Comparing track sizes and brands


B

bigken462

Member
I am in the early planning stages for my first HO layout. My current plans will have about 22 turnouts so I'm trying to do my homework on which is best for my limited skills at laying track and model layout goals. The nearest train shop which may have any track is at least 65 miles and my time is kinda limited presently with no off days scheduled for a while.

I was wondering if anyone may have a link to, or the time to produce a short video. I would like to get a idea of what the different brands of the most popular tracks look like. Atlas code 83 and 100 versus lets say, PECO or micro engineering etc. I've only used O gauge fastrack so my knowledge is pretty limited. If you have knowledge of a link like this, or would be willing to make a short video, I would appreciate it. Perhaps others would benefit too?

Kenny Taylor
Cullman, Alabama
 
Being that you are still in the planning stages, I would probably consider Peco Code 83. From whay I have seen on posts here, I believe that it is readily available. The smaller the code the better it looks in my opinion. I went to code 70 because my layout represents a short line railroad with lighter locomotives. Shinohara also makes code 83 turnouts and flex track. I would recommend staying away from sectional track. You'll have less joints and therefore less of a chance of electrical problems. Micro Engineering makes some excellent track and turnouts, but can be a bit pricey plus their flex track can be difficult to work with compared to other brands.

You might want to try some of the online retailers like MB Klein. Where I live in Montana I have no hobby shops at all and I get most everything on line. Retailers like MB Klein also do sell at a discount off of retail prices.

Take a look at a video below and you'll see what the Shinohara track looks like, but there are some sections with hand laid rail and turnouts also.
 
Man, oh man, I forget that my purpose was to look at your track. Sir, if I could treat you to a huge hot cup of coffee this morning I would. Two awesome videos right there! Now to go back and actually pay attention to the track details.

Ken
 
Ken,

Couldn't agree more with Montanan with respect to Peco Code 83 Flex Track. Good quality, readily available from most places. Like Montanan, I also buy 95% of my stuff on line and from M.B.Klein (www.modeltrainstuff.com)

One MAJOR thing to remember if going to go with Code 83, which is probably the most common, Atlas Code 83 IS NOT compatible with any other make of Code 83 Track due to how it was made. As such, if you choose to go with Atlas you will need to stick with everything Atlas. The other thing to know is that Atlas is having issues with supply due to not having a manufacturer to make their Code 83 Track so availability is not all that reliable.

All other common makers of Code 83 Track are compatible with each other as far as I am aware.

My advice would be to go with the Peco Track though due to what I mentioned above. Failing that, and if money isn't a big issue, then I would go with Fleischmann Track followed by Sinohara Track.

One other thing to think about is the way the track (and I am talking about flex track) is made. Atlas flex track has one rail fixed to the ties with the other rail having the ability to "slide" through along the ties. Peco Track, on the other hand, makes its flex track so that "both rails" slide.

So the pro's and con's of both systems. Having track where only 1 rail slides possibly makes joining the sections a little easier as you only have to "control" one rail. On the other hand, you have to be aware of which rail slides and which doesn't to ensure that you lay it with the sliding rail on the right side for the curve.

Having track that has "both" rails with the ability to slide makes taking the guess work out of which way you lay the track but also means that you have to concentrate on two rails not just one.

One area where the most amount of problems occur is around the turnouts and this is where Peco blows Atlas out of the water. Peco's turnouts are (in my opinion) superior to Atlas'. Some will say that is an exaggeration or I am wrong; however, I have had both makes of track and ripped out the Atlas track within a couple of weeks of laying in preference for Peco Track. I think that speaks for itself.

Anyway, which ever make you choose - before making your final decision check on its availability now AND in the future. In short, if you go with Atlas, you are stuck with Atlas. If you go with Peco, Sinohara or Fleischmann, you have cross manufacturer compatibility should you need something and your choice of manufacturer isn't available at the time.
 
Here are a couple of photos of the Shinohara code 70 trackwork. It is 13 thousands of an inch smaller than code 83.

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


The last picture is of course after some ballast has been put down. I was limited to the Shinohara track as they were the only manufacturer that offered code 70 flex track and turnouts at the time. Also they offer double crossovers, curves turnouts, double slip switches which I needed to fit everything in the space I had available. Another big advantage of using flex track is when you are trying to fit a number of turnouts into an area, you don't have to find a piece of sectional track to fir a certain space or possibly not have good allignment of track or kinks in the track.
 
To be honest with you, I'd be happy with 20/20 eyes :) By the way, that does look like great track, or maybe it just looks like great track due to the person who put it down :).
 
I wouldn't mind 20/20 eyes either. One thing I did like about the Shinohara track is the variety of turnouts they have. Got tired of handlaying them.
 
Saw some double Xovers & slip switches in the pix. The real RRs avoid those like the plague because they require alot of maintenance. The same holds true for model ones! Besides they are only used in VERY congested track areas like major urban passenger depots. AND the model ones cost way more than regular switches.
 
I used it for exactly the reason of being a congested area. I tried to get around it, but unless I used the double crossover, I would have cut the capacity of the yard by half or more. I have another double crossover on another part of the layout for the same reason and it hasn't given me any problems in the 20 or so years it has been in use. So far, this one is also problem free. That's the problem with model railroading, real estate is at a premium and some time you gotta do what you gotta do to makes things work.
 
wombat457 said:
Ken,

...
One MAJOR thing to remember if going to go with Code 83, which is probably the most common, Atlas Code 83 IS NOT compatible with any other make of Code 83 Track due to how it was made. As such, if you choose to go with Atlas you will need to stick with everything Atlas. The other thing to know is that Atlas is having issues with supply due to not having a manufacturer to make their Code 83 Track so availability is not all that reliable.

...
Click to expand...

Tony, I have to partially disagree with what you have stated here. Atlas code 83 is compatible with other brands. I've never had any problems having Atlas flex connect to Shinohara or Peco turnouts. Rexhea, (currently MIA on the forums), prior to beginning to use Fast-Tracks jigs, has several dozen of Shinoharas, and Peco turnouts on his layout, and we've never had any problems connecting them to the Atlas turnouts at all. Also, with some proper debugging, which I described in the thread on tips and techniques, Atlas turnouts can be made to function as well as any other turnout on the market.

What I do agree with you is on the supply problem that has been associated with obtaining Atlas products the past couple of years. That, AWAK, was caused by the factory over in China, stopped making products for several manufacturers, including Atlas. Atlas has had a problem finding a manufacturer to supply their products to the market, although the supply in the LHS here has vastly improved within the past 6 months.

EDIT; Where I said, "connecting them to the Atlas turnouts at all". Should read "connecting them to Atlas Flex at all".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I appreciate the replies guys. Really enjoyed the pictures too! The knowledge gained from these forums are simply invaluable. I plan on buying a metal track guide so I'm hoping that will help correct some of the problems that might crop up. I'm not doing a huge layout by any means, but like most people on here, I'de rather only buy once.

It is frustrating to see that most of the popular tracks - and track tools to instal them with are as scarce at gold.

Thanks again to each of you who chime in to help the new guys!

Ken
 
Which of the PECO turnouts are equivalent to 18" AND 22" radii. I can't seem to find anything less than a 24" on the pages. Both code 83 AND 100. No large trains for me. Just coal and tankers - mostly.

Ken's HO Layout 1.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top