Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Rail Height Between Peco and Shinohara C83 Track

770 views
2 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2008
  • From: Ontario, CA
  • 28 posts
Rail Height Between Peco and Shinohara C83 Track
Posted by 667CDP on Sunday, May 11, 2008 5:59 PM

In a previous post, 'joe-daddy' provided some excellent information on the differences between Code 83 rail from Peco and Code 83 from Atlas. The pics on his blog really illustrated the difference in rail height, thus resulting in some necessary filing or shimming.

My question is, how does Peco C83 marry up with C83 Shinohara? Are they a pretty close match, or are there subtle rail height differences between these two brands, as with the Peco/Atlas combination?

Thanks,

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Colorado
  • 707 posts
Posted by joe-daddy on Sunday, May 11, 2008 6:52 PM
 667CDP wrote:

In a previous post, 'joe-daddy' provided some excellent information on the differences between Code 83 rail from Peco and Code 83 from Atlas. The pics on his blog really illustrated the difference in rail height, thus resulting in some necessary filing or shimming.

My question is, how does Peco C83 marry up with C83 Shinohara? Are they a pretty close match, or are there subtle rail height differences between these two brands, as with the Peco/Atlas combination?

Thanks,

Current production Walthers (made by Shinohara) c83 rail is the same height and web design as Atlas.  With the Peco/ME the diff is in the width of the lower web. If an I represents a rail, I am talking about the width of the bottom _ not the height. That width difference screws up the joiner technology and requires the transitioning. 

Back to Walthers/Shinohara(W/S)  the Ties are about .020 different between C83 W/S and Atlas 83.  They will join smoothly, but you have should to shim up the turnout slightly.   With C83 W/S and Peco you still have the problem of the lower web of the Peco being too narrow PLUS the tie height difference, making it a double foul in my mind.

So far as I can tell, Peco and ME are compatible with each other in C83.

This why I have retreated to using Atlas c83 with Atlas c83 Mark4 turnouts.

Just my 2 cents,

Joe Daddy

My website and blog are now at http://www.joe-daddy.com
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: PtTownsendWA
  • 1,445 posts
Posted by johncolley on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10:31 AM

Another thing to be aware of as it affects the effectiveness of rail joiners is the base flange width varies between track manufacturers. One glaring difference is MicroEngineering track is a lot narrower base than Walthers Shinohara. It is very difficult to join them with Micro's joiners.

jc5729 John Colley, Port Townsend, WA

jc5729

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!