Micro Engineering is a far smaller firm than Atlas -- and indeed those of use who know and like their products are well aware that from time to time they are in short supply. Many reasonably well equipped hobby shops do not carry the full line of M-E flex track. That factor impacts price.
There are of course visual differences too -- the Atlas flex track has what some jokers have referred to as shoe boxes holding the rails. M-E is finer in appearance and is sometimes used by those who mix handlaid track with flex. That higher quality also impacts price.
But the biggest difference from a practical standpoint is this: Atlas is the most flexible and easiest to curve flex track. M-E is far stiffer and indeed, I use a variety of track laying tools from Ribbonrail to bend Micro Engineering flex track to the correct curve -- and to make the tangents more straight. It holds the curve by itself which Atlas does not do. Both forms of flex track have their advantages in the right situation but many modelers using flex track for the first time after graduating from sectional track like the ease of curving Atlas flex track. (I remember the initial Atlas flex track with fibre ties and it too was very hard to curve -- and when Atlas first had plastic tie flex track it also was much stiffer).
I would go so far as to say that the term "flex track" is misapplied to two such very different products as Atlas and M-E. I would say M-E is curvable or bendable but not flexible, while Atlas is truly flexible. Different techniques are called for to curve and lay the two brands. Both have their place.
Dave Nelson
Compare the products side-by-side in order to make a decision based on appearance. But I would make a decision based on whose turnouts you prefer. Yes, you can mix and match, but with some effort that can be avoided if you use only one brand. In my case, I need a variety of curved turnouts, and Walthers/Shinohara has the most complete line by far. Their flex track ties and spike details are good (not large), and so far, I have not found it difficult with which to work; also, I like the ability to use small spikes for attachment as opposed to adhesive or track nails.
Dante
Bluegill1 Is there a reason why Atlas is the cheapest? Is it just volume? Is there a manufacturing/quality reason?
Is there a reason why Atlas is the cheapest? Is it just volume? Is there a manufacturing/quality reason?
Well you got me. The speculation above on Atlas being able to reduce price per unit based on the economies of scale may be a big reason. Note however that relative prices fluctuate, and often Micro Engineering is cheaper than Atlas. Last time I checked the local shop that was the case.
As for quality, while the spike detail on Atlas is heavier than the others the plastic they use is more brittle. I seem to break more spike heads on Atlas than ME, but overall it's engineered to be easy and quick to use.
Walthers/Shinohara has somewhat large spike heads, but ease of use is similar to ME (i.e. more work than Atlas). It's kind of the worst of both worlds in that respect, but it's priced consistently higher than ME or Atlas.
I haven't used Peco, so can't assess their product. Their US prototype code 83 flex always seems to be expensive relative to ME and Atlas, so I really haven't considered using it.
Rob Spangler
galaxy BTW Atlas Code 100 Has been around longer than Atlas COde 83, so it is generally cheaper than the Atlas Code 83 simply because the tooling has been around longer and they have made their money on it times over again
BTW Atlas Code 100 Has been around longer than Atlas COde 83, so it is generally cheaper than the Atlas Code 83 simply because the tooling has been around longer and they have made their money on it times over again
I might add that Atlas Code 100 flex track is quite suitable as well, as galaxy points out. The differences are mainly that Code 100 has a slightly higher rail profile and the ties are black and slightly bulkier. I use Code 100 flex track on portions of my layout that are older before I switched to Code 83 track. Incidentally, the reason I switched to Code 83 track is that many types of specialty track are more readily available in Code 83 including the bridge track on turntables, wyes, crossings, 3-way turnouts, bridge track for bridges, etc.
Rich
Alton Junction
Atlas Code 83 is the Model T of track. It is the most popular and the most available and the most sold.
Since it works as well as any NS track and generally looks the same balasted as the more expensive models, one need not look any further, really.
Unless one is a stickler for fine details, or takes close up pics that are to appear as close to as real as life.
{BTW Atlas Code 100 Has been around longer than Atlas COde 83, so it is generally cheaper than the Atlas Code 83 simply because the tooling has been around longer and they have made their money on it times over again}
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
I use Atlas Code 83 flex track exclusively on my layout. It looks fine and performs just fine.
If your purpose is to perform some very closeup photography for a modeling contest or something likes that, maybe the finer detail of one brand over another makes sense. But, if you are simply looking to construct a layout and want to use track that will give you reliable performance while still looking like real railroad track, Atlas Code 83 flex track will suit your purposes just fine.
Part of the difference is cost of manufacture at point of origin.
Present-day Atlas is manufactured in China. Shinohara (imported by Walthers) is manufactured in Japan. Peco is a product of the United Kingdom. I don't know where other brands come from, but wherever they come from the manufacturer had to pay all the usual costs of business, plus taxes.
There is also the Atlas economy of scale factor. If you make ten times as many widgets as your competitor you can make them for a lower cost per widget.
Notice I said COST. Cost is what the businessperson has to pay. Price (especially MSRP) is what the last person in the distribution chain wants YOU to pay.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - aced Ec 101 in 1985)
ME has finer railhead profile and spike detail than the other brands and the price reflects this difference. I use ME exclusively for visible flex track. I take lots of close up photos and the details do show up in the pics.
ME codes 70 and 55 un-ballasted.
ME codes 80 and 70 ballasted and painted.
Before I made my decision, I ballasted and painted a stick of each of the major brands available and compared them. ME looked the best to me in the side by side. While it is true that all of the brands look good when painted and ballasted, to me ME looks a lot better than the others. If it is important to you, I would buy a stick of each of the brands and compare before making a large purchase..
of course, opinions do vary,
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
Look at the spike and tie plate details. Atlas is usually not as good as brands like ME, Shinohara, etc.
OTOH once it's laid, ballasted, etc. you may not notice at normal viewing distances..
Enjoy
Paul
IMO. I would think that Atlas most likely sells as much of the code83 as all the others combined. I'm would not be surprised if it is also true of all scales and codes of flex track.
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.
Being fairly new, I was wondering if there a reason why there is a significant differance in track cost. I'm looking at HO Code 83.
Nickel Silver is Nickel Silver, plastic ties are plastic ties.
I've been looking at M.E. , Atlas, Walthers/Shinohara and Peco.
Thanks,
David