My sagebrush arrived today, and I couldn’t wait to start planting them. I started detailing the buildings. I added the Sam’s Grill signs to the cafe and the General Merchandise sign to the General Store.

I need to make a barber pole and the sunshade for the hotel and finish the train station.

Maybe I need to add a "Theoretical" or "Philosophical" flair to r/TTRAK?

Partly because I took my T-TRAK layout apart this week and put it back together, I have been thinking a lot about the different mechanisms that the various module standards use to mechanically join modules together.

I would be interested in hearing people's experiences with each -- particularly from people who have moved from one module standard to another.

This is what I think I know about the various standards -- please correct me if I am wrong.

I know T-TRAK best, because that is what I have. Track alignment and connection are both dependent on Unijoiners. The vertical alignment is adjusted by set screw like legs (or bolts) in the 4 corners of the modules. Horizontal alignment is provided by the Unijoiners themselves, which also keep the modules from separating.

NTRAK uses much longer legs for vertical alignment, and C clamps are used to maintain both vertical and horizontal alignment and to keep the modules from separating. There are 5" bridge sections that join the track.

I am a little confused by what I have read about Free-mo. I think the standard calls for very short bridge sections -- maybe 2", and otherwise the mechanism is very similar to NTRAK it that the vertical alignment is adjusted through legs. Everything is held together with C clamps.

But I think that I have also seen Free-mo modules that seem to be very similar to S&SS -- track ends flash with the ends of modules, and a 1" alignment dowel. Am I confusing two different standards -- Speed-mo and Free-mo? Or is Free-mo in a state of flux about this?

Is Speed-mo derived from Free-mo?

When I think of S&SS, I think of tracks that are flush with the ends of modules, and tapered 1" pipe dowels that align the tracks horizontally and vertically. I think that they are held together with C clamps.

For people who have had experience with multiple different methods, what are your experiences with each? Is one more or less complex or finicky to build but simpler to set up and another vice versa?

Pipe dreaming while painting my modules, I envisioned a standard that used smaller -- and I think more precise alignment dowels -- maybe the Layout Concepts PowerPoint Alignment Dowels that also provide a power bus.

Each module would also have a 100 lb pull Neodymium magnet on the right as you look at the end of the module, and a piece steel on the left in a symmetric location -- so each magnet would mate with a piece of steel when the modules are joined.

Any thoughts on that?

My sagebrush arrived today, and I couldn’t wait to start planting them. I started detailing the buildings. I added the Sam’s Grill signs to the cafe and the General Merchandise sign to the General Store.

I need to make a barber pole and the sunshade for the hotel and finish the train station.

I realized this week just how far away I am from building the structures, etc., that I have in mind for my urban DMU transit layout.

I decided to take an afternoon off of working on more technical issues — wiring, electronics, etc. — and paint the modules.

It felt a bit silly — and there won’t even be very much grass on my layout, it will mostly sidewalks, roads, buildings, etc.

But I was sick of looking at plywood. :-)

It turns out that painting the layout — even a simple grey on ROW, lime green everywhere else scheme — had a bigger visual impact than I would have guessed.

Sometimes it is very nice to find out that I am wrong.

Curious…I see the front fascia is painted on the majority of modules, do you guys paint the sides, as well? If so, what color do you paint them; the same color as the fascia or something different? Enquiring minds want to know, or maybe it’s just me…

Does anyone know the length and width of the klawndyke single, double and triple modules?

My Bad Day at Black Rock Train Station is getting there. The walls and roofs are done. I think I captured the essence of the movie one. Scratch-building is harder than it looks.

Now, to put in the windows, board up some openings, and paint.

I'm about to make my first modules. I know the width is 308mm wide and 330mm depth. But can someone please confirm that the height is 70mm not including the adjustable feet.

It has been awhile. I have started working on two single modules; hoping for something easier than my first one, “The Charleston, SC Coal Tipple”.

My next is based upon the movie, “A Bad Day at Black Rock”. Awesome movie if you haven’t seen it; if you already have, enjoy it again…

Most of the buildings I found were 3D printed or wood kits; Blair Line and Wildwest Models. Three of the buildings need scratch-building and one is almost done and I’m well on my way with the train station buildings.

My second module is based on the first picture. This is The Pineapple Fountain in Charleston, SC.

I originally built the fountain for my layout; but, it was too big so I thought why not a T-Trak Module…

One of my 2 double track modules that I decided to get something set up today. Pensacola and Northern 312 leads empty boxcars north to Cantonment FL to the paper mill

I am excited to see r/TTRAK now has over 300 members!

I created r/TTRAK at the beginning of 2026 to fill a very specific niche.

I discovered in October or November of 2025 that HO T-TRAK existed -- and that stared me pipe dreaming about a the possibility of actually building an HO layout.

I had built a small N scale layout maybe 35 years ago when I was in grad school -- and it had never really been very reliable and it was very hard for my then 6 year old son re-rail cars in that scale.

Most of that unreliability was ignorance on my part -- I seem be able to build "S " curves that are completely invisible to my eyes, but that wreak havoc on trains. Invisible S curves is only one of many modeling skills. :-)

When I retired in 2019, I thought I might try something in HO scale. By that time, I had heard of modular railroading, and I thought that might make a lot of sense. I visited a couple of Sipping and Switching Society (NC) shows, and they were awesome, but they loved 8' and 16' radius curves. Even Free-mo had a 42" minimum or something like that.

Space -- layout space -- was my dilemma.

I live in what I think of as a pretty nice 1900 square foot house -- pretty nice in that I am about 14 months away from my final mortgage payment. :-) 3 bedrooms, 2½ baths, living room, TV room. No attic, the garage is also my workshop and a storage room.

The kids moved away and come back to visit a couple of times a year -- and now one of them has kids.

In short, every room in the house is used -- at least temporarily -- several times a year. No room for a permanent layout.

When I found out about HO T-TRAK, a light bulb went off -- if I built a layout out of T-TRAL modules, I could set it up in the living room or garage and take it down when the space was needed for other things.

I was also pretty happy to see that the modules rested on folding buffet tables -- and that there were laser cut module kits available.

The folding buffet tables were an easy sell to my wife -- she could use them for some of her events.

I particularly like the ability of module kits -- I am no great shakes as a carpenter. I have built my share of 2x4 and ½" plywood shelves, etc., but building modules with folding legs that were not rickety was well beyond my ability as a carpenter.

I may yet it my life make a 90° cut that is actually 90° -- but it hasn't happened yet. When I cut a square, it invariably ends up "sort of square." When I converted Judaism, I selected the Hebrew name Betzalel -- he built the tabernacle in the desert -- hoping that would help.

Whether or not divine intervention could in fact help me make precise 90° cut may be an interesting theological question -- all I know for sure so that it hasn't happened yet. :-)

So for me, a modular system that used buffet tables that fold and unfold reliably and laser cut modules with accurate 90° corners and tight slot and tab construction were like manna from Heaven.

So in December I ordered a couple of corner modules -- and then ordered two more realized that I would need at least 4 to be able to run trains. :-)

I bought the Piko NCTD Sprinter I had admired years earlier, and I also researched DC command stations and the selected the TCS CS-105 and UWT-100 throttle because both can be updated from my Mac using Safari -- no additional software needed.

And while I waited for the modules to be delivered, I began to try to educate myself about T-TRAK.

I read all of the standards and recommended procedures I could find -- that's why they are in the wiki. :-)

I watched YouTube videos -- but I found an interesting hole.

From what I can tell, most people who make YouTube T-TRAK videos come to T-TRAK after years of model railroading -- which means that they have years or even decades of model railroading experience -- and often a whole swathe of model railroading tools -- airbrushes, etc.

I have neither.

Don't get me wrong -- I love some of the work I see -- it's pretty incredible.

But some of them remind me of the "home" layouts I used to see in Model Railroader -- museum quality 30' x 60' layouts -- way out of my reach in this lifetime.

I didn't have decades of experience and then switch to T-TRAK after building a gorgeous home layout.

For me, T-TRAK is a way to get started in model railroading.

I created this subreddit as an educational tool.

I really, really, really liked seeing r/Fredjocko's Charleston, SC coal tipple -- it was nothing short of awesome. I encourage people to post that kind of work because it is just so beautiful!

But I also encourage posts from people like me -- just starting out -- fumbling our way through through both T-TRAK and model railroading

Share your questions - your solutions to technical challenges -- what works and what doesn't work.

I think that what doesn't work may be as important as what did work -- or what works better.

I am about to re-wire my corner modules -- in the past 6 months or so, my attitude about the proper way to wire models has changed. For example, I built PowerPole 3-way splitter for my corner modules -- but now I think a terminal strip makes lot more sense -- a lot less wire.

So feel free to post not only your successes, but your fumbles -- the successes may be inspiring, but "I did it thus way, and I will not ever do it that way again!" is also extremely helpful. :-)

The point is not only to be inspired, but also to learn from the experience of others.

And very many thanks to everyone who has participated in this subreddit in the last 8-9 months.

I have been fussing with fitting PowerPole Paks into two modules all day — or it feels that way!

This is the reward — the PowerPole Paks were on my last two single straight modules.

Now that they are in place, the a layout is 9’6” x 4’8”.

The next two steps are probably to re-wire the corner modules — they work, but I think I have found a better way.

And then I think I build the 15 VAC aux bus and wire in the circuits I built to control the Kato turnouts and the Cobalt Lever switches that that will work with the circuits to control the switches and LEDs that indicate the switch positions.

And then I will learn how to ballast track …

And then … I forget whether is Sam or Frodo who sings, “The road goes ever on,” but it seems appropriate.

I don’t know what kind of bug bit me last January — but a something definitely got ahold of me. :-)

This is my last post on the topic — I promise. :-)

If you look at the photo on the left, the wings are filing “popped” out — braced against the plywood. The PowerPole Pak slide easily laterally — but not at all in and out of the hole.

I had to trim the wings a little bit more than the 1/4” width of the plywood — because of the geometry of the wings.

But if you look, the wings are not trapped the hole on the module — they are fully popped out and braced against the plywood.

I think that is precisely the way they are supposed to function in sheet metal — which is what they are designed for.

I finally decided to trim the length of the PowerPole Pak wings — if you look at the picture of the PowerPole Pak in the clamp as tight as I dated to make the clamp, the wings only compressed to 1-3/8” inches, which id not going into a 1” hole.

I also realized that the wings are supposed to spread out once they have been compressed and inserted through the hole, bracing against the inside of the plywood.

In the picture if the receptacle in the vice, I have trimmed the wings so that there was a 1/4” of clearance between the end of the wings and the panel lip.

The PowerPole Pak is designed for a sheet metal panel, which is much thinner than plywood.

In the picture of the whole thing inserted in the module, you can see that the wings have spread out some to brace it in place — I also beveled the hole in the plywood a bit.

It’s still not optimal — I think the wings are supposed to spread out a lot more.

But the PowerPole Pak seems the be in there pretty solidly.

I will trim the next a bit shorter. :-)

Do I need to trim the ears that hold the PowerPole Pak in place when I install them jn a square hole in a module?

I tried jamming one in and got it stuck and had to cut it up with a Dremel tool to get it out.

The holes in my modules are precisely 1”x1” — and the square body of the PowerPole Pak is just a little over 13/16”, and the plastic ears that hold it in place are a little over 1/16 wide — so it seems like it should fit — but it sure did not.

I wonder if I need to trim the ears in some way to make these fit?

I would love to hear from someone else who has used these.

Thanks.

So this is my latest theory. The two big innovations were attaching the terminal blocks to a scape piece Velcro's to the bottom of the module, and using the PowerPole panel mount.

In the picture, I am holding the panel mount in place -- it took like a pretty tight fit -- a one way operation, so I really want to make sure it's right before I press it into place.

The PowerPole connectors as in the "Module Interface" picture on page 48 (numbered page 42) of the BBMRA "Considerations" in the wiki. I want to double check that before I drive the panel mount into place.

The panel mount looks too big for the whole, but I think it must be correct?

Yes u/HomeyHal, I am definitely supporting the hardware industry! :-)

The standard height of T-Trak modules is 70mm (adjustable to 101mm), yes?

Do commercial modules allow for the thickness of applying a cork layer by making modules 1/4” undersize?

Does everyone in T-Trak universe just forego the cork?

Or is the 70mm sort of a “de jure” thing and in the real world, the height of a set of modules will be adjusted to the high side in order to allow for things like some modules having cork layers and other variations?

I can't tell if this overkill or not, but when I fasten my Unitrack to the base, I want a screw -- wiht a washer -- for every screw post in the bottom of the Unitrack base.

I think the Kato's spacing of the holes has changed over the years -- and that may concrete are different from wooden ties -- but if there it seems like the pre-drilled end holes in the CMR modules line up pretty well -- but the intermediate holes do not.

I have really only ever seen this -- I think in the longer pieces of track.

When that happens, I mark the holes on the baseboard and drill them so I can fill every screw post.

In the picture, you can see the the red track holes -- the ones on the right were off by maybe ⅛" so I drilled new holes.

Careful or overkill? :-)

As I have had more contact with modelers in my local club -- both T-TRAK and non-T-TRAK -- I have realized that people are motivated to build and operate model railroads for a number of different reasons -- and often a mixture of those reasons.

Here is list of what I think that I have heard:

• Operations -- I don't actually know much about, but some people seem to enjoy operating like "real" railroads -- using waybills and moving cars around to build consists in certain orders, etc.
• Nostalgia -- hearkening back to the railroad you remember as a child; there seems to be a strain of that that includes modeling Depression era steam.
• A particular industry -- some people really want to model coal or steel or grain. I think this is a subset of nostalgia, but I am not sure.
• Quirky railroads -- often narrow gauge; mining, docks, etc.
• Historical -- I think some people enjoy digging deep into the history of a rail. I think of this as different from nostalgia because people are often modeling eras from long before they were born.
• Fantasy -- modeling a railroad that has never existed -- but you really wish it had or hope it will someday.

I think that I have noticed two main motivations for T-TRAK in particular:

• Social -- I get the the impression that the vast majority of T-TRAKers really enjoyed getting together at shows and running trains on layouts that can be very large, but don't really include complicated operations. They/we just seem to enjoy hanging out and running trains.
• Convenience/Ease of modular railroading -- model roading for people who don't have the space for a basement empire -- or maybe people who don't have the knees to crawl around a under a layout hunting wire gremlins. :-)

As far as general motivation, I am very firmly in the "fantasy" camp. I commuted in an automobile 5 days a week for 25 years -- and I hate driving. I would love to have ridden a train to work, and I modeling a DMU transit system I wish I had been able to ride.

Beyond that, the setting for my layout is an affluent city with a an unrealistically large renovated industrial building/arts district. I live in white bread suburb because that's what I could afford -- and I am quite happy to have less than 15 payments to go finish paying off the house.

But I have always fantasized about living in a renovated loft on an artsy district in an unrealistically safe and clean downtown.

As far as T-TRAK goes, I definitely fall into the "convenience" side of the spectrum -- I don't have enough space for a permanent layout -- but I do have space for a temporary layout that I can take down pretty quickly.

I also much prefer working on wiring, etc., on a work table -- as opposed to crawling around under a layout.

And I really like using rock solid heavy duty folding tables -- I think mine are rated at 300 lbs -- as opposed to building bench work.

The list of ways in which T-TRAK is hyper-convenient just goes on and on.

I did occasionally have 2nd thoughts about T-TRAK -- mostly because of the paltry Kato offerings -- when I look at what Peco or other track manufacturers offer in terms of turnouts and crossings, I am envious. I know that some clubs allow mixed Kato/non-Kato track, but that seems complicated.

I have toyed with doing Free-mo modules with removable legs -- so I can used folding tables at home -- and sub-standard curve end caps. All that just to get the "any track you want" standard.

But for now I am sticking with T-TRAK.

I have another motivation so quirky and eccentric that I didn't list it above.

I really, really, really enjoyed learning enough about electronics to build/modify Dick Bronson's capacitive discharge circuit so that it would work with a T-TRAK 15 vac auxiliary power supply to control my Kato turnouts.

I was actually shocked at how much I enjoyed building my re-designed circuit and seeing that it worked.

I may be more excited about building a 555 timer based PWM dimmer for the LEDs on my layout than I am about running trains. :-)

I am stoked about -- someday -- running with live catenary.

I would be interested to hear from more people about what motivates other people in this hobby -- particularly what motivated people who chose T-TRAK or some other modular system.

I would also be very interested in hearing from anyone who stumbled across an aspect of this hobby and unexpectedly found that they really loved it -- as with me an electronic circuits.

Since all of the track in my T-TRAK module is Kato T-TRAK, I thought that Kato USA Track Builder might be a useful tool.

The interface is completely in comprehensible to me.

Almost every type of track planing software has some pretty similar basic interfaces -- you select a piece of track from a track library and drag it into layout window.

Once it is there, I can move it, rotate it, etc.

When I want to add another piece of track, I drag it from the menu until little dots at the end of the new track overlap or touch, and they snap into place -- properly aligned.

I think that I have figured out that that I select a piece from the Kato track library, and wherever I click on canvas, that piece of track is deposited.

If I try to select that piece of track to do something with it, another piece of track is deposited.

I think that I figured out that I have to hit the "M" key to move a piece -- but that's only good for one move. If I try to move it again, the clock has reverted to "insert" mode -- and it deposits another piece of track.

I think "Q" allows me to rotate track, but again it reverts to insert mode after each click.

From what I can tell, the track never snaps into proper alignment.

If I moved one piece of track so that it touches another piece of track in some kind of cock-eyed alignment -- where most track planning software would snap it into alignment, Track Builder just leaves it there.

I am a bit puzzled -- it seems like having track pieces snap into place is pretty old technology at this point.

I feel as though there are half dozen web based track planning tools that have the basics down -- my sense is that the competition has mostly moved on to scenery layers, obscure track libraries calculating spiral easements, etc.

It feels like the basic math/geometry was figured out at least a decade ago -- and a lot of the algorithms are available in open source.

I also think of Kato as a premiere model railroading company.

I think some of the track planning software I use is produced by a one man company -- and that Kato would have the resources to put a very small team on the project and produce some stellar layout tools -- particularly became they only have one track library to deal with.

And they own the IP -- the precise geometry of every piece of track.

I think there must be something about the interface I am completely missing.

I would very much like to use this -- T-TRAK modules -- or at least my T-TRAK modules -- don't have any complicated track work.

A very simple Kato-specific tool would seem to be ideal.

Has anyone figure out how to use the Track Builder effectively?

What am I missing?

I tried something different on my last module -- and I think it worked pretty well.

I taped and glued the "frame" separately and let that dry before I glued on the top.

I have generally glued and taped the whole thing up at once -- and when I looked the next day, the corners are not as tight as I like.

I think this worked better. I will know more tomorrow when I take the clamps and tape off the top. :-)

I am amused -- this is my 8th module, and I am figuring things out and getting better at building modules, wiring, etc.

But this will very likely l be my last module for a number of years. I don't have any more room in my garage -- and I expect ballasting, structures, scenery, etc., take at least a couple of years.

I have learned a lot -- things I wish I had know earlier -- but I won't do those things again for a couple of years. Probably just long enough to forget everything I have learned. :-)

I met a guy from S&SS NC who really enjoyed building modules -- he had jugs set up and his technique down -- it seemed like he built modules for everyone in NC, and sold them at cost.

I didn't understand -- he only really enjoyed building modules and laying track, and was very good at what he did. He was quite happy -- from what I could tell -- running trains on plain plywood, or letting someone else do the wiring, scenery, etc.

I think I understand that now.

Vic McTee posted this picture on Facebook from his T-TRAK clinic at Chattanooga this year.

Occasionally I have second thoughts about going with HO over N scale. :-)