I'm sure there are many postings on one brand vs another....but a quick question anyway...
I am expanding my layout and now can use larger radii. Used Atlas code 83 snap switches on narrower 18 radius sections...not too much of a problem..
Should I have confidence in ordering Atlas Custom Line for the new section where I will run larger locos? I will need about a dozen with regular remote switch machines so the cost is getting up there.
Or do people in the know swear by Peco or some other brand? (no I'm not going to hand lay anything!)
(Actually my two new P2K 2-8-8-2s run very nicely over the snap switches...but I think they are built with a lot of leeway).
I've got both snap-switches and custom-lines on my layout. They all seem to work just fine. Over the period of construction of my layout, though, I've really come to dislike the appearance of the above-table mounted Atlas switch machines. Their below-table model doesn't have a long enough throw rod to accomodate 2-inch foam. I've found that some engines and cars tend to "dip" into the frog, but this doesn't cause a derailment. One post some time ago suggested that the guardrails on Atlas turnouts are too far from the stock rails, which allows this "frog dip" to happen.
I've tried a couple of different approaches to hiding the switch machines:
I've built scenic covers with plastercloth and foam. This has worked well in some locations, and looks a bit cheesy in others, depending on the topography around the turnout.
I've extended the throwbar on the turnout, and mounted the switch machine several inches away under a hill, again made with plastercloth and foam. This is a reasonable approach, as it completely hides the switch machine and isn't hard to disguise. Here, though, you need the space to put the machine. You could also hide it under a building.
I've glued one of the Atlas under-table machines directly to the bottom of the turnout. So far, so good, but if it ever has a problem I'll have to rip up the track to fix it.
I've changed my buying habits, and now choose Peco turnouts and switch machines. The Peco machines mount directly to the bottom of the track, and the spring built into the turnout itself holds the points solidly against the stock rail.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I use Kato. They are very expensive, but are self contained and work with a DS 64 "Out of the box"
The reason? The other switches appear to get mashed flat or refuse to accept the big rigid wheel base locomotives in my fleet. Ive actually at one point was pondering selling off the big stuff in favor of smaller items to settle the switch problem.
Dont look now, but this month's MR issue has a Walthers Code 83 switch with a tiny self contained machine under.
Fawlty Logic wrote: Should I have confidence in ordering Atlas Custom Line for the new section where I will run larger locos?
Hi, this is a bit off-topic, but may be related to what you are trying to decide:
I have several mfgrs of HO switches in use, including Atlas, Shinohara, Walthers and Peco. These are driven by a variety of motors, mounted in several ways. Some use Rix motors mounted on Rix Flats, because I need to power frog-rails, and their built-in dpdt contacts are there. Some are driven by Peco #PL-10E (extended shaft) types with no contacts, mounted on 1-1/2" square metal pads screwed to the underside of my roadbed. The extended shafts reach thru 1/2" ply plus 1/4" cork and I can replace the motors if necessary without disturbing the track. Since my controls are of a pulse in nature, I cannot use exotic motors like the Tortoise. If I redo my controls, I'll consider them; they're quiet and have contacts in them.
Others are using the older-style of Atlas under-the-roadbed switchmotors that I modified a bit so I can mount them anywhere within reason and activate the drawbar with a length of piano wire running thru a brass tube. Note, I use OLDER style Atlas motors, as I couldn't make the new ones do the job. Pity, the included relay was a great idea. Take a look at this thread from last spring to see how I modified the motors to accept the wire; it is from userid jlj30, entitled Switchmaster versus Switch Tender turnout motors. You can find it under my id BigG too.
It was really simple to file off the peg on the motor arm and drill for the wire. This arrangement will allow the Atlas motors to flip Peco switches, even without removing the spring that makes the Pecos so reliable.
Most of my track is C-100, with some C-83 where the Atlas switches are. So far they haven't given me any problem, but the usage isn't up there yet, Time will tell.
Hope I haven't confused the issue, have fun.... George
I use Atlas Custom Line turnouts (Code 83) with Humpyard mechanical switches. Overall I am happy - but I do have tenders that have the "frog dip" problem. I haven't tried to fix as they don't cause a derailment - but they do compromise smooth running expectations.
On phase one of our layout, started two years ago, we used Atlas Snap Switches, and never ran into any problems.
On phase two, started recently, we again used Snap Switches, and also Custom Lines and every last one is out of gauge at the points.
Some are so far out, that joiners attached to adjacent track push the rails on the adjacent track far enough out of gauge to fail with the NMRA gauge.
On just two turnouts, it took a total of 11 MicroEngineering handlaying spikes just to make them safe for any of our trains and rolling stock. Right now, one Atlas turnout renders one out of three mainlines unusable until i get in there with spikes and the gauge. All trains derail through there every time.
In my opinion, there has been a substantial drop in the quality control of Atlas track over the past two years, and because of this, I cannot recommend that anyone waste their money on it, unless they understand up front that it easily may be unservicable as sold.
I hate to have to say that. I love my Atlas locomotives (though I have to wonder about new ones now), but the gauge doesn't lie.
I agree on the atlas switches. Long ago sometime before the time of Caesar Atlas switches were uber good because they had that metal frog and nickel silver rail.
I doubt I will ever buy another ever again and it's too bad because Atlas does make some good products in other areas of the hobby. These switches are built so simply as they will fail and fail pernamently.
IF the atlas switch does pass your initial inspecition and installation, they will fail at the points where there are two pivot rivets stamped into the tie later.
That Gauge will be the one that makes ALL switches fess up and see where the problem is, if any.
Hm. That's a lot of negative comments on the Atlas switches, more than I've seen before. I think I am the one who commented on the distance between the frog and the guardrails. I have some Code 83 Custom Line units where I had to grind off a bit of guardrail to meet the NMRA gauge. Before that a few cars were "picking" the frog at the throat, not at the point, even after I checked the wheel gauge. They are all fine now.
I don't have enough use on these yet to comment on the durability of the rivets on the points.
The one under-table Atlas switch machine I bought (out of curiosity) didn't have enough throw to hold the points securely against the stock rail.
I've noticed the "frog dip" with my switches, too. I think it happens because the wheel has about a millimeter to go between the frog point and where it rides on the point rail.
I plan to paint my above-table Atlas switch machines aluminum. They are not quite scale, but they will be somewhat realistic.
I plan to continue with Atlas turnouts.
If I understand you correctly, you are using code 83 atlas track and have been using Atlas turnouts (snap). I am a Newbie finishing my sophomore year and I've been through the mill on this one. You'll be told that 'I've used Atlas flex and Peco switches for years and they are the best'. He is only right, IF he is using code 100 Peco and Flex which are quite compatible. But I doubt many will be thrilled with their experiences using Atlas 83 Flex and Peco 83 turnouts because the rails are not the same, and rail joiners don't do a good job of aligning them. Here is a picture of what the rails look like with Peco 83 turnout and a piece of Atlas 83 flex.
Here is what it looks like with Peco turnout and ME flex (83 of course)
Here is where you and I are, either stay with Atlas on Atlas, abandon the Atlas in favor of the much more expensive Peco or ME products, or be prepared to solder fuss and fume with EVERY joint you have where these two incompatible products join.
These pictures DON'T lie. Go get some of each and you will find that the Atlas joiners are too loose and the ME/Peco are just too tight. Your going to get a lot of advice about how you can pinch the joiners etc, but bottom line, it is a pain in the caboose!
Plus, you will pay almost TWICE more for the Peco turnouts. When I spend more money, I expect it will be better and more trouble free. Not in this case.
Here is what I am doing. I have abandoned the Peco product in for the Atlas for the time being. Seems that when you use a Tortoise machine with an Atlas, you get a pretty nice setup. Besides, the Peco turnout motor is a pair of solenoids that make an ungodly noise when you throw them.
I'll be selling 15 or 17 Peco #5's with motors soon, as I have removed them from service. I have been hunting around for a permanent solution. Yesterday, I received my FastTracks jigs that are set up to use Atlas rail. I'll be building my own turnouts getting what are suppose to be the smoothest and most reliable turnout on the market and they will be 100% compatible with my Atlas rail.
Please, no flames, I've shared my 2 cents which is all that it is worth.
Joe
Yes, joining Atlas flex to a Peco turnout is a problem. When possible, I use a section of fixed-radius track on the curved portion of the turnout, if it's a continuation of the curve. The problem isn't bad if you're using a straight section of flex.
I also try to solder the rails all around the Peco. When possible, I like to do this on the bench before I install the turnout.
My layout is foam roadbed on pink 2-inch foam. When I've got the Peco switch machine mounted and ballasted, the sound is pretty well muffled. Of course, I'm running sound engines, so I'm not operating in a quiet environment where such things might be more noticeable.
Oh, really good photos, by the way. They illustrate this problem very clearly.