Hi a total newbie here. You could say I'm expecting, my first baby is somewhere in the mail between California and Puerto Rico. Anyways preparing for the arrival of my Bachmann set I found a freeware named "Right Track Freeware" and it basically lets you build a virtual layout on your computer but it uses as a model the code 100 Atlas tracks; are they physically comparable to the Bachmann E-Z Track or will the layout I made using this program will not come out in real life using the Bachmann tracks?
Thanks for any help.
(you might be seeing lots of other questions in the future)
Hi, there! Welcome.
The gauge of the tracks, that is the distance between the rails, should be spot on for both of them. After that, it's like night and day. The EZ-Track is rigid and limits the configurations you can employ for your track plan. Flex-track, on the other hand, is infinitely variable in terms of what it will permit you to do...with some skills building, of course.
I think that most of us, because of small errors in what we do, are not going to have our track plan reality better than about 95-98% of what we derive on our computer programs. I am not familiar with this program, nor have I ever used any other. However, many who have used them have reported that there were little glitches to overcome as they got closer to the end of their track laying and were beginning to encounter geometric difficulties. With flex-track, such near misses can be corrected by taking out the two or three feet on either side of the miss and adjusting curvatures. Not so with EZ-Track. The curve radii are fixed, so now what do you do? Well, I'll tell you what I and others have done: we use flex-track in the section needing the adjustment, and all comes out well.
Shorter answer...you can get it nearly right with either parameter, but be prepared to use flex-track at some point if only to close the loop nicely.
Oh, I almost forgot. Congratulations! Diesel or steam?
To answer your question, I designed a 4 x 8 layout using the Atlas software planning to use EZ track. It ended up 4.5 x 8 with the easy track.
Short answer, Atlas and EZ track sections are not the same.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
SpaceMouse wrote:To answer your question, I designed a 4 x 8 layout using the Atlas software planning to use EZ track. It ended up 4.5 x 8 with the easy track. Short answer, Atlas and EZ track sections are not the same.
Interesting, radius is radius and length is length. Must be in the turnout types.
Joe
Joe,
You are right. Crossovers take up more space with EZ track. Also with the built-in roadbed, the track is wider than Atlas w/ cork. (And a lot taller) .
Caution:
I used the software together with an Atlas layout plan and found that track did NOT align exactly. Atlas told me that "slight adjustments are necessary" meaning small gaps in one rail to make a curve fit. They said these are within modeling tolerances and should have no effect (give or take thermal expansion).
When I substituted Walthers/Shinohara turnouts in place of the Atlas turnouts, I had to chop them to fit. Combined with the slight variation in frog angle and radii, the final layout was maybe 90% of the original plan.
Use the software as a guide and expect some variation. It is not CAD.
Terry