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!

" A simple track question"

2145 views
6 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:07 PM

What era and prototype are you modeling?

The reason I ask is, Code 83 rail is the right height for 131-134 #-yd rail, the usual for modern construction.  (An industrial area in my neighborhood has a main switching lead laid with 131# rail rolled in 2000.)  It was first used for heavy mainline construction in the East by such railroads as N&W and PRR, starting before the Depression.  Code 70 is about right for 105-115# rail, which was and is found on more lightly built lines but is now very uncommon in new or main line construction.

The more usual prototype practice is to use heavier rail for specialwork, to minimize maintenance.  Having one turnout laid with 110# rail in an area mostly laid with 131# rail would be the reverse of normal practice.

Since I hand-lay my specialwork with whatever size rail is appropriate to my prototype's practices, I can approach this question with complete neutrality.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - on Atlas Code 83 flex with handlaid specialwork)

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 3,312 posts
Posted by locoi1sa on Tuesday, December 25, 2012 12:29 PM

Merry Christmas to you and yours also.

  Micro Engineering also has code 70 flex track too. I use a mix of code 70, 55 and built an industrial spur using code 40 stripped from some old N scale track. Even though this is all hand laid there is still no problem with modern wheels with RP25 flanges. What I do to join the different codes is to use half a joiner from the larger rail size and solder it to the larger and flatten the end and solder the smaller code rail on top. If there is supposed to be a gap I cut the rail between ties close to the joiner and glue a piece of styrene in between the rails. A little sanding and some weathering makes it invisible.

  Have you checked out Central Valley turnout kits? I have been using these for years. I make my own all rail frogs and throw bars for them. http://www.cvmw.com/

          Pete

 I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!

 I started with nothing and still have most of it left!

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Mount Vernon WA
  • 968 posts
Posted by skagitrailbird on Tuesday, December 25, 2012 12:19 PM

Have you looked at the Walthers/Shinohara code 83 turnouts?  I don't know how they compare price wise to the ME turnouts but they work great with Atlas code 83 flex track.  The ties on the W/S turnouts are slightly thinner than those of the Atlax flex track.  To be perfect one should probably shim under the turnouts for an inch or so but I have over thirty of them, have not shimmed any of them and everything works flawlessly.

Good luck!

Roger Johnson
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,670 posts
Posted by rrebell on Tuesday, December 25, 2012 11:45 AM

Remember, some engines (even if they say they have the proper wheels) will bottom out on the spikes, I have all code 70.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: west of Portland Oreg.( the city of Roses
  • 599 posts
Posted by TrainsRMe1 on Tuesday, December 25, 2012 12:52 AM

Thanks Crandell.

       That's great news, I want my layout to look it's best, and no knock on Atlas turnouts, I have quite a few on the layout, I just want to use a different Turnout,in my yards, is there anything else I should know about Micro engineering Turnouts???   Thanks once again for your information.

                                                                  Trainsrme1GiftCool

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Monday, December 24, 2012 11:06 PM

Yes, there's no reason why not.  The only sticky point is getting both the railhead top surfaces and the inside flange faces of all mated rails matched to being flush.  This will require shimming, or bent or modified or adaptive joiners, of soldering...some means of mechanically keeping those two critical bearing surfaces flush to each other across the gaps.  However, for the purposes of electrical continuity and mechanical bearing properties, they work the same way.  The gauge will be the same, the flanges will work against the flange faces the same way, but only if there are no staggers or jagged edges to catch them.

Crandell

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: west of Portland Oreg.( the city of Roses
  • 599 posts
" A simple track question"
Posted by TrainsRMe1 on Monday, December 24, 2012 7:46 PM

Hello,MRRder's,

       First I want to wish everyone a happy and SAFE holiday season, Merry Christmas!!!  may all of the modelrailroaders and modelrailroadettes and your families have a poroperous New Year!!!!!!

     My question is this, I'm using Atlas code 83 flextrack throughout my layout, and I'm using Atlas turnouts w/ caboose groundthrows, I was talking to a friend of mine at our local hobby shop, and he bought a couple of the Micro Engineering Company code 70 turnouts, I was wodering would these fit (and work) with my code 83 Atlas flextrack???? They look a little more realistic, Thanks and again Merry Christmas ans a Happy New Year!!!   

                                  Trainsrme1Gift

Modeling a (what if sub) of the Union Pacific to Coos Bay and Roseburg 

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

There are no community member 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!