Code 83 vs 100-which is better.

[Anonymous]

I understand the design differences between each Code, but is there a difference in performance? Also what type of rail material is better. Nickel-silver or brass?
Thank You

[Anonymous]

There is a long thread on this topic on the Atlas Model Railroad HO forum. The site address is: www.forum.atlasrr.com

The posts really go through the pros and cons of each in great detail.

As to the material used, stay away from brass- I don't think they even make brass track anymore. Brass oxides into a compound that does not not conduct electricity very well, so if you use brass you will forever be cleaning your rail. Nickel-silver works much better and looks more prototypical as well.

[Anonymous]

Well, I guess I have been out of the hobby for a long time. All of my HO track for 20 yrs ago is brass. My trains still run great though.
Thanks for the info.

[rogerhensley]

A difference in performance? No, not because of size. Why should there be? :-)

Now, if you have deep cookie-cutter flanges on some of your locomotives and rolling stock, code 83 is not something you want to use. The wheel flanges may not clear correctly and bounce on the ties and spike heads. If that is what you mean by performance, then, yes.

I use both, but most of my equipment has the NMRA RP25 wheel contour. I keep code 100 because I also have some 50s and 60s locomotives that need the code 100 to run on.

If you are adding track, then use nickel-silver and you will have less problems with electrical contact/pickup. I still have one brass rail turnout on my layout. Everything else has been replaced with nickle-silver. And, no, I have no problems with it. However, that said, not all brass track was the same. Some older starter set brass track was very poor and shouldn't be used. The brass in the old Tru-Scale track was very good.

I use the code 83 to give a better appearance in sidings and secondary tracks. It looks better when laid next to the code 100. Paint and ballast do wonders for code 100, BTW.

Roger Hensley
East Central Indiana HO Railroad
http://cid.railfan.net/eci_new.html

[dknelson]

Nickle Silver is superior to brass on a number of fronts but if you are satisfied with your brass track thousands of model railroaders used it for years too
as to Code 83 (or 70 or 75) versus 100
Code 100 is larger than the rail used by almost any railroad (the PRR used some huge rail for a time of that size_. The one advantage to Code 100 is its greater mechanical rigidity -- that is, it does resist the expansion of homasote and other roadbeds better than 83. That is why even some dedicated prototype modelers use Code 100 for hidden trackage. And David Barrow has switched from handlaid code 70 to Code 100 flex track again because of its mechanical properties.
Painted and weathered Code 100 track can look pretty decent.
Nowadays between the various makes the Code 83 user has access to everything they need -- this was not true a few years ago. If i was starting over and if I did not have so much &#^#*()% AHM stuff from the 1960s I'd go with 83, if not 75 (Peco)
Dave Nelson

[Anonymous]

I use Atlas code 100 w/ Peco turnouts. My trains run great. I weather the track and ballast it and I think it looks good. In fact visitors to my layout are surprised to find out that I used Code 100, let alone Atlas.

[Anonymous]

when i first entered the hobby 50 years ago all that was available was brass track. it was ok but when it oxidized nothing would run. the advent of nickel silver was a godsend! i use code 100 atlas flex. once it is painted and ballasted, it looks fine. i also use all atlas switches and have had very few problems. i also use command control and keeping the trrack clean is important.