Trains.com

Change to Fastrack idea.

954 views
5 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Plymouth, MI
  • 1,615 posts
Posted by chuck on Monday, October 2, 2006 9:33 AM
The track isn't hollow.  The "U" shape sits on top of a bunch of plastic nubs.  This keeps the track from collapsing if you step on it.  Stuff was meant to be placed on a floor and meant to survive being stepped on.
When everything else fails, play dead
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Southwest of Houston. TX
  • 1,082 posts
Posted by jimhaleyscomet on Monday, October 2, 2006 8:55 AM
I hope Lionel continues to manufacture K-line snap track.  Very realistic looking, easy to assemble, easy to modify, easy to insulate sections, black center rail.....but alas new product will probably never be manufactured.  The whole problem with T rail is how do you provide for good conductivity without solder?

Jim H
  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Monday, October 2, 2006 8:06 AM
I bought into using the Realtrax line because it was the most affordable alternative to tubular track. It does take practice to lock and unlock sections while holding them at the correct angle. If I had to do it all over again, I would go with Atlas simply because the flexibility of designing a layout is greater due to the overwhelming variety of product. Once leaving tublular behind, there was no looking back except perhaps with a sense of nostalgia..

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    July 2002
  • From: A State of Humidity
  • 2,441 posts
Posted by wallyworld on Monday, October 2, 2006 8:06 AM
I bought into using the Realtrax line because it was the most affordable alternative to tubular track. It does take practice to lock and unlock sections while holding them at the correct angle. If I had to do it all over again, I would go with Atlas simply because the flexibility of designing a layout is greater due to the overwhelming variety of product. Once leaving tublular behind, there was no looking back except perhaps with a sense of nostalgia..

Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.

  • Member since
    April 2004
  • From: Holland
  • 1,404 posts
Posted by daan on Monday, October 2, 2006 4:01 AM

The MTH realtrax can indeed be tricky to get together. Also the tabs are very sensitive and the first time I used it (a friend of mine has bought it for his layout) it had serious conducting problems due to the tabs. (and yes, they where in the right way connected!) I'm not a big fan of it due to that experience. ( a simple oval, after a few rounds the engine stalled almost everywhere until you moved the track a bit and then it stalled on another place)

What I don't understand is that the simple 027 track with extra ties looks more prototypical then fasttrack (railshape indeed!) and is far better then realtrax regarding conduction and joining together, but 027 is seen as toy-rails??  The 0 gauge tubular track is a bit too high for scale size, 027 tubular is far better and gargraves (also tubular) is about the best looking track money could buy AND with all the good things tubular has in advantage of the newer stuff.

Besides that, you could state that tubular needs a roadbed and that it takes more time to set up your layout, but I don't think the MTH nor Lionel roadbed looks "real" either in terms of color and shape. It's simply too high, the angles of the roadbed are too steep and the color is too bright. If wanting prototipical looks, you'll have to paint it and add extra ballast to the sides to weaken the angle of the roadbed.

Fasttrack is a great way to use the trains on temporary layouts (better then realtrax) since it keeps together much better, but if you're going to build a layout with tracks screwed down, I really don't understand the need for anything else then tubular. It's simple, cheap, easy to shorten and conducts well.

If you want solid tracks, you could look for Atlas 0 rail, but beware of the joiners, after a while they will get loose and need soldering.. (h0 is jammed with those joiners, and I don't have good experiences with it, even when new..) If you don't have a problem with soldering the joints, realtrax also offeres solid track, easy to insulate tracksections and easy to add additional wiring. But you'll need to solder the tabs together in order to guarantee a good operation in the future.

Daan. I'm Dutch, but only by country...
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: St. Paul, Minnesota
  • 2,116 posts
Change to Fastrack idea.
Posted by Boyd on Sunday, October 1, 2006 11:09 PM
With subtle changes to it, I would  like to see them change the shape of the tubular rail to an I shape like a real rail. They could possibly do this without changing  the molds of the roadbed. The ends where the rails mate would still need to have the current shape but the rest of the rail could look more natural. I know of the other track out there, I tried MTH Realtrax and had two pieces of it that I could NOT get to go together. I  ended up  breaking the tabs on the ends of two pieces of it so now they are for display trains. The other two sections I returned and bought some more Fastrack.

Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month