Atlas code 55....

[Jacktal]

I am actually planning my future layout and have started buying different stuff,mainly trackwork.I know that Peco is very good track but don't manufacture every single types of turnouts and are also quite pricey.On the other hand,I've had experiences with Atlas snap-switches and can't say I was impressed by the quality although the flextracks were fair.Can someone tell me what to expect from Atlas code 55 flextracks and turnouts?Are these much better than their snap-junks?How do the Atlas code 55 compare with Peco's,in both reliability and prices?Thanks.

[Adelie]

In comparison to Atlas snaps, their code 55 is out of its class. I've used Atlas code 55 flex track and turnouts (all #7s) in my lower staging level. I'll be using their flex track in some hidden parts of the upper level of my layout. I'm very happy with the results thus far, especially with the flex track. I am not having any trackwork-related problems on that level, including the turnouts, although it has been used sparingly thus far.

I have no real experience with Peco flex track, so I can't help there. The turnouts are much more solid than the Atlas code 55s, probably due in part to the fact they are essentially code 80 buried into the ties to code 55 height (an oversimplification, there is a second "flange" on the rail at code 55 height). Same is true for the rail in Peco flex track. There will be some filing to be done if you are going to join it to Atlas or Micro Engineering track.

My plan is to mix Peco and Atlas code 55 turnouts and Micro Engineering flex track on the bulk of my exposed trackwork. Peco makes 4s, 6s, 8s (sort of), single slips, double slips and double crossovers, while Atlas makes 5s and 7s. My plan has some of all of that (I could have narrowed it down, but didn't because "it was there" and it fit).

I'm going with ME weathered flex track largely because the exposed section of the layout is about 28 x 14, and I don't want to be weathering track for the next 15 years! I would have had no problem using Atlas other than that factor.

When you compare the costs of flex track, be sure to factor in Atlas is about 30" in length, Peco and ME are 36". Atlas is still the least expensive, but ME is only a bit more (and is weathered, if you so specify).

My assessment:
Best: Peco (heftier rail, most solid turnouts, turnouts are spring loaded to ensure good throws).
Best looking: ME weathered flex track.
Good compromise: Atlas

If you are patient in track laying, use good practices and test your work thoroughly, you will get good results with any of those products.

One final warning: I do have some Life Like FA/FB2s that ride on top of the molded spikes in the Atlas flex track. I've heard of other equipment doing the same, apparently moreso than with Peco or ME. My problem is overly large flanges (visibly so) on those locomotives, and I'll either replace the wheels or remove the locos from the roster. Swapping out wheels on cars is easy, on locos it is a bit more tedious. Luckily, they will be undergoing the knife, anyway, for decoder installation, if I keep them.

[Anonymous]

I am putting together my first layout in 35 years and using Atlas code 55. So far I am very happy with the track, the only rough spot is a poorly soldered connection that causes the cars to rock badly. Some work with a file will cure that. The switches have powered frogs. As soon as I figure out the Caboose hand throws I will have an idea of how well they work. I know the cars roll through them smoothly. The cost, at least at my LHS is 2/3 that of PECO ($2.05 for a section of Atlas code 55 flextrack compaired to $3.15 for a section of Peco flex)

I would like to see a better selection in track, more crossovers and maybe a wye would be nice.

Overall I like the stuff.

[Anonymous]

bukwrm,
Caboose Ind. makes 2 ground throws for the Atlas Code 55 track.
The p/n for the one without contacts is 222 and # 224 has contacts.
4Nscale.com has them on sale for $2.50 and $3.95 respectively.
Good Luck,
gtirr

[Tom Bryant_MR]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Adelie

In comparison to Atlas snaps, their code 55 is out of its class. ...

Hi Adelie, I'm not sure what you mean "their code 55 is out of its class" - Atlas ?

I'm interested in this thread, because like others I am planning a new N layout and am thinking about using 55 vs. 80. I'm working on a small N layout with code 80 Atlas and while I'm not unhappy with it, I would like to know the pro's and con's of the code 55. I basically understand it is not as tall relative to the ties and I've heard the same as you about some engines/stock having problems with this.

I believe the general consenus is that 55 looks a bit more realistic ?