Re: Older Shinohara Turnouts

Brad Ketchen <bketchen@...>
 

I am currently using two of my old Shinohara turnouts (code 100 unfortuantely) temporarily until I can afford to buy new ones...and I need about 5 now at about $30 ea... but Shinohara's are used on two of my 'end of steel' spurs. If the engine has only one car to deliver, then I use a cut of cars in front of the car for delivery to reach in so that the engine does not have to cross over the frog. And more switching to do so..all the better. 

and...2 of the spurs are for a cement factory. I could always isolate the two tracks via plastic joiners and run a GE 44 tonner to switch the cars inside the plant. So I can benefit operationally from these old turnouts.

A little more interesting than all this Frog juicer/polarity tech talk. ;)

Brad

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Dante Fuligni dfuligni2144@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:
 

I understand the use of the Frog Juicers for powered frogs as you folks describe it, but I don’t philosophically believe in that “belt and suspenders” approach to wiring unless it develops that the turnout really requires it. I have both the W/S DCC-friendly and the old-style powered frog units. I also have Frog Juicers to power several of the DCC-friendly frogs (but not all). The layout has run for several years without the contact problems you describe. If and when such problems develop, I can easily add the Frog Juicer(s). In the meantime, I save time, money and effort by not juicing every frog.

Dante


Join w4dccqa@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.