Hi all,
I am looking at getting some new turnouts for a layout extension. I would prefer to get something in the #4-#6 range with an insulated frog that does not require any rail gapping, special wiring, switch machines, etc. to install on the layout. I would also like to avoid power routing as well if possible. I think Atlas code 83 turnouts fit the bill, but I have heard that their quality is not always high, so I don't know if I can find what I'm looking for from Walthers, Peco, or Micro Engineering.
Do any of these have the features I'm looking for, and is one "better" than the others? Thanks for any suggestions.
You will have to forego Peco Streamline varieties then because they do route power. I somehow ended up with an Atlas #5 or 6 of indeterminate kind that has a black plastic frog and it also routes power...don't know what type it is or where I got it, but if I throw the points the unlined route goes dead.
Hello all,
What scale are you modeling?
You mentioned Code 83. From that I'm guessing it's HO.
Is that the code of rail you are using on the entire pike?
What are these turnouts being used for?
How are you planning on throwing the points?
Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) turnout controllers: Atlas, Peco Third party: Tortoise, Servo Style
Ground Throw Facia Mounted
By considering these questions, in addition to what you've listed in your post, you will have a better idea of your needs.
I model in HO and use code 100 track.
The turnouts on my pike are Atlas Snap Switches and PECO #2 & #6 turnouts with an Atlas Mark IV Wye. All have insulated frogs.
All turnouts are thrown by their respective OEM switch machines connected to Atlas Switch Controllers. Powered by 12v DC.
Because the PECO turnouts springs require greater force than the Atlas ones, and the Atlas Switch Controllers can burnout solenoid type switch machines, I installed two Capacitive Discharge Units (CDUs).
With the CDUs I was able to power two opposing switch machines on a crossover with the same controller.
Alll the manufactures you listed make quality products.
By assessing your needs and budget any of them will fit your needs.
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
I have Peco, Walthers/Shinohara, Micro Engineering, and Atlas turnouts, all code 83, on my layout. The Pecos look good and work well and I like the integral spring for the points, but are generally above the price I'd be willing to pay unless they were the only option. Likewise for the Walthers/Shinohara - the ones I have are mostly long, or long curved ones. They have a live frog, and also require either a switch machine or ground throw to hold the points in place. Another option is to install your own spring on the throwbar.
Micro Engineering turnouts look great, but the latest ones I have seem different from the ones I bought years ago, with gaps all over the place - this may have something to do with DCC, but it's a real nuisance on my DC layout. I do like the integral springs in these, too, but I may simply replace those turnouts completely. One other drawback to ME turnouts is that they're available only as #6s.The majority of the turnouts on my layout are Atlas, pretty-well all number 6, too. I had an issue with a few of these that had a frog which sat higher that the rest of the turnout's rails, but a few passes with a mill file fixed that. Other than that, they've been very reliable. They do required either a switch machine or ground throw to keep the points against the stock rails, or. like the Shinoharas, you can add a spring on the throwbar. The frog on these is metal, not powered, but can be if you so desire. As is, they're not power-routing, so both diverging tracks are live. If you want to control which tracks are live, simple on/off switches on the layout's fascia will take care of that.Atlas offers a wide range of turnout sizes, and also has curved ones and various crossings, and are the most affordable of the four brands. If the M.E. turnouts get replaced, it'll be Atlas ones as the replacements.
Wayne
doctorwayneOne other drawback to ME turnouts is that they're available only as #6s.
ME has a yard ladder system of #5 turnouts. It's not mentioned on their primative website, but there is a series of 5a,5b,5c,5d and 5e. Ken Patterson has reviewed these on youtube. His latest "What's Neat" has a ME single crossover as a one piece unit - #6
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Atlas Snap-Track is called that because it goes together in a snap - not WITH a snap. When they first came out with it, there wasn't much choice, hand lay, or semi-handlay with Tru-Scale, at least for scale track. Of course Lionel and Flyer had their sectional tinplate track long before Atlas was around. Tru-Scale's fully built up track didn't have a complete 'system' that had all the geometry covered like Atlas did with Snap Track.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
All four brands work fine. Its a matter of personal preference, and it could simply come down to price given all are a quality product.
Atlas turnouts are fine. They are not "sprung", meaning the points are not held tightly against the nonmoving rails. They do have a habit of migrating away from the rails if the throwbar isn't held in place with some sort of friction. Like a thin strip of styrene under the throwbar. Atlas is the most popular, and is the least costly, and are fine.
Pecos are sprung, so the points snap tighly against the stock rails and hold without further assistance. Their footprint is a bit more compact than the other brands so people with limited space tend to favor them. Their build quality is generally impeccable, but they are the most expensive.
ME is competitively priced, tend to have the most realistic looking ties and appearance, and are sprung like Pecos. They may have some unique, but not necessarily difficult, wiring requirements.
Walthers are nice too, but are pricey and I don't see where they offer anything over the others.
- Douglas
Thanks to all who replied. I will definitely take a closer look at the Atlas turnouts (HO), as they seem to best meet my requirements. I am getting them to form the ends of a passing siding. I plan on using ground throws.
Eventually, you will either not regret powering your frogs, or you will kick yourself for not doing it. Manual ground throws exist with wires to power the frogs, as do powered switch machines. I've got a number of #5 and#6 turnouts where I've retrofittted powered frogs, and it's really improved performance.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Our club decided to go with Atlas Customline Code 83 #6 turnouts. We debated using Peco Code 83 #6s and #8s but they were quite a bit more expensive. We were looking at spending another $500 for the Pecos.
Here are a few things that we learned along the way:
- Atlas Customline Code 83 #6 turnouts are not built the same as Atlas Customline Code 83 #8 turnouts. The #6s have stamped NS point rails which are quite durable. The #8s have cast metal point rails which are very fragile. One of the point rails was slightly bent in the #8 sample that we got. The tab that holds the point rail in the throwbar broke off when I tried to bend it into shape. It is a very poor design.
- Atlas Customline turnouts are the simplest to wire. The frog can be dead or live as you wish. You don't need insulated rail joiners for the Atlas but you do for the Pecos. The Customline switches have metal frogs and there is a small hole where a 2-56 x 1/8" brass screw can be inserted to solder a frog feed wire to. Newer Peco turnouts have a wire already attached.
- Atlas turnouts have a smaller angle of deflection than the same # Pecos. In other words the Peco switch turns more sharply. Not an issue for most people but if you want to run long cars it might be.
- Atlas turnouts are longer than the Pecos. An Atlas Customline #6 is about 12" long whereas a Peco Code 83 #6 is just over 10" long. The Pecos can be an advantage if space is tight. The Atlas can be trimmed a bit.
- Peco turnouts have a built in spring which holds the point rails tightly against the stock rails whereas the Atlas point rails swing freely. The Peco spring should be removed if you are using a slow motion switch machine. Removing the spring is easy.
- Atlas Code 83 #6 turnouts form yard ladders without the need for filler pieces whereas the Pecos require a short filler piece between them to get the proper yard track spacing. Atlas has a #5 turnout which works the same way as the #6 but will allow you to shorten the length of the yard ladder.
- Atlas Customline #6 switches seem to be very consistent in terms of quality. We bought approximately 60 #6 turnouts. So far I have only found two very minor defects. One was a point rail that didn't quite close tightly against the stock rail. The other was a bit of flash between a couple of ties. Both were easy to fix. I haven't checked the height of the frogs yet (thanks for the suggestion Wayne).
- Peco Code 100 Electrofrog turnout designs have changed over the years. Unfortunately, Peco has used the same designations throughout. If you are buying older turnouts they will require more work to wire them for a power routing frog. Soldering a feeder wire to the older Peco Code 100 frogs is a pain.
To the OP, I think the Atlas #5 and 6s would suit you very well. I'm not familiar with the #4s. Avoid the #8s IMHO.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
RR_MelOne thing that I like about the Peco turnouts is the mounting of the Peco PL-10 switch machine attached to the under side the turnout. It’s not for everyone but I like the ease of installation.
.
The PECO switch machine never gets the recognition it deserves. It is a nifty piece that attaches easily, and it is very reliable. Everyone I have known that has used them is happy with them.
They also allow you to use "diode matrix" alignment for siding selection.
I never used PECO turnouts, so never used the switch machines either.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
I use the Peco insulfrog turnouts and have been very satisfied with them. I have over forty on my layoutThough they are power routing you can feed power to all six rails, which in fact I make sure I do so that the point rails are fed from two directions and you do not rely on point rail conact for power. I have no problem with stalling, though occasionally I will have to either file or insulate the frog because some equipment may short when a metal wheel spans the gap at the point of the frog.
You CAN mount the Atlas undertable machien directly to the bottom of the turnout, that just means a trench parllel with the rails for it to sit down in. I'd put a piece ov thing styrene or card between the ties and th emachine. A servo can also be mounted like this, similar to the Peco machine, but no spring needed and they are even smaller than the PL-10. With a foam topped table, you can put Tortoises in from the top - I did that 2 layouts ago, following a method I first saw on a Freemo group's web site. Only works if you use foam and no plywood underneath.
You can diode matrix any twin coil machine, including Atlas. And Tortoise type stall motors.
-Randy
My layout is all Atlas code 83, including turnouts, and I have had no problems beyond the usual problems identified in these fora for all turnouts, regardless of manufacturer.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
WP Lives
I have been using Shinohara code 83, 'DCC friendly' switches. Take them out of the box, install them, and run your trains.
They are not power routing and you don't need insulated rail joiners. You will need a method to keep the points tight against the stock rail.