I have been planning on using MTL track for a small portable layout. The red flag went up when I started seeing that the flex was not compatible with the rest of their roadbed track. If this is just an issue of adding IBL roadbed under the flex, I am ok with it. If it is more than that, can you guys enlighten me before I go spend the money? This is the basic plan. it is about 2x5 ft.
I don't see problems using flex track with roadbed track. I mixed them before. I have not used Rokutan track, so I have no experience, but they do make a piece to interface MTL with Rokutan. Suggestion is to keep the rail height the same, and you will be fine.
To match railheads between MTL roadbed and flex track, you'll need about 80 mils of roadbed. To match to the sectional bridge the approaching roadbed needs to be about 100 mils thick. Mark
Sounds like I just need to go buy some flex and see what I can do! Wish I didn't have to buy a full pack of flex! I suppose I would just find something else to spend it on......
A Märklin section has virtually the same profile as the MTL flex (Märklin is less than 10 mils thicker). Why not use a piece as a stand in for the full pack of flex? Mark
Believe me when I say, the layout plan you have could be built with nothing but flex track and switches. I don't know anything about the R Brand, so I won't speak to that. Just so you know I use code 50 and 80 along with Kato's code 73 and have no problems with compatibility. A shim here and shim there and I'm good to go.
Those are the responses I was hoping to hear! Thanks guys. I found a bunch of MTL flex on the Z-track Resale site for a really reduced price. So, it is on the way to me now. Next week should be interesting. I had to clear my work bench to get ready for some merit award judging this Saturday. I have six models (HO) that are going for merit awards in structures. Next is investigating what others have done with their layouts for sub-roadbed and under table switch machines. I am liking the servo so far.
