mixing track brands on the same layout

[mickey4479]

Interesting feedback on this tread. When I first got into O scale, I started with an MTH proto 1 starter set that came with a transformer and a loop of MTH track. My first layout was a 9 X 5, 0-36 diameter, a reversing loop and a siding. Because I liked the looks of Atlas track and especially the switches, I made a deal with the hobby shop to trade out the MTH track for Atlas. The added expense for Atlas track on that size layout was not too bad. Since that time, I have added on and the cost of Atlas track and switches is significant. However, I do not regret the decision to go with Atlas track. I am satisfied with the Atlas switches and the track. How large will your layout be and how much track and how many switches do you think you will need? That may help you decide.

[phillyreading]

I don't recomend mixing brands of track unless you have a few years experiance in the hobby as there are many problems that might arise, unlevel track issues at joining, track needs to be raised for use with Lionel switches, derailments at the place of joining(one rail wider than the other). Speaking of Lionel switches I am staying away from the 6-23011 series of O gauge switch as it has been my greatest headache using this style switch with older Lionel loco's and Williams loco's, the power even quits to the solenoid & light bulb-I have used a multimeter and found power at the terminal screw on the switch but not at the solenoid.
Have not had any problem with using GarGraves track except that GarGraves does not make an insulating pin for their track, so I have cut down K-Line S gauge insulating pins a little & use them.
Look at the track you are thinking of buying at a hobby shop first, put both tracks side by side to see any differances, then look at the track pins-what will it take to go from one type of track to another?
Lee F. in West Palm Beach FL

[winrose46]

I use tubular ogage on elevated tresels and within tunnels and gargraves on areas I have visible. The exception is my 3rd and 4th levels that utilize tubular O27 on the reversing loops with ogage tubular on the 10 foot span between the two loops and on tresels over the gargraves on the 2nd loop.

[Anonymous]

This is a very interesting question. I still have some tubular track along with some FasTrack and though I gotten some transition pieces, im wondering if I should keep the tubular track and just use them together with the FT or just use all FT from this point. Not an easy choice.

Chris

[brianel027]

George, are we are talking 027 track or tubular 0? The Gargraves switches had some design modifications made a few years ago and it is my understanding that the newer ones function much better than the older ones.

The Lionel 0 switches tend to be more reliable than the Lionel 027 ones, but that depends on vintage too. I find pre-1969 Lionel 027 switches to be much better than the newer MPC design still being used today. Although modifications can be made to the 027 switch to make it perform much more reliably.

Many like Spankybird here, have gone to using the newer redesigned K-Line switches... these have a very small almost non-existant switch box housing. Even with the older over-sized housing, even the older K-Line turnouts are better than the MPC-era designed Lionel ones.

I will add that the K-Line 027 uncoupling track is inferior to even the MPC era Lionel ones. And you would do better to buy used postwar ones... the windings must be better because they do work much better - for whatever reason - they just do.

On ballasting and adding ties to 027 track (and even tubular 0), I cut my extra ties narrower than the metal tie on the track, which allows more ties to be placd between the metal ones. Once you finish ballasting, you don't really notice this, but having the extra ties makes the track look much better. Aside from the additional work, adding the extra ties is still probably cheaper than switching track (for pure visual reasons). You can use balsa wood to make the additional ties.

Many will tell you that quality switches are worth the extra money, like Curtis brand. A few years ago I started switching switches (no pun) to pre-war Lionel 027 ones and find them to be superior to the newer ones without doing additional modifications.

[overall]

I would add those 3R ties to the tubular track along with ballast. That improves the appearence of the tubular track. The Atlas ties are smaller and spaced closer together so the difference would be apparent for that reason.

George

[jimhaleyscomet]

I often use different types of track for the mainlines verses the inside loops and sidings.

Jim H

[cnw1995]

Do you just want to use up the tubular track? - the regular 'ol Atlas track sure looks better but it's far more expensive. I started with 027 in a train set and stayed with it partially because it's cheap! ;)

I guess, George, the only thing that matters is how it all looks to you.

[mpzpw3]

That is a hard question. The atlas switches that I have seen look pretty realistic compared to Lionel tubular. Are you thinking about adding ties to the tube track? That would probably help. Have you considered using tubular in hidden areas, such as tunnels, and areas hidden by buildings and scenery, and using Atlas for the areas most often viewed? When I changed brands, I was able to sell my O-27 track (pennies on the dollar, mind you), and purchase a lot of the track I currently use with funds from the sale. Not the best idea, but a thought.

[overall]

I would like to have the benefit of the forum's collective wisdom on a question . I like Atlas switches. ALL of my equipment operates through them without derailment. I have derailment problems with my Lionel 072 and Gargrave switches. Now, I have a lot of Lionel tubular track after being in this hobby since about 1962. I would like to use what I have rather than buying all new track. I know that Atlas switches and Lionel track can be combined by using transition pins. My question is, should I do it? If you visited a layout where the builder had done that, what would you think of it? Would you think it looked good, bad or really hideous?

Comments gentlemen?

Thanks in advance

George