Could Lionel License The Construction And Sale Of A Full Complement Of Super "O" Track To Another Manufacturer?

Dennis, I would build at least one Super-O layout if the curves and turnouts were available in wider radius.  As you say, the business case would be the challenge, so this seems unlikely.   Perhaps a "crowd-funding" effort might gauge the level of interest.  -Ken

Dennis are you referring to my Super O Manifesto?  Lol...  

The answer is obvious, Lionel "could" license it if they choose.  Also, depending on the age of the track, there may not be a necessity for a license, but I'm not a patent lawyer.

Sure, Lionel could license Super-O to an outside supplier.  But since it would be competing with their existing FasTrack line, I'd be pretty surprised if they did so.

That said, if Super-O became available in the same array of diameters as FasTrack (including switches), I wouldn't hesitate to convert my FasTrack layout to Super-O.  Back in the Seventies, I had a Super-O layout, and I had no problems whatever with it.

An idea worth exploring! But also agree that Lionel has gone all-in on FasTrack as that is the track system that appeals to newbies, youngsters, and that huge part of their customer base entering the hobby by purchasing a starter set for a carpet central or 4x8 plywood set up.

Have really enjoyed that Super O thread.   Other than knowing that it did exist I really don't know much about it.

Why?,  Excluding the 3 rail tinplate track, we already have Gargraves and Ross making great products with a full compliment of radaii, flexibility. The blackened middle rail of these two is much less destructive the the pick up rollers than Super-O was/is

If an extinct track system would ever be re-issued, why not the K-Line Super-Snap?  It looks very similar to Super-O, but unlike Super-O, all O-gauge trains, from tinplate to modern, will run on it--even the switches. We had a pile of Super-O straight track many years ago, and the only thing it was good for was shelf track.  Tinplate trains won't run on Super-O as the rail profile is too low. The tooling for the Super-Snap track must be around somewhere, all it would take is someone willing to produce it. 

John 

Could they do it? Yep! Will they do it? Not at all likely.

Personally, I would love to see Super O resurrected.  However, just imagine the tooling costs for wide-path Super O switches which would be purchased by only a small and ever declining group of niche buyers.

I would like Lionel to consider a better track system like Super O.  Unfortunately, Lionel has determined that those who operate Legacy scale equipment appear willing to  settle for the same Fastrack system that satisfies the low end of the market.

I have also heard that this track system was originally very difficult and labor intensive to manufacture .

And then there is the matter of that "copper" center rail using a material which is anathema to Lionel due to its cost.  

And, as others have pointed out, why would Lionel permit sales of Super O to cut into the fat margins on their lousy but high volume Fastrack system?

I'm in! Although I'd like to also see turnouts using lanterns and equivalent length both routes, so as to be able drop into an expanding layout,realistic siding bumpers,grade crossings  and legacy features such as lcs. And lastly, improved rail to rail contacts.But I  won't hold my breath for this reason. I believe  lionel doesn't solicit it's customers for any product ideas. Period. It's ''here it is boys, take it or leave it''policy is doing back room damage to an otherwise fine institution. I had the opportunity to discuss this issue when at an orlando train show back in 2017. I asked a lionel rep. who appeared to be in his mid 30!s hWhy did you start then stop using a blackened center rail? His response was; we (lionel llc.) thought it was ugly. Ok, so I mentioned that growing up,walking the old Hudson to Mohawk trackage assured me that it would be prototypical to blacken the cr and roadbed out just past the running rails. His response though me back! He replied that he was aware of the coal cinders used as ballast, and that along with the oil drippings left by passing trains the center rail would be harder to detect. Good answer. So I assumed that he would have passed info/idea up through the chain and maybe he did. But somehow all we got folks is orange roadbed fastrack? Well that's certainly prototypical when you have a vat car derail while carrying orange paint? Thank for allowing me my 2cents. Lionel,are you listening?  Be awesome to run a $1000.00+ loco on lionel and not somebody else's track. 

L.I.TRAIN posted:

Why?,  Excluding the 3 rail tinplate track, we already have Gargraves and Ross making great products with a full compliment of radaii, flexibility. The blackened middle rail of these two is much less destructive the the pick up rollers than Super-O was/is

Well, if  I'm building a PW-style, toy train layout (like the one I have now!) you can be sure I'm not going with Gargraves or Ross.

"Form over function."

L.I.TRAIN posted:

 The blackened middle rail of these two is much less destructive the the pick up rollers than Super-O was/is

Super o doesnt damage rollers.

Super O Bob posted:

Dennis are you referring to my Super O Manifesto?  Lol...  

 

Hi Bob,

I thought the points that you made regarding a case for reissuing Super "O" track on the companion thread were very compelling.  Quite frankly, the fortunate people who had a chance to run trains on your beautiful Super "O" layout with wide radius curves would leave with an understanding of why so many people love this track system, and would be excited to run their scale equipment on it.  

For me, the excellent point you made about Lionel selling premium equipment, particularly highly detailed, scale, fully featured  locomotives, without having a companion premium track system, really made sense to me.  (And, I do fully understand why many people would be perfectly happy with Lionel's current offerings if they fully suit their purposes.)

Forum Members,

The above posts are very enjoyable to read, and make many well considered arguments and suggestions. Thanks to each of you!

Ron464nyc posted:

 Be awesome to run a $1000.00+ loco on lionel and not somebody else's track. 

That is my point exactly...

Yesterday it was Addams Family Super O Layout...  now we look to be heading back to ressurection of super o! 

This topic used to come up about once a year.  I have a barn full of super o in storage...  literally hundreds of switches and everything.  But if lionel ever did reissue it, or some NEW scale like track system, i would be all in.. 

Super O Bob posted:

L.I.TRAIN posted:

 The blackened middle rail of these two is much less destructive the the pick up rollers than Super-O was/is

Super o doesnt damage rollers.

Only badly formed rollers from the 50's.  I would love to see it SuperO come back but sadly since my layout is already built it's too late for me.

I would be awesome though, different length straight sections, different radius curves.  Switches that look like Ross or AtlasO and didn't melt when they fail.

One thing that would be a plus, since MTH and AtlasO track is hardly ever in stock, Lionel or who ever could make a killing if they could get it on store shelves.

I would be awesome though, different length straight sections, different radius curves.  Switches that look like Ross or AtlasO and didn't melt when they fail.

One thing that would be a plus, since MTH and AtlasO track is hardly ever in stock, Lionel or who ever could make a killing if they could get it on store shelves.

Exactly... its not like you can even get the alternative...

Ken-Oscale posted:

Dennis, I would build at least one Super-O layout if the curves and turnouts were available in wider radius.  As you say, the business case would be the challenge, so this seems unlikely.   Perhaps a "crowd-funding" effort might gauge the level of interest.  -Ken

Ken,

I didn't mention turnouts because of the likely assumed cost, but that would be phenomenal.  I hadn't thought of crowd funding, which would be a great idea if it is a feasible alternative.  (I did find myself musing about the unlikely possibility that some devoted, but unknown, Lionel enthusiast with the means could do the reissue under license, if necessary, without the same necessity for establishing a business case for the project.  He or she would likely  have to be a big Super "O" fan, and that hasn't happened yet.)

Allan Miller posted:

Could they do it? Yep! Will they do it? Not at all likely.

Given the passage of 50+ years, history makes a compelling argument that you may be correct.  But licensing (if necessary), assuming Lionel would not be competing with its present track systems to a significant degree, may provide an alternative.  I suspect the reissue would provide Lionel with some great, additional promotional material for both their high-end, and, postwar inspired product.

Orange'a gonna respond lionel?

Ron464nyc posted:

Orange'a gonna respond lionel?

Why would they?  It's pretty clear that if they were going to reissue Super O, they would have done it a long time ago.

Rusty

Would love to see “NEW” Super O - wide radius curves / switches / long straights / etc

Does anyone remember seeing the samples of 3 foot straights at York a few years ago ? 

They were done privately not by Lionel - looked awesome 

Plenty of old 027 and 0 gauge track out there but they still keep making more - some people want new track

Me 😎

I hadn't realized the Addams family layout was super O.  It would have been an appealing choice when building my layout right now its all built with Atlas O track. There will be other layouts in the future though.

BlueComet400 could very well be the future of our hobby, and their money is just as green as yours. 

John

Lets hope not...  because the hobby of scratch building a detailed hirail scale layout would be lost.  

What you are missing in this is that you have different customers for o guage product.  Lets make an anology...  consider selling cars...

If you dont provide enough market bandwidth, such as types of vehicles, like minivans, sedans or pickup trucks you have situations where as a company u are forcing your customer to buy something they dont want.  Like trying to sell a farmer a sedan.  Makes sence if you only sell sedans, but that vehicle doesnt fit the farmers lifestyle.  He needs to haul trailers, bulk goods in the vehicle, have off road capability etc, etc.  He simply goes elsewhere to buy his truck.

Offering only a track system that appeals to the carpet layout once a year crowd, doesnt fit the lifestyle of model railroaders with scale layouts that are permanent.

You have to realize the scarcastic tone of what was being said.

Calling any fellow train enthusiast a fool for what he/she chooses to run is flat-out rude and immature. We all have our own individual interests within the hobby. None is better than the other, just different. 

John 

Could it be made today at the same quality of the past and still be affordable? 

I would love to see superO made again but Lionel told me a few years ago that most of the tooling for superO has either been lost or destroyed. If that is true then forget Lionel ever doing it. 

If just certain pcs could be made like 30"straights, wider radius curves and better switches I think that could be a start. 

New tooling is expensive so either a company or a person with very deep pockets need to be involved and in the end how much would it cost to the hobbiest for the track. If too expensive it could kill the whole project. 

With all the negatives I still think it would be a great track system to do again. Let's hope!!!!!!!!!

Dave

romiller49 posted:

Could it be made today at the same quality of the past and still be affordable? 

I wondered that myself...  i would expect the copper in the original track would be very expensive today.  The copper quality i think was really good.

I have tried in the past to get super o made again.  Im not expecting to go there again.  I will let others try that.

I am amused this keeps arising.  Let everyone have their point of view...

I like and dislike Super O track.

Like: nostalgia and it is a decent track system. 

Dislike: buss bar for center rail. A minor issue, but one extra step when assembling the track. Plus accurately getting it placed on the center rail. My bigger issue is the switches, specifically the switch motor housing.  I have an FM Trainmaster that will catch on the housing if the switch is used in a curve. This is remedied by placing a short section of track prior to the offending end of the switch. Unfortunately, this increases the size of the layout, a bit of a problem if you’re trying to keep the layout compact.

Steve

Hi steve...  actually in the super o instructions, they show that straight being needed...  i think they used a #746 in the example...  i will see if i can find that.

On my custom switches, i designed them in CAD, and i placed the motors farther out to clear a postwar GG1 pilot on the adjacent track.  I was using 5-inch track center spacing.

Super O Bob posted:

romiller49 posted:

Could it be made today at the same quality of the past and still be affordable? 

I wondered that myself...  i would expect the copper in the original track would be very expensive today.  The copper quality i think was really good.

The fact the copper in the original track would be very expensive is an interesting point.  It would also be interesting to quantify the inflation in the price of copper, say since 1960.  Using an inflation calculator online, $1.00 of Super "O" track in 1960 would cost $8.53 today.  But, that obviously calculates the general inflation rate.  The inflation rate for copper would be the important calculation for this particular material.  (Of course, if the product was made in Asia  the calculation would be different - and might be almost incalculable with any precision for the future in the present environment depending on the sourcing.)

This should be a graph of copper prices in the United States since 1960 that I located online:

       https://www.macrotrends.net/14...istorical-chart-data

Assuming I'm reading the graph correctly, the price of copper in early 1960 was about .30 per pound.  "The current price of copper as of October 25, 2018 is $2.75 per pound", according to that website.  Interestingly it looks like the price of copper decreased during 1960. [Note the drastic drop in the price of copper since 2011. That level of volatility might be concerning all by itself.]

In conclusion, this somewhat less than rigorous attempt at quantification indicates that copper prices are only slightly greater than the general rate of inflation from roughly 1960 until yesterday.

But the "affordability", question is a very relevant fact.  Built to Order?

I am very unconvinced that any current, and certainly past tube rail, track system l know about is what l want, and has been an obstacle.  I would like to see an article in OGR showing all commonly used O scale track, in good clear side-by-side photos.  I want simple to use, non -proprietary, compatible, but REALISTIC track for high rail use.  I have plenty of Marx 0-27 and 0-34 tube track for a historical 1940's temporary holiday layout, and it looks funny under modern locos that can even make those curves.

Great topic and great points by all. The one thing we can all be thankful is when Lionel DID come out with Super-O, that was (in my opinion) the start to the realistic era and your railroad can now have a sense of realism, which was and is not possible with traditional tubular track.  My first Lionel train came on Christmas 1961 and that set came with the Rio Grande 2379 and Super-O track. All my friend that had Lionel trains were WOWED when they saw my Super-O train board.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

The answer is obvious, Lionel "could" license it if they choose.  Also, depending on the age of the track, there may not be a necessity for a license, but I'm not a patent lawyer.

The patent that might have covered Super O track (here) expired a long time ago.

Anyone today is free to produce the same track without a license.

You could likely even call it Super O, since Lionel has probably abandoned that trademark.

https://youtu.be/0PnRp8oQR40

Look at this guy!  I thought i had the largest...

Goes to show i am not the only nutty super o guy around...  i wonder if its because we (the latter half of postwar era) kids grew up with super o, we love it so...

L.I.TRAIN posted:

My first Lionel train came on Christmas 1961 and that set came with the Rio Grande 2379 and Super-O track. All my friend that had Lionel trains were WOWED when they saw my Super-O train board.

Channelling clyde... dang!  You started out top shelf...

Thundering out of the west on super o track...

Interestingly, Lionel filed for a trademark on the Super O name in 1997 and 2003.

 The 1997 application was abandoned.

The 2003 application was granted in 2006, but subsequently cancelled, probably because Lionel did not use the mark in commerce.

L.I.TRAIN posted:

Great topic and great points by all. The one thing we can all be thankful is when Lionel DID come out with Super-O, that was (in my opinion) the start to the realistic era and your railroad can now have a sense of realism, which was and is not possible with traditional tubular track.  My first Lionel train came on Christmas 1961 and that set came with the Rio Grande 2379 and Super-O track. All my friend that had Lionel trains were WOWED when they saw my Super-O train board.

Steve, my first set was brought by Santa on Christmas morning in 1960, and it also included Super "0" track. And like you, "All my friends that had Lionel trains were WOWED when they saw my Super-O..."  And this included my first cousin and close friend who had very large O Gauge layouts, since their dads had also become avid hobbyists.

Professor Chaos posted:

Interestingly, Lionel filed for a trademark on the Super O name in 1997 and 2003.

 The 1997 application was abandoned.

The 2003 application was granted in 2006, but subsequently cancelled, probably because Lionel did not use the mark in commerce.

Great work by you and gunrunnerjohn regarding the patent and trademark.  I had some vague recollection of a filing by Lionel around the time they made the track Super "O" Bob referenced.  Perhaps it was the 2003/6 Trademark you referenced.

Great detective work!

Menards?

Sounds to me that the copper center rail of Super O track is both a major disadvantage and advantage. A disadvantage is its cost, an advantage is its superior conductivity, which might have great appeal. Do you agree?

Another advantage is it's very nice appearance.

If new Super O was resurrected, it would be great if transition tracks were made, so Super O could be connected to existing layouts with  O Gauge, 027, etc., track. That way, Super O could be added to our already existing layouts. Could that be done?

My guess is that if major manufacturers would not make such transition tracks, then clever, highly skilled OGR Forum members could create them and maybe have a nice side business. Super O lovers would pay a pretty penny for such transition tracks so they could add Super O track to their existing layouts. 

If such transition tracks are pragmatic (and they might not be), they could be very useful now in order to add existing used Super O track to existing layouts with different track.

Arnold

superwarp1 posted:

Super O Bob posted:

L.I.TRAIN posted:

 The blackened middle rail of these two is much less destructive the the pick up rollers than Super-O was/is

Super o doesnt damage rollers.

Only badly formed rollers from the 50's.  I would love to see it SuperO come back but sadly since my layout is already built it's too late for me.

I would be awesome though, different length straight sections, different radius curves.  Switches that look like Ross or AtlasO and didn't melt when they fail.

One thing that would be a plus, since MTH and AtlasO track is hardly ever in stock, Lionel or who ever could make a killing if they could get it on store shelves.

I have a locomotive, tender, and a few cars made in the late 50s-60s whose rollers are worn due to many hours of use on Super "0" track.  My dad bought one set in 1961 and a handful of extra cars that he ran on a small Super "O" track layout.  All the units with rollers he ran at the time have varying degrees of Super "O"  "grooveage" with the locomotive and tender having the most.  After very many hours of constant usage, that layout was later damaged and never used again.  When I got interested in trains a few years later, my dad bought me quite a few additional cars which I ran on O27 track exclusively in the late 60s & 70s.  None of the units I used have any "grooveage".  It's very easy to see "grooveage" on our 233 Locomotive, 233W Tender, 6434 Poultry Dispatch, 6517 Bay Window, and 6822 Searchlight Car.

None of the rollers appear to be "badly formed", and they continue to work fine using Lionel O27, FasTrack, K-Line Super "K", and K-Line SuperSnap track.  I doubt the average person would NOT classify the Super "O" "grooveage" on the units I mentioned as damage.  I fail to understand why anybody would deny the thin rail and/or buss connectors on Super "O" track causes it.  I don't have anything to gain from reporting it, and I doubt others who've experienced the same thing with Super "O" track don't have anything to gain either---other than replacement rollers.  Is that a potentially untapped, huge, money-making market?.......selling unnecessarily replaced rollers on ebay?

I like the look of Super "O" track and FasTrack.  However the look of both when using trestle sets doesn't appear to be realistic.  With Super "O", the ties appear to be hanging.   Incredibly, the ballast on FasTrack seems inanely glued to the rails???

"New tooling is expensive so either a company or a person with very deep pockets need to be involved and in the end how much would it cost to the hobbiest for the track. If too expensive it could kill the whole project." 

I'd be surprised if the tooling for Super-Snap track has been destroyed. It has been produced a lot more recently than Super-O. The 2 brands are nearly identical, but Super-Snap was produced in many different dimensions--I think as wide as 96" curves, as well as extra-long straights and O-72 switches. 

Super-O curve

I had two postwar locomotives growing up, and they were run a significant amount, with all running on Super "O" track.  The No. 2332 GG-1 definitely has some grooves on the rollers.   I don't recall the steamer that came with the Super "O" track as having any groves, but would have to check.  I honestly never paid any attention to the groves other than noticing them, and I still run both engines with the original rollers.

I also haven't paid any attention to the difficulty or cost of replacing rollers, but grooves did occur in my GG-1.  It's still my favorite electric locomotive though! 

 It would be interesting to know what that cost would be for replacing rollers.  Does anyone know the likely cost to replace two rollers?

I have no groved rollers.  Beenvrunning on it since 1967.  Arching on dirty track is what groves rollers.

Im in traffic.  Cant text.  Arcing sparks take a nibble of the rollers witg each spark.  Tenders when whistles arc on dirty track. 

Copper is much softer than steel... 

I have high milage engines with copper on the roller.  Ill take pics.  O gauge track eats rollers if dirty.

U just cant cut hardend steel with soft copper!

Im driving to lhs to get my naiagra

K-Line SuperSnap curve, straight, switch, bumper, and conversion tracks have all been reissued in recent years under the name "O-Line Reproductions".

BlueComet400 posted:

...I'd be surprised if the tooling for Super-Snap track has been destroyed. It has been produced a lot more recently than Super-O. The 2 brands are nearly identical, but Super-Snap was produced in many different dimensions--I think as wide as 96" curves, as well as extra-long straights and O-72 switches. 

 

 

Blue Comet 400,

That is a very attractive track, and Lionel may own the tooling. (Do you think Lionel does?)

Their is admittedly a nostalgic attraction to Super "0" track for many of us.  But having replaced my Super "O" layout with similar GarGraves track, the appearance is very different.  On a large layout, the copper center rail virtually disappears from view - likely the intentional design characteristic, which is enhanced by its coloration, low profile, and, in all likelihood the shape of the non rectangular ties. That virtual "disappearance" didn't happen at all with the GarGraves track, although I believe my GG layout was the quietest layout that I ever built.  For me, Super "O" much more closely resembled prototypical two rail track.  

But the Super Snap track looks very nice.

Considering all of the options that are available, I don't think there would be much of a market for Super O.  IMO, the segment of the market that would buy Super O is far smaller than the tinplate market, and we've all seen what is happening there.

Super O Bob posted:

I have no groved rollers.  Beenvrunning on it since 1967.  Arching on dirty track is what groves rollers

The arcing on dirty track is precisely what I learned as an adult.  As a child I virtually never cleaned my Super "O" layout because conductivity issues were never an issue because of the copper center rail.

For me, the grooves were a non-issue, and they still are.  But, the issue seems to be important to some.  I would just clean the track now since, as an adult, I understand the importance.

Grampstrains posted:

There is still plenty of "Super "O" still out there so why make more?  Even if they did, the first thing posted on  this forum would be to complain about the price.

You make a good point there about potential price. The various track systems that are out there now aren't exactly cheap, and I expect that a resurrected Super-O, given its relatively limited market potential in the grand scheme of things, would be a pricey little bugger. 

You are very lucky for not having any "groved" rollers, Super O Bob.  I don't know what "arching" is, but if you mean "arcing", your statement might be correct.  However it has no bearing on the trains in my collection.  My dad's layout was used heavily, and I remember him wiping it often.  I don't think he soldered nor glued the bus connectors to the track.  If that caused any arcing, then that's the fault of the Super "O" design.  I certainly never saw any Lionel instructions nor tips about securing the bus connector permanently to the track to prevent arcing which may have contributed to the problem.  I think the main contributor was the slight bump the rollers got each time they came across the two small spaces between the beginning and the end of each bus connector and the blades from each track.

Perhaps you've filled in the small spaces on either side of the bus connectors, or you don't run the same few trains over and over as my dad did.  Just because you haven't had the problem, doesn't mean others haven't had it.

RE: Availability of Super O.

Granted, not the only source but a quick check on Ebay shows there's plenty listed for sale! I'm not making any judgments on price (frankly I'm not clued in enough to know) but if you want Super O it's a click away.

Johnstrains,

Thanks!  If you don't mind a few more clicks, could you post examples of the pricing for 72" radius curves and switches?  That's great news to hear that they are readily available, as I have 1/2 of the tables built for a new layout in a second room in the basement where space has been made available to me.  Since my other layout is now limited to O - 31track to avoid the duck-unders, I want to use 0-72 radius curves to run my larger equipment.  That Williams scale GS-4 is stunning, as is the Williams scale N&W No. 611!

The old wives tail of superO track causing grooves in rollers has been around for many years. There is no proof of superO track causing this condition. I have been running trains on super0 and have never seen this condition. 

Filthy, dirty track arcing is what causes wear on rollers not superO. Does not happen, never did happen and never will happen. It was only a rumor. 

Dave

I have planned to use Super O on a new layout with Ross Switches. I wonder if Ross could make Super O switches. For double the price I would probably still consider it. I have plenty of track. The switches have always been the problem. Nothing, and I repeat, nothing looks as good as Super O. Replace the rollers- Every time I send an engine to Len for restoration he replace the rollers and arms.

SuperO and K-Line super snap track look nothing alike. The super snap is much larger in size then superO. 

Maybe the tooling could be used to make superO, but I doubt it.

Dave

when atlas O track was designed and made in the late 1990's, 2 of the goals of the atlas people was to make a track line that used rails  like prewar t-rail track and look as good as super -o does . i believe they  did it. ....its the last track system i will ever buy .

Wow, this thread had some legs, which indicates real interest.

- The K-Line Snap-Track was not something that I cared for at all. Seems it was as tall and ridiculous-looking as the traditional Lionel 0-31 and Menard's track.  The 0-27 track always looked better; too bad it wasn't produced in 0-72 radius.

- Super-O was certainly a step forward, too late. The rail/blade support hump in the ties, however, always stood out in a bad way. It would have to be engineered away. People complain about the center blade wearing rollers. Have we seen that with MTH Scale-Trax and its only slightly thicker blade? Also, if the blade on Super-O was copper, it would not have worn down the much harder Lionel rollers. Was it copper? Bronze is very hard. Was it bronze? (I've never messed with any Super-O.)

With GG and Ross I see no need for Super-O, though I do like the more subtle color of Super-O rails, as compared with the 50's chrome bumper effect of the other two.    

Super O Bob posted:

I have no groved rollers.  Beenvrunning on it since 1967.  Arching on dirty track is what groves rollers.

 

Im in traffic.  Cant text.  Arcing sparks take a nibble of the rollers witg each spark.  Tenders when whistles arc on dirty track. 

Copper is much softer than steel... 

 

I have high milage engines with copper on the roller.  Ill take pics.  O gauge track eats rollers if dirty.

 

U just cant cut hardend steel with soft copper!

 

Im driving to lhs to get my naiagra

Ok.  Finally home from the lhs with my 6013...  i couldnt type and drive so i am behind in response...

This is one of my favorite subjects...  roller wear...  i really dont care if any of you believe me.  I will continue running on super o.

I have had NO ROLLER WEAR on any of my PWC, pw original, MPC, or modern scale engines and have operated on super o extensively. 

As a kid, i would run for 1 to 2 hours every day from about 1967 to 1983 on two different super o layouts on conventional voltages.  First a 5x9ft and then a 16x32ft... stopping in '83 when i went to college.  Then I built my big super o layout and ran about the same amount from about 2003 to 2011 all solidly at full power 18v tmcc&legacy.  

I would have train parties where friends engines and my engines would run for hours straight usually starting at 4pm and ending at about 1am to 2am (8 to 9hrs straight).  We hosted alot of running parties in those 8 years.  Many on this forum will tell you they didnt damage any rollers on their engines running at my house.  We always joked about roller wear at the parties.  We would have about 8 to 10 parties a year.

From 2013 till now i have a 50ft x 23ft back room super o layout 18v legacy only which i do not run enough, probably only 2 to 3hrs a week.

I have never had any roller pickup notched or warn by the super o track.  Keep in mind, steel material rollers are 3 to 4 times harder than the copper material depending on grades, and MECHANICALLY you can roll all day on soft copper and not cut STEEL.

FREE ROLLING Roller wear is from arcing (sparking) of the rollers operating on dirty track.  This can happen on any track type if dirty.  In my years collecting postwar,  i have seen a few rollers clearly notched that matches the exactly the rail head shape and widgh of tubular track.  Some kid never cleaned the track and ran alot while pickup rollers and whistle tender rollers sparked away.  It is the sparking that pits and cuts the rollers irregardless of track type.

This is dirty super o and i would never run on track looking like this... rails are black with wheel grime and center rail is badly tarnished.

This is clean super o.  I simply use 3m abrasive pad and wipe the track after about 2 weeks or so of operation.  Clean track top of railhead is shiny.  You can also see the shiny glint on the copper.  Keep your track clean.  Use track cleaning car if you are lazy.  I just wipe with scotchbrite abrasive pads (the dark oxide ones).  I can post a pic.  Its so easy and i can wipe one 275ft loop in about 5min or less. Even the nastiest super o can easily have shiny railheads and top of center rail with these pads without alot of effort...

There is no sparking on clean track.  So no roller wear.  Proof the super o track alone doesnt cut rollers are all my engines and all my friends engines on my track.  Infact i can find some rollers that have clear copper residue on rolling surfaces showing the copper is softer than steel and moves from rail to roller.

 Cleaning your track is in every manual on model trains...  this electrical performance is why.

So thats it.  Ripley's.

D500 posted:

Wow, this thread had some legs, which indicates real interest.

 

Yeah, great thread. Learning a lot.  

phrankenstign posted:

I don't think he soldered nor glued the bus connectors to the track.  If that caused any arcing, then that's the fault of the Super "O" design.  I certainly never saw any Lionel instructions nor tips about securing the bus connector permanently to the track to prevent arcing which may have contributed to the problem.  I think the main contributor was the slight bump the rollers got each time they came across the two small spaces between the beginning and the end of each bus connector and the blades.

Hi phrank...  no i have never soldered the bus clips...  besides, if you have a bump, you dont have it right.

Repro bus clips WILL NEVER FIT FLUSH with the top of center rail.   Use only the original bus clips.  The notches may need filing slightly to clean up the cuts so the bus fits FLUSH.  Sometimes the center rail slips to one end or another creating a fit problem of bus clip.  You grab it with a needlenose and move it.  The center rail is just staked to the ties.  It can move legthwise a little.  So that is something to help get the bus clip fit just right.  There is no noise or bumps when its bus clip fits flush.

As for cleaning, its important to get the grime off the rails.  Wheel grime from oiling axles etc...  so use abrasive pad to strip the grime...

 This is a video of old layout 4 loops of track, all super o, each about 200ft long.  No bus clips ever came loose, they are not soldered.

https://youtu.be/O9yUJojQhKw

 Lots of extreme operation...

 https://youtu.be/6RlYLTU5gvM

Super O Bob said:

"Some kid never cleaned the track and ran alot while pickup rollers and whistle tender rollers sparked away.  It is the sparking that pits and cuts the rollers irregardless of track type."

There is no question that as a 9 - X year old young boy, that I ran my two locos on a 90 square foot Super "O" layout without proper cleaning of the track.  For one thing, the placement of the layout required that you walk on the train table to get to the back 12'.  Since the trains ran flawlessly on the track, I was no wiser other than the "clean your track regularly" mantra.  And, the sparking was normal operation to our way of thinking.  I certainly would be more vigilant now, and, I certainly wouldn't construct a train table that required walking on to clean and service the track.

I never used the Super O track my dad had.  In fact, as a teenager I always wondered how he powered the track.  I was unaware of the clip and lockon that were used.  I do know my dad didn't use any repro ones for two reasons:  I don't think anybody was making knockoffs back then.  Each track always came with a clip.  There was no need to buy more.

This being a physical world, nothing is perfect.  Some bus connectors were tighter than others.  It's possible the ones that weren't as snug as the others may have slowly been pushed toward one side creating a bigger gap on the other side.  I don't know if that contributed to the problem, but the wear did occur over the long run---whatever the cause(s).

The cost of replacing rollers doesn't matter to me at all.  Despite the grooves on the rollers of the trains I mentioned, none of them have failed to work over the years.  I've used Lionel O27 & FasTrack, and K-Line O Super "K" & SuperSnap.  The center rail on all three is the same as the outer rails, so the wear is even across the rollers.  I rotate through all of the trains from year to year.  (I don't have a permanent O gauge layout.)  The trains aren't subjected to the same intense usage my dad subjected them to in the early 60s.

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

Super O Bob said:

"Some kid never cleaned the track and ran alot while pickup rollers and whistle tender rollers sparked away.  It is the sparking that pits and cuts the rollers irregardless of track type."

There is no question that as a 9 - X year old young boy, that I ran my two locos on a 90 square foot Super "O" layout without proper cleaning of the track.  For one thing, the placement of the layout required that you walk on the train table to get to the back 12'.  Since the trains ran flawlessly on the track, I was no wiser other than the "clean your track regularly" mantra.  And, the sparking was normal operation to our way of thinking.  I certainly would be more vigilant now, and, I certainly wouldn't construct a train table that required walking on to clean and service the track.

Yea, track maintenance is NOT just for the 1/48th scale men in hardhats!  I always design for accessability...  if you cant, there are those diecast track cleaning cars that secure the abrasive pads that you can run around.  They do ok...

phrankenstign posted:

I never used the Super O track my dad had.  In fact, as a teenager I always wondered how he powered the track.  I was unaware of the clip and lockon that were used.  I do know my dad didn't use any repro ones for two reasons:  I don't think anybody was making knockoffs back then.  Each track always came with a clip.  There was no need to buy more.

This being a physical world, nothing is perfect.  Some bus connectors were tighter than others.  It's possible the ones that weren't as snug as the others may have slowly been pushed toward one side creating a bigger gap on the other side.  I don't know if that contributed to the problem, but the wear did occur over the long run---whatever the cause(s).

The cost of replacing rollers doesn't matter to me at all.  Despite the grooves on the rollers of the trains I mentioned, none of them have failed to work over the years.  I've used Lionel O27 & FasTrack, and K-Line O Super "K" & SuperSnap.  The center rail on all three is the same as the outer rails, so the wear is even across the rollers.  I rotate through all of the trains from year to year.  (I don't have a permanent O gauge layout.)  The trains aren't subjected to the same intense usage my dad subjected them to in the early 60s.

Phrank...  yea if you see a larger gap on either side of the bus clip, the center rail is slightly out of position.  Just grab with a needlenose and slide the rail to fill gap.  It will also fix the snug ones you mentioned.

The bus clips should be flush, then wipe your finger across the top and as you pass from rail to bus back to center rail, it should feel smooth.

The art of sucessful bending the track, you get alot of experience w/dremel cutting new notches and adjusting for proper fit of bus clips.  

I was really meticulous with shimming my track and there was no lumps bumps or anything.  Used alot of 1/64 plywood shims and a bubblelevel to make everything perfectly level.

Depending on how nuts you want to be...  super o rails also have a reflex bent on one end (up and down).  This was to capture the rail better to the clips so they stay put after years of reassembly with other tracks.  To make things SMOOTHER i would take each piece of track to a small vice and take this bend out.    It was tedius but my railhead is perfectly smooth.

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

 

...If new Super O was resurrected, it would be great if transition tracks were made, so Super O could be connected to existing layouts with  O Gauge, 027, etc., track. That way, Super O could be added to our already existing layouts. Could that be done?

If such transition tracks are pragmatic (and they might not be), they could be very useful now in order to add existing used Super O track to existing layouts with different track...

Arnold

Arnold,

Transition tracks would be a nice addition if economically feasible.  My recollection is that Lionel made transition tracks for at least O gauge track during part of the Postwar era (as defined by Dr. Greenberg).

You guys have convinced me to clean my O Gauge tubular track and 022 switches, which I will do tomorrow, for the 1st time in over 10 years. LOL, Arnold

I have used different kinds of track for many years from 0-27 to Super 0 as well as K-line, Atlas, Ross, and Gargraves ... you name it.  I don't "clean" my track because I found out years ago that a spray of electronic cleaner properly spaced on the track keeps the trains running and the track "clean".  I don't know why it works so well but it does and without gunk building up on the wheels or rollers.  I know .... hard to believe but just try it, you may just like it!  By the way, I love the look of Super 0 track and like several of you, had it been available in broad radius curves (commercially), I would have probably gone that route.

Alan

I would switch to Super O in a minute if made on the on the same plan as Fastrak or Atlas O. I used Super O from 1974 to 1985. I started buying it in 1966. Took a while to collect all that I needed. I am using Atlas O right now.

This is what i use to get the grime off my rails and make them shine (i only do it to the TOP of the rail heads.

I just stay on top of it and clean after a few weeks of operation, keep rails shiny.

If you have hard to reach areas or are lazy, use this...

Doing it by hand is easier and faster and better.  Put 3 fingers on pad holding to the railhead and walk along the layout.  It goes fast.

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

 

...If new Super O was resurrected, it would be great if transition tracks were made, so Super O could be connected to existing layouts with  O Gauge, 027, etc., track. That way, Super O could be added to our already existing layouts. Could that be done?

If such transition tracks are pragmatic (and they might not be), they could be very useful now in order to add existing used Super O track to existing layouts with different track...

Arnold

Arnold,

Transition tracks would be a nice addition if economically feasible.  My recollection is that Lionel made transition tracks for at least O gauge track during part of the Postwar era (as defined by Dr. Greenberg).

This Super O was done with adaptors in mind...

So Actually you are good to go right now.  Super O was made with a series of pins to allow you to connect to ogauge.  The railheads are close to same height.  I also used the SO to Ogauge pins to run my super o up to a 313 bascule bridge with no issues...

There is o27 adaptor pins too but track needs a shimming...

This is what they made to get super o to attach to EXISTING o gauge and o27 switches and track.  You can see by picture which is which and the number.

O27 adaptors on top, o gauge on bottom.  I used these to integrate postwar acessories.  You could reuse all your ogauge remote switches with super o if you wanted.  The circle L boys designed it that way from the beginning.

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

I have used different kinds of track for many years from 0-27 to Super 0 as well as K-line, Atlas, Ross, and Gargraves ... you name it.  I don't "clean" my track because I found out years ago that a spray of electronic cleaner properly spaced on the track keeps the trains running and the track "clean".  I don't know why it works so well but it does and without gunk building up on the wheels or rollers.  I know .... hard to believe but just try it, you may just like it!  By the way, I love the look of Super 0 track and like several of you, had it been available in broad radius curves (commercially), I would have probably gone that route.

Alan

Alan,

Thanks for posting.  Is there a brand, or brands, of electronic cleaner that you could recommend?  Also, any rough estimation as to the "spacing" that you have found to be effective.  This seems to be an excellent method for track cleaning.

In this regard, I am also taking notes as to the other methods suggested for track cleaning, including the excellent posts by Super O Bob.

Super O Bob said:

"Super O was made with a series of pins to allow you to connect to ogauge.  The railheads are close to same height."

Great reminder!  I even have some of those pins, and, had totally forgotten. 

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

. hard to believe but just try it, you may just like it!  

Alan

Thanks a ton Alan...  i will try that...  great suggestion!

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

Super O Bob said:

"Super O was made with a series of pins to allow you to connect to ogauge.  The railheads are close to same height."

Great reminder!  I even have some of those pins, and, had totally forgotten. 

I was taking pictures and reposting...  see the envelopes.  I think there are also insulated versions i may have but didnt take picks...

Here is illustration for you...

david1 posted:

I would love to see superO made again but Lionel told me a few years ago that most of the tooling for superO has either been lost or destroyed. If that is true then forget Lionel ever doing it. 

If just certain pcs could be made like 30"straights, wider radius curves and better switches I think that could be a start. 

New tooling is expensive so either a company or a person with very deep pockets need to be involved and in the end how much would it cost to the hobbiest for the track. If too expensive it could kill the whole project. 

With all the negatives I still think it would be a great track system to do again. Let's hope!!!!!!!!!

Dave

Maybe somebody like John Menard could make this happen. Just saying!

Brad

Even if Ross were to use Super O rails with their wooden ties it would not be the end of the world.

petrifiedagg posted:

I have planned to use Super O on a new layout with Ross Switches. I wonder if Ross could make Super O switches. For double the price I would probably still consider it. I have plenty of track. The switches have always been the problem. Nothing, and I repeat, nothing looks as good as Super O. Replace the rollers- Every time I send an engine to Len for restoration he replace the rollers and arms.

Petrified-

You could easily use lionel o gauge o72" switches with the super o wide radius track.  If u wanted to make it look nice you could airbrush the switch housings and bases in brown to match super o.  Just mask the rails.

Check out the adaptor pins for super o to o gauge, in previous posts.  Super o and o gauge have about the same height to railhead.

So a despirate man could easily put o72 switches into a wide radius super o layout.

petrifiedagg posted:

Even if Ross were to use Super O rails with their wooden ties it would not be the end of the world.

Before i designed custom in CAD, i was thinking about taking ross switches and putting balsa wood ramps on top of ties to make it look like super o and paint brown.

But i decided to give the custom switch a try.

Super O Bob posted:

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

 

...If new Super O was resurrected, it would be great if transition tracks were made, so Super O could be connected to existing layouts with  O Gauge, 027, etc., track. That way, Super O could be added to our already existing layouts. Could that be done?

If such transition tracks are pragmatic (and they might not be), they could be very useful now in order to add existing used Super O track to existing layouts with different track...

Arnold

Arnold,

Transition tracks would be a nice addition if economically feasible.  My recollection is that Lionel made transition tracks for at least O gauge track during part of the Postwar era (as defined by Dr. Greenberg).

This Super O was done with adaptors in mind...

So Actually you are good to go right now.  Super O was made with a series of pins to allow you to connect to ogauge.  The railheads are close to same height.  I also used the SO to Ogauge pins to run my super o up to a 313 bascule bridge with no issues...

There is o27 adaptor pins too but track needs a shimming...

This is what they made to get super o to attach to EXISTING o gauge and o27 switches and track.  You can see by picture which is which and the number.

O27 adaptors on top, o gauge on bottom.  I used these to integrate postwar acessories.  You could reuse all your ogauge remote switches with super o if you wanted.  The circle L boys designed it that way from the beginning.

Very helpful, Super O Bob. Thank you! My O22 switches look very toy like, but I absolutely love everything about them. Great to know that you can add Super O to an O Gauge layout  and still use O22 switches. Arnold

Does anyone know if Scotch Brite pads are good for cleaning tubular track, and will not damage the track?

Does anyone know if Scotch Brite pads are good for cleaning tubular track, and will not damage the track?

Super O Bob posted:

Ron464nyc posted:

 Be awesome to run a $1000.00+ loco on lionel and not somebody else's track. 

That is my point exactly...

Yesterday it was Addams Family Super O Layout...  now we look to be heading back to ressurection of super o! 

 

This topic used to come up about once a year.  I have a barn full of super o in storage...  literally hundreds of switches and everything.  But if lionel ever did reissue it, or some NEW scale like track system, i would be all in.. 

Hey super 0 bob, have anything for sale? Enjoyed your topic and opinions so much I'm looking at all my 0gauge track and,well,got me thinking! I am curious though about the track to track connectors. Can the bus clips be solderd? Or is this really a non issue like roller wear.

BlueComet400 posted:

If an extinct track system would ever be re-issued, why not the K-Line Super-Snap?

Already done HERE.

Ron464nyc posted:

Super O Bob posted:

Ron464nyc posted:

 Be awesome to run a $1000.00+ loco on lionel and not somebody else's track. 

That is my point exactly...

Yesterday it was Addams Family Super O Layout...  now we look to be heading back to ressurection of super o! 

 

This topic used to come up about once a year.  I have a barn full of super o in storage...  literally hundreds of switches and everything.  But if lionel ever did reissue it, or some NEW scale like track system, i would be all in.. 

Hey super 0 bob, have anything for sale? Enjoyed your topic and opinions so much I'm looking at all my 0gauge track and,well,got me thinking! I am curious though about the track to track connectors. Can the bus clips be solderd? Or is this really a non issue like roller wear.

HEY RON...  I REREAD YOUR QUESTION...

I might have misunderstood.  If you use original (not repro) bus clips and fit them properly (flush) they will not come up.

It is possible you might have a clip that was spread open and bent open slightly, and you and rebend it with needlenose pliars.  But i have not encountered this.  Normally they fit snug and stay in place.

Because of how good the solid copper center rail carrys current, i actually only wired drops to my track every 18ft or so!  This is unheard of for atlas or gargraves because it is so much tougher to push current thru those other types of track.  Usually they do drops every 6ft or less for optimim performance.

Even with the 18ft separated drops, i still measured a steady 18volts!  I used the Super o #43 power track to hook my wires on.  I used all solid core large gauge feeders and under table bus wires.  My point with this is because the drops are so far apart 18ft separation, if any bus clips came up (they are every 9 inches or so) the trains would STOP.  So they never did and i never had any issues with them popping up so they didnt need to be soldered.  Realize i took care in fitting them down and filed the edges of the center rail notches so that the bus clips would fit flush.

So if done right, you dont have to solder them down...

I think it can solder.  I solder my solid copper bus bar under the table to my drops to my #43 power tracks...

Yea i got stuff for sale...  on ebay...  i also will have a huge stash of atlas o freight cars to sell, those i will put up on the ogr buy/sell in a few weeks...

My dad had quite a few packs of those O27 transition pins.  I always wondered why Lionel engineered those metal tail pins and metal rail pins rather than just mold them as round pins on the O & O27 sides.  It seemed weird to stick in a folded flat pin into a round hole.  What was up with that?

Hudson ron1956 posted:

"Hey super 0 bob...Enjoyed your topic and opinions so much I'm looking at all my 0gauge track and,well,got me thinking!"

_______________

Bob is very knowledgeable about Super "O" as you have clearly recognized.

And, as you can see, he's very generous with sharing that knowledge.

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Does anyone know if Scotch Brite pads are good for cleaning tubular track, and will not damage the track?

I’ve used it to clean all types of three rail track and had not had an issue. The caveat might be to not use it excessively. Once I’ve cleaned with the scotch bright, I’ll keep it clean with track cleaner fluid or a track cleaning eraser. Remember, some brands of track are plated and the scotch brite after excessive use will remove the plateing.

Steve

RideTheRails posted:

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Does anyone know if Scotch Brite pads are good for cleaning tubular track, and will not damage the track?

I’ve used it to clean all types of three rail track and had not had an issue. The caveat might be to not use it excessively. Once I’ve cleaned with the scotch bright, I’ll keep it clean with track cleaner fluid or a track cleaning eraser. Remember, some brands of track are plated and the scotch brite after excessive use will remove the plateing.

Steve

Thanks, Steve. I will follow your advice and be "workin' on the railroad" tomorrow. Arnold

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

I have used different kinds of track for many years from 0-27 to Super 0 as well as K-line, Atlas, Ross, and Gargraves ... you name it.  I don't "clean" my track because I found out years ago that a spray of electronic cleaner properly spaced on the track keeps the trains running and the track "clean".  I don't know why it works so well but it does and without gunk building up on the wheels or rollers.  I know .... hard to believe but just try it, you may just like it!  By the way, I love the look of Super 0 track and like several of you, had it been available in broad radius curves (commercially), I would have probably gone that route.

Alan

Alan,

Thanks for posting.  Is there a brand, or brands, of electronic cleaner that you could recommend?  Also, any rough estimation as to the "spacing" that you have found to be effective.  This seems to be an excellent method for track cleaning.

In this regard, I am also taking notes as to the other methods suggested for track cleaning, including the excellent posts by Super O Bob.

Dennis....the brand I use is CRC.  The particular product is called CRC 2-26 multipurpose electronic lubricant.  I generally use it once per year and spray it directly (light push of the spray nozzle) on the middle track.  Just leave a "line" of lubricant on top of the rail.  You can also spray a small amount on the outside rails but just a little goes a long way.  Do this every 6 or 8 feet.  No need to wipe the track ... just run a locomotive around a few times and you are good to go. 

When I didn't run trains every day, I could go a couple of years between applications but I run trains more often now so once a year seems to work fine.  Honestly, you will be amazed at how well the trains run and the increase in reliability of the signals going to the locomotives....

Scotchbrite is an abrasive and will eventually wear through, but I can't think of a lighter abrasive pad really. It does have various grits as well, green kitchen stuff usually being a medium/light grit, browns get coarser. I've seen red and white both coarser and lighter.

 Clips might pop up once a week, or once a year, or never.  I don't think I've had one come up in two years now. 

But if they do, it can cause "pole vaulting"  of cars with pickups.  I've had it happen about 4 times in the last 6 years.

The connection itself is great. So soldering one side, just enough to hold the clip level is really all you'd need.  I've lost 3 clips that never resurfaced...?  I just wrapped the spots with a cut tin can.  It still conducts better than any track I own except maybe brand new O track. I just haven't measured yet.

Roller and shoe wear is not a non-issue on MANY locos. But I think it's worth it. I'd call it a minor issue. Easily delt with, but some folks are touchy on things like roller wear. I see rollers as a maintenance part that will have to be changed once or twice before the motor ever dies. (Like axle bushings, brushes, etc)

Some we're pretty bad, but I have new rollers that show what I know is Super O wear. Tube track center rail is wider, and the contact patch actually grows with wear and slows wear with more support at that area after wear. 

The angles and edges of S-O takes a toll even though the center rail material is softer copper.

phrankenstign posted:

My dad had quite a few packs of those O27 transition pins.  I always wondered why Lionel engineered those metal tail pins and metal rail pins rather than just mold them as round pins on the O & O27 sides.  It seemed weird to stick in a folded flat pin into a round hole.  What was up with that?

I think because molded pins would be plastic and not carry current from the o gauge track to the super o outer rails...  so the super o side needed to be a pin.

The pins also have a short section where they are raised up and act as RAILHEAD also because they fill the gap between the super o and the ogauge that is formed because the super o ties and o gauge ties prevent the rails from touching, there is a gap.  So these pins also fill that gap and become railhead for about 1/8 inch.  That contributes to the wierd shape. 

So then to fill that huge hole in the ogauge track rail they just folded over the metal pins.

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

Honestly, you will be amazed at how well the trains run and the increase in reliability of the signals going to the locomotives....

Alan...  yes another great point...  clean track really helps the robustness of command signal... and trackside signals as you mentioned.  I highly recommend clean track...

On scotchbrite, that stuff is designed to strip the surface of metal to polish it.  I rather use the abrasive pads that just clean gunk from metal and leave it clean.  The pads work great and turn black with rail gunk and track remains clean and shiny.

I think its better to use than scotchbrite.

Adriatic posted

 Clips might pop up once a week, or once a year, or never.  I don't think I've had one come up in two years now. 

But if they do, it can cause "pole vaulting"  of cars with pickups.  I've had it happen about 4 times in the last 6 years.

 

The angles and edges of S-O takes a toll even though the center rail material is softer copper.

 

Adratic...  if you have any pop up, it usually is the center rail has slid to one side.  You can move the center rail about 1/16" side to side down length of track and get better fitment of the bus clips.  Also use a small flat file and debur the edges of the notch and that usually fixes it.  If they come up, it is because the notch may need filing and fitting.  When flush you will not pole vault.  

I have seen the edges of the center rail wear.  The center rail has a flat on top then it drops off on edges.  It seems to not mess with rollers because as i said, mecanically the steel is 3 to 4 times harder than copper.  So that copper wears away not the steel.

I will look for some cabooses i have seen get copper rollers and take a pic... 

We had train nights with a theme.  Few times it was run UNION PACIFIC night.  My cabooses would get a workout.  I have lionel scale cabooses with smoke so they are pulling power, and ran for so much time they would see the most time on track.  Not one has roller wear.

I am big UP guy, and run only freights, so these UP cabooses dont really ever leave the track.  Its a good test...

Ok...  i have a comment on wide radius super o track.

I know many will just try and get O72" curves and be good with that.  But if you are bending your own, bigger is better.  If you can fit it, i encourage o92" or larger.

I designed my original layout around 5 inch centers, that means each parallel track measures 5 inches from center rail of one to center rail of the other adjacent line.  So i planned o72", o82", o92", o102", and o112".  Then for really sweepy curves i have o134" and o144".  As you know the measurement is the diameter of the circle.  So o144" super o is a 12 foot diameter!

One thing i noticed (if you run long trains) is its best operation is around 092".  It was still tight enough to get a good folded dogbone layout, but also permitted great train function.  That is to say the freightcars stayed on the track really well with o92".

I cringe with o82" and that was the MINIMUM radius i would do in the tightest curves.  From o72" to o82" was an improvement, but things got much better around o92" to o102".

So if you are pulling long trains, and can, i would encourage you thinking BIG and going to o92" or larger.

I built my current (new) back room layout (temporary) with 4.5inch centers.  It looks better to me, and i did it for appearance.

However now with the 86ft box cars, and 89ft autoracks and 21inch passenger cars, the overhang can cause impact with big boys and articulated engines on adjacent tracks.  Even with o92", big boys will hit the 21" pass cars and 86ft box cars in the turns. 

So i an planning to tear it up and go back to the 5inch centers.

I am getting too old to remember what cant run on adjacent tracks next to big boys.  And i dont want to tear up my trains.  So i am going back to 5inch centers so i can run anything and not worry (because there is always at least one big boy on the layout).

So my best reccomendation is 082, o92, o102, o112 for mainline loops, that is 5inch centers...  your choice of center to center distance impacts which radius curves you do (if you are keeping things square, without easements or lead in curves).  K.I.S.S.

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

RideTheRails posted:

Arnold D. Cribari posted:

Does anyone know if Scotch Brite pads are good for cleaning tubular track, and will not damage the track?

I’ve used it to clean all types of three rail track and had not had an issue. The caveat might be to not use it excessively. Once I’ve cleaned with the scotch bright, I’ll keep it clean with track cleaner fluid or a track cleaning eraser. Remember, some brands of track are plated and the scotch brite after excessive use will remove the plateing.

Steve

Thanks, Steve. I will follow your advice and be "workin' on the railroad" tomorrow. Arnold

I forgot to add and I think most would agree, NEVER use steel wool pads to clean track and/or wheels.

Steve

It is too bad no one has tried to expand the Super O assortment. I've always been a fan but like everyone else, was limited by the lack of larger radius curves and turn outs. I still have a small Super O layout that I use occasionally with my traditional trains, but I went with Atlas O in order to run my scale sized trains. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I thought I remember seeing some black plastic Super O "test shots" surfacing before Lionel released FasTrack. There was some speculation at the time that Lionel was kicking around the idea of resurrecting Super O, but ended up developing FasTrack.

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

I don't "clean" my track because I found out years ago that a spray of electronic cleaner properly spaced on the track keeps the trains running and the track "clean"...

Alan

 

Dennis....the brand I use is CRC.  The particular product is called CRC 2-26 multipurpose electronic lubricant.  I generally use it once per year and spray it directly (light push of the spray nozzle) on the middle track.  Just leave a "line" of lubricant on top of the rail.  You can also spray a small amount on the outside rails but just a little goes a long way.  Do this every 6 or 8 feet.  No need to wipe the track ... just run a locomotive around a few times and you are good to go. 

When I didn't run trains every day, I could go a couple of years between applications but I run trains more often now so once a year seems to work fine.  Honestly, you will be amazed at how well the trains run and the increase in reliability of the signals going to the locomotives....

Alan,

Thanks much! That is an elegant solution to track cleaning, and will make the process much quicker and easier.  I just ordered some and it should arrive in a couple of days.  Among the other likely simplifications resulting from using this process is cleaning those harder to reach areas, or, areas with scenery close to trackside.

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

OGR CEO-PUBLISHER posted:

I don't "clean" my track because I found out years ago that a spray of electronic cleaner properly spaced on the track keeps the trains running and the track "clean"...

Alan

 

Dennis....the brand I use is CRC.  The particular product is called CRC 2-26 multipurpose electronic lubricant.  I generally use it once per year and spray it directly (light push of the spray nozzle) on the middle track.  Just leave a "line" of lubricant on top of the rail.  You can also spray a small amount on the outside rails but just a little goes a long way.  Do this every 6 or 8 feet.  No need to wipe the track ... just run a locomotive around a few times and you are good to go. 

When I didn't run trains every day, I could go a couple of years between applications but I run trains more often now so once a year seems to work fine.  Honestly, you will be amazed at how well the trains run and the increase in reliability of the signals going to the locomotives....

Alan,

Thanks much! That is an elegant solution to track cleaning, and will make the process much quicker and easier.  I just ordered some and it should arrive in a couple of days.  Among the other likely simplifications resulting from using this process is cleaning those harder to reach areas, or, areas with scenery close to trackside.

Personally ive had bad experiece with any kind of lubricant on outer rails.  Traction tires and lubricant don't mix.