good- reliable no derailments, no power loss, have some using the diverging leg as the main route with no problems.
bad- looks need improvement-these are not micro engeneering turnouts.
I use them in my holding track areas where the look dosent matter.
Bad: Guard rail spacing is sometimes too wide, points need some filing or adjustment.
Good: Mark III's are reasonably priced and they don't look bad inside hidden stageing
The mind is like a parachute. It works better when it's open. www.stremy.net
Good- readily available, rugged, affordable
Needs Improvement- looks as much like a real RR switch as a monkey looks like a Porche.
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
Good - reliable - been around for years.
Bad - if you say anything you may get your post deleted or locked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When I started my layout, Atlas #8s were not available so I went with Walthers #8s for mainline crossovers. After Atlas came out with the #8s, I switched to those. I also have several Walthers large radii curved turnouts. Everything else is Atlas. The work reliably and have had to file just a few points. They work well with the Atlas undermount switch machines. As for appearance, they definitely pass my "good enough" standard.
larak Bad: Guard rail spacing is sometimes too wide, points need some filing or adjustment. Good: Mark III's are reasonably priced and they don't look bad inside hidden stageing
Don't like 'em?
Buy the high dollar switches or roll your own.
I like 'em because they are reliable and affordable unlike the $20-30.00 switches.I tried Shinohara and replace 'em with Atlas within a very few weeks.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Hi!
Atlas has been around for decades, and I have used their turnouts, track, and electrical switches since the '60s. I recently bought several of the new code 100 #8 turnouts, and they are terrific!
Frankly, I see nothing to complain about insofar as quality is concerned. They are nicely priced, readily available, and "get the job done". My opinion is that you get a really good deal for the money. Are their "better" turnouts available? Well, if you want more detail and realism and different electrical connectivitiy, the answer is yes. But, you will pay for it!
My last HO layout, as well as the one "in progress", will use Atlas flextrack and turnouts exclusively. And I will weather the rails and the ties, and the end result - IMHO - will be more than "good enough".
In closing, I don't think the label "good and bad" applies to our MR stuff. I prefer to use the term "strengths and weaknesses" or "likes and dislikes".
ENJOY,
Mobilman44
ENJOY !
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Bad:
Good?
When I started building in my present layout space, I bought a few turnouts of various makes, including Atlas. The turnouts I am installing now, have been operating over and will install in the future are all hand laid. The commercial products all went free to a good home...
For those who have never done it, hand-laying turnouts and other specialwork isn't some arcane art practiced by wizards in the dark of the moon. All it takes is attention to detail, a willingness to discard pieces that aren't quite good enough and a couple of good track gauges.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with Atlas flex and hand-laid specialwork)
I have never had a problem with Atlas turnouts. Are the as percise in prototypical looks as others, no. You can pretty much get them at a hobby shop without a problem. You can go to a hobby shop and see an empty spot where a Walthers turnout was and go back a month later and still see that empty spot.
Bump...
I mean the frog bump. I wish the customlines had a more durable throw bar.
Good-Affordable, plentiful, available, reliable.
The four HO layouts I've built in the past have always used Atlas code 100 turnouts. The first one used the "snap switches" which are about as low end as you can get but considering I was running Bachman and Life-Like train set equipment, they met my needs. My three layouts since used the custom line turnouts and I have always had good luck with them. I will certainly agree they aren't the most prototypical looking but the #6's, and even #4's have always met my needs. I think my biggest complaint with them is the throw bar that won't stay in one place without help but thats where ground throws come in.
My newest layout, a switch to N scale, is the first layout I've built that doesn't use Atlas. I've switched to Peco code 80 primarily because of the points holding in place without help.
Modeling the fictional B&M Dowe, NH branch in the early 50's.
My layout is small, and I need the tight turns I can make with Atlas snap switches.
I really don't like the switch machines, and I've come up with a number of creative ways to hide them in the scenery.
I used snap switches on my teenage layout in the early 1960's. Some of those same old switch machines, approaching a half-century of age, are installed on my layout today. And yes, Atlas hasn't changed the mounting brackets in all that time.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I've never had a problem with my Atlas turnouts, All of mine are #6, and after nearly 15 years of trouble-free operation, they keep doing what they're supposed to. Granted, I've had to file down a point or two, but that's pretty much it. I don't bother with their switch machines--I prefer the Tortoise instead.
Thank you everybody that has responded. This was just the kind of information that I was looking for related to the Atlas turnouts. Unfortunately, I am one of the original writers who had asked about Atlas turnouts and both of my threads were locked. We all know that we do not say the dirty word on this board anymore and I am not going to say that word.
Thank you so much everyone for your helpful comments in helping me make a decision.
Good:
Very durable, once I got them working.
Closure rails needed jumpers to get good connections. Not sure if it was just a bad bunch of turnouts that Altas had at the time (several years ago) as they were very interested in seeing examples of it to figure out what was going wrong.
And ditto on them not being 'short loco' friendly.
I'm an N scaler, so I can't speak to the quality of Atlas' HO lines. But their N scale code 55 has become the defacto standard for modelers seeking solid performance, ready availability, and outstanding appearance. Nothing but love for Atlas here.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
MisterBeasley My layout is small, and I need the tight turns I can make with Atlas snap switches. I really don't like the switch machines, and I've come up with a number of creative ways to hide them in the scenery. I used snap switches on my teenage layout in the early 1960's. Some of those same old switch machines, approaching a half-century of age, are installed on my layout today. And yes, Atlas hasn't changed the mounting brackets in all that time.
MisterBeasley,
Do you have any ideas for hiding a couple switch machines in a yard. I use mostly under mounts but due to some track changes after the benchwork was done, I have a couple where the joists fell right below the turnout and I can't get the under mounts in without cutting into the joist, forcing me to use top mounts.
The bad? My main complaint is with the Customline #4's I purchased for my layout. The outside rails are bowed in on the non-diverging route for both Right and left handed turnouts. It makes laying straight track impossible. You can see my problem here (scroll down, it's shown pretty clearly a few shots down). Unless you are standing in a similar spot to where I took my picture it's not that obvious, but it does make for some funky fits for lard ladders, etc.
Others have posted a work-around. They have taken a metal straight edge, pulled the outside track snug up against it, and then nailed it down (Grampy's Trains is one guy who posted this, you can search the forum on it). I'm a "caulk guy" so that solution doesn't work for me.
Other than that, I would say you can't beat the price but they do need something to hold the switch points snug against the track as they will drift away from the desired position over time.
All in all, if you are staying away from the #4's and understand you are "getting what you paid for" in terms of prototype fidelity you can't knock 'em.
~rb
I have used Atlas turnouts since the 60's, never had a problem with them. I do not use #4s, a few 6's but mostly 8's and 10's. The rail height on code 80 is high, but a little rust seems to make them seem more to scale, especially when ballasted. The code 80 handles the older rolling stock better, the newer stuff has smaller flanges.
I do not like the electric turn out switches, and use Caboose hand throws, inside position in sidings on the throws, outside is mainline...very simple, saves a lot of wiring. And they look more prototypical.
My biggest dis-likes about Atlas #6 turnouts are the pot-metal frogs which stick out like a sore thumb from painted and ballasted track, and the frog power connection that seems to defy any attempt to make a secure electrical connection short of tapping threads and adding a distracting screw.
That said, I have found them to be pretty much bullet-proof, so they are my "go-to" turnouts where reliability is a priority and proto looks are secondary. I have several in lower deck staging areas where maintenance or replacement will be possible-but-challenging and in high traffic situations where the viewing angle somewhat hides the off-color frog.
I address the frog connection issue by scraping the inside ring to bare metal, then stuffing the hole with a force-fit fold of stranded wire, and touch the nest with solder. Not a true soldered joint, but so-far-so-good for seven years and counting.
I prefer the looks of Walthers and MEC turnouts but have had to correct flaws in the geometry and flange-way depth from time-to-time.
Jim
What is it about 2009 threads that are causing people to revive them lately?
Rich
Alton Junction
[quote user="richhotrain"]
You mean like the tie plant posting over in the prototype forum?
https://youtu.be/KF-yh4mU6ps
[quote user="maxman"]
richhotrain What is it about 2009 threads that are causing people to revive them lately? Rich You mean like the tie plant posting over in the prototype forum? https://youtu.be/KF-yh4mU6ps
Good: I already have a bunch.
Bad: They're not ideal, but they're already paid for.
Other good: you're a teenager trying not to freak over the complexity of hand laying (it isn't really complex but you don't know that yet and there's no one there to tell you) and the crazy prices of what you want at your beginning level of addiction to modeling railroads. Cheap is just fine when it's all you can afford.
Five kids makes cheap necessary....
I use Atlas Centerline with caboose manual throws, which is good unless you have 100 switches. Those caboose throws also look more prototypical than Atlas switches, and there is no under layout wiring with manual throws.
I am in n scale, using code 80 since I have a lot of older stock with those wider flanges that seem not to like code 55 as well.