Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Rivarossi 0-8-0 and Code 83

1380 views
4 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 25 posts
Rivarossi 0-8-0 and Code 83
Posted by mhdishere on Thursday, March 7, 2002 8:04 AM
I have two Rivarossi 0-8-0 switchers I bought used at a train show, and I wonder if they'll run on code 83 track. The wheels fit in the notch on the NMRA standards gauge (tire on the top, flange touching the bottom of the notch). I've heard that means they'll work down to code 70, is that true?

I'm planning my layout and would like to use code 83, but I'll use code 100 if I'll have operating problems. Yes, I know, I could buy a proto 0-8-0, but I have these engines and want to use them.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 7, 2002 8:42 AM
I don't know the answer to your question, given the specific equipment you're asking about, but I do have a suggestion that might help before you begin to invest time and money into your layout plans.

On a piece of 1X 6 or 8, 3-4 feet long, create test tracks of several rail heights, i.e., code 100, 83, 70, etc. All you would need is a 3' section of flex track in each height - thus minimal expense involved. Run your locos back and forth on each track and see which rail code is best suited for your equipment.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 7, 2002 8:56 AM
You can take Mike's excellent idea a step or two further - how about various radius curves and/or percent grades?
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • 25 posts
Posted by mhdishere on Thursday, March 7, 2002 9:11 AM
Thanks for the advice. The engines run fine on code 83 flex track, I was concerned that I'd have trouble on turnouts and the like.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, March 7, 2002 3:24 PM
Bingo! I think you hit the nail on the head. Unfortunatly, I can't help with any experience with other than code 100, but I think I remember a train stalling on a powered frog due to the flanges being too deep, and the bottom of the frog being covered in gunk, losing conductivity. I think it was cleared up by cleaning the bottom of the frog, whether the flange no longer touched or whether it was now conductive I don't remember. And this was code 100!
I would have my doubts about code 70, but code 83 has a good chance of working. Well, worse come to worse, you'd just be out one turnout. How about this: code 83 everywhere, including turnouts, except for code 70 spurs? Well, you'd have to buy one code 83 turnout and one length code 70 track, or find a helpful hobby store, then, buy your track there, to pay them back for their great customer service!
I've heard of people turning down the flanges, at least on older brass models, I don't know how difficult this is, nor how to do it on your tender (don't forget about that).
P.S. I know of at least one Rivarossi (a Pacific) with a horn-hook coupler on the tender that will not accept the McHenry replacements, nor a Kadee. Check yours out, you may have to build a coupler pad out of styrene or something. (unless you use horn-hooks...)

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!