Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
I had HO trains as a teenager (I'm now in my 40s). I've been in N since the mid 1980s. My first layout was done with the standard code 80 rail (Peco turnouts) because that's all there was. I've razed that layout, and about 10 months ago began building an all-new one using Micro Engineering code 55. My advice is this: The code 55 didn't seem at all that hard for me to put down. If you've never worked in N-Scale before, I bet it will be tricky for you at first, because HO code 83 is gargantuan by comparison. But the rail height and width, and tie spacing etc, look so much better than code 80 that I would never use 80 again. So far, everything I have runs perfectly on it. Long steam engines pulling strings of passenger cars will BACK AROUND 180-degree turns, through a turnout, without a hitch. The keys here are: 1) gauge - Making sure that EVERY wheelset on EVERY engine and car is in gauge is a MUST. I just use the standard NMRA N-Scale gauge and check everything I buy. If you don't do this, you'll have derailments at turnouts for sure. 2) Broad curves. My first layout had a minimum radius of 12". Now, everything is 18" or broader. This makes a HUGE difference. Sure, trains might "negotiate" those tighter turns, but they cause more derailments, and aggravate slight discrepancies in the trackwork. If you're worried about scale "looks", stick with the higher-quality stuff. The better rolling stock (Microtrains, and a few others)., better engines (Kato of course, but also the newer LifeLike and Bachmann Spectrum N-Scale stuff is really nice. Concor/Rivarossi is medium-quality, but some of these are really nice too, although it's hit-or-miss). Both Kato and Concor make nice N-Scale passenger cars, but I'd still have to give the nod to Kato here. Couplers: Microtrains (Kadee). Hands down. There are some other similar ones, but I still don't think they are as good yet. If you really want to be in "scale", you can put Z-Scale couplers on all your N-Scale equipment. It looks terrific, if you've got the patience for it. (I know HO modelers who use N-Scale couplers for the same reason). I looked the Atlas code 55. But since nearly everything in N-Scale has flanges too deep to run on it, I had to rule it out. I wouldn't mind putting the low profile wheelsets on all my rolling stock. But what about steam locomotive drivers? There are lots of engines that you just can't fix for the Atlas code 55 unless you are willing to machine down the flanges. Besides, frankly, the ME track looks better. I also highly recommend using the Woodland Scenics foam roadbed and foam glue. This stuff costs more than using cork, but it is FABULOUS. It's quieter, goes down easier, and flat-out looks better. I've never tried to go all the way down to code 40. But for sure, you would need to change out all your wheelsets to low-profile ones (nice ones are made by Northwest Shortline, and Microtrains). And even though I like tiny trains, I think even I would find code 40 just a little too fine to mess with. I would strongly advise you to buy a few lengths of code 55, 40, and 80, and even a few turnouts. Look at them. Hook a few pieces together and run an engine on them. That's what I did. That's why I decided that hands-down, Micro Engineering code 55 was the way to go for me. Cheers, and good luck!
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag

Update Reply

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!

Model Railroader Newsletter See all

Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!

Subscriber & Member Login

Edit post

Post Body

Tags (Optional)

Subscriber & Member Login

Users Online

Search the Community