Code 83 for mainlines today?

[Anonymous]

Hi all,

I'm Ryan from South Africa. I have been away from the hobby for about 5 years, so I'm a bit rusty. I am modelling Union Pacific.

Previous posts (plus NMRA RP15.1) indicate that code 83 will be suitable for mainlines and code 70 for yards etc.

Code 83 is equivalent to 132lb/ft rail. This was fine for 1950's mainlines, but is this still the size that UP and other class 1's are using on their mainlines?

Many thanks in advance

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by uysr
Code 83 is equivalent to 132lb/ft rail. This was fine for 1950's mainlines, but is this still the size that UP and other class 1's are using on their mainlines?

In another thread, Dave H. (nhs792) states that UP and BNSF both use 141 pounds per yard rail today.

Of the commercially available track, code 83 is closest.

[ericboone]

Yep. Code 83 is appropriate for HO scale modern mainlines and code 70 for the yards and branchlines. Code 100 is too big except in very rare cases.
Actually, I believe 132lb/yard rail is the average mainline today. 1950s mainlines tended to use 110 or 112 lb rail. Code 70 is close for that weight.

[ndbprr]

The only stretch of railroad ever built with the equivalent of code 100 is the corridor under the auspices of the PRR. That's what I am modeling and that is what I am using.

[dehusman]

Code 83 is fine for modern mainlines. 141 lb is NEW standard. Most of the UP's mainlines are laid with 115-136 lb rail.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

Thanks to all of you for the help. I am thinking that code 83 seems to be at the upper end of the acceptable sizes, but it will be a good choice for my mainlines. If I have a passing siding on my single track mainline, do I use the same size rail as the mainline, or a smaller size?

I am thinking of the new Peco code 83 series for most of the mainline. The other option I am looking at is Shinohara. Do you have any comments on this?

For yards I will probably use code 70, and here Shinohara seems the best bet. I am reluctant to go finer than code 70 for reasons of ruggedness and reliability of operation. Any comments?

Thanks again, Ryan

[markpierce]

Code 55 on some of your industrial spurs, particuclarly those in the foreground, would be a nice touch. Ruggedness shouldn't be an issue there.