Not only that, but they will run significantly better.... Stick to the G1MRA pretty much, although better still is the NMRA specs, but stay at the recommended values, not the wide tolerances... this way is a little "tighter" than G1MRA, but operation improves.
Both standards have some weird tolerances to accomodate the typical tolerances of LGB and others, the NMRA "latitude" is worse, but the core specifications are really better.
Mostly this is gauging wheel back to back precisely, making sure none of the flanges are too thick (otherwise back to back and gauge is impossible at the same time)... then reducing the flangeway widths to specs.
What you wind up doing is getting switches to support the wheel tread all the way through the frog, not have the wheel fall into the frog.
This also eliminates the need for flange bearing frogs and eliminates the requirement that all flanges be the same depth, so you don't get the "bump" in the air either, where the tread leaves the rails to ride on the flange, thus breaking contact between the tread and rail.
This also clear increases the power distribution to the loco through the frog... you see Piko put the metal strips in the bottom of the flangeways to help pickup, but the bottom of the flangeways is where dirt and junk collects, not a great place for conductivity.
It takes working on both rolling stock and track switches, but the rewards are greatly increased running reliability, both power and tracking.
Greg
