code 83 flextrack

[2021]

There is another concern when considering whether to use code 100 versus code 83 and that is the ties. Code 100 has larger ties (often black) that are less realistic than the smaller and better spaced ties used on code 83. Also the code 83 is more prototypical in size. Thirdly, you can't find bridge ties in code 100 (at least I couldn't). Having said all that, it probably sounds strange to say that my new layout will use code 100 - why, because it is more forgiving on installations and gives fewer derailments. It also eliminates the problem of deep flanges on some older model locomotives.
Ron K.

[Anonymous]

If I ever get a new layout off the ground (Its been years, a switch in living arangements in the house forced me and my dad to tare down my layout mid way through) I want to use Altas or micro engineering code 83, I really think its time to step way from sectional track (All of my layouts, while fun we're sectional nightmares) The loss of the Altas 83 rail joiners scares me. Would it be worth it to go back to Altas or move on to micro engineering?

[Anonymous]

Well i'm starting my third layout and I guess I'm going the easy route with Bachmann EZ track. It loks clean and will go together quickly.
Ken

[Anonymous]

I love the looks of the Micro Engineering Code 83 flex. In planning my next layout the ME flex will be in the foreground areas. The down side is that ME is a bit pricier than the Atlas which will be used in the areas a bit further away from the viewer. The price of the Atlas is fantastic, it works great - it just doesn't look as nice (in my opinion only) as the ME. I have not used the Walthers flex, so I really don't have an opinion of it.

[nslakediv]

When I started my layout Atlas just released the code 83 line, so thats what I went with, a lot has changed since then. 1) the flextrack used to have a fixed rail and a sliding rail, now both slide and it is true, the gauge does go a bit wide sometimes. 2) atlas used to have a code 83 railjoiner, it was flat and fit real snug on the rail, looked great. now they only produce the code 100/ 83 joiner, big and bulky and does not fit rail real good. 3) the turnouts used to have a real solid mounting system for the switch points, now they are real loose and I modify them before installation by cutting a thin piece of styrene and gluing in to keep points from breaking free of the tie bar. 4) when you put a turnout on a flat piece of wood and butt a piece of flextrack up to it, check out the difference in tie height. those are some of my observations, would I use anything else? NOPE!! I use walthers switches for the large frog # and the curved ones though. THAT'S EVOLUTION THOUGH.

[PennsyHoosier]

I am using Code 100 for everything. You can't miss. Code 83 isn't far behind.

[mcouvillion]

tdtess,

Some flextrack has one rail that is looser so that it is easier to form curves. The downside is that this track is harder to keep in gauge. Some track is very stiff and difficult to form curves (MicroEngineering comes to mind), but the detail is awesome and it will definately stay in gauge. I'm not aware of anyone making anything other than nickel-silver any more, so the difference in conductivity, if any, is negligible. In HO, code 100 is a little large from a prototypical standpoint; code 83 is more realistic to scale for mainline service. Code 70 is for lighter duty or sidings, and code 55 is mostly for industry spurs.

Use whatever floats your (U-)boat!

Mark C.

[deltamech]

I am currently building my third layout. I am using Atlas Flex Code 83 track on this layout. I glue the track sections to the roadbed. I have had very good results with this track and method of installation.

[IRONROOSTER]

Some flex more than others, opinion differs as to which is better. Personally, I like a lot of flex, but some prefer more stiffness. I use Shinohara code 100 in S scale and really like it.
Enjoy
Paul

[rexhea]

tdtess,
All I can tell you is that I have laid and operated on around 500 ft. of Atlas Flex, code 83, and I am very pleased with it. I haven't had any problems in the installation or operations and it looks very good. I have more track to lay down and will continue to use Atlas.

REX [:)]

[cwclark]

a lot of modelers will mix the track...they will use code 100 for the main lines and code 83 for sidings and / or spurs...some go as low as code 70 and code 55..that's real low!...personally i use all code 100 from Atlas or Model Power but they along with walther's make a good code 83 track..it all depends on what you want on your railroad..I use code 100 because i want the track to last a long time..i clean my track quite often and the higher track will last longer than code 83...I figure if the good lord let's me stay on this earth that long then i'll be cleaning my track for at least another 30 years...in that much time i could wear the rails down to a stub with all the cleaning i do....Chuck[:D]

[ClinchValleySD40]

Originally posted by tdtess

I see a wide range of prices for flextrack. What differentiates the quality of one brand to the next? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

How do I decide which brand to buy? $$$

Are some brands better conducters of electricity or is that a real concern to have? Nope

Code 83 flex (I assume we're talking HO scale) all operate the same, only difference is in looks.

Larry

http://www.youtube.com/user/ClinchValleySD40

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52481330@N05/

http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/showgallery.php/cat/500/page/1/ppuser/8745/sl/c

 

 

 

 

• Reply