Nope...this hobby is about having FUN ! If C55 is a PITA to lay (for some) then using C80 or even Unitrack is quite acceptable. 'Prototypical' isnt on the top of the list for a great number of modelers. However...having fun is...:tb-wink: .
WAIT... Backup... This is supposed to be FUN?! Put me down for C55 and C40 user. Steve summarized the key points perfectly. However there is one thing I'd like to add. Code55/ Code80 Flex can operate much better than Unitrack if given proper time and attention. However, for some, the amount of work might not be worth it to just go from best to better. Flex can be superior, but more often than not, it causes headaches because it was laid in a hurry. Go slow, absorb the excellent information found throughout TrainBoard, and ask questions whenever you dont understand. If you do those things, you'll definitely have a ton of FUN!
Mark.... I remember u always singing the praises of Unitrack...hmmmmm. You know them Ninjas are starting to worry about you..>LOL .
Steve... Dont know... Hell...I have been giving Unitrack some serious consideration myself...and I already took the DCC leap myself..... ..maybe there is a perpetual full moon ! LMAO!! * hears jaws hitting the floor. Did he say George might use Unitrack !! :tb-wacky: .
Geez, before you know it I'll be running more diesel than steam.... Wait a minute! I ordered another diesel a few weeks ago?!?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s
After reading these last half dozen posts, I can only conclude the world has come to an end. :tb-tongue: :tb-tongue: :tb-tongue: Boxcab E50
It just might be about to end. A discussion about: Track type DCC vs DC Diesel vs steam And everyone is remaining calm. Hmmm.
why not consider peco code 55 thats what im goin to use on my layout, i havnt laid any track as of yet but imo the peco code 55 is better than atlas because there arnt as many problems with the deep flange equipment. personally i havnt used atlas code 55 myself though but i was unimpressed when i used there code 80 track and points.
Holy Model Railroading Batman !!!! :tb-ooh: I just received a brand new Bachmann 4-8-4 Mark !!! :tb-smile: Now I know there is a tear in the time warp continuum. :tb-wacky::tb-nerd: .
Code 55 all the way for me, it's 100 times better looking. The club uses code 80 because they're stuck in the past and it looks like crap once your used to the fine scale proto look of code 55.
If I can chime in, I can offer some observations. First, there are virtually no issues with older rolling stock except some old Arnold S2 wheels that were too large for code 80. Second, I think the ME track looks better and has the benefit of conrete ties as well as accompanying bridge track. Third, the track is pretty solid and not at all flimsy and it tends to stay in gauge a lot better than other flex tracks. Now the flip side First, Atlas is indeed a lot easier to work with. Second, Atlas has a nice selection of sectional track and turnouts. Third, Altas is more available and cost less than ME track. Ok now the bad side of each Atlas does have a lot of flange issues and not with just old flanges, there are some issues with recent locomotives scraping, albeit barely, the spike details on the ties. ME can be very frustrating to work with, but if you go slow and deliberate, the track is beautiful. There is very little to no turnouts from ME, your best bet is to either splice in Atlas turnouts or be prepared to build or purchase turnouts using the Fast Tracks system. There is a guy I know that sell handlaid turnouts for just a little more than the cost of a Peco turnout. He is on e-bay, and I can give you a link to his store if you PM me. In the end, I decided to use the ME and Fast TRacks turnouts, because sometimes you need more than the Atlas selection of turnouts. While I have had to improve my track laying skills, I am much happier becasue I have been able to blend Code 70 on the mains, Code 55 on the yards, sidings and industrail trackage and Code 40 on the branchline trackage. And I will say that I like the way the ME looks over the Atlas. It is mostly indestructable like Peco track. I do not expect anyone to follow my method, I will admint it was a cool factor that has worn off and now is too late to turnback now. Either way, there are realtive merits to both, and Atlas may be easier overall, but the slinky like rail worries me as I have seen some narrowing of gauge on curves. I am sure they can be easily corrected though.
Atlas Code 55 All the Way I guess I'll have to chime in and add to the general drift here.... After installing Unitrak throughout my double-deck D&RGW Soldier Summit layout and freaking out on it -- the non-prototypical look, and particularly the spacing issues brought about by the limited choices Kato makes available -- I ripped it out, sold it on eBay, and used the proceeds to purchase Atlas Code 55. I'm only 20% of the way toward rebuilding my layout, but I am *so* glad I made the change. I don't have time to scratch-build turnouts, so the variety of Atlas C55 turnouts -- wyes, curved turnouts, and nos. 5 through 10 -- have enabled me to solve all kinds of problems that Unitrak forced me into. Great care is needed to assure a uniform, level track bed, but once this is done, the operation is flawless -- more so than Unitrak, in my opinion. And best of all, the track LOOKS like U.S. railroad track. I still believe that Unitrak is a good choice for beginners, but Atlas C55 is the right choice for me. Bryan
Could it be that you're getting the rail to hot when soldering and it's causing the "spikes" to soften, releasing the rail? Do you use a heat sink when soldering to those short pieces of rail?
That might be a part of his troubles. I wondered the same. However, I will note from my using ME C83 in On30 it is indeed fragile- Very easy to pop the "spike" extrusions. Boxcab E50
Just to correct a misconception often encountered on these boards, ME code 55 flex track does NOT cost more than Atlas. Calculated on a per-inch basis, ME costs slightly less, based on prices from N-Scale Supply (who sells both). Note that you get 36" per section for ME and only 30" from Atlas. MH
One thing to consider with the Peco track is that the tie spacing is not correct for North American railroads. If you are not concerned with prototypical looks, this is not a problem and the Peco track line is solid across the board. However, correct tie spacing was an important factor for me which is why I use a combination of Atlas and ME code 55 track. Jamie
Without getting too nitpicky about the selection I have left out many of the other brands simply because of availability or range selections. Kato: The negative with Kato is its tie spacing and rail height. However I would suggest you look at what John sing has done with Kato Unitrack. The good thing about Unitrack is that it is stout and mechanically dependable along with a comprehensive selection of sections and switches. You can be up and running quickly and actually test some of your track plans and quickly change them. That is if you do them before you commit to the heavier scenic work. Atlas: I am currently working with Atlas Code 55 and I like it. Primarily because of its refined nature, it can be a little more temperamental as many have noted regarding flange issues and some of the earlier mechanical issues with the switches. I also think the Atlas code 65 Roadbed track is very promising unfortunately it is out of the running until the line has developed more selection of switches and sections. Peco Code 55 This has been an excellent track line over the years. It performs excellent; it is stout in nature due to its deep buried rail. Unfortunately its tie spacing is not appealing to us US prototype modelers (given the later alternative Atlas Code 55). On the other hand it is amazing what can be done with careful detail in ballasting and weathering. Again let me point out John sings work with Kato the same can be applied to Peco. No matter which one of these you choose, I don't think you could go wrong some very impressive layouts have been built with all three.
I would heartily recommend either "Peco" code 55 or "Unitrack"...............I have 20+ years of experience laying track of one kind or another, and I finally ended up with a "Unitrack" layout after turning my nose up for years. IT'S A BREEZE!! TO WORK WITH. I found all the other Code 55 track except "Peco" too "finicky" & delicate to work with to suit my taste. I have never been THAT picky about "tie spacing" & "rail height"...........as I'm a firm believer in the 3' rule. With my age & eyes, smooth operation & being able to consistently run trains w/o problems is a lot more important that exacting accuracy. There are those that will settle for nothing less, God bless 'em, but I'm not one. I build a layout to be "bullet proof" & trouble free, and "Peco" and "Unitrack" both fill that requirement to a "tee".
