HO Flex Track Dilema

[nfmisso]

QUOTE: Originally posted by djoiner

I am new to the scene & debating between code 83 & code 100 flex track for a new layout and need some advice please. I like the code 100 because it is more sturdy, the ties are even, and there are through -holes for mounting. I like the code 83 because it is more scale-realistic, however the ties are very uneven on straight sections, the spikes are more fragile, and there are only small (mounting?) depressions on the bottom side of the ties, not through holes for mounting. Also, the mounting holes are in the center (for code 100), lining up nicely with the gap between the two cork roadbed halves underneath! Should I just glue down the track & forget nailing? Are there other cautions for using code 83 (such as compatible wheel flange depths on cars, limited options for turn-outs, etc.?) Help!

Use Aleene's Tacky Glue for both your roadbed and track. I use canned food/pop/soda/etc as weights overnight to hold everything in place.

[nfmisso]

QUOTE: Originally posted by djoiner

I am new to the scene & debating between code 83 & code 100 flex track for a new layout and need some advice please. I like the code 100 because it is more sturdy, the ties are even, and there are through -holes for mounting. I like the code 83 because it is more scale-realistic, however the ties are very uneven on straight sections, the spikes are more fragile, and there are only small (mounting?) depressions on the bottom side of the ties, not through holes for mounting. Also, the mounting holes are in the center (for code 100), lining up nicely with the gap between the two cork roadbed halves underneath! Should I just glue down the track & forget nailing? Are there other cautions for using code 83 (such as compatible wheel flange depths on cars, limited options for turn-outs, etc.?) Help!

Use Aleene's Tacky Glue for both your roadbed and track. I use canned food/pop/soda/etc as weights overnight to hold everything in place.

[orsonroy]

I prefer Peco switches and smaller rail, so I opted for Peco code 75, with Micro Engineering code 70 and 55 flextrack added for a bit of variety. It's hard to tell the difference between code 100 and code 83, but it's easy to see the difference between 100 and 75!

That said, code 75 is much more expensive than either code 83 or 100, and I'm now locked into only one manufacturer for the bulk of my track.

The variety of track sections for code 100 and code 83 are about the same, so it boils down to personal preferance and budget. If you're planning a large layout, code 100 will stretch your budget further. If you need curved switches, Peco code 100 curved are cheaper than Shinohara's code 100 or code 83.

Yes, smaller rail is more finely detailed than code 100, so it's a bit more fragile. Just be a bit more careful with what you're doing, and you'll be fine.

[orsonroy]

I prefer Peco switches and smaller rail, so I opted for Peco code 75, with Micro Engineering code 70 and 55 flextrack added for a bit of variety. It's hard to tell the difference between code 100 and code 83, but it's easy to see the difference between 100 and 75!

That said, code 75 is much more expensive than either code 83 or 100, and I'm now locked into only one manufacturer for the bulk of my track.

The variety of track sections for code 100 and code 83 are about the same, so it boils down to personal preferance and budget. If you're planning a large layout, code 100 will stretch your budget further. If you need curved switches, Peco code 100 curved are cheaper than Shinohara's code 100 or code 83.

Yes, smaller rail is more finely detailed than code 100, so it's a bit more fragile. Just be a bit more careful with what you're doing, and you'll be fine.