Track codes..

[jacon12]

code 85, code 100 and any others. What should a new modeler look for? Why the different codes? My guess is it has to do with rail height and some would look more 'correct' than others. Is that about right?

[railman]

code 83/100 refers to how tall the rail is...some modelers use 83 because it looks a little bit nicer, yep. 100 is a bit higher, and unless your branch line has been visited by a modern track gang, looks really big.

They both look good, though. 83 is a bit smaller. Some use 100 for main line, 83 for branches. It all works in the end, though.

[lonewoof]

code "xx" indicates rail height in thousandths of an inch: Code 100=.100 inch high, code 83=.083 inch high. In HO, code 100 is larger than is normally used on the prototype. (It's about 152 pound rail, as I recall). Code 83 is about right for most mainline track. Code 70 is appropriate for yard track, industrial spurs, maybe log rails.
I don't know what the corresponding sizes are (or what's available) in other scales.

[twhite]

I use code 100 for the main, 83 for the yards and passing tracks on my HO layout. Even though 100 is heavier than most prototype mainline rail, with painting and ballasting, it tends to look okay on a MRR. One reason I use 100 for my turnouts, main OR yard, is that they're sturdier than 83. I also have some NEM-flange European equipment that I run from time to time, and on the lower 83, it just bumps along. I just like the 'heft' of 100 better.
Tom

[dehusman]

Assuming we are talking HO scale, Code 100 is larger than any rail used on any US main line, although close to modern track (which is about 140 lb rail, or 140 ibs per yard). Code 83 is about the size of 132 lb rail which is a heavy mainline rail. Code 70 rail is about a 90-115 lb rail and is a common steam era size rail, now used for sidings and yard tracks. Code 55 is a light rail about 75-80 lb that was a 1800's size rail or steam era yard and industry track. Code 40 rail is verly light and only suitable for older yard and industry tracks.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

I have heard that code 100 is very forgiving for begineers. I really can't see a whole lot of difference.

[eastcoast]

I have tried many codes and prefer to use code 100 nickel silver
for mainly two reasons, truck flanges not the same on all equipment
and the ease of cleaning the rails. I have used brass 83 and did not
feel I had favorable results on my layout, so I switched to NS 100.
Some of my spurs are still a mix of brass and/or cheap steel rail
from various toy train packs. Most of these are non-powered.

[jacon12]

Thanks.
Is it because of the reduced speed of the train that prototype rr can use 'lighter' track in yards etc?

[wp8thsub]

QUOTE: Originally posted by train boy

I have heard that code 100 is very forgiving for begineers. I really can't see a whole lot of difference.

One way to look at this is compare model track to toys. The toys I get for my 2 1/2 year old have bigger parts which are safer and more forgiving of clumsy fingers than the parts of toys intended for older children. If you're a newcomer to the hobby and at the bottom of the learning curve (regardless of your age), code 100 HO track is probably going to be easier to use than some of the alternatives. However, the Atlas line of code 83 track is just about as easy to use and offers better detail than typical code 100. Once you develop your skills you can choose to move on to more detailed track if you wish. Starting off with something like Micro Engineering code 55 is a sure path to frustration for a newbie.

If you are building a layout close to eye level, the differences in track detail and rail size can be very noticeable. An industrial spur laid with code 55 looks quite obviously different than an adjacent mainline with code 83. Tie, spike and rail detail plays a big part too, and nicely detailed track with prototypically shaped code 100 rail looks much better than code 100 with hugely oversized plastic blobs for spikes and I-beam shaped rail.