Code 55 may have destroyed my interest in N-scale forever

I'm sorry for your disappointing results. I had considered changing to flex track and code 55 for a more prototypical appearance and design advantages over sectional track. Once I saw how delicate the N scale products were compared to what I had been using (Unitrack) I realized this would not work for me. By the same token I found a much greater admiration for those individuals that have the proven skills for working with N scale code 55.

Chalk it up to experience and go back to using what you know works for you. Then get back to running your trains.

Jerry

 

Wisely said Jerry..


Shades

 

Lou D is not off base, here.

Your trains are only as good as the track on which they run. Your track is only as good as the roadbed on which it is laid and the manner in which it is laid. The roadbed is only as good as the benchwork/sub-roadbed/base on which it is laid.

Another thing to consider is that you never settle for "good enough". Who was that Soviet Admiral who stated that the real enemy of excellence was "good enough" (or words similar)? Never settle for anything less than the best that you can do. If you know that you can do better, do so, even if involves taking apart the whole business or a long section of construction, even. Take your time and do it properly. If a section of track is giving problems, address the problem, do not settle for suffering even the one-in-ten-times-this-engine-runs-on-this-track-it-derails. Find the cause of the derailment and fix it.

Take your time. Yes, we want to get those trains running as soon as possible. To accomplish that, perhaps constructing a small pike on a two foot by four piece of plywood with sectional tack will help. You can learn basic tracklaying skills, there. In addition, as you add scenery and the like, you can learn those skills, as well.

I did this in the construction of the Short Creek and Nopedale. First, I got my nineteenth century pike to an intermediate state of construction. Thus, if run trains I must, I could run those. I based the SC&N on an N-TRAK module with ends to allow for continuous running. It took the construction of three different ends, all with progressively larger radius curves, better quality track AND probably most important, better quality construction of the ends, to get something with which I was happy. Those sharp curves and turnouts simply caused too many derailments for my tastes. Further, the hastily constructed ends which I first made caused problems with the track, which caused further derailments. I took more time and care in constructing the second set of ends, and even more of the above in the construction of the third and final set of ends. I am pretty much at the point where I am happy with the track, except for some of the Kato street trackage, Kato is supposed to issue a few new pieces, soon, so, some of that may come up.

For the second section of the pike, even though it is basically a double tracked roundy-round with a few turnouts, I am still taking my time and care to lay the track properly. Poor trackwork will spoil the fun of even a simple roundy-round. It brings to mind an old book by Leslie T. White, in which, amoung other things, he describes what happened when he attempted to "slap down" a roundy-round. I have also found some things that I do not like about particular sections of the track, and those sections will be replaced and/or repaired. Even then, I will run quite a bit to make sure that all of the track is what I want and shows minimal problems.

And yes, I do use the Code 80 track. Still, use of that track is not a licence to be sloppy and hasty. If N had a code 100, even that would not be a licence for haste and carelessness.

 

Hello, Johnny! In addition its my gallery, how to treat Atlas C55 turnouts:

http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/vadimav/album/120478/

As to C80 versus C50:

C80 has narrower width between guard rails in frogs, deeper frog depth and wider pits.
So, C55 rolling stock runs worser at Peco, dangerously swinging at pits of frogs!

Conclusion: C55 car run at c80 not compartible due to safety. Wheel/axle changement needed!

As to ME C55, - i ve got stronger oxydation of rails due to bigger concrntration of Zn and Cu.
ME C55 turnouts does not applicable to apply, due to more difficult treatment than even Atlas ones !



---------
Vadim

 

Vadim,I switched to ME track from Atlas C80,the lack of oxidation on the ME astonishes me.I hardly ever clean my track,it stays spotless.
When I switched to ME,the amount of work to lay it was staggering.It's very difficult to get a nice,smooth bend out of it,and getting the ties aligned perfectly is a nightmare..When I did my lower level two track mainline,what I could have done perfectly in a few nights with Atlas C80 ended up taking three weeks with the ME track..Here's some old pics of my track when I just finished the lower level..A lot of it's changed now,the connecting track from the top level to the bottom is gone,and the turnout in the lower left corner has been moved further up to the straighter section of the track for better running.The benchwork was widened a little,and that track is now the connection track,runs almost up to the soldering iron in the second pic,much more livable grade......

 

Hello [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Georgia, Verdana]LOU D

I have some test ME55 flexes at my layout at tunnels. To help having good e-pickup i use No-Ox. It really helps for ME case. Also all my locos springed, powerpacked. Also, E-Locs have working pantos, soldered to decoder pover via diodes ( i use working DCC catenary - it really helps )

----------
Vadim
[/FONT]

 

I’m pretty sure my roadbed is good because I spent a lot of time doing it. I can’t remember for sure, but I think I spent months doing it. I then sanded it all smooth and used a straight edge to check for level before painting it. I already had experience putting down roadbed on my first Code 80 layout and remembered all the mistakes I made with it.

 

As opposed to many posts in this thread, in the 35+ years I've been using ME (Railcraft) products (C70, C55, C40) plus installing their #6's on modules that I've built for others, I have never had track problems. I've hand-laid hundreds of turnouts over the years and I never have had, and I continue to not have track problems. I just don't have 'em. Problems with engines running on my track are due to the gauge of their wheelsets, so I always check the gauge on every engine I buy, and I have never had a single one over the decades that was completely in-gauge.

My layouts and modules are ALL portable, and taken to three shows almost every year, transported in the back of my Suburban or my truck as well as in the back of a big U-Haul trailer. My present C55 and C40 track has been on several modules in excess of 15 years, and I have not had any track problems whatsoever with it. I do not consider it to be "fragile" or "delicate" and frankly, the guys who build their Ntrak modules and use Atlas 80 have exponentially more problems that our group. I'm not privy to the T-trak (or "track" ?) guys having problems with their miniscule modules, but our group does not have track problems.

This idea that C55 track is either "delicate" or "fragile" compared to Unitrack may be true if you regularly drop anvils on it. But, in regular use, both in home layouts and portable modules if C55 track (or any flextrack) is laid on substantial subroadbed, with Midwest Cork Products roadbed, with the track glued (not nailed) down and with soldered rail joiners, it's not going to cause you problems.

But, you gotta know how to solder, how to get the rail ends close, how to use a file and flush cutter, and know that you have to sand both the subroadbed and the roadbed before gluing the flex down.

AND, put a feeder in the middle of EVERY piece of rail...every piece.

I use Tortoises to power all my turnouts, and I've had to replace two of them (out of several hundred) over the years. I've had to replace almost a dozen DPDT toggle switches as they wear out too, but I don't consider these things to be "problems"...just normal attrition due to use and age.

So, everybody jumping on the bandwagon saying "C55 is fragile and delicate" and is "unsuitable" for your use, what to you DO to your track anyway???? My handlaid code 40 has lasted over 20 years, and I clean it just like I do the rest of the code 55. My code 40 turnouts have been totally trouble-free.

Additionally, there are no pizza-cutters on my layout, although they work on the ME/Railcraft flex and the hand-laid code 40. 80% of all my couplers are body-mounted MT Z-scale couplers and I don't have ANY phantom uncouplings.

So, those of you who keep saying that the finer details, smaller track height, lo-pro wheelsets and hand-laid turnouts cause problems aren't living in my universe. Maybe in your universe, it's true, but I'm gonna bet it isn't any of these factors that contribute to poor running, but poor construction methods and practices.

I agree 100% that each brand and style of track has its place in the hobby and I won't bad-mouth any of it. But, there is no doubt that Atlas 80 or Peco 80/55, or Kato Unitrack do not provide a "prototype look" because of their tie dimensions, tie spacing and tie/rail attachment protocols. Fact is that the big, oversized features of these brands and styles of track work to their advantage under rough handling. However, under normal handling, they offer no advantage over either Atlas 55, ME 55/40 or even hand-laid track. Having reliable, durable, long-lasting track as well as good looks is certainly possible using good (not extraordinary) construction techniques.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

Thanks Vadim, you have some very interesting track photos

 

Same here..I have virtually no track problems other than wheel gauge.I've gotten to the point that I don't even bother running something new until I check the wheels.
The only track I've ever used was Atlas C80,and ME C70 and C55.When I used Atlad C80,I had a few problems with switch frogs/points just going dead.The ones I was using had some wierd colored point rails,looked cast.The only fix was to rip it out..Now,I don't know about the new Atlas C55 switches, but when it first came out,I bought a half dozen turnouts..I took one look at them,and put them on Ebay.I didn't like that cast frog at all,I just knew it would be problems..
Now,ME isn't perfect,but at least if there is a problem,it's all real metal,it can be soldered if you know what you're doing.I've had a few ME switches that had contact problems with the frogs,they weren't soldered right..I just used a fine "V" cut file,cut a "V" down about half way through the dead gap,and soldered and filed it,five minute job,leave it right in place...If it was an Atlas with those goofy castings,it'd be going in the trash.

 

If you end up going back to Unitrak, there must be folks on tbw forum going in the other direction, such that a lets trade track section of the swap meet might make it more cost effective. Whatever you do, I hope you get back to having fun

 

Well I’m torn between starting another layout without a yard using Unitrack and trying to do something with this yard, but only because of the huge amount of time and money that I already have invested.

I got so frustrated with fixing the track every time I wanted to use it that it got to where I wound walk into the train room, turn everything on, see a problem and walk out. Most of the problems were the same problems over and over only in different locations. It got to the point where I only went into the train room once a month for about ½ hour to not going in for months at a time. I need to do something because it just taking up space.

I think I mentioned before that I like the design because it fits in my limited space with everything I’ve wanted. Plus operations are fun and challenging when there isn’t a problem. I also love being able to set up routing with my computer to move trains around and through the yard.



I look at layouts like George AKA mtntrainman has and I’m so envious because I love seeing long trains making their way around through the landscape. I even thought of dropping the yard down and building a raised Kato viaduct above it as an extension to my other Unitrack layout and just use the Code 55 layout as a prop.

I guess I'm trying to get myself excited or motivated to do something

 

It's not always easy to do when you've worked hard on something that you aren't happy with, but a useful way to think about a situation like this is to ignore how much work you have already done, or money you have already spent, and evaluate your choices solely on what you will have to do to get a result you are happy with.

If you determine scrapping your old track and starting over with Unitrack is a more effective route to a pleasing result then do it. The old track installation has little future value to you if you aren't happy with the result.

Note that the above makes no consideration for which type of track is "better". What's best is what you are pleased with in the end.

George

 

I’ve been trying to think of it like gambling in Vegas were you’re there just for the fun of it and write it off as part of the experience, but since I’m not a gambler that isn’t working.

I don’t know what to do with it. I know it’s fixable, but the question is how long before I have to do it again. Since it’s in a corner I have to pull everything of it including my buildings and move it to a larger room where I can work on it every time there is a problem. Each time I take it out through the door on its side, something else happens to it.

The whole reason for the yard in the first place was to have a place to store my rolling stock and it actually started out as a staging area that got carried away when I tried to add a way around it to turn trains around.

 

Couldn't agree more...
I've used all the track...Atlas code 80, Peco code 80 and 55, ME code 55 and Atlas code 55 (I'm looking forward to using ME code 40 on future finer scale modules)
I'm more of a finer scale snob , although not yet to the extent of Bob and the proto87 folks, but I'm certainly heading that way, considering all the work I do detailing engines and rolling stock. I'm just letting my skills catch up to what can be accomplished, I get a lot of great info from folks like Bob and the others who work with fine scale track. I do my best to be active in the local modeling community, so I also model N-Track (code 80) and T-Trak (Kato Unitrack).
I say all that to say this...
nothing is 'foolproof'...any and every issue I've ever had with track has been 'operator error'...there's a learning curve associated with using any brand of track, and it starts from the bottom 'up'...base, roadbed, track, etc...
Even Kato Unitrack isn't foolproof; I've had to file and smooth connections to ensure 'bulletproof' trackage on the T-Trak modules... some extra tweaking goes a very long way to ensure good performance.
Any issue I've had has always been a result of something I've done or not done in regard to preparing and affixing track...quite frankly, laying track is my least favorite part of the hobby, simply because of all the work I know I must do to ensure great performance; yet, it always becomes the source of my greatest satisfaction when I end up with track that looks good and provides ultra smooth running.
stick with it...it's difficult to see someone 'get out of N scale' because of a little frustration; IMO, that's like eating a badly cooked meal and giving up eating anything anymore altogether because of it.
Respectfully,
Bruce

 

I'll chime in and agree that NO track system is bullet proof. Period. It does not matter which brand, what type of layout (Ntrak, T-Trak, permanent or semi permanent, etc). As it's been stated taking your time with a track plan and construction minimizes problems. Especially track planning IMHO. I think we all have had problems with track from time to time as well as rolling stock quality control. That's frustrating enough. But it's too easy to pencil in potential problems trying to squeeze another crossover, etc into a plan. I had the hardest time overcoming that one myself. It's hard to not want to get longer trains or places to keep our rolling stock on the layout instead of in boxes in storage and such. Hindsight has always been 20-20 and will always be. I'll not offer any other advise other than to sit back and re-visit what about the hobby you like most. Then work from there and ask lot's of questions as there obviously a wealth of experience and ability here.

 

I swear by the Unitrack simple and reliable

 

I have found that to lay track without problems is impossible. No matter how careful you are, problems will pop up, some times years later. I used code 80 on my permanent layout built in 1992. I sanded the Midwest Cork Roadbed smooth and level and gapped the track, had leads to each section of Atlas flex track, used peck turnouts, med and long. During the twelve years I had the layout, I replaced one med turnout at least 6 times. The track would grow and pop the turnout. I had another place where the track grew and grew. I would cut out one rail so that it was not so tight that you could barely see the joint to having a gap of 1/32", within months, it was tight again and would need re cut. Over the years, I probably cut out at least 2 inches. I tore the layout out when I found 8 pop ups of at a least 1-2". Why the track kept expending I do not know. It just did. It was in my basement, always cool and damp. The layout was laid over pink or blue foam glued to plywood, with the track glued to the cork with yellow elmer's glue. The ballast was elmer's white glue. I now use t-trak and Kato unitrack in the same basement and have had no expansion problems for the last 4 years. Life is too short to fight with your hobby, finds what works and go with it.

 

Question for the OP: After the roadbed was laid, sanded and painted, did you lay all of the track (and ~50 turnouts/switches) all at once - and then find out you had multiple problems - or did you install, for example, one loop (or siding/yard track) at a time, get that running correctly and then work your way either in from the front or out from the center?