Fastrack and Tubular, what do you really use?

[magicman710]

I noticed that in my older thread "Compare the advantages of fastrack and tubular" almost everybody said to go with tubular, and that they use tubular.

But, surprisingly, on my more recent post, "What people use for track survey" A LOT of people used Fastrack, so, whats the deal? Did everybody that posted on my old post used tubular?

I think on my new layout I will use either tubular or fastrack, but NOT both.  I see alot of people mix track systems on their layout, but in my opinion, it doesnt look great, but its what you want, and I have no problem with it.

 

Grayson

[Anonymous]

Well I would call Fast Track Tubular because it is. The only difference is one is on a plastic base and the other on metal ties. Tubular is tubular regardless of the base it sits on.

[magicman710]

Fastrack and Realtrax are technically tubular, but almost everybody on this forum understands tubular as being anything besides Fastrack or Realtrax.

Thanks,

Grayson

[Anonymous]

Real Trax is a solid rail. However I get your point 0-27 and Fast Track.

[kpolak]

I am planning to use fastrack on the flats, and tubular on a girder bridge that wraps around the Christmas tree halfway-up.

Fastrack w/ ballast doesn't look so good on bridges.

Kurt

[nitroboy]

If you have Fastrack and alot of tunnels, use the tubular in the tunnels. You don't see it, and its cheaper.  My new layout will have Fastrack. Been buying the pieces over the last year so it didn't hit the pocketbook to hard.

[chuck]

While FastTrack  is  made of tin plated steel sheet formed into an inverted U, it is not hollow.  There are plastic "nubs" that occupy 50% of the track.  Atlas O will soon be reeasing their version of FastTrack with rails shaped like Gargraves but on the same style plastic ballast base used on FastTrack.

[magicman710]

Not being rude, but this turning into a topic about whether fastrack is tubular.

[rogruth]

I use O-27 style tubular track with 42 and 54 inch curves and K-Line O-42 switches.Very pleased with my ,some say,stupid choices.

[Anonymous]

Mixing is ok if you have to do it for a short hidden space or in my case, I have to cross a bridge that won't let me use fastrak without a major hatchet job.  Easy fix, simply use four transition fastrak o and whatever o you need then resume the fastrak. To do this often on a layout would be expensive and probably be more expensive (or at least a wash of trying to save money using regular o) In my case, using  regular o was to solve a problem, not to save money.

I also enjoyed the other thread about the track and I was really amused at the amount of folks talking about how much more expensive fastrak was. Well, yea, it's more expensive than o and I'm a little hot about the high price of the smaller tracks but I find overall, fastrak to be my way to go.  I also like the plug and play ease of most fastrak accessories.

As for some of the folks giving examples of prices (a 10 inch straight for $4.00) all I can say is you need to shop around.  obvoiusly the regular o will be cheaper too but some of the price examples were, in my opinon, a little high and available cheaper somewhere out there. I know I pay less than $3.00 for the 10 inch and get even better pricing on the 30".

[dbaker48]

I am currently using fasttrack and gargraves.  Trying to decide which for the final layout

 

[3railguy]

Both are great track systems. What you choose depends on what your likes are. (and budget). If you're a tinplate kind of guy who is into postwar or prewar or modern copies of these, then tubular may be for you. Fastrack is more realistic better with realistic modern made trains. Fastrack switches do perform better than the tubular variety and Fastrack has a good variety of curve diameters. The cons are it is difficult to cut, expensive, and noisy if laid straight on a table without isolation (but so is tubular).

 Probably the best thing you can do is buy a loop of each and make your own decisions. We can only give you so much advice before turning this into track wars.

[otftch]

I use 027 tubular exclusively.27,42,and 54 inch radiuos curves and Lionel 027 and 042 switches.

                                                                             Ed

[phillyreading]

I use O gauge and 027 tubular track and Gargraves track.  Fastrac is over my budget allowance and would have to rework all my layout to incorporate the Fastrac. 

Just like smoking I say NO to Fastrac!!!

Lee F.

[thor]

I use tubular track wherever a bit of fiddling is required to make something fit because FasTrack doesn't allow for much, if any, deviation. I also use tubular for yards and sidings except for the turnouts which I bite the bullet and buy FasTrack for because they are so good.

I use FasTrack for the main lines where speeds are going to be higher and where loose joints could cause derailment. I use tubular anywhere there's going to be a lot of wiring, like track contactor switches, semaphore signals, crossings because FasTrack doesnt accomodate the lumps and bumps of wiring unless you cut away some of the ballast which spoils its appearance.

Eventually I could see my FasTrack being outnumbered by tubular because the latter is cheaper and it sounds a lot better, I really like the sound that wheels make on tubular and the clicking of the rail joints. I don't like its appearance and adding a few more oversized ties doesnt really help much but if I ever have a permanent basement layout I'll use LOOSE ballast to cover the bed to the height of the rails bottoms.

However I cannot see ever using tubular turnouts, they are really awful and buying top notch ones like Ross is as pricey as FasTrack which I prefer. Also I like the Art Deco look of the remote switch levers, they really are a class act in every respect.

You said "I see a ot of people mix track systems on their layout, but in my opinion, it doesnt look great" but I disagree because on our real life mainline station in England, the main lines were beautifully laid and ballasted but right opposite the goods (freight) yard was a pretty run down collection of heavily rusted rails and haphazard, splintered ties mixed in with occasional stretches of new ones and it actually resembles quite closely the sort of effect given by tubular/027 and FasTrack mixed.

[brianel027]

I "REALLY" use good ol' 027 track.

I know John Long and I haven't always seen eye-to-eye, but I think his comments are right on the mark here. It's a matter of preference based upon what you can spend, how much space you have for a layout, how much you hope to accomplish in that space, what kinds of trains you'll be running and then just what suits your tastes upon those parameters.

Really outside of some real basic rules, there's no right or wrong in this hobby. Some run conventional and others command. Some like postwar, others prewar and others modern. Some like true scale and others can live with the flexibility of "toy" trains. Some think MPC-era trains aren't any good, but for others (considering their bargain prices today) it allows them to participate in the hobby.

I remember when John Lennon was murdered and Ray Charles was asked what was his favorite composition by John Lennon. Ray responded how could he just pick one when they were all good, some stronger than others but all with their individual merits.

So it is with our trains. Whatever track (and trains) suits your tastes and budget will absolutely be the right choice for you.

[traindaddy1]

O27 tubular.  Fastrack is a little too noisy and expensive for this "older" guy.  I think the  tubular track compliments my idea of what a Classic TOY Train should run on. Thanks for asking.

[Santa Fe Kent]

It's all good!.... pass the salsa and chocolate sauce....