Best N scale track (4 options, but feel free to post about another brand).

[Packers#1]

I've got the go ahead that I will have a new layout when the attic that my layout is in becomes my bedroom (1 year). So, I want to get the track completly squared up. So, here are my 4 considerations:

Atlas code 80 (what I currently have)

Atlas code 55

Micro engineering code 70

Kato unitrack

Now, my thoughts here. The unitrack is an outside underdog, as the radi are preset. The disadvantage of Micro engineering is that it seems to cost a good deal. Atlas code 80 is okay, and I guess the turnouts will perform good with ground throws (custom-line). Atlas code 55 is a little more realistic.

I highly value all you folks ideas, and thanks in advance to all replys.

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

There is no best.

The one that suits your purposes best is the best for you.  For me it was Atlas 55.  Doesn't mean it is the best for you.

[NKP68]

Atlas 55 is what I would suggest. This is what I am currently using. It is a little more difficult to lay due to its size but it is worth it!

[cuyama]

Atlas 55 is what I would suggest. This is what I am currently using. It is a little more difficult to lay due to its size but it is worth it!

The OP should just be aware that the flanges on older engines and most stock Micro-Trains cars will hit the molded-in spikes on Atlas C55.

[Packers#1]

Atlas 55 is what I would suggest. This is what I am currently using. It is a little more difficult to lay due to its size but it is worth it!

The OP should just be aware that the flanges on older engines and most stock Micro-Trains cars will hit the molded-in spikes on Atlas C55.

Thanks all who have replied so far. cuyama, what about the atlas engines in my sig. (Atlas classic GP30 and GP9).

[Vail and Southwestern RR]

---

Atlas N scale locos are generally good stuff.  They'll run fine on code 55 track.

[jrbernier]

  Any Atlas engine built since the 90's should run fine on the code 55 trackage.  MT wheel sets need to be replaced with MT 'low profile' wheel sets or get the special Atlas metal wheel sets for MT trucks(the standard Atlas wheel sets are too tight).   Your Atlas GP9 and GP30 should be fine.

Jim

[wm3798]

I am using Atlas c55, and I love the stuff.  It looks fantastic, it's as easy to work with as their c80 flex, and they have a wide selection of turnouts (#5's, 7's and 10's) plus a full range of sectional track for fillers.  It's priced to be the most economical of all the code 55 systems.

 

If you're using Caboose ground throws, I suggest you get the variety with the electrical contact.  Atlas c55 turnouts have frogs that can be wired to route power, which virtually eliminates stalls of even tiny locomotives.  Also, it's possible to recess the ground throw below track level, which helps minimize the overscale size of the CI throw.

I cut a small block of homasote and sink it about 1/4" below the foam surface, and secure it in place with some liquid nails.  I use a track nail pushed up through the bottom of the slide bar on the switch throw to transfer movement to the throwbar on the turnout.

 

A less expensive alternative is to use a micro slide switch, a double pole single throw.  This can be rigged up with a throw bar to both physically and electrically throw the switch.  I paint the slide switch silver to resemble a line side electrical cabinet.

If you're just beginning your collection of N scale equipment, don't worry about the flange issue.  The problem is with the wheels that don't comply with NMRA standards (Micro Trains in particular) The track is in compliance, and most other newer rolling stock will work just fine.  You can also purchase replacement wheelsets to replace those MT pizza cutters...

Lee

[Packers#1]

Thanks for the information, everyone. Lee, you give such long replys, it virtuly eliminates all questions. Thanks again for all the help, I can't wait what else turns up.

[wm3798]

Wait till you get my bill!

[CSXDixieLine]

Just my ... I am planning layout construction on "the big one" and in the mentime have constructed a 3x7 test layout using Atlas Code 55. It does look great and so far none of my equipment has had any problems with wheel flange clearance (knock on homasote). Also, I like the fact that Atlas Code 55 offers #10 turnouts--hope they look as good on my layout as they do in the package. Jamie

[Packers#1]

Sounds like Atlas code 55 is in the lead. Anyone gonna try to argue differently?

[R. T. POTEET]

None of the above!!!

I have been using Rail Craft/Micro Engineering Code 55 since 1983; in the words of that '70s era cigarette commercial - the brand name escapes me at the moment - "I'd rather fight than switch!"

[jackn2mpu]

None of the above!!!

I have been using Rail Craft/Micro Engineering Code 55 since 1983; in the words of that '70s era cigarette commercial - the brand name escapes me at the moment - "I'd rather fight than switch!"

Another vote for ME code 55. The only problem is getting the ME c55 turnouts - they're as rare as an honest politician. The cigarette brand was Tareyton and the pic used in ads was of a person with a black eye holding a cancer stick (not a smoker but my late parents were). 

[Jake1210]

I personally would recommend handlaid code 40 or 55.

[R. T. POTEET]

None of the above!!!

I have been using Rail Craft/Micro Engineering Code 55 since 1983; in the words of that '70s era cigarette commercial - the brand name escapes me at the moment - "I'd rather fight than switch!"

Another vote for ME code 55. The only problem is getting the ME c55 turnouts - they're as rare as an honest politician. The cigarette brand was Tareyton and the pic used in ads was of a person with a black eye holding a cancer stick (not a smoker but my late parents were). 

Tareyton! That's right! I don't know why I didn't remember that because I even smoked them for awhile. They were the ones with the charcoal filter as I recall and each pack had a coupon and each carton had five(?) extra coupons. I didn't smoke them for long because they tasted like aitch e double hockey sticks. They had a catalog and you could redeem your coupons for "valuable" gifts. Buy a carton-a-week and in 40 years you would have enough coupons saved up to buy a respirator!

Anyway, ME Code 55, although obviously very heavy rail, still has the best appearance in N-Scale but switches can be a real problem; Atlas' offerings is a little better than ME's but is still rather thin. If you want something other than #6s you either build'em yourself - which is what I do - or you buy BK Enterprises kits which are fantastic but which are fantastically expensive.

It has probably been fifteen, maybe even twenty, years ago that someone promised N-Scale Code 45 track but nothing ever came from it. Some Nn3 modelers, I understand, lay down wire - 25 gauge or 28 gauge or something in that area - to simulate 90# rail. I haven't seen this; over a year ago, however, I put a post in the Prototype section about using Code 40 track and I got a response about this wire technique. Subsequently I did read something in one of the hobby magazines about it. The rail ordered his flat wire from a company in Connecticut if I recall right; the only fly-in-the-ointment was that this wire had to be ordered in a full spool 1000'-1200' in length which cost in excess of 200 bucks but it did give you enough wire to lay down fifteen to eighteen scale miles of track. That boils out to twelve to fifteen bucks a mile which is a bargain if you consider that using Atlas Code 55 will cost you close to 40 bucks a mile.

I DO NOT PROPOSE TO TRY THIS!!!! although I am considering use of some Code 40 on side tracks on my next layout.   

[fredswain]

I used all Kato on my layout based on recommendations of the owner of the train store near me. While it was very easy to develop a track plan with it due to it's ease of use, and I definitely wouldn't have come up with my track plan without it, it's use is one thing I regret. I'm not sure what the hype is about Kato track or why many people talk highly of it but I can absolutely say from experience that it's junk. It is extrememly hard to ballast if you want to go for more realism. Their switches are complete junk. I was sold on their so called reliability but they are junk. They are extrememly sensitive to anything getting in them. If you look inside of one to see how they work, you'll wonder how they function at all. It's the most improvised rigged system I've ever seen. As an engineer I can truly say that's the last way to do it that I would have ever thought of.

Trains derail easily on them but there is no consistency with them. i've had to physically modify several of them with a dremel to make them reliable. It's hard to describe why without actually showing it. Now that I've finished them, they work fine.

If you want high detail, you can't add ground throws that do anything. You can create something to be a static display of course. All in all if I had to do it again I'd go with Peco Code 55 but that's just me. I'd also use good old cork roadbead rather than the newer foam stuff you glue down.

Just my opinions.

[MichaelWinicki]

I spent many years fooling around with Atlas code 80 stuff... and their code 55 product just blows the code 80 right out of water!  The rail size, the tie-spacing... You weather the Atlas code 55 a little and it flat-out looks amazing!  You through in the modearate pricing and the availability of the product and I don't think it's even a contest quite frankly.

[Packers#1]

What I've decided on is code 55 w/ woodland scenics trackbed. i think I'll put my current stock of code 80 to use in some NTRAK modules.

[ham99]

I have been using Atlas #80 track, but as switches go bad I have replaced them with Peco switches.  If I were starting out, I'd use Peco track.  But not #55.  Too many problems reported with wheels hitting the spikes, unless you want to change to Fox Valley wheels.  I have to look closely to tell the difference between 80 and 55 anyway, so appearance is not an issue for me.

[fredswain]

I personally don't like the Woodland Scenics roadbed. I prefer the cork. I had a much harder time making it look nice. That's just me though. I'm sure many people love it.

[Packers#1]

I personally don't like the Woodland Scenics roadbed. I prefer the cork. I had a much harder time making it look nice. That's just me though. I'm sure many people love it.

I used it on my first layout, and it looks rather nice. Besides, I already have a good deal of it. And to shape, you only need a pair of scissors.