Realistic HO Track (?)

[Anonymous]

Hey Guys,

I will be expanding my layout in a few months and I would like to hear which brand of flex track and switch you find most attractive. Anything goes as long as it is HO 'cause I'm not switching scales (I have over 100 freight cars and 12 locos). All I want to know is what brand (and code of rail if that is important to you) and why you like it even if it is because it is cost effective. I'm not a MRR elitest so there won't be any criticism from me.

Right now, I have a lot of Atlas code 100 flex track on cork. I have about ten Atlas #4 turnouts, about thirty Atlas #6 turnouts, and three Peco turnouts. I also have some Micro Engineering bridge flex track that I think looks great. I am looking to move into a home with a basement so my space will go up dramatically. If I decide to switch to another brand, I can use the Atlas in hidden staging for example.

Let's hear it! - Ed

[Anonymous]

Hey Ed,

I like Atlas a lot, and have and use the custom line because of the power-routing frogs. As you well know, I had many layouts designed to use the snap-track, but I learned that with the style of cars and type of cars I will be running, it is not possible to use snap-track. Five months later, and I HAVE a lot of those types of cars now. I wi***o thank you and the others for setting me straight on that. You were correct. There was no way I could use that track with what I have now. I now exclusively use custom-line turnouts from both Atlas and Walthers.

I prefer code83, since I run a lot of class 1 roads. I plan to lay down code100 rail for my staging yard, and have looked into code70 rail for my yards and branch lines.

I will probably go with code83 for my branch lines and yards though. It seems a little cheaper and easily available.

I plan to intermix Walthers track with Atlas, since Atlas does not afford me with the bridge track nor the interesting array of different # turnouts, cross-overs, and slip switches that Walthers does. And I am aware that Walthers track is basically Shinohara.

I have 300+ cars and 90+ engines currently, with more being added by the week. I just painted up a small fleet of THE ROCK engines using previously painted and undecorated shells and chassis. You didn't ask, but I will be using Woodland Scenics foam roadbed for my layout. I have seen cork rot, crumble, and deteriorate. When I tested out the Woodland Scenics over cork, I noticed it was a lot quieter. Plus, the fact that it is already black helped me make my decision, since a lot of my ballast is black, and won't have to worry about covering every inch of the foam, like I had to with cork roadbed (it shows through some of my old ballast).

-Wolv33

[Anonymous]

Boy this topic has come up a lot lately. I use Atals Code 100 track w/ Peco turnouts. I run DCC and I am more interested in operation reliability than in looks. I understand those who prefer coded 83, code 70 (or even the Peco Code 75), but I have found that layouts w/ code 100 seem to require less maintenance.

[Anonymous]

when i built my first layout i used tru scale roadbed with the track already attached. this looked ok but was a little noisey. that was many years ago. presently i use atlas flex code 100 throughout the layout with atlas #6 switches. all my rail is visible except on the helix. i paint my rail to make it look more realistic. i have had a few problems with the switches as far as electrical continuity but a simple jumper wire solves the problem. these products are cheaper than most and are very reliable. if you paint your rail and apply your ballast wisely it will look great. i use homosote over plywood as a base,it is easy to spike track to the homosote and put your ground cover down later. ggood luck!

[Anonymous]

Ed,
My last layout, (30 years ago) was all Atlas flex-track code 100 (brass) that really held up well. So, in building my new layout I naturally went to Atlas flex-track code 100 (nickel silver this time). Track laying is complete now. I used cork on my original pike and wanted to try something different, so bought a whole lot of Woodland foam and laid it on 1/2" plywood with white glue. It was easy to put down and the trains run very quiet. I salvaged some of the old track and used it on sidings.
Good luck in your new digs.
polyjim

[cmrproducts]

Jim

I agree with you on using code 100. I too run DCC and have a fairly large layout 25'x75' and I do not want to have to worry about dropping something on the track and destroying the rail. And with the code 83 Walthers turnouts, do not even try to remove them and reuse unless you spend a lot of time rebuilding the turnout with pc board ties. The little plastic tabs that hold the rail to the ties just explode like pop corn if you try to adjust the turnout or pull the wrong way! I can just imagine having a lot of code 83 track and watch the rail break out of the tabs with the seasonal expasion/contraction that takes place in the normal basements.

My basement is dry and dehudmidifed so I really do not see much change in the trackwork but at the Club HO layout we are not so lucky and have humidity approching 90% at times and the HO layout had problems in the first years until we cut enough rail gaps!

BOB H Clarion, PA

[BRAKIE]

Ed,I use code 100.I find this very easy to work with and more forgiving then code 83.I also use DCC and more into operating then I am looks and wanted maintenace free track work.I have used code 100 for years and find it to be(for the most part)trouble free.I use Atlas switches with Caboose Industries ground throws..I find this to be a winning combination for me.

[Anonymous]

I have chosen to use Atlas code83 on my railroad. Pretty much I chose between Atlas code83 and atlas code100 as it's readyly avaliable and cheaper than other brands. I've heard a lot of good thinks about the mirco engineering flex track so I may have a look at some of that and maybe use some of that in detailed locations.

I chose the atlas code83 over the atlas code 100 for three reasons the main one being the spike detail. on the code83 the spikes are much finer than the code100 the spike on that are massive and that bothered me. reason #2 was the tie dimensions. Again they're finer on the code83 It makes the locomotives look more massive against them. Lastly was the colouring. Not really a big deal and didn't factor into my decision much but the brown ties do look better than the black in my opinion. Strangely enough the size of the rail didn't really factor into my desision much. The difference between the two when placed next to each other isn't all that great. The average person isn't going to notice.

As for turnout's I'm building all of them myself so I haven't even looked into them.

[bnonut]

I use Atlas code 100 on all hidden track including the helix. On the visible side I prefer Atlas code 83. It looks and runs better than Walthers/Shinohara. The Micro-Scale line is excellent. My sidings use a variety of code 70, 55 and 40. I have constructed turnouts and still prefer to use the #6 100 or 83 atlas turnout.

[Anonymous]

Wolv33,

So the layout is taking shape? How close are you following 'the plan'? If so, I have an idea where to begin the branchline. Did you get the dedicated space you planned?

As for the track, I can't help figuring the track you select is related to the turnouts because the turnouts I like right now are Peco. I understand Peco comes in Code 100 and something near Code 70. The problem is that I remember a fellow in a MR article stating that MEI Code 83 track is the most realistic because of the tie plate and spike detail. I have some MEI Bridge track and it is very good. I just don't think it would be a good idea to mix Code 100 turnouts with Code 83 rail. So I need to find a Code 100 flex track with brown tes, good detail and reasonable price. Do you have any ideas for this one? - Ed

P.S. I thought the Atlas turnout were called the 'all live' variety not the 'power routing' variety. Let me know if I have this backwards.

[Anonymous]

Hi Ed,

Well sorta. LOL! The dedicated space is about a week or so away. The original idea was impossible due to the width. I learned from another model railroader on here (he works in a trailer company) that even a 16' wide trailer would NOT be enough to house the layout-and that the 80' is actually 75' because they measure the tongue, not the end of the trailer as the length.

So, with that information, I decided to get an 80'L x 28'W double-wide trailer home, and have it completely gutted from water and heat and power. Just outter walls, roof and floor. There is more than enough space for the layout now. I will be hopefully getting it in a week or so. We have the property all set to have it put on. Just waiting on the availability for it.

Well Ed, if you could give me your idea, I might be able to make some changes to the design. I did add a branch line to fini***he original design, plus I added a long passing siding down by the engine repair facilities and a DERAIL track as well.

When it was found that I needed the bigger trailer for the layout, I went and added another mainline to the design, another branch line, and a secondary switching yard. You are welcome to take a look at the design, but I won't send it till I hear from ya. The file is large and you need to be aware that I am sending it so you do not get in trouble with your ISP for large files sitting on their server.

I also have an aisle diagram as a jpg file that I can send you, and an additional jpg for my blocking districts.

As for Atlas track. The Custom line MK2 turnouts are supposed to be power-routing, since they have metal frogs. The snap switches are not, because they use plastic frogs.

Ed, they have code83 to code100 transition joiners, so you COULD actually combine the two. I have seen code83 to code100 transition track too, but it is not made by Atlas. I think I seen it in the Walthers catalog. That is what I decided to get to make a smooth transition to staging from the upper layout area.

For a code100 flextrack, you could go with the Atlas and paint the rails. I haven't heard much of brown ties for code100 track. I weather all my track before putting it down, so the brown ties make no difference to me. I also cover the tops of the rails with a light oil, so I can easily remove any paint/weathering from the tops of my rails after I am done with the weathering.

Ed, I am probably gonna need to contact you when I start laying the track. I have no clue what some of those radius curves are, and right now cannot find my protractor. LOL!

Let me know if you want me to send those diagrams and the latest rts design. And again, THANKS for all the help you have given me. You and Bob H. are great to talk to, and I have learned a lot from both of you guys!

-Wolv33

[BR60103]

Ed:
I use mostly Peco track with some British Scale track. Most of this was recycled from a previous layout (or even several previous layouts.) Most of the new track was Peco code 70 which is nearly as sturdy but seems to be better designed.
If you can get it up, I would reuse what you can of the old stuff and add on with whatever you choose.
Peco make a code 100 to code 70 rail joiner, but I usually just squash one half of a code 100 joiner and solder the code 70 on top of it. with a bit of practise you can get the inner top edge to line up almost every time.
--david

[Anonymous]

Ed I have only been in the hobby about 2 Years and I started out with code 100 and I have stuck with it. as for the turnouts I use Customline #6 #4 and in a few places snap switches. As for the difference in the size of the spike I can't see the detail because most of the track is not close enough to see, when you wear BIFocals you have to be close. I have purchased all of my track from a shop on the internet called hobbiesrus.com, code100 is $1.55 and code83 is $1.99, all the other prices are low as well.
Mike

[on30francisco]

I use Central Valley tie strips. These can be used with either codes 82, 70, or 55 rail. These tie strips are extremely realistic looking with scale tie plates and spike heads. If you want to use regular flextrack, Micro Engineering makes it from code 100 to code 55 in HO. This track is realistic looking also.

[wp8thsub]

I use Micro Engineering (ME) flex almost exclusively, in codes 83, 70 and 55. The small spike heads (along with the varied tie arrangements) help make it very realistic, but also make it more challenging to use than super-flexible track brands like Atlas. Because I place a high priority on realism, ease of installation scores no points with me and I don't use other brands where track is visible. For staging yards and long runs of hidden track I use Atlas 83 and 100.

Something that freqently gets mentioned in online forums is the alleged durability of code 100 and higher maintenance of smaller rail. I have built and maintained a lot of track of many types and find that this doesn't hold for most home layouts. A home layout built with code 83 or smaller rail, assuming the track is installed properly, will last just as well as anything built with code 100. My last layout used Atlas code 100 in staging, some Atlas 83 for a helix, and ME flex everywhere else, and previous layouts had a similar mix. I found no difference in how the various codes of rail held up in normal operation, including some yard trackage with handlaid code 55 turnouts and yard body tracks that saw heavy use every operating session. Some of my code 55 flex is over 15 years old and has been recycled through two layouts (soon to be a third) and it's still perfectly useable. If you were building a club layout intended for very intensive use durability might become an issue, but that's why the prototype uses heavier rail for mainlines too. Plus if you plan to regularly drop power tools and other heavy objects on your track you might want to go with beefier stuff.

Tie color is a complete non-issue if you paint the track (which gets rid of the unrealistic shine too), so mix 'n' match brands at will and see which you like. Some brands have thicker ties than others, but a little shim cardstock takes care of that. If realism isn't important to you, I would suggest not to even bother with ME. Use Atlas. If you still want to go with code 100 but want better tie detail and rail profiles than Atlas etc. try Shinohara. They (or at least they used to) make some very nice looking code 100 track. Because of the detail it minimizes the aesthetic problems inherent with oversized rail.

[Anonymous]

Ed,

I'm with Rob on this one. Micro Engineering (Codes 83, 70 and some 55) on all the visible stuff. Code 100 Atlas flex in the helix and hidden staging. I think the rail head contour of the ME is the most realistic looking of the brands out there. Code 55 can run into flange issues on old equipment, but that is what replacement wheelsets are for...

Guy

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Trainnut1250

Code 55 can run into flange issues on old equipment, but that is what replacement wheelsets are for...
Guy

Don't throw them away, you never know when you may need them to cut a pizza!![(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]

[johncolley]

Save all the c100 for hidden track and staging. I use c83 for main lines and c70 for all the visible rest. Also, I use HO cork for mains, N cork for sidings/ A-D tracks, and table top for all other, some of which is cookie cuttered for lower or higher spurs.

[ericboone]

I would stay away from Atlas. I was involved in a club with about 100 Atlas turnouts (all code 83) and about 30% had frogs that were higher than the rest of the rail. Also, the formed sheetmetal points were prone to getting bent easily when cleaning. I would use something with machined points like Micro Engineering's product.. I do like MEs fine detail also. They do make a good realistic line of track. Of course for ultimate realism, go finescale at www.proto87stores.com. :)

[Anonymous]

Until recently I used Atlas Code 100 flex everywhere on my layout. I started outusing Atlas TOs but switched to Peco. I now handlay my track and TOs. Handlaying TOs gives a lot more flexibility in the track plan. I have a 10' X 20' room with an around the walls track plan. I'm now starting a branch that will run out of this trainroom into my bedroom on a series of movable modules. The end module will be a return loop-double tracked 30" radius with a turntable and roundhouse in the middle. Mainline trackage will be Code 83 where I can use RTR 4" track sections to connect the modules. Handlaid turnouts are pretty simple once you do a few. I make my points closure rail and wing guard rail in one piece which makes the TO very reliable.