similar)
 

Oh, and _now_ you will need to use the PECO-provided frog wire, and some form of external micro-switch/juicer system, to feed power to the frog.

For a slightly more-lucid breakdown, check the "Wiring for DCC" website directly.
http://www.wiringfordcc.com/switches_peco.htm 

In _all_ cases, (whether left "ex factory", or modified "DCC friendly"),
MC is correct that Electrofrog turnouts will need to have insulated joiners (or rail-gaps) on the _heel_ end of the diverging rails from the frog.

I hope this helps...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

PS you can add MC-style jumpers directly to Insulfrog (plastic frog) turnouts,
as the straight and curved switchrail/closure-rail/diverging-rail assemblies are not bonded together via the common metal frog.

In such cases, certainly yes, they very effectively augment the stockrail/switchrail contact with a hardwired path.

Im using Peco code 83 

Im using Peco code 83  Insulfrog turnouts. Love them, robust construction and  can use a index finger, switch machine, to switch the points. Only reason I'm using insulfrog, as  after ready reading through http://www.wiringfordcc.com

As they are DCC, ready as is

My Bad

Prof's right about the short if hooking up the jumpers to Electrofrogs.

Jumpers are for the Insulfrogs (or Electrofrogs with frog isolated /"snipped" and then serviced by a juicer of some sort).

Personally I don't think you need to go through that trouble, as the blade-to-stock contact area is relatively large and reliable, especially as you're using these for a staging yard and presumably not going to paint the track.

Just run a cotton swab with mineral spirits or iso alcohol around the area once in awhile to clean away any dirt / dust.

I'm using Peco Insulfrogs

Because I am cheap and like simplicity, I am using all Peco Code 100 Insulfrogs.  They are all hand-thrown, which is both easier to do and more prototypical in my opinion, and are used as-is from the factory. 

Randy

I hope this helps...

Yeah, I couldn't figure out how they were reversing the polarity thru the ties somehow so I'm glad to find out they aren't :> )    I guess the best thing to do is buy one and look at it in person. If the points are spread enough to not short out and the power feed contacts are reliable they should be fine for staging..DaveB

Peco Vote - AAA

Hi Fave
For what its worth - I'm using mainly Peco Code 83 Electrofrogs and am sublimely happy.

Purchase with confidence.....

Rob
Cornhill & Atherton

Yeah! What he said...

Yup. Me too. Exactly. Except I'll be putting in pushrods for mine from the fascia.

Spooling Erur

That's "Dave" by the way not "Fave".
F is next to D on the keyboard and you are not my "Fave"

Rob

That's "Dave" by the way not "Fave".

    No Crows for you..:> )

!!

...splutter!

Tore point off the throwbar - help?

So, I also use Peco electro-frogs, code-75 in HO, and love them.  But recently I added a Tortoise to a 3-way, and by mistake overpowered it, and the force tore one of the point rails up and out of the throwbar.

Any suggestions to fix this?

I've already tried reinserting the point rail into the throwbar (easy enough) but need to hold it there.  Various glues and expoxy attempts have all failed (this needs to be a pretty strong joint).

Short of replacing the throwbar with a copper-coated one, and then soldering the points to that... any other suggestions?

Peco turnouts

As one of the other responders has said above, I'm cheap, too! AND lazy, to boot. I really like the idea of a turnout having the points sprung so they snap over positively and make good contact with the stock rails. No need for switch machines; just a flick of the finger. I have been using MicroEngineering  turnouts, and they operate the same way, but do not have the attached frog wire. (shucks!) They do, however, have the frog isolated and also have the short jumpers already attached. To me, this is (almost!) worth the price of the turnout, which is still somewhat less than the Pecos. Which is a good thing.  I've been attempting to build FastTracks turnouts, and I have some that actually work rather well, but, as I said, I tend to be lazy, and have to keep urging myself to make sure they are short-free (or as much as anything is on a model rr), but the ME ones are really nice, and I think I'll stick with them as much as possible on my layout. I'm also using frog juicers from Tam Valley, and I can't say enough nice things about them. What a great idea! (Wish I'd thought of it...)

                      fred1940

*C.I.G., Cumberland Transfer RR 

*(Chief In Garage; otherwise, not so much...)

@ Steven

Steven, have you considered the plio bond glue that fast tracks sells with it's turn outs. Not sure if it would work for your application or not. It also might ruin the turn out if it does not work. On a positive note we had a similar thing happen on the club layout and I soldered a replacement throw bar into a turn out. the first time I soldered it to things I did not want it soldered to and had to remove the pc board tie and make a second one and then solder it. The turn out is in the yard and gets thrown all the time and has been working fine ever since, more than a year. I am thinking that if I can do that on my second attempt you should be able to as well, just be careful with the flux and you should not have solder go where you don't want it. It was actually very easy to do. My helper had never done it either and all we did was clean up the channel the throw bar moved in so it worked smoother and installed a new one, easy as pie.

I'm using electrofrog code 75

No problem so far, but I don't have them for that long so far.

Anyway, I have them operated by servos with frog polarity controlled by aux decoders (ESU Switch Pilot Servo + Extension), also with their own aux. switch PL-13, and manually (frog polarity change by point contact with stock rail), and any of the alternatives work just fine.

I just made a small mod in my most recent units, kind of "just in case" for the long run. I soldered two feeders to the point rail, just in case the hinge becomes loose with time and the contact is lost, but that's just a precaution. Here a couple of pictures:

The feeders are the two wires more on the left side, here in more detail:

As for the rest, I believe they are one of the best turnouts in the market. Even the apparently fragile code 75 units have a robust and forgiving construction.

Hope it helps.

Rgds,

Antonio

Code 75/83/100

 Just a care point regarding use of Peco code 75 (Dave's original question was about code 100 btw).

The Cornhill & Atherton chainsaw used Code 75 and I had derailing issues with some locos (Mantua Mallet as an example).
All locos run just fine through Peco Code 83 and I think this is because Code 75 turnouts don't adhere to NMRA standards. You may be lucky, but I wasn't.......

Rob Clark
Cornhill & Atherton RR

Code 75 vs NMRA

Well, thanks for pointing that, I didn't know there were issues with code 75 and NMRA. I've looked into it and it seems that you're not the only one with this problem. However since I'm on this side of the "pond", I'm using mostly NEM stuff and I hadn't any issues so far, even with old rolling stock, although I had to trim a bit those "pizza cutters" wheelsets.

Anyway, I'm happy with PECO stuff and if the code 75 is sturdy, I guess code 100 will be even more.

That's my 2 c (€€€, I mean)

Cheers,

Antonio

Not "VS", just a different set of specs...

Dear Antonio, Rob, et al,

Please note that it is not an "issue" between the PECO turnouts and NMRA,
rather it should be noted that all PECO items (_except_ the Code 83 "US geometry" range)

are (unashamedly/deliberately/consciously) built to British Railway Modellling Standards Bureau (BRMSB) standards (Which is not altogether unsurprising, PECO being a UK-based company, and a stalwart "go to" option of the UK/European model railway scene for literally decades!).

There is a degree of tolerance cross-over between the BRMSB and NMRA RP25 specifications,
but as with any complex mechanical system (IE a model railway layout set of track installation and equipment),

the key to reliable running has to be _optimising_ the specific combination and interaction of the components in-play...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Peco = OK

Prof........
Bad choice of words on my part.

There was no intention to imply any kind of fault with Peco Code 75 track - just pointing out that it isn't to "US spec". Spiking detail is also different to Code 83.  My experiences of Peco products has always been good when matched with appropriate rolling stock standards.

Rob Clark
Cornhill & Atherton RR