Track Questions for Pre-1980s N Scalers

I have some questions for those of you who built N scale layouts prior to the 1980s. Which brand of track worked best for building a layout? I have noticed that some older locomotives rise up on the plastic bits of modern Atlas snap track, mainly re-railers on bridges and the frogs on switches. Did the locomotives of the time have trouble on the plastic portions of period 90 deg / 45 deg crossings and switches? Was the track built to accommodate the obnoxious flanges found on most locomotives back then, or did you pretty much have to deal with things as they were?

I look forward to hearing about your experiences and thank you ahead of time.

 

I started in the early 1970s with Atlas flex track and switches, still have some Atlas flex track in one of my yards. Looking for better switches I tried Peco, still using it today, works great lasts forever. Never had a flange issues, of course using code 80, way to much to even think about changing and just don't think the little bit better looks is worth it.

 

I think that the Atlas switches of that time had wider tolerances. Almost of the locomotives of the time had narrow check gauges (flanges back to back) on their wheel sets, eg. Rivarossi steam (RR) was the worse. Atlas made their switches to work with those narrow wheel sets. I can't remember that I had any problems at the time. The depth of the flange way was deeper and designed to provide more support for "pizza cutters" through the frog , but I don't think that it mattered that much. Smaller wheel flanges eg. Con-Cor/Sekisui(Kato) would drop at the frogs, but I didn't have derailments because of it. My old layout is under 50 feet of earth in a landfill, so I can't check the switches. I wish I'd kept a few pieces of track to compare.

When I got back into N scale after a 35+ year hiatus, I went back to code 80. All of the "old stuff", I hung on to, would ride up at the frogs of the current Atlas switches. I thought that the "pizza cutter" flanges were causing the ride-up, but it was the wheel set gauge. Once I re-gauged the wheel sets to a NMRA gauge, the problem went away. If the gauge is not wide enough, the wheel set rides-up at the frog, RR locomotives will loose electrical contact and stop. The wheel sets will pick the points too. I think that the old switches were made to the European standard (NEMA), and current Atlas switches are made to the NMRA standard or a close approximation. If checked with a NMRA gauge, the points are usually off, but the frog and guard rails check pretty close. I hope this helps, Charley.

 

When you refer to modern Atlas snap track I will assume it is not code 55 but code 80. And the problem of older equipment flanges having issues with rerailers and some switch frogs on Atlas code 80 seems to be a more recent issue than older. More of a manufacturing issue than a flange issue although some older stuff could be used for pizza cutters. Seems like the flangeways on some stuff that is not code 55 has gotten shallower so that even some of my more modern stuff with much finer and shallower profile flanges are having some issues with it.

Some of the early stuff out there besides Atlas was AHM, Arnold Rapido, Peco, Minitrix, and Bachmann. There were some other brands that don't come to mind right now and I believe Model Power had a line of track. Pretty much safe to say if they were a train manufacturer that had a line of track. May have been made by someone else with just their name on it.

I don't remember any issues with track as related to flange depth back when. The main issue was controlling all the small fires breaking out from the powered turnouts melting down, with some brands being worse than others in that regard.

 

Lots of problems but not flanges. Wide tread would short out switches at the frogs, so I resorted to turning all Rapido wheels down on the tread width. Gauge was all over the place, I used an MT coupler gauge as the master. The deepest flanges by far were Rapido, and those didn't ride up over much of anything, actually, despite that.

I went to under-the-table turnout motors as my original Atlas motors simply burned out. I still have some turnouts dating back to the 70's buried deep in the storage yard in the current layout, soldered up with jumpers and powered with under-the-table machines. Still no real problems except with some narrow-tread wheels. It's not the flanges that get me, its the tread width changes.

 

Ah, yes, the excitement of adding each new Atlas First Generation turnout! I had all of two of them on my first layout, circa 1970.

The Trix / Aurora / Postage Stamp track, with a 7 1/2 inch radius, was also fun. Their turnouts, with the enormous switch machines, matched that curvature. But what they sold made it around those curves, more or less. I had a reverse loop on a later layout that used this track so that I could get it to fit inside an Atlas loop which had 9 3/4 inch radius.

Interesting that generally the same track geometry introduced by Atlas in the 1960s still exists in the Atlas Code 80 catalog, and for that matter the HO Atlas Code 100 as well, where 15 inch radius (roughly equivalent to 7 1/2 inch in N Scale) continues to be available... well, at least catalogued, given the well-known inventory issues at the moment.

I suppose I must declare myself a hopeless geek in that I know the catalog numbers of the three Atlas Code 80 radii without looking: 2510 (9 3/4 inch), 2520 (11 inch) and 2526 (19 inch).

 

Always Peco. No competition.

 

Started out in the late '60s with Arnold Rapido track and trains, which were pretty much bulletproof in operation. Continued using Arnold track until the early '80s, when I started building N-Trak modules and changed to Peco track.

 

I started in N scale in '69 and used Atlas track. In the mid 70's, I started using Peco long turnouts because I wanted something larger that the Atlas #6. Although I have switched to code 55 Atlas track, the old Peco's are still in use in the moveable staging yard.

I will say I dearly miss 2 pieces of the old Atlas track line, the 3-way turnout and the #6 double slip. I would really love to have a #7 or #10 double slip in code 55. Maybe it will be produced before I build the 2 main terminals.

Glenn

 

Built my first N-scale layout in 1972, used Atlas track and some Trix.

I did not have any problems with locos or rolling stock, locos were Atlas and Trix, rolling stock consisted of Trix, atlas and later Kadee (now Micro Trains).
Converting all my rolling stock to MT couplers and trucks allowed for longer trains pulling with my locos and derailments were few and far between, mostly when I had a turnout thrown the wrong way.

I used Atlas code 55 on my present layout and have had no issue with it.

 

Atlas track came with the Atlas train set I bought, so I went with that -- all sectional track, at that -- in all my first layouts, some up to 4'x8' sized. Electric motors on the switches burned out in a flash so I stopped buying electric ones. But when Peco came along I had a replacement for all those Atlas switches. I started with flex track soon after. The super-curved Bachmann, Rapido, and Trix turnouts didn't match well with the Pecos so I used very few of them. There was another brand of switch I liked very well because it had instead of plastic frogs a solid metal one-- a good thing to have in an era of traction tires, balky motors, one-truck pick-up, and other electrical continuity disruptors. Company called Grafar out of England -- don't know what happened to them, never could find those switches when I wanted to buy more about a year later.

 

Peco make a double slip and a 3 way in code 55

 

Started out with Atlas track in the late 60's. Had problems with the first batch (tapered rods that only reached 3 of the driving axles) Bachmann ATSF northern. When attempting to move the engine through the diverging route, the bottom of the cylinder casting would hit on the switch machine. And like others have said, changed to Peco, and that is what I still use. I have found the track gauge tight about a half an inch before and after the frog, in the diverging route.
But only see it on the Electrofrog code 80 medium radius turnouts. If I was just starting a layout, I would probably use the Peco code55.
Robert

 

An interesting question.

In a word: Peco, Peco, Peco.

I started RR modelling in 1976 and although I have attempted to use Atlas products a couple of times, have found their products are simply not up to scratch.

The British Peco brand is far-superior (at least in my experience and IMHO).

Komata

"TVR - serving the Northern Taranaki..."