My ho scale layout is all code 100 track. I am now adding a freight yard to it and am going to use code 83 track and turnouts. My question is, is there a difference between track joiners for code 100 and 83 Track? I am told to use special joiners where the code 100 meets the code 83 track. Is this the best way to make the change?
thanx
ccg
You can buy transition joiners, there is also some transition track, Code 100 at one end Code 83 at the other. II think the easiest and least expensive is using the joiners. Some folks have successfully modified standard joiners to do the job. The one thing to make sure of is that the top os the rail is the same height to give you a smooth transition.
Good luck,
Richard
I made my own transition joiners using the standard Atlas NS rail joiners suitable for both code 83 and code 100 track. With pliers I squeeze one half of the rail joiner as flat as possible. Then solder the flat half to the underside of the code 83 rail. Insert the code 100 rail in the open end of the rail joiner and solder it. Use a heat sink on the code 83 solder joint to keep it from melting apart since there is nothing clamping it together.
The other thing to note when doing code 83 and code 100 track is that if you are using any Micro Engineering code 83 track (bridge track, etc.) with Atlas code 100 (as an example) is NOT try to use the ME rail joiners. (This is noted with ME track.) The Atlas transition joiners with will for this purpose, however. (I know this for a fact as I have ME bridge track on my layout with code 100 Atlas track.)
The transition joiners are just made of much lighter material with an extended area in the middle so that after being slid onto the track they can be bent up in the middle to match the top rail surface. I use them and then I always solder them. I use two short pieces of snap track with the joiners in the middle to make it easier to install on the layout. It is easier than messing with the transition at the flex track joints.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
My layout is mostly Code 83 track, but one section is Code 100.
I bought two 6" pieces of transition track and put one at each end of the Code 100 section which is in the middle of my layout.
It works flawlessly. It is really worth the money to installl transition track rather than trying to modify standard rail joiners.
Rich
Alton Junction
Rich:
That is the best way to do it. I didn't know they still made them.
Phoebe Vet Rich: That is the best way to do it. I didn't know they still made them.
You can probably find them cheaper on line.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/HO-Code-100-83-Transition-Track-Walthers-948-897-/310951461755?pt=Model_RR_Trains&hash=item486626c37b
$9.99 plus $2.99 on eBay.
When I went to Phase 2 of my layout and switched from Code 100 to Code 83, I used transition track at the 2 points where they met. This was fast and easy, and produced flawless transitions. On the other hand, I don't think that it would have been that hard to do this with a bit of shimming and extra care.
I would recommend trying to make the transition on a straight section of track. Doing this on a curve or where there is a turnout is asking for trouble.
Another thing to consider, and this has nothing to do with Code 83 vs Code 100, is electrically isolating the yard and adding a circuit breaker to protect it. This would involve providing a separate track power bus. It would make it easier to isolate problems, and when you get a short the other section of your layout would keep running. It's just something that's a lot easier to do at this point in construction than it is to do later.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
My layout is all c100 but had to use a number of Walthers c83 Double Curved Turnouts as the regular Shinohars Turnouts were only c100s and not the needed radiuses I needed.
I made my Transition jointers out of regular Atlas jointers just by taking my Dremel with the Abrasive blade and making a slight cut though the rolled top edge of the jointers.
I then slip the jointer onto the two pieces of track and take a long nose pliers and bend the metal jointer at the cut mark up until the c83 rail head meets the c100 rail head!
I then solder the joint. A little light file work to remove any burrs and it is ready to go
No Shimming of ties as when I ballast the track - the ballast will fill in under the ties as I use N Scale Ballast!
Reason for the N Scal Ballast - I get more than a few rocks between the ties using N Scale Ballast than I do with the HO Scale sized Ballast.
If one ever really looks at the amount of ballst pieces between real ties and then the number of supposed HO Scale Ballast Rocks - there is quite a big difference!
With the smaller ballast it will flow under any ties that might be bridging slight dips in the roadbed and make the track stay put!
BOB H - Clarion, PA
I have transitions between different codes of rail all over my layout, 83 to 70, 70 to 55, even 83 to 55. I also have a couple places where the code 100 in staging joins code 83.
I really like the Atlas "transition" joiners. As noted in another post above, they have a slot in the middle that lets you bend the joiner so both rails line up perfectly. To maintain alignment they really need to be soldered. I've also made my own transition joiners by cutting a similar slot in a normal joiner with a Dremel tool and cutoff disk.
Rob Spangler
If your Code 100 and Code 83 flex are both Atlas, they have equal railhead to tie bottom thickness (the code 83 ties are .017" deeper.) They can be joined with standard Atlas joiners. Just excavate a deeper groove under the Code 83 rail, since the bottom of the joiner will line up with the Code 100 rail base.
I proved this with the one yard of Code 83 I laid in the Netherworld as a test. At the first-installed end I slipped .017 inch slivers of plastic into the Code 83 end of the joiners. At the other end, I didn't bother. The flex is anchored with latex caulk, and I weighted it level (using flat angle iron spanning both sections) while it cured. Wheels have been rolling from Code 100 to Code 83 and back to Code 100 for close to four years now without a hiccup.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
For joiners between your Code 83 track sections, you might consider using Altas Code 80 N Scale joiners. These joiners will fit on Code 83 rail if you pre-size them using a scrap of Code 83 rail tapered on one end to spread the ends of the Code 80 N Scale joiners. Although much shorter than the Atlas Code 100/83 joiners, the Atlas N Scale Code 80 joiners hold the rail ends much tighter resulting in just as stable a rail joint connection. Best of all, these tiny joiners almost disappear once the rails are painted and ballasted.
Hornblower
This is a bit late but I used a little different approach. I filed down the code 100 rails leaving a ⅛" wide gap with a .017" shelf for the code 83 rail to sit on and a regular code 100 joiner.http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/2015/01/january-11-2015-code-100-track-to-code.html
[quote user="RR_Mel"]
Ken G Price My N-Scale Layout
Digitrax Super Empire Builder Radio System. South Valley Texas Railroad. SVTRR
N-Scale out west. 1996-1998 or so! UP, SP, Missouri Pacific, C&NW.