rrinker I'm just the other way - just as I am plannign the biggest layout I've ever built, too. But it's not about buying cases of turnouts at once. I've always used Atlas. Never had a problem. They've worked very well in the last two layouts I built, even without poweing the frogs. I even added the wires for frog power, but never hooked them up because none of my equipment had any power issues. It's a bit harder to power the Atlas frogs - you need to use a brass screw in the hole provided int he frog casting because the pot metal is not readily solderable. Peco already has a wire soldered to the frog for power. The main reason I am going Peco this time - Peco 83 has a wider variety of turnouts, and I've tried my hand at handlaying turnouts and it's just not for me. So it would be Atlas + hand lay anything Atlas doesn;t amke, or pay more than the price of a Peco for someone else to hand lay what I need, or go with Peco and very likely not have a situtation that can't be handled by an off the shelf piece. Also the Peco to me looks better, there's more detailing cast in. ANd their flex track is a perfect medium between Atlas and ME. It bends easily, more like Atlas, much better than ME, but it doesn't spring back as easily as Atlas. That was my main stickign point, I did not decide to go Peco until I had a few pieces of their flex track to try out. --Randy
I'm just the other way - just as I am plannign the biggest layout I've ever built, too. But it's not about buying cases of turnouts at once.
I've always used Atlas. Never had a problem. They've worked very well in the last two layouts I built, even without poweing the frogs. I even added the wires for frog power, but never hooked them up because none of my equipment had any power issues.
It's a bit harder to power the Atlas frogs - you need to use a brass screw in the hole provided int he frog casting because the pot metal is not readily solderable. Peco already has a wire soldered to the frog for power.
The main reason I am going Peco this time - Peco 83 has a wider variety of turnouts, and I've tried my hand at handlaying turnouts and it's just not for me. So it would be Atlas + hand lay anything Atlas doesn;t amke, or pay more than the price of a Peco for someone else to hand lay what I need, or go with Peco and very likely not have a situtation that can't be handled by an off the shelf piece.
Also the Peco to me looks better, there's more detailing cast in. ANd their flex track is a perfect medium between Atlas and ME. It bends easily, more like Atlas, much better than ME, but it doesn't spring back as easily as Atlas. That was my main stickign point, I did not decide to go Peco until I had a few pieces of their flex track to try out.
--Randy
Randy,
The choice of PECO flex track is the best reason yet presented to choice PECO turnouts, considering the differences in tie thickness, rail profile, etc.
Not sure what you mean by better selection?
Yes they have a #5, and yes they have one curved turnout. I never saw the #5 thing as a big deal. I built a yard years ago with Atlas #4 (4-1/2), it was ok but since then #6 is my minimum except industrial trackage.
I can make that curved turnout, 36" inside radius, 60" outside radius, from an Atlas #8. Cut some webs in the ties and give it a little flex, works great.
Has PECO made and code 83 slips yet? I use Walthers when I need those, they work well with ATLAS flex track.
But again, if you like the PECO flex, then go for it. I do agree about the detail, but after paint and ballast, not enough to make me spend the money or do the extra work to the turnouts.
Sheldon
Randy, you raised a point with ME flex track. I'll probably go with ME code 70 for everything on my new layout, so I was wondering what your experience is with working with it.
My experience with Atlas flex is that it was always a bit of a hassle to bend the very end of it for spurs and sidings since it wants to snap back straight. Something that stays bent might be a little easier for that task. Of course, Atlas would be advantageous for making broad sweeping curves.
So I was wondering just how difficult working with ME flex track is?
- Douglas
The springy nature of Atlas flex track is what makes it so easy to use. You can bend it to a nice smooth curve without having to massage it over and over and over. The springy nature is no problem if you use track nails or spikes because you can spring it nice and smoothly to fit the centerline and then nail or spike it down. If you object to the nail heads, then no problem, after the track is ballasted pull them out. And Bobs your uncle as the Brits say.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
DoughlessMy stock #6 insulfrog Peco code 83 turnouts make a yard ladder with dead frogs that are nearly exactly 8 inches apart. My six axle Kato SD38 fits nicely in the live space at about 7.8 inches truck end to truck end. The stock Pecos have little excess track beyond the frog, so the centerline of the yard tracks are about 1.75 inches apart. Adding more tangent track to widen the centers to 2 inches would of course widen the dead space.
I won't be buying any track for a while. I have diesels of varying lengths from SD40T-2's, to SD40's to SD45's, to GP40's, GP30's and many others. If I had a row of dead frogs, might just be my luck I might have the same problem as "he who is not to be named".
As for Peco code 83, if money were no object I'd go cadillac. I might as well go Micro Engineering code 83 #6 which I'm hearing a lot of good things about and they cost 7 dollars less each, which adds up.
Back to staging: I have a lot of code 100 I want to re-use, which is why I am strongly leaning toward Peco code 100 large, to replace the ancient Atlas code 100 #6. The choice there of course is insul frog vs. electo frog - 2 dollars difference and proponents for each.
riogrande5761 Doughless My stock #6 insulfrog Peco code 83 turnouts make a yard ladder with dead frogs that are nearly exactly 8 inches apart. My six axle Kato SD38 fits nicely in the live space at about 7.8 inches truck end to truck end. The stock Pecos have little excess track beyond the frog, so the centerline of the yard tracks are about 1.75 inches apart. Adding more tangent track to widen the centers to 2 inches would of course widen the dead space. I won't be buying any track for a while. I have diesels of varying lenghts from SD40T-2's, to SD40's to SD45's, to GP40's, GP30's and many others. If I had a row of dead frogs, might just be my luck I might have the same problem as "he who is not to be named". As for Peco code 83, if money were no object I'd go cadillac. I might as well go Micro Engineering code 83 #6 which I'm hearing a lot of good things about and they cost 7 dollars less each, which adds up. Back to staging, I have a lot of code 100 I want to re-use, which is why I am strongly leaning toward Peco code 100 large, to replace the ancient Atlas code 100 #6. The choice there of course is insul frog vs. electo frog - 2 dollars difference and proponents for each.
Doughless My stock #6 insulfrog Peco code 83 turnouts make a yard ladder with dead frogs that are nearly exactly 8 inches apart. My six axle Kato SD38 fits nicely in the live space at about 7.8 inches truck end to truck end. The stock Pecos have little excess track beyond the frog, so the centerline of the yard tracks are about 1.75 inches apart. Adding more tangent track to widen the centers to 2 inches would of course widen the dead space.
I won't be buying any track for a while. I have diesels of varying lenghts from SD40T-2's, to SD40's to SD45's, to GP40's, GP30's and many others. If I had a row of dead frogs, might just be my luck I might have the same problem as "he who is not to be named".
As for Peco code 83, if money were no object I'd go cadillac. I might as well go Micro Engineering code 83 #6 which I'm hearing a lot of good things about and they cost 7 dollars less each, which adds up. Back to staging, I have a lot of code 100 I want to re-use, which is why I am strongly leaning toward Peco code 100 large, to replace the ancient Atlas code 100 #6. The choice there of course is insul frog vs. electo frog - 2 dollars difference and proponents for each.
I'm probably going code 70 for my branch line layout this time, and ME seems to be more available than Walthers code 70 or Peco 75.
riogrande5761 The springy nature of Atlas flex track is what makes it so easy to use. You can bend it to a nice smooth curve without having to massage it over and over and over. The springy nature is no problem if you use track nails or spikes because you can spring it nice and smoothly to fit the centerline and then nail or spike it down. If you object to the nail heads, then no problem, after the track is ballasted pull them out. And Bobs your uncle as the Brits say.
Yeah, I've used nails and tacks to bend track even when adhesive was the ultimate security, but it was still a hassle for me to keep the one end bent and secured while positioning the rest of the track straight.
The best way for me was to solder the flex to the diverging leg of the turnout, that makes the one end very secure and steady and it also allowed the sliding rail to slide down the proper end.
I was just thinking that track that stayed bent at one end would be easier to work with and position it for aligning spurs and sidings.
Yeah, I have am using code 70 also in yards and branch lines as well and all the code 70 I am aware of is stiff track, so I adapt where necessary.
On curves with the springy flex track, I nail down all but about the last 8 to 10 inches. I tack it over so that last part is about straight, then solder on the next piece and it all bends like one long smooth piece of track. For turnouts, I don't solder it but I tack it down using ME spikes to hold it's shape, that seems to work very well. On the other end one rail sticks out and I trim it flush with the other rail as it would be fastened down in that orientation. Yes, if track stayed bent, it would be easier in one way but for bending nice smooth curves, it's a lot of massaging it. I have both stiff (code 70) and springy (code 83 Atlas) I've worked with. I guess there is no perfect world.
I solder all my rail joints, and glue my track with adheasive caulk, so the springyness of ATLAS flex has never been a problem. I do use a spike, or nail, and some weights, as needed during installation.
When I was young, I hand layed track and built my own turnouts. But when ATLAS code 83 came out, I switched. I now reserve those skills for special trackwork only when needed.
I have run on layouts with code 70 rail, I have hand layed code 100 thru code 70. Code 70 can be "fragile"........
For me, code 83 everywhere is an acceptable compromise. I use paint, scenery, ballast and ballast profile to create the difference between the mainline, a yard, and a siding.
I take no issue with those who want to be more exacting, I was like that when I was a younger modeler. I'm a lot more "casual" now.
And I ditched all the code 100 30 years ago......there is no real saving track that is hand layed.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I solder all my rail joints, and glue my track with adheasive caulk, so the springyness of ATLAS flex has never been a problem. I do use a spike, or nail, and some weights, as needed during installation. When I was young, I hand layed track and built my own turnouts. But when ATLAS code 83 came out, I switched. I now reserve those skills for special trackwork only when needed. I have run on layouts with code 70 rail, I have hand layed code 100 thru code 70. Code 70 can be "fragile"........ For me, code 83 everywhere is an acceptable compromise. I use paint, scenery, ballast and ballast profile to create the difference between the mainline, a yard, and a siding. I take no issue with those who want to be more exacting, I was like that when I was a younger modeler. I'm a lot more "casual" now. And I ditched all the code 100 30 years ago......there is no real saving track that is hand layed. Sheldon
Thanks for the tip on the code 70. The reason I'm considering it is because my closest LHS, stocks ME code 70 and had a good pile of flex and #6 turnouts. Its no more expensive than more popular code 83.
Honestly, I couldn't tell the difference between 70 and 83 even upon close inspection, but he had all the supplies right there at close to internet prices so it would be easy to just order more and pick it all up at once and have it. The difference might show up in photos if I ever decided to do the internet pics thing.
But if there are downsides to it, I wanna know.