PaulWhen I was making my Atlas double crossover I called Atlas Technical and specifically ask them if there was any difference between the #6 code 100 and code 83 turnouts and was told the footprint was identical. I had a code 100 and after he confirmed they were the same I ordered the code 83s. When I overlaid them I couldn’t see any difference by eye, they did appear to be identical.I had designed my double crossover using the code 100 turnouts as a go by and it went together perfect.
https://melvineperry.blogspot.com/2012/06/june-25-2012-my-double-crossover.html
Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
I've never had a CSM chardonnay, but I will keep my eye out. I like their wines. I've been in search of an affordable chardonnay. Our house wine is a Pinot Grigio, by Priolla.
My uncle founded a winery in Napa, but we he passed away the family discount vanished and his son jacked the prices up. We just drank the last bottle of a 2008 Pinot, that my wife bought for me at around $35/bottle. It looks like my cousin would be selling it for over $200 if he had any left.
It was really good, but would I pay 200,...........no.
So I don't get the thread locked, My turnouts are Walthers and Atlas code 83
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Randy,One would think that Atlas switches of different Codes but with the same number frog would be the same...but they aren't. The Code 100 and Code 83 switches vary from each other. From 3rdPlanIt's library:Atlas Code 100 Customline #4 switch:Frog: 12.5o Normal length: 9"Routing length: 7 23/32"Entry to intersection: 3 3/16"Rail Closure Radius: 20"Atlas Code 83 Customline #4 switch:Frog: 14.25o Normal length: 9"Routing length: 8"Entry to intersection: 4 1/16"Rail Closure Radius: 26"
Atlas Code 100 Customline #6 switch:Frog: 9.5o Normal length: 12"Routing Length: 10"Entry to Intersection: 4 1/32"Rail Closure Radius: 36"Atlas Code 83 Customline #6 switch:Frog: 9.5o Normal length: 12"Routing Length: 10"Entry to Intersection: 4 1/32"Rail Closure Radius: 48 15/32"
Atlas Code 100 Customline #8 switch:Frog: 7.125o Normal length: 13 1/2"Routing Length: 12 5/32"Entry to Intersection: 5 1/2"Rail Closure Radius: 75 11/16"Atlas Code 83 Customline #8 switch:Frog: 7.02o Normal length: 13 1/2"Routing Length: 12 1/8""Entry to Intersection: 4 5/32"Rail Closure Radius: 60"The Atlas #6 Code 100 & Code 83 switches are the closest to each other, but they are not exactly the same. Why are any of them different? I have no idea.
jjdamnitCan I blame "autocorrect"???
Sure you can. I blame autocorrect all the time!
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Hello All,
richhotrainYou can't just leave us hanging. Which Chardonnay would you choose and how much a bottle? You can buy a great Chardonnay for around $16 like Chateau Ste Michelle Indian Wells Chardonnay.
Personally I prefer Viognier over Chardonnay! !
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
SeeYou190The height difference is only 0.017", I think you made a typo.
Can I blame "autocorrect"???
After checking your math you are correct. !!!
Note that with Peco track it's more than just the rail height to compare their code 100 to code 83. Peco Code 100 track is euro-style, with curves through the frogs, they are not numbered turnouts. The Code 83 is more expensive not just because it's smaller and a bit more fiddly to make, but it is also more of a scale model scaled to AREA drawings, North American practice, and the turnouts have actual number frogs, with straight line diverging routes.
You can't just take a track plan made for Peco 100 and drop in Peco 83. It won't line up.
Atlas has 2 types of code 100 - Snap Track, where the turnouts are curved, and Custom Line, where the turnouts have proper frog number angles (though the angle of their #4 is actually 4 1/2). Plus they have Custom Line with Code 83 rail. You can take a Custom Line Code 100 track plan and swap in the equivalent Custom Line Code 83 turnouts and it should all line up.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
BigDaddy Isn't it like asking us how much should you spend on a bottle of Chardonnay? The local big box wine store has 36 priced <$6 (wouldn't drink any of those) and 18 > $99 (wouldn't buy any of those)
Isn't it like asking us how much should you spend on a bottle of Chardonnay? The local big box wine store has 36 priced <$6 (wouldn't drink any of those) and 18 > $99 (wouldn't buy any of those)
Rich
Alton Junction
For me, it's not that 0.017" is a huge visible height difference; that's just over a 1/64" after all. However, smaller rails make our model trains look bigger and more to scale, while giant fat Code 100 rail makes everything on them look more toy-like. It's just like fine handrails vs. thick ones. There isn't much difference in diameter between an old Athearn BB wire handrail and, say, the latest Rapido wire handrail. But when applied to a model and painted, the difference is stark by comparison.I will never use Code 100 ever again.
I prefer the smaller ties on Atlas 83 over the 100 ties, but that's just me.
jjdamnitThe height difference of 0.73" really doesn't concern me. However, the $10.00 between the two does.
The height difference is only 0.017", I think you made a typo.
Once weathered, I think code 100 track looks fine in all except up-close photographs, and you have the advantage of knowing any equipment should run OK on it, including those old Rivarossi locomotives that can be had for bargain price now.
Of course, I was building in N scale in the 1980s and 1990s, and we used code 80 rail that was MUCH WORSE than code 100 in HO scale.
I use code 83 (Walthers/Shinohara) because I liked the massive variety in the product line and how easy it was to find. Now it is much harder to find and has begun to command some crazy prices. I would not choose this line today.
Ultimately it is your choice, weigh the pros and cons of each and go from there.
You know how many you need and you know your financial status. If you don't have a budget, you probably should. Otherwise you could end up like some guys on youtube, who buy on a whim, and have 1000 pieces of rolling stock, squirreled away in boxes that will never see a train track and building kits, you will never build.
Say you need 20 turnouts, and spending the extra $200 makes you wince, use code 100 or go with another manufacturer.
I built the first part of my layout with code 100, but later sections with code 83. I think the code 83 looks substantially better. I find it easier to ballast code 83 as well, since the ties are thinner. As I recall, some of the speciality turnouts like dual-curve and 3-way, have more suppliers in code 83.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I use Atlas Code 100 track; both sectional and flex, with Atlas Snap Switches, Custom Line and PECO turnouts.
The height difference of 0.017" (corrected) really doesn't concern me. However, the $10.00 between the two does.
Ringo58 Building my new switching layout and I'm between code 100 or 83. My past layout was all atlas sectional code 83. I'm going to be using peco and wanted to get a good opinion from people who use 100. I like code 83 but the PECO 83 turnouts are $10 more than the 100. Is it worth it to spend a little more for 83?
Building my new switching layout and I'm between code 100 or 83. My past layout was all atlas sectional code 83. I'm going to be using peco and wanted to get a good opinion from people who use 100. I like code 83 but the PECO 83 turnouts are $10 more than the 100. Is it worth it to spend a little more for 83?
That's a hard question to answer. How many turnouts are we talking here? What's your budget? If you can afford it and it's worth it to you, I would advise you to do it.
Not quite the same thing, but I built my layout using Atlas Code 100 flextrack and turnouts on the main, Code 83 flextrack and turnouts in yards and sidings. I wish now I had used Code 83 on the main, and thought about Code 70 on sidings and yards...
Gary
It depends on how picky you are. If you are picky on how well "to scale" everything looks, then you may not like code 100 rail.
If it is used to model a heavy main line, it looks ok. If it's not a heavy main line, it looks huge.
For a switching layout, code 83, or even code 70, is going to be much closer "to scale" than code 100. But if you can get past the looking too large, it will work just fine.
Personally, I prefer code 83 over code 100. Yard tracks and industry sidings/spurs and switching areas I prefer code 70 over code 83.
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.