I am in the process of expanding my HO layout. I think I used Atlas code 83 flex track on the original layout with Peco #6 turnouts. I know some flex track holds a curve better than others during track laying. I'm looking for opinions and recomendations as to what flex track people like the best.
Thanks for you input
I seem to be in a minority group that feels the more flexible type like Atlas makes for smoother curves with a whole lot less effort, since it natually will form an easement. I tried ME, which is the complete opposite of Atlas - it doesn;t want to bend at all without persuasion. Frnakly, I hate it. Trying to make a smooth eased curve requires layoign it out on the subroadbed and then carefully working the track to follow the line. Atlas, all I ever had to do was secure a bit at one end to be straight, then from the other end (I usually solder 2 sections together so there are no loose joints in the middle of a curve to potentially kink) bend it in to the desired radius, and let the rest fall into place.
I'm using Peco turnouts on my new layout, because I need more variety than Atlas makes and I'm not about to hand lay. I tried that. Not for me. So I tried Peco flex - it's sort of an in-between. It bends fairlyeasily, but not as flapping in the breeze as Atlas. When let go with no fasterners, it spring part way back, not all the way back like Atlas. Since it's an exact match to their turnouts - I'm using Peco flex this time.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
The look of the track was more important to me than whether it was the springy type or the type that stays where you shape it to.
Walthers track stayed put where I bent it and there was a bit of a learning curve with the first few pieces. The secret when bending is to work from the far end of the piece back to where it has joined the previous piece. Once it has been shaped in place it only takes a couple of pins to hold it there until it is fastened more permanently as there is no springy force pushing against it.
Where the appearance of the track comes into play is when the layout is photographed. I am a details person and not all track looks the same to me even when just running trains. If you don't notice such things it doesn't matter what brand you use. If you plan to make photographing your layout as part of the hobby then you need to scrutinize the track closely before you choose.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Thanks Batman
I use nothing but Micro Engineering track, and I have never had trouble making curves.Disclaimer: I use the unweathered, not the weathered, track. The weathering coating seems to increase the difficulty of bending, I have heard.
Disclaimer: This post may contain humor, sarcasm, and/or flatulence.
Michael Mornard
Bringing the North Woods to South Dakota!
rrinker I seem to be in a minority group that feels the more flexible type like Atlas makes for smoother curves with a whole lot less effort, since it natually will form an easement.
I doubt that we're part of a minority, Randy, but I like Atlas track for the same reasons as you. It's also more affordable than M.E. or Walthers/Shinohara flex track.
Another of my favourites is Central Valley tie strips, which appear to make me a true minority. The tie strips are probably flexible enough to make a 5"radius, but they do have very good detail, and it's fairly easy to add the rails using contact cement. For that, I usually solder-together four or five 3' lengths of rail, then install it in one simple operation.For turnouts, I use ones from Atlas, Micro Engineering, Walthers/Shinohara, and Peco, along with scratchbuilt.
Wayne
I use Atlas code 83 mostly, but the lighter branchline, sidings and yards are nearly all code 70, with some code 55 on the branchline. To date almost all the code 70 is ME, but I bought a few pieces of Peco code 70 flextrack, and I like it a LOT better than the hard-to-form ME, so I'll be using it from now on.
Turnouts are all Fast Tracks, made with ME rail (that'sd what the jigs are designed to use).
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
eds-trains I am in the process of expanding my HO layout. I think I used Atlas code 83 flex track on the original layout with Peco #6 turnouts.
I am in the process of expanding my HO layout. I think I used Atlas code 83 flex track on the original layout with Peco #6 turnouts.
I use Atlas flextrack because it is easy to keep straight and it bends easily into curves. During the infamous Atlas flextrack shortage a few years back, I bought some Peco flextrack, installed it and hated it. Once shaped, it seemed impossible to get it back straight.
On my new layout, I installed mostly Peco turnouts because I wanted to rely on the spring loaded points that I could flip with my finger. On my old layout I used Atlas Code 83 #6 turnouts powered by Tortoises. That worked well, but too much wiring, running wires from DPDT toggle switches mounted on control panels to under layout Tortoises.
The connections between Atlas flextrack and Peco turnouts is seamless for me using Atlas rail joiners.
Rich
Alton Junction
I'll join the minority with Randy and Wayne.
I prefer Atlas flex track. I have found it to be extremely easy to work with. I only use other brands for code 70 and 55, or bridge trackage.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
When I saw minority, I mean typical responders to these threads - most of the "high end" modelers seem to prefer ME track. That's not saying anyoen who uses Atlas isn;t "high end" - Dr. Wayne's photos speak for themselves.
I've seen plenty of "down at the scale eprson level" photos - once painted, the Atlas spike detail appear no more oversize than any others. At least for Code 83 - the Atlas Code 100 track, on the other hand... The most jarring track to me is when it's all hand laid but only spiked every 3rdd tie or so. You sight down the rails - the turnouts flow like they were molded in place (because they were) but then you see spike..empty tie..empty tie..spike...
Was that Code 100 Peco flex? Because I'm having no problems straightening out the sections of COde 83 I have set up for a test track on my workbench. I've had a couple of pieces I've taken out of the box, made some curves with, the straightened out to slide right back into the box.
Atlas and Peco flex for me. ME bridge track where that makes sense. Peco, W/S, and hand-laid turnouts.
To get flex track straight again, or very, very close, turn it on its side so that one end of the ties is down, and give it a solid drop/rap on a countertop. You should be good to go.
I remember the first time I tried to work with the Walthers track, I immediately thought HMMMMMM! I am not sure about this. It did not take long for me to figure it out and actually like it. I still have no real preference though, six of one.........
The one thing I like about the Walthers track is when you take out the pins to stick it down it doesn't move which made it stay perfectly aligned with my spline roadbed.
To straighten it out just turn it on its side and push it flat, just takes a second.
Hi Ed, Writing as a (UK) Newbie to Model Railroads, my experiences are:
Shinohara: No No (albeit Walthers may have improved their new version) I found the Track was all too ready to pop-out from the scale Spikes. An unbelievable reluctance to curve and even with 30" (genuine) 'Tracksetters' in place, it just kept trying to straighten-up and forced the 'Tracksetters' out!!! Never again.
Atlas: Easy to flex and curve (sliding rail to the inside, as per Atlas website) No problems + it is very robust and takes a few knocks. Just needs a good No. of Pins to initially keep it in place. I used this for 24" Rad curves - I didn't even bother trying with my Shinohara track.
Peco: Excellent almost "slinky-smooth" ability to flex, curve and stay put. It is robust and scale dimension-wise, bang to rights as per American Railroad standards + the Rail-joiners are very unobtrusive.
Conclusion: I will probably relay all my Mainline with Peco and relegate the Shinohara to Spurs. Paul
"It's the South Shore Line, Jim - but not as we know it".
At the time I was building my layout (1995) there was a fellow that had an extensive layout in his basement and he used code 83 Shinohara. I was sold.
PRR_9616-FA2x by Edmund, on Flickr
Plus they had a huge selection of turnouts and crossings. Some of my crossovers are #10. I'm sure I purchased at least 200 m of flex track.
PRR_T-E7_sm by Edmund, on Flickr
I never had a bit of trouble making transitions or curves. There were a few places I forgot to trim off the little nubs on the ends of some of the ties (molding gates) Most of my visible joiners were Atlas N scale or Micro Engineering. Very tiny.
Of course, all for naught since it is no longer made. Still, I'd use it again. It has been carrying trains on almost a daily basis for 26 years and hasn't given me a bit of trouble.
Regards, Ed
Hi Ed, That looks like pretty good track laying to me. I hope I can get mine to that standard.
The main reason I chose Shinohara, was the greater range of T/O's available, especially Curved ones. Also I needed a 30 degree Diamond + 2 No. #4 T/O's. These were not available from Peco.
Some time ago, I did contact Walthers and ask if they would continue offering the same full range of track, now that Mr. Shinohara had retired. I hope they do so. Regards, Paul
My plans or for the visible part of my layout, I'm using Peco code 83 (Electrofrog) turnouts and flex track.
I did use code 100 Peco turnouts but Atlas code 100 flex in staging and the ties on the Atlas flex are thinner to the track dips down a bit from the turnout to the flex. It could use a bit shimming for that transition.
gmpullmanAt the time I was building my layout (1995) there was a fellow that had an extensive layout in his basement and he used code 83 Shinohara. I was sold.
I have some Shinohara code 70 track I bought years ago because I wanted code 70. Sure, it looks great but I am not Liam Neeson with "special skills" and it's like wrestling with an anaconda to get it to look good. Perhaps the guy with that great looking layout must have mastered laying it well and smooth. Great for him, and maybe you but, for me a big NO. I'm sure once it is down it is bullet proof, but getting it nice and smooth and even, I prefer track I can form more easily and looks good.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
LastspikemikeThe Walthers version of Shinohara is as easy (or difficult, depending on your point of view) as Atlas. Both have firm spring back effects.
I have Walthers (made by Shinohara) code 70 and it is night and day different from my Atlas code 83 and code 100. It's stiff and you have to do a lot of working and massaging and re-aligning the ties etc. to get it formed right and looking good. My Walthers code 70 is not springy at all. My Atlas is springy and easy to bend.
LastspikemikeThe Walthers version of Shinohara is as easy (or difficult, depending on your point of view) as Atlas.
I don't know what you used, but I have both Atlas and Walther/Shinohara code 83, and they are night-and-day different from one another.
I think you have your brands mixed up, or you were sold the wrong product.
I have 13 boxes (130m) of Walthers code 83 on the layout and it is not springy at all, it stays where you put it the first time.
LastspikemikeAtlas and Walthers are made with the same structure. Both have gaps in the tie strips between every other tie under the sliding rail.
By Walthers I presume you mean Shinohara-made? There is no "sliding rail" on Shinohara flex track.
LastspikemikeWalthers has no tie gaps under the fixed rail
Shinohara has every-other tie gapped alternately.
Shinohara_C83 by Edmund, on Flickr
deleted.
Everybody has an opinion. I use Micro Engineering exclusiviely for the visible track sections on my layout. All three codes - 83, 70 and 55. In hidden trackage I use Atlas code 100. ME is harder to bend but the quality of the finished product is worth it.
While it is true that the other brands look good with paint, ME looks better to my eye.
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
Here's another vote for code 83 ME track. While more expensive than Atlas, I like that it holds the curve apparently better. You also can get the weathered type which saves a bit of time/money.
eds-trains I am in the process of expanding my HO layout. I think I used Atlas code 83 flex track on the original layout with Peco #6 turnouts. I know some flex track holds a curve better than others during track laying. I'm looking for opinions and recomendations as to what flex track people like the best. Thanks for you input
I'll just toss my 2 cents worth in. Some prefer the really "stiff" flex track saying it holds it's shape. I have some older Walthers flex made by Shinohara and it definitely holds it's shape, but it's bloody difficult to get shaped to a smooth flowing curve. You have to spend a lot of time massaging it over and over to gradually work it to the desired curve. And the ties tend to get wonky so you have to work those along to get them straight and even as well.
It takes a lot of extra time and effort to get the same results as springy Atlas track, which forms smoothly and evenly with very little effort and almost no time. That's what I like about Atlas springy track. It forms smooth and even with little effort. I don't need track to hold it's shape; fastening it down with spikes or track nails is what hold the shape quite nicely. Once I am happy with it, I can ballast and then remove track nails.
LastspikemikeJust fitting Walthers flex track today. Relatively easy to work with. Does not bend as smoothly as Atlas but is much easier to shape. Atlas track nails and Peco track spikes do not fit into the holes in the ties in the Walthers flex track. Walthers sells these pins: https://www.walthers.com/code-83-track-fastening-pins
How easily does it bend or form? I have noted Walthers is one of the more expensive flex track options at $7 per stick (in 5 packs at MBK). By comparison Peco comes in a box of 25 at MBK for $135 which comes out to $5.40 per stick.
This debate could go on and on, but I remain convinced that the "best" Code 83 flextrack is Atlas. I have tried other brands, but Atlas gives me the best performance in laying straight track and in forming curves.
Period.
Lastspikemike Atlas is "springiest" Walthers next, Peco next and ME isn't springy at all. Atlas is very hard to get into shape, especially at each end, but once it's there it stays there. You can't really straighten Atlas track fully once it's taken a curve properly.
Atlas is "springiest" Walthers next, Peco next and ME isn't springy at all.
Atlas is very hard to get into shape, especially at each end, but once it's there it stays there. You can't really straighten Atlas track fully once it's taken a curve properly.
Since Peco doesn;t fix one side like Atlas, the outside rail does tend to slip out of the spike detail. But I haven't had any problem with getting it back in when straightening a piece. Even working it in the air, instead of flat on the bench - the trick is to hold the rail you don't want to move firmly at the end you want it to statyy and then bend the track. Haven't broken off any spikes, either, and I keep playing around with the same three pieces on my workbench.
Don't seem to have any problem bending a piece that's already connected at one end and having it open gaps at the joint I don't want - similar method of pressing on one rail, or not pressing - if you firmly press the outside rail to the ties at the free end, it WILL pull away from the joint at the other end, so it's sort of the opposite of trying to make the rail move in the ties - DON'T hold it tightly so it can slide and stay connected.
After testing, I don't see this being any more difficult that Atlas when I get to the layout, since any curve will be formed with at least 2 pieces soldered together first. It's just springy enough to form a smooth curve without having to hand walk along the ties and carefully lining everything up like ME. That's the real difference between a springy track liek Atlas on oen end and stiff track like ME on the other - you MUST draw a full centerline, or some sort of guide line, or use templates like Ribbonrail, with ME track. With the more springy forms of flex track, you mostly just need the start and end point of the curve, the track will naturally form a smooth curve between those points. Only reason I am using Peco over Atlas is to avoid having to file and fit every track joint with a turnout, since Peco has a much wider variety of turnouts so I don;t have to attempt any more handlaying, plus the Peco turnouts just look better.
Yes, this debate could go on forever.
Still Atlas track and turnouts here, not even a question or any interest in reasons why others are "better".
I have Walthers double slip switches, but everything else is Atlas or scratch build specials where needed.
Sheldon