In HO there are least five choices for Code 83 flex track - Atlas, Micro Engineering, Model Power, Peco and Walthers / Shinohara. Are there any others? What are the merits and shortcomings of each brand, in particular Model Power which seems to be the least expensive? Just trying to work out what brand to buy.
Bill
At one time or another, I've used all of those brands of code 83 flex track except for the Model Power, so I don't know anything about it.
All the others are good quality track and we have some Micro Engineering codes 55 and 70 on our railroad and like it just fine so I wouldn't have any reason to not use their code 83.
We're using Precision Scale Top Track in both standard and superelevated for our main and code 70 for the passing sidings and really like it. It's the only one I didn't see on your list. It has nice spike and plate detail, with relatively small spike heads.
The last point is that I wouldn't let price be your main reason for picking one over the other since the track is going to literally make or break the operations of your railroad. Quality and appearance should win out over price.
Hope this helps.
bagal wrote: In HO there are least five choices for Code 83 flex track - Atlas, Micro Engineering, Model Power, Peco and Walthers / Shinohara. Are there any others? What are the merits and shortcomings of each brand, in particular Model Power which seems to be the least expensive? Just trying to work out what brand to buy. Bill
I would also suggest you purchase one piece of flex and match it up with your turnouts that you plan on using. I am using Walthers-Shinohara code 83 #5 turnouts with Atlas code 83 flex. I noted that there is a slight difference where the flex connects to the turnout in rail height. I have had to file these. The height of the ties appears to be where the difference is. Atlas flex has slight taller ties than the WS turnouts.
-Regards
Tom
Well, I have used Atlas and have the Micro Engineering track. The ME, while labelled as flex is more like bendable track as it bends to a shape and does not spring back like the Atlas does. The ME has nicer detail around the tieplates and spikes while the Atlas will form a nice smooth curve on it's own.
I have used both Atlas Code 83 and Walthers/Shinohara Code 83 flex track. I originaly used all Walthers flextrack because I was using their turnouts. I did mix the Atlas Code 83 flex trackwith the Walthers turnouts and they worked well. I have problems with the Walthers flextrack popping out of the ties if you try and flex it too much. The Walthers flex track is much more expensive than Atlas, and I buy my Atlas flextrack by the box of 100. My new layout is 100% atlas code 83 flextrack and turnouts.
I have never used MicroEnginering, however I have several model railroad friends who think it is the best flex track, due to detail.
JIM
Jim, Modeling the Kansas City Southern Lines in HO scale.
MIKE0659 wrote:The last point is that I wouldn't let price be your main reason for picking one over the other since the track is going to literally make or break the operations of your railroad. Quality and appearance should win out over price.
Ric Hamilton/others:
How well does the Micro Engineering flex line up with turnouts, e.g. Atlas, Walthers-Shinohara, Peco, etc. As per other discussants, I know Atlas with Walthers-Shinorhara turnouts is a height issue--I'd prefer avoiding having to file ties or put shims under them--as I'm a newbie, I figure it's going to be intricate enough of a process to get smooth curves, turnout function, etc. with track-laying not to have to worry about track/turnout incompatibility.
Jim
fulton wrote: MIKE0659 wrote: The last point is that I wouldn't let price be your main reason for picking one over the other since the track is going to literally make or break the operations of your railroad. Quality and appearance should win out over price. I can agree with this point, but as a novice trying to make the same decision (which code 83 track to buy), the answer still isn't clear to me. Appearance is a judgement call, but how does the "quality" of the track make a difference? If the rails pop out when the track is bent (Walthers/Shinohara, mentioned above) then it's not going to be worth the money (and this is one of the most expensive brands!). Has anyone else had this problem?Is there anything in the (presumably) lower quality of the cheaper brands (like Atlas) which will affect how well trains run on the track? Or how easy it is to install well?
MIKE0659 wrote: The last point is that I wouldn't let price be your main reason for picking one over the other since the track is going to literally make or break the operations of your railroad. Quality and appearance should win out over price.
I've used both Atlas code 83 and shinohara. I prefere the shinohara because I'm using walthers code 83 turnouts. If you are using atlas turnouts then I would stick with Atlas flex track. They both look great in my opinion, and Atlas is quite a bit cheaper. If you're not sure, go out and buy one flex track of each and make your own decision that way.
Oh, and atlas flex track is very bendable and snaps back in place, whereas the shinohara flex track actually keeps most of its shape once you bend it.When you're laying out your track, sometimes its nice to have the flex track hold its shape while you are nailing it down, to get an overall view of the final layout.
We've laid many hundreds of feet of Precision Scale, Walthers/Shinohara and Micro Engineering without ever popping the rail out of the ties on our own and other's railroads.
The only way I can think of to pop it out of the spikes is to try to over bend it in one quick bend or to twist it. You have to work it to the curve you want a little at a time. No, it isn't as flexible as Atlas track, but the idea behind flex track isn't to be able to wave it back and forth, but to flex it to any curve you want. Any flex track will do this, but not all will be able to be curved just by grabbing the ends and bending in one shot.
The more difficult to flex track also holds the curve you put into it, it doesn't have to be pinned down as much just to hold the curve, especially if you glue your track.
The last consideration is your talents when soldering your track. If you are a little weak in this area, you might have problems getting smooth joints in the curves. It's a pretty common problem on a number of layouts I've seen. A nice curve with a kink at the joint in the middle.
The appearance issue is only as important as it is to you. We were looking for a certain level of detail and found it. When ballasted ands weathered, this detail really comes out and improves the look of the scene.
When mixing brands of track and turnouts, as well as rail sections (Codes or sizes), you may need to do some shimming or other things to get the rail head level for smooth operation. We used cardstock of various thicknesses and even sanded some to get the transition we needed. The effort paid off since we can operate up and down grade with live coal loads and pushers, shove and pull through turnouts and not have any derailments. Of course a big part of this is your rolling stock and locomotives too.
But the point is that the work you put in when laying that track (And even roadbed.) will pay off in the long term.
All the flex track is good and will be as reliable as long as it is put down properly.
Like someone else suggested, buy a piece or two of each brand and try them out on whatever material you are using for roadbed and with the fastening system you will use to hold it down.
As with everything else, it is all up to your preferences and what you are comfortable with.
Good luck.
jbloch wrote: Ric Hamilton/others: How well does the Micro Engineering flex line up with turnouts, e.g. Atlas, Walthers-Shinohara, Peco, etc. As per other discussants, I know Atlas with Walthers-Shinorhara turnouts is a height issue--I'd prefer avoiding having to file ties or put shims under them--as I'm a newbie, I figure it's going to be intricate enough of a process to get smooth curves, turnout function, etc. with track-laying not to have to worry about track/turnout incompatibility. Jim
I don’t have any code 83 around to compare it with the Atlas 83. All I have is ME code 70 and the Atlas 83. What I will say however I think you are dealing with less than .020” difference between the various manufacturers of code 83. Filing/sanding that off the bottom of 5 or 6 ties near the joint would not be very hard. Atlas also makes transition rail joiners for code 100 to code 83 instances but can be adapted to use for a small difference like we are talking. Also keep in mind that when the track is ballasted and glued, it will not move.
Seeing that you are a newbie, I would recommend using the Atlas 83 at least until you get the hang of laying track. If you mess up with the Atlas, it will easily return to a straight piece where the ME won’t. I have found that I had to lay the track two or three times till I was satisfied.
As an aside, here is a couple comparative pictures of track. ME code 70 is on the left, Atlas Code 83 in the middle and Atlas code 100 on the right. The ME track is delicate and will easily rip off the ties. The 83 is more robust. The Atlas 83 does not look bed in person but when you can get a camera lens that close, it does show up as big spikes. I personally think I will do the code 70 when I lay track for my future empire
http://home.xcountry.tv/~r.hamilton/quickpics/DSCF0001.JPG
http://home.xcountry.tv/~r.hamilton/quickpics/DSCF0003.JPG
Jim, IMHO your best bet is to buy one of each as has been suggested and judge for yourself.
As far as laying flex, it is not hard. I, and many others, use clear acrylic caulk on the cork or roadbed and I have found that when I put the Atlas flex down on that caulk, it sticks immediately and rarely moves on it's own accord. The caulk is still plenty pliable so that the flex can be tweaked into place but it stays where I put it. There have only been a few cases where I pinned it down.
Best of hunting for your solution.
I used both Walthers and Atlas on my last layout. I'd say the Walthers looked a little better, the ties were closer to scale, and I like that fact that the track was spiked down rather than a big nail in the middle of the ties. The spikes gives it a little more of a 'handlaid' look. Also, because the Walthers track is more rigid, the curves you put into it are smoother. I used a set of (I think?) Ribbonrail metal gauges which fit between the rails and are curved to specific radiuses (radii?). If you look at a curve made with Atlas track, it often is actually a series of alternating short curved and straight sections.
That all being said, if I use code 83 on my new layout, I'll probably use Kato Unitrack.
jsmaye wrote:What I like about the Atlas track is that it's much easier to add easements due to the springiness of the track. The stiffer tracks only have whatever curvature you bend into them.
This is what makes uing Atlas track better for a newbie.
jsmaye wrote:While I concede the superior appearance of unlaid Walthers/Shinohara (used it in the past) and ME flex track, I believe that, once the track is laid, painted, ballasted, weathered, then surrounded by buildings, vegetation, figures, and details, and, finally, traversed by trains, the difference becomes negligible.
True to a point. While operating you don't notice it but if you like 'railfanning' your layout with a camera, some track shows up like a sore thumb...at least to me. Handlaid with spikes every fifth or sixth tie and code 100 with the oversized spikes are on the top of my list in HO. That is why I recommend people start with code 83.
Thanks to everyone who responded to this post. As I live in New Zealand and don't really have a LHS, let alone one that stocks each brand, it wasn't practical to try one or two of each brand, so I have to rely on forums like this. I was however able to try several different types of turnout and have settled on Atlas 505 and 506 #6 and Walthers/Shinohara #6. Since I started this post a box of Atlas code 83 has arrived so that is what I will use at this stage.
The general concensus seems to be that all brands are acceptable but that the ME ,Walthers and Peco are superior to Atlas in appearance.
Now has anyone used the Model Power track?
I had the same question as you a when I started laying track a few months ago. After some research,and advice drom the forum i chose peco code 83. It has the best appearance and ease of use in my opinion. The ME is good also,just harder to work with,and less forgiving once shaped. The Alas is reliable,but I found it sits higher on the ties,and actually has a wider railhead which makes it appear bigger than ME,Peco,Walthers.Also,since I build my turnouts with the Fastrack jigs,I wanted track with 1/16 inch ties so no shimming would be needed. I do use the Atlas for hidden areas because of the cost advantage,but that is beginning to narrow.It's all a matter of personal choice. For me,ease of use and appearance were paramount.