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!

Code 83 rails vs code 100?

17411 views
123 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: Pacific Northwest
  • 3,864 posts
Posted by Don Gibson on Friday, March 9, 2007 7:16 PM

Code 100 track is cheap because it's 50 years old and much of the tooling is paid for. It also apeals to beginners because of price and having lower maintenance than brass track - which is cheaper yet.

Code 83 track is newer and closer to realism. That plus the offering of DCC type switches in code 83, makes it popular on this side of the pond.

Never mind that even more realistic track is available in codes 75, 70, and 55 and fineline 87.

 

Don Gibson .............. ________ _______ I I__()____||__| ||||| I / I ((|__|----------| | |||||||||| I ______ I // o--O O O O-----o o OO-------OO ###########################
  • Member since
    March 2006
  • From: Almost Heaven...West Virginia
  • 793 posts
Posted by beegle55 on Friday, March 9, 2007 6:25 PM

I use code 100 and I think the same way you do, they look close enough to save money by buying code 100. I think code 83 users are more apt to have problems, not that they do, but the potential is stonger with code 83. If you are experienced and know about standards of different track type, wheel flanges, weight and other things, I guess you could work with code 83. I just prefer code 100. Just my My 2 cents [2c]

 -beegle55

 

Head of operations at the Bald Mountain Railroad, a proud division of CSXT since 2002!
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Friday, March 9, 2007 5:45 PM

Not that I could think of, Lillen.  I have used Code 100 in my latest layout because it is cheap, works reliably, is strong, and can allow the passage of deeper flanges that might otherwise get hung up on ballast or other details inside the rails or frogs.  As some will agree, once you have it ballasted and painted, it doesn't look much different from the Code 83.

Moderator
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 17,255 posts
Posted by tstage on Friday, March 9, 2007 5:44 PM

Lillen,

Code 83 rail is .083" high; Code 100 is .100" high.  Code 83 is closer to prototypical mainline rail, therefore more realistic looking.  Code 100 is slightly taller but more bullet proof.

I have Code 83 and have NOT had any problems with it.  Some of the older Rivarossi cars and locomotives with deeper wheels flanges might have problems on Code 83 track.  All other rolling stock and locomotives with RP-25 flanges will work fine.

Tom 

https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling

Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: Sweden
  • 1,808 posts
Code 83 rails vs code 100?
Posted by Lillen on Friday, March 9, 2007 4:57 PM

Hi, Looking around for some flextrack I came to the conclusion that C83 is much more expensive then C100. Why is that and what are the benefits of modelling with C83 over c100? I now that it suposedly looks better but I can not really say that I notice much of a difrence. Is there a good reason besides looks to get c83?

 

Lillen

Unless otherwise mentioned it's HO and about the 50's. Magnus

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

There are no community member 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!