railjoiners between code 83 and 100

[clif_nmra]

I am connecting Atlas code 83 track to code 100. I tried the Atlas supplied rail joiners that connect code 83 and code 100. I can't get the joiners on to either code track. To me they are useless. I read somewhere a solution to this problem. So is there a better solution ....other than filing down the code 100 track at the joining point? I solution I guess may be to raise the 83 track to meet the 100 code using something under the rails. .

[FThunder11]

i use code 100 all around...the rail gets soldered and i like the small difference, as the clickety-clack sound is made when the cars go over it.

[clif_nmra]

That is not an option as I have already bought and installed some of the code 83. The rest of my layout is code 100 mostly flex. This is a high visibility area so hence the 83. I only have this problem in just one track connection.

[dave9999]

Atlas makes a transition joiner for joining code 83 and code 100 track. Dave

[clif_nmra]

Have you tried using the transition rail joiners by Atlas?
I couldn't even get them onto the 83 or the 100 rails.
They are so tight that pressure makes them bend in half.
I think I'll just shim the track up to meet.

[steel]

Microengeering also makes these. Have some ordered along with their bridge flex track. Have not arrived yet, so I can't comment on how they work.

[TBat55]

In one of the last 3 issues of MR, the author Terry comments that one thing he would have done differently is NOT use transition rail joiners. He suggested pushing a regular joiner onto the Code 100, lay the Code 83 on top of the joiner, then solder the Code 83 rail to the joiner (don't solder the Code 100 to allow for expansion). Sounds good to me.

[clif_nmra]

I thought of that but it seems that it makes the code 83 track higher than the code 100 rail.
Since I only will have to do this once...I think I'll use a screwdriver and spread the joiners so they will slide together. I think I'll use a sectional short code 100 and mate it with a small section of code 83 track OFF THE LAYOUT then solder it. I'll see if I can find the article. thanks

[Anonymous]

I posted this on a similar threat on this forum( sorry about the duplication), but the 2005 Walthers Reference Book on page 275 there is reference to two transistion tracks; Code 83 to 100 and Code 83 to 70. Looks like this could be a solution. Might be a little expensive. Has anybody tried these on their layout?

Rudy

[TBat55]

I think he said to crimp it first (flatten the Code 83 side of the joiner).

Also, Code 100 is 0.100" tall and Code 83 is 0.083" tall. The difference is 0.017" (17 thousandths). If you can't get 017 thick styrene to shim the ties, maybe you could get various thicknesses that make up 017. Then the tops of the rails would be aligned. You'd still want to spike or solder it in place (hence the flattened joiner).

[gmpullman]

Walthers (Shinohara) does make a transition track and I've used several of them where my staging yard is Atlas code 100 and the rest of my layout is code 83. They are about 5" long and straight. They're well made and also solves the tie thickness problem.
I highly recommend this solution. I don't know how easy they are to find. I bought mine a few years back...

[Anonymous]

clif_nmra - I feel your pain - literally. I tried pushing some of those connectors on and shoved one end of it about 1/4 " into my thumb. Those connectors are lousy.

I ended up doing the old grinding of the code 100 rail, though I don't recommend that alternative unless you're pretty skilled with the dremel tool, as you can take a lot of material off pretty quickly if you're not careful.

[clif_nmra]

Since I had a surplus of these atlas transition rail joiners, I finally hit upon a solution. I took a knife or a screwdriver and forced the openings wider. Before doing this I ended up putting force and bending the little so-and-sos in two!
Yep, I got sore fingers until I got smart. Where is their quality control in designing these things???