> Community > Forums - Reply to Topic

Thread: Track Spacing Reply to Thread
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the > Community > Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
07-23-2020 12:19 AM
Greg Elmassian I have a lot of friends that have torn the cab awnings off their 1:20.3 locos
07-22-2020 10:38 PM
mickey Iím no expert on this stuff, but boy that looks too close for comfort for me.
07-21-2020 04:58 PM
Greg Elmassian Put cab window shades on those locos and they will touch...
07-21-2020 09:14 AM
Bryan14 Here is a picture from a Facebook friend showing 1:20.3 locos on 6.5” spacing.
07-16-2020 08:51 PM
Greg Elmassian I'd select the prototype minimum mainline spacing, convert to 1:20.3 and go there.

I have found 13 foot to be minimum in many cases, which would be about 7.7" or 7-3/4" to make it easy.

I think your spacing would allow contact between 2 1:20.3 locos... remember to increase spacing on curves.

07-16-2020 07:48 PM
Jeff Williams My Accucraft K-36 is 6.75" wide (over the cab window visors) and my K-27 is 6.25 wide, (also over the visors). This is wider than the maximum width of the cylinders.

My tracks are spaced 8" center to center with a 9'4" minimum radius on the inside track on one curve on my layout. The other inside curves are 11'4' radius or more.

Clearance on curves is a bigger issue with smaller radii turns, where the pilot beam and cylinders significantly increase their overhang from track centerline, exceeding the maximum static width of the cab visors. If you are running any articulated locos/Mallets, the increase in overhang can be really significant.
My elevated table is 16" wide, so with 8" center-to-center spacing, you end up with 4" from the center line of the track to the edge of the table. It actually looks quite well balanced. With Llagas Creek turnouts, the extra-long ties that the turnout throws attach to actually extend about 3/8" beyond the edge of the 16" wide table, making them a "snag" point if you are walking or working close to the track. I had to install "guards" at those points to avoid the snag problem. Reducing the center to center distance or widening the table would eliminate this problem, of course.

Also, you can just be sure that two wide 1:20.3 D&RGW locos or big articulateds aren't running on both tracks at the same ttime!
07-15-2020 02:25 PM
David Leech My railway is designed to be 1/32 scale both British and North American and I decided that 5 Ĺ inch centres looked good for both.
The 'inside' track is designed to not have anything too close so that when 'Narrow Gauge' visitors run, then they stay on that track and the other track is left clear.
I did have a problem with height on the tunnel, and although I thought it plenty high enough, I did have a visitor with and engine that was even taller!
David Leech, Delta, Canada
07-15-2020 11:22 AM
krs The trouble if you make the spacing too wide, ie to comfortably accommodate 1:20.3 scale rolling stock, the it looks unrealistic when running 1:29 scale trains.

I thought maybe looking at the prototype might help to decide

4.00 meters seems to be the standard for standard gauge, and if one runs the correct scale trains that match the 45mm track gauge (ie 1:32 scale) that might be OK, but in Large Scale track gauge and (standard gauge) rolling stock scale at 1:29 are not consistent, the rolling stock is a bit oversized.

If one is running 1:32 live steam, I would make the track spacing the minimum that will just accommodate 1:20.3 equipment, and to be on the safe side, set up a clearance gauge to check equipment if someone brings over their trains to run.
07-15-2020 10:54 AM
Pete Thornton
If you need to accomodate 1:20.3 scale equipment, the widest loco we have found so far is spec'd at 6.44 inches - an Accucraft steamer
I was going to say the same thing. The big D&RGW locos, like the K-36/37, are very wide. If you expect to have 2 of them passing each other (especially on curves) you need to space the track at 7.5" or 8".
07-14-2020 10:29 PM
krs The question about the widest "G-Scale" rolling stock seems to come up every few years.

If you need to accomodate 1:20.3 scale equipment, the widest loco we have found so far is spec'd at 6.44 inches - an Accucraft steamer

If anyone knows of wider 1:20.3 rolling stock, please post.

This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.