Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Code 70 with 83 track

1069 views
4 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 2,343 posts
Code 70 with 83 track
Posted by kasskaboose on Friday, September 19, 2008 8:47 PM

I thought to have micro engineering code  70 track in my yard and sidings and 83 on the mainline.  Code 70 turnouts are far more expensive and harder to get than 83.  In fact, I haven't even seen anyone advertise No. 4 turnouts in Code 70.  I thought to use that type on the yard and sidings. 

Here are my questions:

1. Can't I just use code Atlas code 83 turnouts everywhere (cheap and plentiful) and have tranisition joniers to connect them to the code 70 track? 

2. What are good ways to have codes 70 and 83 on the layout? 

3.  Should I order unweathered ME Code 70 track now or wait until places have a supply of the weathered type?  I really like the pre-weathered track.  It looks better than anything I can do!  If I should do my own weathering, how?

TIA!

Lee

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Eastern Shore Virginia
  • 3,290 posts
Posted by gandydancer19 on Saturday, September 20, 2008 3:47 PM

Code 70 turnouts are not that hard to find, but they are a little more expensive. I used Peco small radius electro-frog for my code 70 areas, but I also have one CVT code 70 turnout kit. I haven't built it yet, but I don't expect to have a problem with it.

1. Yes, if you want to.

2. Code 83 for the mainline & passing tracks, and code 70 for yards, industrial spurs / sidings.

3. I just paint my rails with Roof Brown from Polly's or other paint brands.

If you want to use code 83 for everything, use a full height roadbed for the mainline, N scale height roadbed for passing sidings, and no roadbed for yards and industrial areas. There is not much height difference between code 83 and code 70. It's only 13 thousandths, and that small difference is hard to see, whereas the different roadbed height can be seen more noticeably.

Elmer.

The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.

(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Somewhere in North Texas
  • 1,080 posts
Posted by desertdog on Sunday, September 21, 2008 12:46 PM
 kasskaboose wrote:

I thought to have micro engineering code  70 track in my yard and sidings and 83 on the mainline.  Code 70 turnouts are far more expensive and harder to get than 83.  In fact, I haven't even seen anyone advertise No. 4 turnouts in Code 70.  I thought to use that type on the yard and sidings. 

Here are my questions:

1. Can't I just use code Atlas code 83 turnouts everywhere (cheap and plentiful) and have tranisition joniers to connect them to the code 70 track? 

2. What are good ways to have codes 70 and 83 on the layout? 

3.  Should I order unweathered ME Code 70 track now or wait until places have a supply of the weathered type?  I really like the pre-weathered track.  It looks better than anything I can do!  If I should do my own weathering, how?

TIA!

Lee

Lee,

I have used transition joiners, transition track sections (Walthers) and the old trick of squeezing a rail joiner very flat, setting the code 70 rail on top of it and soldering it in place.  All three methods work well for joining code 70 and code 83.  The Walthers transition sections are nice, but a little pricey and you need to cut out the tie runners on one side if you want to use them on a curve.  Even then, the curvature needs to be slight.

As to the pre-weathered ME flex track, I've used it when I could find it.  It does look nice.  When I could not locate it or get an order in a hurry, I used the un-weathered sections and sprayed them with various shades of Rustoleum: primer, black and a light dusting of gray.  The only downside to this is when you curve the track, it leaves bare spots where the ties have moved with the flexing.

John Timm 

 

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Monday, September 22, 2008 4:28 PM

I have seen many prototype installations where the specialwork was much heavier rail than the adjacent running rails, mainly to reduce the amount of maintenance required at places where maintenance is both a frequent necessity and extremely disruptive.

In my own work, if I have a Code 83 thoroughfare track the specialwork will be AT LEAST code 83, even though the yard and engine service tracks branching off it will be laid with code 70 rail.  Where the main line (code 83) passes through a puzzle palace yard throat I am seriously considering building the specialwork with Code 100 rail, just to get the contrasting 'heavier rail' look.

While I hand-lay my specialwork, the same rail height concepts apply to the 'store-boughten' variety.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Somewhere in North Texas
  • 1,080 posts
Posted by desertdog on Monday, September 22, 2008 5:59 PM
 tomikawaTT wrote:

I have seen many prototype installations where the specialwork was much heavier rail than the adjacent running rails, mainly to reduce the amount of maintenance required at places where maintenance is both a frequent necessity and extremely disruptive.

In my own work, if I have a Code 83 thoroughfare track the specialwork will be AT LEAST code 83, even though the yard and engine service tracks branching off it will be laid with code 70 rail.  Where the main line (code 83) passes through a puzzle palace yard throat I am seriously considering building the specialwork with Code 100 rail, just to get the contrasting 'heavier rail' look.

While I hand-lay my specialwork, the same rail height concepts apply to the 'store-boughten' variety.

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

Chuck,

You bring up a very good point.  In fact, I was a little bothered by some code 83 crossings in the midst of otherwise code 70 track on my layout until I saw how much heavier the rail is on many prototype crossings and switches. 

 

John Timm

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!