With Roadbed or without

[dwhitetop2]

I am starting my new layout and I am torn between using track with roadbed or not. I really need some expert opinions. Is it worth the extra cost or not. I sort of like the bachmann turnouts with DCC. What are your opinions on them? They seem rather costly. I can go either way, I just want opinions.   Thank you all    Dave

[larak]

Hi Dave,

Here is one opinion. I am not sure if you are refering to track with built in roadbed or just track installed on roadbed by you.

Case 2) IMHO all track except for street running, some yards and sidings belongs on roadbed. The thickness can vary. Mainline gets the thickest.

Case 1) IMHO separate roadbed properly ballasted is better looking than "all in one" track/roadbed combos. Some others like it more. Be advised that this kind of track will limit your options on curve radius and special work and thickness.

I am sure that you will receive varied answers to your question.

Karl

[dwhitetop2]

Im sorry , Iwas talking about the track with built in roadbed. Jeff Wimberley camos. it pretty well.    Dave

[Midnight Railroader]

Personally, I dislike the track with roadbed attached. It never looks realistic to me.

I'd go with cork roadbed or homasote and flextrack.

[cudaken]

 Cost to me is a big factor. 3 foot section of Flex Track is $2.75 at my LHS and around $1.00 for cork. I normally but around 5 sections at a time. If I need a 28 radius, I have it, need 24 inch straight section I have it. No Oops, I need a 22 inch turn and I bought a 26 inch.

 I never ran a good quality engine on track that has built in road road bed. But, the cheap engines I started with made more racket on it than when it was on flex track.

 Laying the cork road bed is not hard either. Plus, if your bench work is not perfectly flat say where 2 section hook up? You can sand the cork to make it flatter.

          Cuda Ken

[twhite]

I've used both, in fact I have both installed on my Yuba River Sub.  For the most part, I've used foam roadbed and flex-track (I'd use cork, but in my particular climate location I've found that it dries out and becomes crumbly very fast), and for one section, I've used wide radius--(36") EZ track with the built-in roadbed, but mainly because it's in a rather tricky section of my layout, and I needed exact curveature simply for safety--a sheer cliff that drops 6 actual feet to the garage floor--that I found I could not trust with laying flex-track in that particular area.  So I'd say it's up to what you really want. 

I know that Jeffrey has very good operation with his EZ track set-up, and I've had no problem at all with my one long section, which has been on the layout for 7 years.  As to not looking 'prototypical', with careful weathering and ballasting, it's hard to tell where my EZ track ends and the flex-track begins.  But that's all up to the individual eye of the beholder.  

Tom    

[blownout cylinder]

I'm finding that I tend towards cork myself as I'm modeling a freelanced prairie/high plains RR---ergo a built in roadbed would be a little too clean in my case. And tall. It would also have to be based on what you are trying to achieve. If you are modeling doubletrack mains then maybe it might be a good idea but if it is a single branchline that spends a good part of the time in the weeds then-------?

[tomikawaTT]

I personally have two points of heartburn with all sectional track, but that with 'built-in ballast' especially:

1. There are no commercially available spiral easement sections, so every curve starts with that typical toy train lurch (and can derail cars with inadequate coupler swing for the straight-to-curve coupler offset.)  A length of flex can correct this deficiency with sections not on ballast.  Correcting the preballasted variety is less straightforward.
2. The vertical easement at the beginning or end of a grade simply doesn't happen with rigid roadbed.  This is an issue if you don't have trackwork that is as flat as a laser-leveled tabletop.  That vertical kink will cause locos to hang up (4-8-4 with all four driver sets lifted clear of the rail equals no traction!) and, especially at the summit, may cause couplers to lose their grip on each other ("The Limited rolled backward down the grade before derailing at the bottom...")

The reason I said this is my personal heartburn is influenced by a layout design that has numerous grades (with level stretches between) and more curves than a Hawaiian Tropic competition.  The Flatland and West Pancake won't have to concern itself with vertical transitions, but the horizontal variety still make a difference.

Chuck (Modeling mountainous Central Japan in September, 1964)

[TMarsh]

I prefer flex-track with cork road bed for two reasons. 1-It's cheaper in my case. I say that because maybe someone has a case where it my be cheaper to use the built in type. How, I don't know but I suppose it is possible. 2. It is easier to fudge a bit if your actual laying of track doesn't quite go with your plan. You are not tied to a particular radius and straight is not necessarily straight. And like Ken said sometimes there may be a hump that a solid piece won't make a smooth transition over. Depends on your plan.  

As far as realism goes I've seen pictures of those like Jeffrey and Tom that have used it and quite frankly you can't tell the difference. EZ-Track type can be made to look every bit as realistic as Flex or regular sectional roadbed.

Good luck with whichever you choose.

Todd

   

[wjstix]

Bachmann EZ Track is designed to have ballast eventually laid over it - take a look at the pic used in their ads over the last few years. It has fairly deep ties so you can use conventional ballast. Kato Unitrack makes ballast to go match the built-in ballast/roadbed so you can add some along the sides of the built-in roadbed so it looks more realistic...although some modellers have found other companies' fine gray-mix ballast works just as well.

I used cork once 35 years ago, never since. For years I used "Ribbonrail" pre-formed upsom board roadbed with flex track. It worked well, but the upsom board would expand and contract over time, requiring track adjustments. For the current layout I'm using Kato. Their Code 83 track has a narrow profile and to my eye looks great. I "paint" the rail with Neo-lube, an electronics lubricant (that conducts electricity unlike paint) and then clean the heads of the rails with a brightboy. Then I paint some of the ties with shades of brown or gray to get a mixed effect - not all black. Eventually - when the track is in place permanently - I'll go back and weather the roadbed with maybe an alcohol and india ink wash.

I like the Kato because you can set-up and test the layout design and actually run trains, and make changes easily at that stage. Kinda sucks to glue down cork roadbed and then find out later you could put in another industry or make operating easier if you could move the track over an inch or two!!

[dwhitetop2]

Thanks all for all of your opinions. I think I will go with the flex and either cork or foam. I used the foam on my last layout. It worked out well. Im going to have a double main so there will be a lot of track. Thanks again for all of your advice.    Dave

[mobilman44]

Hi!

All of us have some definite opinions on this subject, and for what its worth, here is mine......

In my humble opinion - and I've been playing with trains since the mid-'50s - track with built on roadbed limits your configurations, is expensive, and tends to be toylike!  Now please don't jump on me - for this is just my opinion, and not that of management.

If you are a beginner at the hobby, then perhaps sectional track is best for you.  But if you expect to be in the hobby "forever", sooner or later you will ditch the sectional track, and pick up some cork or similar "roadbed", and a quantity of flextrack, and lay in all those  special configurations and easements and the like. 

Whatever you do, please ENJOY !!!!!

Mobilman44