Code 100 vs Code 83 track

[Anonymous]

Simply put, I'm not partial necessarily to either, but does one tend to cause fewer derailments, or better overall run-ability of trains? I know Code 83 is closer to scale appearance wise, but that's not entirely important to me, I'd rather have whichever one will hold the trains on the track better.

[cacole]

The only thing that is going to make any difference as far as your trains staying on the track is the wheel flanges on your locomotives and rolling stock. If everything you have has NMRA compliant wheel flanges and is not European, it should all run just fine on Code 83 rail.

[twhite]

I've never seen a 'versus' about either code 100 or 83. I use both--code 100 for mainline and code 83 for passing track and yards. I know code 100 is supposed to be 'oversized' for scale track, but with painting and ballasting, it's very hard to tell, unless you like looking at my layout through a microscope. I have a couple of European locomotives with the NEM flanges that I run occasionally, and I don't have any trouble with the code 83. I just happen to prefer the 'heft' of code 100 for mainline running, but that's strictly a personal opinion.
Tom [:D]

[Don Gibson]

IT'S LOOK'S vs.COST.

Code 83 is current design and production.

Code 100 is 50 year old - and tooling design has been largely paid for .There is also still some demand.