Trains.com

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!

What track do you prefer?

5414 views
29 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Bakersfield, CA 93308
  • 6,526 posts
What track do you prefer?
Posted by RR_Mel on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 9:30 AM

 

What track do you prefer?
 
I’m curious to hear about what other model railroaders thoughts are on rail size.  Keep in mind I made my decision and laid my track in 1990.  I used cork for my roadbed on plywood including my 3½% grades.
 
I went with Atlas code 83 Flex Track for all of my viewable track and code 100 in hidden areas.  I like the look of the Atlas code 83 track (ties) better than code 100 but because I have a lot of deep flange locomotives and rolling stock from the 60s & 70s I didn’t like the idea of a deep flange wheel on code 83 track where access is limited (helix, mountains and tunnels).  The idea of deep flanges rolling through code 83 turnouts where I can’t see them didn’t then and still doesn’t appeal to me.
 
I’ve never had a problem with deep flanges in Atlas or Peco code 83 turnouts but I hear every deep flange wheel as they cross the frogs.  I tried several manufactures code 83 double crossovers and all of them failed on deep flange wheels.  I ended up making my own double crossover using Atlas code 83 Custom Line turnouts.  No problems in my homebrew turnout.
 
Positive and negative input welcome.
 
 
 
Mel
 
Modeling the early to mid 1950s SP in HO scale since 1951
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: North Carolina
  • 1,905 posts
Posted by csxns on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 9:45 AM

Atlas code 100 flex Peco code 100 turnouts.

Russell

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 618 posts
Posted by DAVID FORTNEY on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 9:56 AM

Although I used code 83 atlas track and turnouts on my former layout but since I moved to a smaller home and have onset Parkinson's I have been using HO Kato unitrack. The best track with roadbed out there. Their turnouts and track are bullit proof. It is code 83.

Any engines with deep flanges sit on a shelf and look pretty or they are sold. 

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 1,950 posts
Posted by NVSRR on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 10:15 AM

I hand lay mine.  Code 83 rail

A pessimist sees a dark tunnel

An optimist sees the light at the end of the tunnel

A realist sees a frieght train

An engineer sees three idiots standing on the tracks stairing blankly in space

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 2,360 posts
Posted by kasskaboose on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 10:16 AM

I have ME code 83 track on my layout.  While more expensive than Atlas, I like that the former is pre-weathered and bends easily.  Connecting ME track is easy b/c I scrape off the weathered ares with a knife or other sharp object.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Bakersfield, CA 93308
  • 6,526 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 10:17 AM

DAVID FORTNEY

 

Any engines with deep flanges sit on a shelf and look pretty or they are sold. 

 

Dave I’m in love with my Rivarossi Cab Forwards, can't part with them over flange size.
 
 
 
Mel
 
Modeling the early to mid 1950s SP in HO scale since 1951
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
  • 1,503 posts
Posted by GP-9_Man11786 on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 10:21 AM

I'm an N Scaler and my choice was Peco Code 55. I chose it because it's sturdier than Atlas C55, abit less expensive, can accomodate old locos with pizza cutter wheels and the turnouts are pretty bullet proof.

Modeling the Pennsylvania Railroad in N Scale.

www.prr-nscale.blogspot.com 

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:14 AM

Same as you Mel, code 100 in hidden and staging for lower cost and more durability and code 83 in visible areas, and some code 70 in yards.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    February 2013
  • From: Saginaw, MI
  • 205 posts
Posted by Bob Schuknecht on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:20 AM

My layout is Peco code 83 because Atlas wasn't available when I was laying track. Switches are a variety of Peco, Atlas, and Walther's Shinohara.

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • From: Ludington, MI
  • 1,847 posts
Posted by Water Level Route on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:22 AM

csxns

Atlas code 100 flex Peco code 100 turnouts.

 

Same here.

Mike

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 618 posts
Posted by DAVID FORTNEY on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:56 AM

RR_Mel

 

 
DAVID FORTNEY

 

Any engines with deep flanges sit on a shelf and look pretty or they are sold. 

 

 

 

Dave I’m in love with my Rivarossi Cab Forwards, can't part with them over flange size.
 
 
 
Mel
 
Modeling the early to mid 1950s SP in HO scale since 1951
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 

neither can I Mel, I have 3 Rivarossi cab forwards and they are keepers. They all run great and look as good as anything out there today IMO. A buddy of mine has a nice layout with hand laid code 100 track so I run them there, he really would like to have them so he just drools when I come over Lol. 

The junk is sold but my steam engines are keepers. 

Dave

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,663 posts
Posted by rrebell on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:58 AM

Shinohara code 70. Was going to go code 83 but was scamed back in the mail order days, so stuck with the code 70. If I was to start over I would go Peco code 83,  even though my stuff works great the Peco is not as delicate.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 12:09 PM

rrebell

Was going to go code 83 but was scamed back in the mail order days,

Back in the 1980's I was scammed by a major mail order company too - one of the major advertisers in the magazines; I think they went out of business right after I sent my order and money and that, as they say, was all she wrote.  I fount out later they were closed and never so a refund, but I don't recall it was much that I lost, more the rude awakening.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Denver, CO
  • 3,576 posts
Posted by Motley on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 12:18 PM

All Peco for me. I also use the Peco switch machines, and control them with NCE stationary decoders.

Michael


CEO-
Mile-HI-Railroad
Prototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 1,358 posts
Posted by SouthPenn on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 12:28 PM

When I started my layout I used Atlas code 100 track and Atlas switches. Code 83 track was hard to come by as it was new. Eventually I switched to Atlas code 83 track and Shinohara switches. The only place there are any Atlas switches left are in hidden staging. My hand laid track is Micro Engineering weathered rail. I use a dremel tool with a wire brush to clean the ends of the rails.

If I were to make major changes or add-ons, I would seriously consider going back to code 100. It's much cheaper and more robust-IMHO.

South Penn
  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,244 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 1:40 PM

Peco Code 100.

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • From: Bakersfield, CA 93308
  • 6,526 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 1:45 PM

DAVID FORTNEY

 

 

neither can I Mel, I have 3 Rivarossi cab forwards and they are keepers. They all run great and look as good as anything out there today IMO. A buddy of mine has a nice layout with hand laid code 100 track so I run them there, he really would like to have them so he just drools when I come over Lol. 

 

The junk is sold but my steam engines are keepers. 

Dave

 

Dave if you slip in a can motor and add 8 to 10 ounces of weight the Rivarossi Cab Forwards will pull the paint off the walls.
 
 
Mel
 
Modeling the early to mid 1950s SP in HO scale since 1951
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
  • Member since
    January 2014
  • From: MN
  • 139 posts
Posted by Da Stumer on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 2:41 PM

I use atlas code 100 sectional track, with some flex track for the long straightaways on cork roadbed.

-Peter. Mantua collector, 3D printing enthusiast, Korail modeler.

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • 2,616 posts
Posted by peahrens on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:15 PM

My current layout is 2012 vintage track.  I chose Atlas code 83 flextrack and Walthers-Shinohara code 83 DCC friendly turnouts, liking the wide turnout selection.  I would do the same if doing over.  What I would not repeat was three Atlas 90 code 83 degree crossings, which happen to be in series and gave fits to too many wheels trying to traverse them.  Some filing corrected the significant problems.  Don't know if the problems have been corrected. 

Paul

Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 1,855 posts
Posted by angelob6660 on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:15 PM

All in N Scale.

The only track I owe is basically in train sets, back in the 1990s. Atlas and Bachmann.

I do have a few Kato straight tracks from their passenger train car sets. And 3 packs of 15" radius curve for a complete circle.

I do not own any switches, buildings, scenery, and people because mainly all my money goes to locomotives and freight cars.

Modeling the G.N.O. Railway, The Diamond Route.

Amtrak America, 1971-Present.

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:47 PM

Micro Engineering flex track and Peco switches.C83.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    February 2013
  • 479 posts
Posted by HObbyguy on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:50 PM

Shinohara code 83 with Walthers turnouts actuated with tortoises.  I wanted to try the Shinohara track so bought a box to start with when I began constuction of the layout.  Then the Atlas track became unavailable so just stuck with the Shinohara.  But I also used a few sections of ME bridge track and I hand-laid rails on wood ties for my trestle.

I don't have any vintage locos with deep flanges, not that I would consider running anyway, and I like the way the code 83 looks.  I ran across a deal on the Shinohara track a while back and got a couple of boxes at half the going price, so have enough to keep me busy for quite a while.

Not sure it is worth the price tag, but I like working with it.  A lot stiffer than Atlas so it holds a bend, but not as stiff as ME track.

Huntington Junction - Freelance based on the B&O and C&O in coal country before the merger...  doing it my way.  Now working on phase 3.      - Walt

For photos and more:  http://www.wkhobbies.com/model-railroad/

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,890 posts
Posted by carl425 on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 3:55 PM

peahrens
My current layout is 2012 vintage track.  I chose Atlas code 83 flextrack and Walthers-Shinohara code 83 DCC friendly turnouts, liking the wide turnout selection.

This is what I'm using as well.  I've got a few pieces of ME code 70 to use at the coal loaders and a few pieces of ME bridge flex.

I have the right to remain silent.  By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.

  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: US
  • 2,455 posts
Posted by wp8thsub on Tuesday, December 22, 2015 7:08 PM

I use a few different brands.

This track is Micro Engineering.  I use codes 83, 70 and 55 from them

This yard is Shinohara, mostly code 70.

And this yard is Atlas 83.  I also use Atlas code 100 in staging.

Rob Spangler

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: NW Pa Snow-belt.
  • 2,216 posts
Posted by ricktrains4824 on Wednesday, December 23, 2015 8:45 AM

Atlas and ME code 83 mainline, and ME hand laid code 70 yard. 

New layout will have same ME code 70 yard (salvaging all handlaid trackage), and ME 83 mainline. Staging will be the Atlas 83. 

I've grown to liking the ME flex better, as, at least for me, it holds better curves than the Atlas flex.

Turnouts are mixed of ME, Walthers/Shinohara, and Atlas. (With handlaid mixing in on new layout, made of ME code 83/70.)

Ricky W.

HO scale Proto-freelancer.

My Railroad rules:

1: It's my railroad, my rules.

2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.

3: Any objections, consult above rules.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Southern Quebec, Canada
  • 868 posts
Posted by Guy Papillon on Wednesday, December 23, 2015 8:53 AM

Atlas code 100 for the entire layou.

Guy

Modeling CNR in the 50's

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Saskatchewan
  • 2,201 posts
Posted by last mountain & eastern hogger on Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:52 AM

Whistling

On the LM&E all tracks are code 100 Atlas and peco turnouts, some with Blue point controlers but most five finger manual.

Johnboy out....

from Saskatchewan, in the Great White North.. 

We have met the enemy,  and he is us............ (Pogo)

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:57 AM

I'm using HO Kato Unitrack. The rail is a narrow-profile code 83, noticeably narrower than Walthers or Atlas code 83. It looks pretty close to scale. I still have a fair number of cars with plastic wheels, and when replacing them with metal wheels I've been using semi-scale wheels. They work fine on the Kato track.

Unitrack has disadvantages; particularly in HO, there's a limited number of choices like basically only two turnouts (No.6 and No.4) and seven curve radii (starting with 24" radius "conventional curves", there are three sizes bigger and three smaller, each 2-3/8" apart). The advantages are near prototype appearance of the rail (and painting the rail and some ties and weathering the pieces adds to the realism) and reliability, plus being able to lay out a trackplan first and do real-world testing before making it permanent. 

Stix
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Wednesday, December 23, 2015 9:59 AM

So basically I prefer whatever track will work, look and operate well.  Like others, I have a combination of brands.  Flex right now is mostly Atlas code 83 and 100, and some Walthers code 70.  In future layouts I'll likely try some others like ME or Peco.  For turnouts I have a combination of Atlas code 100 and 83, Walthers code 83, Peco code 100, Shinohara code 100 and 70.  I expect to be buying Peco code 83 in the future as it is American prototype and great quality, will probably try ME also.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    November 2015
  • 25 posts
Posted by archy on Wednesday, December 23, 2015 12:29 PM
150 pound to the yard with six-hole joints. Unfortunately I have to make do with something a bit smaller for modeling.

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!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!