I visited the local hobby shop today on a social call and discovered a large display of the True-Track in the n-scale section! I have been interested in the track because of the appearance and the fact that I feel it is really an excellent option for the 1940 era that I model. I had purchased some directly from Atlas to evaluate on my current layout. I have been using Kato Untrack for several years and have it on my current layout. I like the reliability of the Unitrack and the variety of options because I love to run trains! I am now taking a second, serious look at the True-track for some part of my next layout.
I am very optimistic about this line of n-scale track. The fact that Paul Graf, who was one of the contributes to online n-scale forums has been promoted in the Atlas organization.
Why can't anyone make RTR roadbedded track with Code 55 rail? Is it against the laws of physics to do that?
I'm using Atlas n True Track for my first layout and I am happy with it. But I agree with you, Atlas should have used code 55 instead of 65, this way it would have been fully compatible with their existing line of code 55. The sectional track is great for beginners, and could later expand their layout with code 55 flex and turnouts when they gained more modeling experience.
I'm working on a small,lightweight,portable switching layout.I want to keep it simple,so I'm using the True Track switches,since they're self contained,and ME C55 flex track..
Mike Fifer did an excellent YouTube video in which he demonstrate Tomix track in comparison to Kato Unitrack. I would like to see him do a YouTube video on the Atlas True-Track and perhaps include how it might be used with Kato Unitrack. I used True-Track I already had and replaced some of the passenger yard track with it; connecting it to the Kato Unitrack turnouts. I am experimenting with ideas for a future layout.
When I started back into N scale last year, I already had bought Bachmann EZ track from a local Hobby Lobby. There was enough to make a LARGE circle around the Christmas tree at my old house, before the wife & I got married a few years ago. Sooooooo, when I was pressed to build a layout by my wife (and get back into the hobby), I just bought & ordered Bachmann EZ track. Why? Because it snapped together, and stayed put on the carpet around the Christmas tree! The only reason. LOL All the Atlas track I had, just came apart after the train had gone over it a few time. Plus, it didn't keep it very high out of the carpet. And yes, I ALWAYS hear the BOOs & HISSES from ALL of you, everytime I bring up the fact I have Bachmann EZ Track on my current layout. But, you know what? I haven't had a problem with any of it? The remote turnouts work, the L & R crossovers work, and it's been a year! After doing a Google search this morning, reading the PROs & CONs about Atlas TRUE TRACK Code 65, I may just go invest a few bucks, and try a second layout using it?
I replaced the Kato Unitrack on four of the passenger yard tracks with True-Track...cell phone photo.
Atlas True Track is Code 65 to better accommodate deeper flanges ("pizza cutters") which cannot be used on their Code 55 track line. This way they didn't exclude that portion of the market that prefers deeper flanges, but wants better-looking track. True Track isn't bad; I think it's biggest flaw is the choice of ballast color: while tan ballast exists in the real world, the far greater majority of track ballast is grey, and repainting True Track would be a royal PITA.
This totally makes sense to me. It can cost someone a pretty penny to change out wheels on your rolling stock if you have a large collection. This is a PERFECT example as to why I am still "old school" when it comes to track. I still use the old foam or cork readbed with flex track option. I can make the ballast color any way I want it. I custom mix my ballast as I have found NONE commercially available that I like right out of the package. Ryan
They've got a way to go before the equal the range and reliable availabilty of Unitrack. The turnout to me looks a bit 'train set' like with that long curved leg, what is the double track spacing using a crossover made with the turnouts?
I would have used True-Track when statrting my current layout in 2007, except for the limited choices of track and switches at that time.
One of the strong positive aspects of True-Track in my opinion is the appearance, thus I would not use it in a hidden yard. The tie spacing is a nice part of the appearance.
For staging, where you aren't as concerned about track appearance, Kato Unitrack is far superior. I had actually begun to stockpile Unitrack just for that purpose....staging...when that layout was dismantled. Then after another failed layout attempt I decided to use that Unitrack to just build a small yard/loop layout and thus it has become my primary track for now. I'm not thrilled with its looks, but more thrilled than no layout at all. From my experience, the Atlas track is such a distant 2nd (or even 3rd or 4th) in the market that it's not even something I'll consider as it stands. The durability of the Atlas track is the main problem. The rail comes loose in the spikes, and it's all over. Regarding the variety of pieces available, you would be surprised how close Atlas is to having a comparable line to Unitrack. They really need about 4-5 new pieces to have the majority of what Unitrack has for pure trackage. (notwithstanding all the odd accessories, doubletrack viaduct, etc) After that it would be a matter of additional curve radii which are definitely nice to have but not as mandatory as, say, a number 7 or number 8 turnout which is badly needed. (and again, I would have to be convinced that the test pieces I had were an anomaly to even see that as a win) I wish you all luck using it....it does look pretty good and I wish it was an option for me.
I have followed the True-Track for a few years, and during 2013 I purchased enough to replace a part of the mainline of my layout. I think it looked much nicer on the mainline than Unitrack because I model the steam era and the 1940s. After a short time, I moved all the True-Track to a yard for further evaluation, thus my experience is limited in use on the mainline. I found that connecting the sections required more care that needed for Unitrack to get proper alignment and connection. I plan to use True-Track on a new layout, but I cannot afford to totally abandon Unitrack because I have a large investment/inventory.
I started my small layout in 2012 with True-Track but soon started to have problems with the turnouts causing derailments with my older and some newer steam engines. (all covered in an old Atlas Forum entry- now lost). The problem was that some of the larger (i.e 2-10-0 etc) engines got caught in the frog. I switched to Unitrack in 2013 and have never looked back. Fred
for center to center track spacing using the turnouts in doubles for crossover: a 1.9" c-t-c distance is created this was determined by AnyRail software which is quite precise in track length, radius, and turnout geometry. respectfully gary l lake dillensnyder
While at Trainfest, a few years ago, I was told by someone from Atlas that the TrueTrack line was going to be expanded. To include things like numbered turnouts and more crossings. I've given up hope.
