Atlas code 55 track issues? HELP!

[NellsChoo]

Hi all

I have been reading Model Railroader for about a year now, along with a few other full and N scale railroading magazines. I am hoping someday to build my first layout, and in the meantime am buying engines and rolling stock that appeal to me. I was planning to use Atlas code 55 N scale rail because it looks so nice, but keep hearing about issues with this rail and wheel flanges on older rolling stock. How old is "older"? How hard is it to find and install replacement wheels on locomotives? It looks more difficult than with rolling stock.

I’d like to know a little more about this issue as I’d hate to lay Code 55 track and find out I should have used a different version. I can only find a sentance here and there on the topic.

Jonelle

[Anonymous]

Probably lots of "it depends" answers to this. For me it was a simple matter to replace wheels on rolling stock I had with Microtrains, but then they already all had Microtrains trucks, and I didn't have that many to begin with. As to locomotive, I have a Kato P42, which is not too old a model. It was extremely close to being a problem, in fact for some of the sectional pieces I got and a few of the flextrack lengths, the flanges did rumble on the ties (actually the little molded spikes that hold the rail to the tie). Some manufacturing variation coming into play, apparently, and I had enough extra track that I just set those pieces aside. For the majority I'd guess there was just the most minimal of clearance, where they may touch down on curves depending on how fast the train was going.

Just a few days ago I decided to grind down the flanges on the loco a little just to be sure. This seems to have worked out well.

Mike

[NellsChoo]

I see, so the flanges can be too tall? Hmmm... what is the best way of testing your equipment? By that I mean which type of rail setups are the most likely not to work? Turnouts?

[Anonymous]

Um, yeah, they can be too tall. I thought that was what you were worried about in the first place?

In the absence of any other responses here I'd suggest doing a Google Groups search, that's where I found some hits. Sort of new at this stuff myself, and not using any turnouts in my simple dogbone layout so can't help you there.

Mike

[NellsChoo]

I didn't know for sure what to worry about, that was my point. I guess I will just have to keep searching for info as I go along.

[Marc_Magnus]

I didn't know a lot about the Atlas code 55 It's just look fine for the few I have seen here in Europe.
I use since it exist the code 55 from Peco.
This brand offer flextrack and a lot of turnout and crossing, all in code 55
I run old Rivarossi/Atlas models on my Maclau river (still not for a long time, well better running steam engines are coming) and they run without problems.

The only drawback of this track is its apparence, the flextrack is ok; I think with a little weathering and cutting some ties randomly to hide the too much regular look it look fine, but the switches have a very big trowbar that needs some work to hide it. I cut the two pins going upstair . I remove the sping snap action because I motor them with switch master motors. To improve electrical continuity I use the electrofrog version of the turnouts.

[DSchmitt]

The Peco code 55 track is functionally code 80. The rail has a double base code 80 rail that is embeded in the ties in such a way that it looks smaller but still provides code 80 clearences. for the wheel flanges.

While there are wheel flange depth issues with Atlas code 55, it is not difficult to change the wheels, even on very old cars. Wheel flange depth on locos is more of a problem, but locos made in the last few years by the top line manufactures have wheel flanges that are small enough for the Atlas 55 track. I'm sure there are some people who who could help make a list of specific models, but I'm not one of them. Might be a worthwhile project

I suggest before buying a loco set it on a section of Atlas 55 track and look at it in good light also push the loco back and forth with your finger on its top. If it slides smoothly it should be OK. After a short time you will probably be experienced enough to tell if the flanges are OK just by looking at the wheels with the loco still in its box

[cuyama]

The issues with Atlas N scale C55 track and legacy equipment have been discussed many many times on the atlas model rairoading forums. A substantial debate, in fact, breaks out about every two or three weeks. Here's a recent example:
http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13344

Generally these "discussions" rapidly degenerate into name-calling and bad feelings, but there is some useful information exchanged as well.

Here's the bottom line. Atlas C55 is built to just match the NMRA recommendations. Many older (and current) products from Microtrains, Lifelike, and others do not precisely match the recommendations and many will not operate on Atlas C55 without modification.

For rolling stock like MT cars, this will require changing out wheels for lower-profile wheels -- coupla minutes per car. MT cars shipped in the last few months include lower-profile wheels that work fine. For older MT cars, you may purchase replacements in bulk relatively inexpensively.

For engines such as most Lifelike, Arnold, etc., it's much more involved. Northwest Shortline offers replacement wheels for many locos, but it involves disassembling the engine. Most Kato and Atlas locos seem to work well without modification.

The advantages of the Atlas C55 are clear: it looks great (except for the funky throwbars); it's very easy to wire the frogs for DCC; the flextrack actually flexes; prices are reasonable; etc. The disadvantages are also clear: Atlas C55 requires rework or tweaking of many locos and cars; only limited sizes and types of turnouts are available so far; early samples were fragile (since seemingly corrected).

PECO C55 is not nearly as good-looking as the atlas C55, but it works with virtually all current and past locos and cars. It's usually more expensive in the US, but does have the advantage of a built-in spring to hold the points one way or the other (you need a ground throw, switch machine, or something to hold the Atlas C55). The PECO C55 is slightly trickier to wire, especially with DCC.

This is not an easy choice. A lot may depend on how much equipment you already have on hand and how comfortable you feel working on equipment to coax it to operate with the Atlas C55.

I have operated on some very large layouts with each type of track and I can say that either can be made to work well with a variety of equipment -- it just depends on how you would like to spend your time and effort and the kind of results you would like to achieve.

Good luck!

Regards,

Byron
http://www.modelrail.us