Which Hi-rail Track (Yet Again)?

[txspecial]

I have a 19x16 walk-in layout built on 5/8" plywood under 1/2" Homasote, and 300 ft of Lio FasTrack with TMCC.  The layout is my first, and the FasTrack and switches have worked superbly.  As amply noted, though, it's noisy and the plastic roadbed doesn't look realistic.

I'm thinking about replacing the FasTrack as part of a major layout upgrade to improve track appearance and noise level, as well as adding DCS to the TMCC, and am looking at Atlas O, MTH ScaleTrax, Gargraves or Ross track & switches.

I've followed and searched the previous discussions on track in the Forum, as well as the recent CTT article comparing track.  However, I have several questions not addressed in what I've been able to find:

• Have any of you switched from Atlas O to Gargraves, Ross or ScaleTrax?  For what reasons?  Are you satisfied with the change?
• Are there any other advantages of Gargraves and Ross track over Atlas O?
• Do the electrical connectors on Atlas O track loosen over time?  How much problem do the "brittle" switches pose?
• Have any of you switched from ScaleTrax to Atlas O?  For what reasons?  Are you satisfied with the change?
• The disadvantages of ScaleTrax seem to be its wide track spacing, limited selection of sizes and difficulty fitting track pieces together.  Are there any other disadvantages of ScaleTrax that arise as the track is used?

I'd like to thank any and all in advance for your thoughts.  If the questions have already been answered but somehow missed in my searching the Forum, please just point me in the right direction.

Bob

[chuck]

Scale trax doesn't play well with anything else pus it has an odd tie spacing and tieplate detail.

Gargraves wood ties look like wood.

Atlas O has decent detail and the tie plates and spikes look reasonable.  The flex track is not easy to work with.

Ross track probably looks the best but is not made of solid rail. The ties are slightly oversized.

Ross switches are the best, period.  Some folks will use Ross switches with Atlas track. 

BTW, you can use a wash on the FastTrak ballast to make it look more realistic and there are some techniques to quiet it down, including using foam no-grip shelf liner under the track.

Also, Atlas will be releasing its own version of FasTrack shortly with a more realistic "T" profile. 

[txspecial]

Chuck -- thanks very much for your insightful comments.  I've tried lots of different washes with the FasTrack, and it looks better, but I think it's the uniformity of the ballast that gives an artificial feel.  The electrical properties of the track and switches are outstanding, however.

I've tried painting the outside rails a rust color, and painting the center rail flat black, but it still does not look as realistic as the other "hi-rail" track.

Do you have any thoughts about electrical properties of Atlas O, Gargraves, Ross and ScaleTrax?

The reason I ask is that I bought a 4x8 of Atlas O and tried it out -- had lots of connectivity problems with the little track fasteners, and I was concerned whether they loosened up in time.

Bob

[chuck]

The newer style Atlas O connectors have small "dimples" in them that help hold them in place.  NOTE: Atlas O track is not meant to be used for temporary/floor layouts.  The mechanical and electrical properties make it suitable for permanent use.  Since it is Nickel Silver it takes solder very well and I would give serious consideration for doing this on a permanent layout.  Ross makes a nice roadbed product that works with their own track as well as Atlas.

[txspecial]

Thanks, Chuck. 

From having fiddled with the Atlas O test track I bought, I can well see that it's not suited for temporary floor layouts.  Maybe it's just my hand at connections, or laying out the test track on the carpeting, but I had a numerous problems getting good connections to run electricity throughout the track for power -- thus my concerns over Atlas O track.

I think for me the hi-rail choice is probably going to boil down to Ross versus Atlas O.  Is there anything to the Ross claim that the pins assure track alignment (by implication better than the Atlas O track fasteners)? 

And would you happen to know if there is any noticeable difference in noise between these two brands of track? 

Finally, do you have an opinion on the ScaleTrax "claim" that their switches are stronger and more reliable than Atlas O?

I think I recall from earlier posts you said you used FasTrack, and that you'd painted the rails and base.  Are you satisfied with the FT, and at peace with the noise? 

Bob

[chuck]

About the only way to get Atlas to behave on a floor layout is to use cable ties to cinch track sections together and possibly use conductive grease in the rail joiners.  Neither of these are conducive to temporary layouts.  Neither of these issues apply to permanent installation.  The track screws hold the track on place and the dimpled connectors will maintain contact for electrical flow.

Pins do "help" with alignment of Ross/Gargraves but the tubular track has a slight noise issue, though nothing like FasTrack.  The hollow rails tend to "sing" a little at higher frequencies.  I suspect that Ross sectional is less noisy than Gragraves flex in that there is no webing to resonate.  When GG is ballasted, noise is less of an issue anyway.  The quietest "layout" I've ever experienced was Atlas O floating on a short berber style carpet.  Only noise was whiring of smoke unit and clickety clack of wheels on rail joints.  It's too bad that carpeting doesn't look like any scenic material I've ever seen.

I have an extremely low oppinion of ScaleTrax.  Given the "flimseness" of the sectional track, I have a hard time imagining the switches being better than Atlas.  Of all of the swithces I have or have used, Ross is the top of the line, period.  Curtis High Rail is made to similar standards but may not have as large a selection.  You drop one order of magnitude down to Atlas/FastTrack, then its another order of magnitude drop to the original O-22 and then it's pretty much everybody else below this.   

[marxalot]

Ross is the top of the line, period.  Curtis High Rail is made to similar standards but may not have as large a selection. 

Chuck,

Is Curtis High Rail products back up and running? If so great. The last time I placed an order my check was returned with an attachment saying that do to health issues the order could not be produced. Mr. Curtis had been very helpful in getting me going on the right path with his switches...... he was dealing with an old HO'r!  Ross is very similar and is good quality no doubt.

Jim

[chuck]

I don't know if Curtis is still around or not.  I know that Mr. Curtis was involded with Ross in the beginning and that somehow they parted ways.

[lionelsoni]

Anyone considering pursuing Chuck's suggestion of using "conductive grease" should know that he's talking about electrically conductive grease.  Thermally conductive grease is very often used to improve the connection between electrical components and heat sinks, but is usually not conductive.  Other non-conductive greases are used to keep electrical connections reliable.  They neither harm the connection nor improve it directly, but, by displacing oxygen, keep the metal, particularly aluminum, from oxidizing and increasing the contact resistance.  These would also be useful for keeping track connections reliable, perhaps even more so than electrically conductive grease.  Finally, be aware that "dielectric" means "insulating", not "conducting".

[chuck]

Thanks Bob, I should have noted that in the post.  I think the electrically conductive suff usually has silver suspended in it to conduct the electricity.  Not easy to find, kindof pricy, and tends to be a bit messy if it goes where you don't want it to.