Atlas or Peco

[Anonymous]

im about to start laying track on my new HO layout [:D] im using code 100 track and will be wiring up DCC, i have LOTS of switching built in. I know Peco turnouts are better quality but even using the cheaper Atalas to buy all those turnouts will cost me over $600![:0] which do you think i should use based on cost, reliability and all that, which is a better value?

[ClinchValleySD40]

Peco. Price = you get what you pay for.

[Anonymous]

Peco is coming out with code 83 American Prototype track and turnouts. Also if you are thinking of switching your t.o.'s manually you can save some in that you will not require ground throws for the Pecos, this may offset some of the cost difference.
My $.02
Mark
http://webusers.warwick.net/~u1015590/

[Anonymous]

im throwing my turnouts with a push-pull device with knobs on the side of the benchwork

[Anonymous]

I use peco and micro-engineering turnouts on my layout. The peco is much easier to deal with, and if they made code 70, I would use them exlusively.
The model railroad club I belong to used to use anything that anyone brought in, and we had the resulting problems. About 5 years ago, we decided to standardize on peco code 100, and we have had zero problems with the several hundred peco switches we have. Wish I could say the same about the shinohara switches that were installed before we standardized.[banghead]

[orsonroy]

Jtrainnut,

I'm using Peco code 75 and Micro Engineering code 70 and 55 without any problems. Wherever I have two different track sizes butting up against each other, I just file down the hump. 1-1/2 levels of track are in and operational, and no derailments caused by the filed areas yet!

[Anonymous]

Are Atlas turnouts "that bad ," or are the Peco "that good ? " I'm considering the same as JPM335. Will I regret it , because of being "cheap?" Any comment on the new Walthers dcc freindly ?

[Anonymous]

I am using Atlas turnouts on my first layout because it is an Atlas track plan. they work OK. I have had some problems with them. most of the problems were the trains derailing as they entered the turnout. I think the #6's(and i only have one on the layout) work better than the #4s.

[Anonymous]

On all of my previous layouts, I used Atlas turnouts. On my current layout, I used Peco turnouts. I definitely would never go back. Having said that, if you are on a tight budget, the Atlas turnouts are OK. It's sorta like comparing a Toyota and a Lexus. Both are good, but one is a lot better.

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rororo

Are Atlas turnouts "that bad ," or are the Peco "that good ? " I'm considering the same as JPM335. Will I regret it , because of being "cheap?" Any comment on the new Walthers dcc freindly ?

Many, many modelers use Atlas switches and track components, and they'll provide you with reliable service for years. That said, Peco really is a higher quality product that offers track components that Atlas doesn't (conversely, Atlas offers more diamonds than Peco, which is a pain).

I prefer Peco for several reasons. When I started laying track almost a year ago, Peco only offered codes 100 and 75. Code 100 is way too big, and code 75 was appealing to me because it's different (code 83, while liked by many modelers, is really too big for most mainline track before 1960). Peco switches don't require ground throws and generally don't fall apart like Shinohara and Atlas switches can. I do use my Peco track with certain Micro Engineering track elements, mostly diamonds and code 55 track (for sidings)

So yes, you can buy Atlas track to save some money, but Peco switches are generally better all around. Using Peco code 75 switches, Atlas code 83 flextrack, and Micro Engineering code 70/83 transitional rail joiners might be a viable option, as would waiting for the complete line of Peco code 83 track (which won't be completely released for a couple of years)

[cwclark]

pecos turnouts are better quality and look more prototype than Atlas...but I have always used Atlas turnouts since i started modeling in '78...I customize them so that they look better than what they do out of the package...first, i cut off those fake ties at the ends and replace them with styrene or balsa wood strips for the ties..secondly, there are two solid plastic parts atop two of the ties where the switch machine is installed..i usually whittle them down with a hobby knife so that they look like ties, thirdly, I take a dremel tool cut off wheel and at 1/2 speed, grind down the turnout points so that the rolling stock doesn't pick the rail...and lastly, I weather the ties and rails...after i'm done with an atlas turnout the only thing that doesn't look prototype is the two grommets they use at the end of the point rails to hold them in place where they meet the closure rails on the turnout... I like Atlas turnouts...they have always been reliable (and cheaper on my pocketbook) I just wi***hey would make curved turnouts like the shinohara and pecos type...curved turnouts are the only place I use shinohara or pecos turnouts Chuck[:D]

[Anonymous]

Having just completed a layout and using Atlas switches, I wish I would have gone with the Peco's. My problem with the Atlas switches are the frogs. It appears the wheels from the cars and engines "drop" into them. Its like I have pot holes all over my layout.

As time permits, and my wallet will allow, I will begin replacing all of the Atlas switches.

My 2 cents.

[Anonymous]

" My problem with the Atlas switches are the frogs. It appears the wheels from the cars and engines "drop" into them. Its like I have pot holes all over my layout. "
dgoodlander

What code are you using ? Is it because of the gap of the extra high code 100 ?
That's another thing, "code 100 or code 83 ?" The savings add up, but will 100
cause me added derailment trouble, or is it just unprototypical ?

[Anonymous]

what about fleichman < i think thats how its spelled, i have an offer to pick up about 40 of em for $20, they need some work but its nothing i cant handle

[cwclark]

I have had to file the frogs on a few of the atlas turnouts..it is a problem at first but a few passes with a needle file and then they work fine...I usually file the frog point a bit thinner and then file the frog where the flanges roll across them over and over until the flange movement over the frog is smooth...Chuck[:D]