New guy looking for a little advice

[onryou]

I recently became interested in model trains again after a few years. I originally was interested in building the Susquehanna Valley (N-18) Layout from the Atlas N-gauge layout book and bought pretty much most of the track to build it. Much to my despair I recently discovered atlas came out with an awesome looking Code 55 track. Also after poking around the internet it was brought to my attention that the two connecting lines for the upper and lower tracks have over a 6% grade to them. My first question is what's the maximum grade in general that most locos will tolerate with lets say up to 20 freight cars. My solution to this would be to extend the left side from a 4x6 to a 4x8 and using a 1/4" sheet for the upper level. This would drop the grade to around 3.8%. I have a few other layouts in mind. Should I stick with the Code 80 track or make the switch to 55? I also considered maybe HO. Can code 80 still look decent on a layout? I've also been looking at DCC. Peticularly at the Digitrax Super Chief 8A. and Lenz Set-90 systems. Anybody have experience with how simple they are for using with turnouts compared to conventional wiring. Thanks in advance for the help.

 

[Dualcore]

I am also a newbie, but I found this thread about elevation at
http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7171rade height.
Am also looking at the Digitrax and Lenz systems-either the Digitrax Zephyr set, or the Lenz Set-100. Have you looked at this site? http://www.tonystrains.com/productcompare/dcccomparison.htm
I wish they would update, but the info is valid, even if the prices are out of date. Internet Model Trains has the Lenz Set 100 system on sale for less than $300. Looks like a clear winner to me.

 

[onryou]

Here's a pic of the layout. I modified it a bit to decrease the overall grade of the connection ramps and increased the minimum turn radii to 11" so my 4-8-4 can run on it. Since I bought a turntable back then I figured I might as well make use of it with the extra space I have. Let me know what you think.

 

[onryou]

I also have the Woodland Scenics Town Kit though I don't know if I'll be able to fit them in on this particular layout. I'm considering buying the Scenic Ridge Kit and putting that together first for practice. What do you guys think?

 

[Dualcore]

I can't tell you anything about N scale, and am a newbie at model railroading in general.
The accepted rail size for HO track is code 83. Code 100 if you need extra undercarraige clearance.
If you have access to a scanner, make paper mock-ups of your buildings. Mount to cardboard and see if they fit.

 

[onryou]

Just thought I'd give an update on the layout. I did end up buying Scenic Ridge and I'll be building that part first to build up some experience. After I've finished that layout then I'll start on the modified N-18 layout. The pic is of both. I'm finding out now that Woodland Scenics wants me to fudge some of the curves on the layout thus the reason for the disconnected parts of the schematics.

 

[UP2CSX]

You don't have to follow the Woodland Scenics plan exactly to use the structures. For example, you don't have to use that figure 8 with the crossover tracks coming out of the tunnels. I would actually drop that whole section of track and just connect the mainline back to the inner curve section with switches. That will leave you with a lot more room for scenery and you can build mountains around your railroad and not have to fight steep grades just get around a figure 8 that doesn't really help anything concerning operations on the railroad.

 

[vato loco]

Having mess with both Atlas Code 80 and ME code 55. JMO Code 80 is easier to lay and more forgiving of errors. All though code 80 is not as to scale, you can dress it up some with a little weathering. Now i have found the ME code 55 (Atlas code 55 wasn't out when i started my current layout) The 55 was harder to solder and was less for giving of boo boo's. But man the looks of it is awsome! My next layout I will more than likely use atlas code 55! I got some pic's lying around http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8278 of my current layout that is slated to be scraped for the new plan......but any way's
Possible new track plan:

 

[onryou]

Another question for you guys. I have a lot of Atlas switches with the above table remote switch machine (2700 & 2701, 2704 & 2705). How easy and practical would it be to convert these to work with under the table switch machines? Also do you need the deluxe version switch machine or will the cheaper non-deluxe work fine as long as the frogs are wired to terminal joiners or something of the like. Also has anybody used non-deluxe with code 55 switches? I'm considering selling my current lot and switching to code 55 since it definitely looks great but I wouldn't want to add much more hassle to track laying since I'm almost convinced I should try flex track instead from how the code 80 sectional track laying is going.

 

[Cjcrescent]

If you are serious in switching to flex, I would say go with the Atlas 55, including the switches. A good friend of ours who looks in on here occasionally, Glenn Samuel, is a long time N gauger. He used Atlas Code 55 on his latest layout and it looked really good. It was available in #4, #6 and #8 switches I believe. Non of the switches came with motors. He used ground throws so he didn't have that non-scale lump of plastic on his track.

 

[onryou]

Drew up an overview of my room with the layouts using XtrakCAD. Some parts are blank since I haven't quite gotten the hang of placing flex track yet. I also thought of what I'd like to do for my third layout. Something with a neighborhood to match the town on scenic ridge and I've always wanted to incorporate a lighthouse so I'll be making it lakeside. The houses and lighthouse offered by Branchline look great although they are pretty expensive for unpainted kits.