Topics

Older Shinohara Turnouts

Thomas Murray
 

I have 13 remaining "non DCC friendly" Shinohara turnouts on my layout that have served well in DC. Now planning to convert to DCC, and reading the "Wiring for DCC" page, I have a dilemma. I don't desire to use tortoises or mechanically linked switches to power route the isolated points, frog, and closure rails. I want to keep the brakeman's job secure (I like to hand throw turnouts) and it would be too expensive to replace all of the turnouts. It appears that the only good choice would be to purchase a couple Tam Valley Hex DCC Frog Juicers as this would also solve the "points as contacts" issue. Am I on the right track? Thanks!

Don Vollrath
 

Yes. As with all power routing types... Isolate the diverging frog exit rails at the end of the turnout by using insulated rail joiners, and add a Frog Juicer to supplement the power connection at the corrected polarity from the points.


DonV



---In WiringForDCC@..., <tmurray63034@...> wrote :

I have 13 remaining "non DCC friendly" Shinohara turnouts on my layout that have served well in DC. Now planning to convert to DCC, and reading the "Wiring for DCC" page, I have a dilemma. I don't desire to use tortoises or mechanically linked switches to power route the isolated points, frog, and closure rails. I want to keep the brakeman's job secure (I like to hand throw turnouts) and it would be too expensive to replace all of the turnouts. It appears that the only good choice would be to purchase a couple Tam Valley Hex DCC Frog Juicers as this would also solve the "points as contacts" issue. Am I on the right track? Thanks!

Brad Ketchen <bketchen@...>
 

Tam Valley Frog juicers are expensive. Might as well buy new turnouts. Micro Engineering are the best for handthrowing as I do myself.. I've always had issues with Shinohara's (as I call them 'Shitohara's). 

Brad

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:26 AM, dvollrath@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:
 

Yes. As with all power routing types... Isolate the diverging frog exit rails at the end of the turnout by using insulated rail joiners, and add a Frog Juicer to supplement the power connection at the corrected polarity from the points.


DonV



---In WiringForDCC@..., <tmurray63034@...> wrote :

I have 13 remaining "non DCC friendly" Shinohara turnouts on my layout that have served well in DC. Now planning to convert to DCC, and reading the "Wiring for DCC" page, I have a dilemma. I don't desire to use tortoises or mechanically linked switches to power route the isolated points, frog, and closure rails. I want to keep the brakeman's job secure (I like to hand throw turnouts) and it would be too expensive to replace all of the turnouts. It appears that the only good choice would be to purchase a couple Tam Valley Hex DCC Frog Juicers as this would also solve the "points as contacts" issue.. Am I on the right track? Thanks!

Craig Zeni
 

Or...use SPDT slide switches as both the power router and mechanical point throw...cheap as chips and reliable.

Craig Zeni
Cary NC

On Aug 26, 2017, at 8:26 AM, Brad Ketchen @bketchen [WiringForDCC] wrote:


Tam Valley Frog juicers are expensive. Might as well buy new turnouts. Micro Engineering are the best for handthrowing as I do myself.. I've always had issues with Shinohara's (as I call them 'Shitohara's).

Brad

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:26 AM, dvollrath@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:

Yes. As with all power routing types... Isolate the diverging frog exit rails at the end of the turnout by using insulated rail joiners, and add a Frog Juicer to supplement the power connection at the corrected polarity from the points.



DonV



---In WiringForDCC@..., <tmurray63034@...> wrote :

I have 13 remaining "non DCC friendly" Shinohara turnouts on my layout that have served well in DC. Now planning to convert to DCC, and reading the "Wiring for DCC" page, I have a dilemma. I don't desire to use tortoises or mechanically linked switches to power route the isolated points, frog, and closure rails. I want to keep the brakeman's job secure (I like to hand throw turnouts) and it would be too expensive to replace all of the turnouts. It appears that the only good choice would be to purchase a couple Tam Valley Hex DCC Frog Juicers as this would also solve the "points as contacts" issue.. Am I on the right track? Thanks!

Thomas Murray
 

To me, the slide switches takes away from the scale appearance and $150 for (2) TV juicers vs $385 for new turnouts. Each Hex juicer covers (6) turnouts. (1) mono juicer for the remaining turnout.  Thanks for the input.



Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S7.

-------- Original message --------
From: "Brad Ketchen bketchen@... [WiringForDCC]" <WiringForDCC@...>
Date: 8/26/17 7:26 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: Re: [WiringForDCC] Re: Older Shinohara Turnouts

 

Tam Valley Frog juicers are expensive. Might as well buy new turnouts. Micro Engineering are the best for handthrowing as I do myself.. I've always had issues with Shinohara's (as I call them 'Shitohara's). 

Brad

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:26 AM, dvollrath@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:
 

Yes. As with all power routing types... Isolate the diverging frog exit rails at the end of the turnout by using insulated rail joiners, and add a Frog Juicer to supplement the power connection at the corrected polarity from the points.


DonV



---In WiringForDCC@..., <tmurray63034@...> wrote :

I have 13 remaining "non DCC friendly" Shinohara turnouts on my layout that have served well in DC. Now planning to convert to DCC, and reading the "Wiring for DCC" page, I have a dilemma. I don't desire to use tortoises or mechanically linked switches to power route the isolated points, frog, and closure rails. I want to keep the brakeman's job secure (I like to hand throw turnouts) and it would be too expensive to replace all of the turnouts. It appears that the only good choice would be to purchase a couple Tam Valley Hex DCC Frog Juicers as this would also solve the "points as contacts" issue.. Am I on the right track? Thanks!

Annette and Dante Fuligni
 

If your operation can use the turnouts as power-routing units, you will not need to use the Frog Juicers. For example, they can be used for stub-ended spurs or yard tracks. Frog juicers are for use on isolated (insulated), unpowered frogs that are too long for your locos that will lose power passing over unpowered frogs because they have short-wheel-base pick-ups. (Or you can instal decoders with keep-alive function in those locos.)

Dante

Brian Eiland
 

 How about utilizing a double crossover Shinohara on a DCC layout,...any problems, fixes, etc.
i have one that I might like to use on my new layout plan
Brian



On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Dante Fuligni dfuligni2144@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:
 

If your operation can use the turnouts as power-routing units, you will not need to use the Frog Juicers. For example, they can be used for stub-ended spurs or yard tracks. Frog juicers are for use on isolated (insulated), unpowered frogs that are too long for your locos that will lose power passing over unpowered frogs because they have short-wheel-base pick-ups. (Or you can instal decoders with keep-alive function in those locos.)

Dante

Don Vollrath
 

Dante,

You are missing the 2nd half of the reason to use a Frog-Juicer... it supplements the often poor electrical connection of the point rail connections to power the frog and frog rails... Particularly useful when used with power routing turnouts. The momentary act of one of the turnout points touching one of the stock rails causes the Frog Juicer to flip to the proper polarity and supply reliable power to the points, frog, frog rails and a track stub if you chose to do so. Of course there are other ways to do it involving SPDT switches. And it will not fix the operator issue of running into a turnout with the points thrown in the wrong direction.


DonV



---In WiringForDCC@..., <dfuligni2144@...> wrote :

If your operation can use the turnouts as power-routing units, you will not need to use the Frog Juicers. For example, they can be used for stub-ended spurs or yard tracks. Frog juicers are for use on isolated (insulated), unpowered frogs that are too long for your locos that will lose power passing over unpowered frogs because they have short-wheel-base pick-ups. (Or you can instal decoders with keep-alive function in those locos.)

Dante

David Klemm
 

My philosophy is also to not rely on the power routing of a turnout.  Over time the wipers will wear or dirt will get in there and impede contact and thus the current.  All the turnouts get a powered frog and our club uses the TAM Valley product on hundreds of turnouts.


David




From: WiringForDCC@... on behalf of dvollrath@... [WiringForDCC]
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 9:29 AM
To: WiringForDCC@...
Subject: [WiringForDCC] Re: Older Shinohara Turnouts
 
 

Dante,

You are missing the 2nd half of the reason to use a Frog-Juicer... it supplements the often poor electrical connection of the point rail connections to power the frog and frog rails... Particularly useful when used with power routing turnouts. The momentary act of one of the turnout points touching one of the stock rails causes the Frog Juicer to flip to the proper polarity and supply reliable power to the points, frog, frog rails and a track stub if you chose to do so. Of course there are other ways to do it involving SPDT switches. And it will not fix the operator issue of running into a turnout with the points thrown in the wrong direction.


DonV



---In WiringForDCC@...,
If your operation can use the turnouts as power-routing units, you will not need to use the Frog Juicers. For example, they can be used for stub-ended spurs or yard tracks. Frog juicers are for use on isolated (insulated), unpowered frogs that are too long for your locos that will lose power passing over unpowered frogs because they have short-wheel-base pick-ups. (Or you can instal decoders with keep-alive function in those locos.)

Dante

Annette and Dante Fuligni
 

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

Blair & Rasa
 

I agree with the philosophy, Dante, but when laying new switches, I do put a wire drop in from the frog to below the layout.  That way, in future, juicing the frog isn't a painful task, should it become a problematic switch.

Blair

On 17/08/28 23:08, Dante Fuligni dfuligni2144@... [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

------------------------------------
Posted by: Dante Fuligni <dfuligni2144@...>
------------------------------------

http://www.WiringForDCC.com
------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links



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

Mark Cartwright
 

Just a note on Shinohara....
I struggled with Shinohara from around 1976 to 1982 in N Scale.....And then nearly gave up the hobby all together. It wasn't even in Gauge...I had to go over near every mm of my small layout, with an NMRA Thingy in my hand.....
I put it all aside for the next 30 years, till I owned a paid off basement with a house on top. 
And though I still have a bunch of it in a Time Capsule Drawer.....> It stays in there.
Here's the thing...
If you have to struggle too much = You are doing it wrong or perhaps should not have started in the first place....Like an Ex-Girl-friend who has been married 7 time; since I last lived with her. Wonderful Woman...However.....I predicted that, for I didn't marry her. (I used to call her Scarlett for a Reason.)
but I digress...
===
I started out with an N Scale Layout in 1969, in Atlas track of the day and then went to Shinohara around 1975. As a University Student on a serious budget, I remember walking home and eating lunch/dinner in my apartment for nearly a month ! To save just $25 for a Shinohara Double Crossover for my Coffee Table Layout. 
>>>> Even the plan from a book in 1971, I would not approve as an operational plan....Too many damn switches on too many tight curves....
Today...as an officially old man of 64 years old...
No
Been there done that.
So...
Here's the thing...
I recommend not struggling; that is without at least calming down and re-evaluating your whole situation from time to time.
and if you are considering using Shinohara?
Think again.
:)) Mark

When I was six years old, I was given Korean War Vintage Steel Track on clip on cardboard ties.
Near Terrible thing to do to a poor young model railroader on a bottle budget...But I did get it to work..and it motivated me to ?
Make More Money.

Brad Ketchen <bketchen@...>
 

I agree about Shinohara turnouts. I had always problems on my DC layout and had to bin half of them...even trying to wire them up. It was nice you could park a locomotive on the track the points weren't directed to... but extremely problematic. My friends with bigger layouts never used them. 

Save up for my new ones.. perhaps work on another area of the layout. Or like i've done for a work around.. i've abandoned a spur until I can afford more turnouts and avoid the headaches/heartaches and overall aggravation. After all the modeling of abandoned spurs is very accurate where I live in and around Toronto and provide a really nice modeling touch.

Other problematic turnouts I have are the Atlas that come in a bit cheaper... however the points are really loose and do not want to use those oversized unprotypical caboose Industries ground throws. People have these picturesque/near accurate layouts and they use those awful ground throws..

Good luck!
Brad

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:30 AM, marcdecapri@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:
 

Just a note on Shinohara....

I struggled with Shinohara from around 1976 to 1982 in N Scale.....And then nearly gave up the hobby all together. It wasn't even in Gauge...I had to go over near every mm of my small layout, with an NMRA Thingy in my hand.....
I put it all aside for the next 30 years, till I owned a paid off basement with a house on top. 
And though I still have a bunch of it in a Time Capsule Drawer.....> It stays in there.
Here's the thing...
If you have to struggle too much = You are doing it wrong or perhaps should not have started in the first place....Like an Ex-Girl-friend who has been married 7 time; since I last lived with her. Wonderful Woman...However.....I predicted that, for I didn't marry her. (I used to call her Scarlett for a Reason.)
but I digress...
===
I started out with an N Scale Layout in 1969, in Atlas track of the day and then went to Shinohara around 1975. As a University Student on a serious budget, I remember walking home and eating lunch/dinner in my apartment for nearly a month ! To save just $25 for a Shinohara Double Crossover for my Coffee Table Layout. 
>>>> Even the plan from a book in 1971, I would not approve as an operational plan....Too many damn switches on too many tight curves....
Today...as an officially old man of 64 years old...
No
Been there done that.
So...
Here's the thing...
I recommend not struggling; that is without at least calming down and re-evaluating your whole situation from time to time.
and if you are considering using Shinohara?
Think again.
:)) Mark

When I was six years old, I was given Korean War Vintage Steel Track on clip on cardboard ties.
Near Terrible thing to do to a poor young model railroader on a bottle budget...But I did get it to work..and it motivated me to ?
Make More Money.

Craig Zeni
 

One of the issues I always had with the Shinohara turnouts was that they didn't meet the NMRA gauge...the gap between the curved stock rail and the open point was almost always tight...the backside of a wheel that wasn't perfectly in gauge would hit that point rail - instant short.

If the point rail gets adjusted etc to make it meet the NMRA gauge, and the wheels are in gauge, they're decent turnouts...the old ones will work fine with DCC and powered frogs.

Craig Zeni
Cary NC

On Aug 29, 2017, at 9:45 AM, Brad Ketchen @bketchen [WiringForDCC] wrote:


I agree about Shinohara turnouts. I had always problems on my DC layout and had to bin half of them...even trying to wire them up. It was nice you could park a locomotive on the track the points weren't directed to... but extremely problematic. My friends with bigger layouts never used them.

Save up for my new ones.. perhaps work on another area of the layout. Or like i've done for a work around.. i've abandoned a spur until I can afford more turnouts and avoid the headaches/heartaches and overall aggravation. After all the modeling of abandoned spurs is very accurate where I live in and around Toronto and provide a really nice modeling touch.

Other problematic turnouts I have are the Atlas that come in a bit cheaper... however the points are really loose and do not want to use those oversized unprotypical caboose Industries ground throws. People have these picturesque/near accurate layouts and they use those awful ground throws..

Good luck!
Brad

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:30 AM, marcdecapri@... [WiringForDCC] <WiringForDCC@...> wrote:
Just a note on Shinohara....

I struggled with Shinohara from around 1976 to 1982 in N Scale.....And then nearly gave up the hobby all together. It wasn't even in Gauge...I had to go over near every mm of my small layout, with an NMRA Thingy in my hand.....
I put it all aside for the next 30 years, till I owned a paid off basement with a house on top.
And though I still have a bunch of it in a Time Capsule Drawer.....> It stays in there.
Here's the thing...
If you have to struggle too much = You are doing it wrong or perhaps should not have started in the first place....Like an Ex-Girl-friend who has been married 7 time; since I last lived with her. Wonderful Woman...However.....I predicted that, for I didn't marry her. (I used to call her Scarlett for a Reason.)
but I digress...
===
I started out with an N Scale Layout in 1969, in Atlas track of the day and then went to Shinohara around 1975. As a University Student on a serious budget, I remember walking home and eating lunch/dinner in my apartment for nearly a month ! To save just $25 for a Shinohara Double Crossover for my Coffee Table Layout.
Even the plan from a book in 1971, I would not approve as an operational plan....Too many damn switches on too many tight curves....
Today...as an officially old man of 64 years old...
No
Been there done that.
So...
Here's the thing...
I recommend not struggling; that is without at least calming down and re-evaluating your whole situation from time to time.
and if you are considering using Shinohara?
Think again.
:)) Mark

When I was six years old, I was given Korean War Vintage Steel Track on clip on cardboard ties.
Near Terrible thing to do to a poor young model railroader on a bottle budget...But I did get it to work..and it motivated me to ?
Make More Money.




Thomas Murray
 

Thanks all for your inputs as they were all valid. In the past I've purchased (8) DCC Walthers Shino's as replacements because I like the appearance of these over others. I even added a tiny music wire spring to all turnouts that's hardly noticeable when painted. The dead frogs of the "new" cause no problems for my locos. The "olds" will stay until I start running DCC and if problems arise I'll probably replace them with "bonded" DCC Shino's. The "juicers" can always be traded or sold if not needed. Thanks!!



tmurray

George Galyon
 

We have two old style (double crossbar) Shinohara Code 100 double crossovers in operation at our club which work well in both DC and DCC mode.  You have to throw both divergent routes simultaneously to avoid shorting at the K crossings (the upper and lower crossings in the crossing diamond) and the X crossings require both gunking up (I prefer JB weld..we have used printers ink but it wears quickly) to build up an insulation layer on the track sidewalls (not the top) of the X-crossings.  We also find that bulbs in series with the track feeds really help prevent shorting at the X-crossings if the "gunking" is too thin.  The newer Shinohara C100 doubles
(with the single crossbar) do not need gunking but you still have to throw both divergent routes simultaneously.

G. T. Galyon
Olde Newburgh Model RR Club

Alan Cushing
 

Hi,
   About 25 years ago, I built a 12x14 layout wired for two throttles.  Maybe 10 years ago, I switched one throttle to DCC.  The layout used Walthers (Shinohara I believe) code 83 turnouts.  The main line used Tortoise machines while the yard, and a few sidings, used hand throws using the power-routing built into the turnouts.  I did have one switch, the yard throat, that refused to power route.  For that I substituted an electric caboose throw (220S).  Everything worked fine.  Each switch had the frog rails isolated.  The frog and its rails were switched either by its own power routing, by a caboose throw, or by contacts within the tortoise machines.

   I only had two DCC throttles so I never worried by power districts or seperate circuit breakers.

   Recently I have moved, put part of the old layout into storage, and am waiting for a new layout room to be built.  I purchased a 3-way Walthers DCC-compatible turnout to put into a logging siding.  Whoooaaa!  This is a new switch;  it requires external power routing, things just got way too complicated.  The basic caboose throw seems obsolete as it provides no power routing.  I suppose a frog juicer would do it but at $15/frog.  I was hoping to simplify the new layout design using more hand throws, less machines and control panels.  Where are we going?  What does a beginner with a small layout do?

   Alan

George Galyon
 

At our club we use two old-style Shinohara code 100 double-xovers with DCC and they work fine.  You do have to throw both divergent routes simultaneously to avoid shorting at the X (upper and lower)crossings.  With the old doubles you need to add some insulation at the K (left and right) crossings.  We also "fortify" the K crossings with auto light bulbs in the power feeds.  The Shinohara's are not by definition DCC friendly but they are more than "half-friendly" and good enough.  See Alan Gartner's website for wiring details but we don't do any wiring and all power is fed through the doubles by point-stock rail contacts.  Once in a blue moon we run a rail cleaner through the doubles and that's good enough.  Shinohara's point rails are rail stock...not castings or stampings, and they have a nice firm edge...

http://www.WiringForDCC.com/switches_walthers.htm#a8   

George Galyon
 

Our club has two Shinohara turnout assemblies (a 3-way and a double x-over) with the "old" double cross-bar design.  Both work well in DCC and DC with just point-to-stock rail contacts...no derailments..nada.
Try it ..you'll like it. I think the saving grace is that these turnouts have a generous "gap" between the point rails and the stock rails ...generous enough so that none of our rolling stock bridges the point-to-stock
rail gap.  And..we keep the point and stock rail contact area clean with an occasional swipe. 

Note:  I did jumper wire the point-to-closure rails on the 3-way for better electrical continuity..no gapping though. 

Note:  I did "putty up" the X-crossings on the double crossover to eliminate shorting.  You need to cover the vertical surfaces at the crossing for good DCC operation.  With India ink I needed to put an auto light bulb in one (of the two) feeder wire.  With JB weld I got enough thickness on the vertical surfaces of the X-crossing so I didn't need the light bulbs.
ref.  See Double-crossover article on "Wiring for DCC" web site.