Now that I have some Fast Tracks SweepSticks to make accurate curves, I experimented some more with the Peco Code 83 (US Style) flex track I was planning to use.
As per my previous experimenting, it curves easily, like Atlas, very smooth, not wiggling or careful working along like ME (I have some of that, too). It does not snap back to straight like Atlas - but it is very easy to put back to straight withlout little wiggles in it.
I'll add some pictures later. I stook a section and used some 30" radius Sweep Sticks to form a curve. After removing the SweepSticks, the track remains curved on my bench. Putting the SweepSticks back in, there was a slight deviation - more than likely caused by me when removing them, not by the track straightening itself, as it has laid there undisturbed for several weeks now. Had the track been fastened down to something before removing the SweepSticks, it would have stayed there perfectly.
So I am happy with my choice of Peco track (if only they would get those #6 Code 70 turnouts released...come on, Peco, it's been 2 years!). I can get the turnouts I want, and the flex track is a perfect compromise between the springy Atlas and the stiff ME. Easy to smoothly curve like Atlas, but holds the curve like ME. And it looks good.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Randy, if taking photos, could you do a close-up of Peco next to Altas and ME so we can see the visual difference? If not a bother.
Paul
Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent
I'll have to try and find some Athearn and ME, it's all probably buried in the stack in the corner of my garage from when I cleared the basement. I have the Peco at hand because I recently bought 2 boxes of it.
I know it matters to some people, but I'm not looking at my track that close up, and once ballasted and painted, I don't even see the Atlas details. I will say the spike heads on the Peco when viewed close up (to me, that's taking my glasses off and holding it a couple of inches from my nose - things are really clear to me when I do that) are very tiny and look like they shouldn't hold anything. I'll see how a picture comes out - I only have a phone, not a good camera with a macro lens.
Actually, it came out pretty good:
I agree Randy. I'm building my layout using Peco code 83 flex, being the first time I have ever touched a piece being last month.
I like it much better than Atlas. Each has their own methods, but I lay my roadbed down first. The Peco is very easy to simply form along a curve, keeping it centered as I work along the curve. I haven't botherd to use ribbon rail or sweep sticks, etc.
One thing, the width of the rail base (dont know the technical term) is narrower than Atlas. I use Atlas N gauge code 80 joiners, and they had to be splayed a bit to fit over Atlas code 83 while they slip easily onto the Peco code 83. In fact, many of the joiners are too wide and have to be narrowed.
- Douglas
Doughlessthe width of the rail base (dont know the technical term) is narrower than Atlas.
Wabtec and the ASCE calls it the base, WIKI calls it the foot.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
I like Peco track as well, both flex track and switches.
When I was a newbie, back almost 10yrs now. I was at Caboose Hobbies shopping for track. And when I looked at Atlas track I didn't like how it straightened out after curving. I took a look a Peco flex and liked how it easily curved and hold its shape. Been a Peco user since then.
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
How does the Peco code 83 rail cross-section compare to Micro Engineering? Any idea? I have no trouble connecting Atlas code 83 to my code 83 Fast Tracks turnouts made of ME Code 83.
Since the Peco and Atlas are about the same (outrageous!) price per stick, the finer spike heads on the Peco might make it my flextrack of choice in the future.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
Atlas is easy to use, but the cross section is the worst in the comparison by far.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
I am by no means an expert, building our first layout, but I did do a lot of research on the components, including the Code 83 track that I would be using. I wanted consistency, so my intent was whichever I selected, would be the one used throughout.
Peco has a really nice balance between the rigidity of ME and the super flexibility of Atlas. Having installed over 80 feet of it so far, I am very happy with how it goes down (and the few times due to user error, I have had to lift off). Might be a bit more expensive, but am very happy with the selection and investment.
Work Hard! Train Hard!
Rapido had a short-lived go at producing track. My local establishment has a wack of it in stock and I am thinking of grabbing it to use in staging. Does anyone have experience with Rapido code 83?
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Hello
I made my decision on PECO code 55 track and the newer Unifrog turnouts the other night. It's ordered and on its way.
I was leaning towards ME for so long because of its prototypical tie size and spacing. In my opinion it is the finest looking track there is cosmetically but they only have a number 6 turnout, N scale.
Fast Tracks looks like a lot of fun but I have all these beautiful brand new locomotives and rolling stock just sitting on the shelf doing nothing. After three years of starting my layout and scatch building bridges, I want to play with my trains now
I'm generally a very indecisive person until I know and understand all the facts involved. After seeing the robustness of PECO track how the rails are embedded in the ties and how flawless the turnouts work on my brothers layout, I finally made my choice.
And it's about time
TF