Well, I did it. I sold off a bunch of my Unitrack, and made enough to replace it with Atlas Code 55 No. 7 and 10 turnouts and 100 sections of 30" flex track. I still think that Unitrack is an excellent choice for many modelers, but not for me. I'll explain why in a subsequent post... but for now, I've some questions and would really appreciate your views on them. To be sure, all these matters have been discussed before, but I'd like to get a sense of the latest views and perspectives: In the past, it seems that there were some reliability problems with Atlas Code 55 turnouts, including a case where a celebrated modeler abandoned N scale in a snit. Were they confined to the #5 turnouts (which I'm not using)? Have these been resolved? I'm having sticker shock over switch machines. I need DCC-capable stationary decoders on the 18 mainline turnouts that will be under CTC control. The state of the art would be Tortoises, right? The problem is, I'd have to purchase new controllers. I've got a bunch of Lenz LS-150 DCC controllers, but as I understand it, they don't work well with Tortoises because they don't sustain the current after a switching operation and might allow a gap to develop. True? What's the most cost-effective combination presently of Tortoise + reliable DCC controller? NCE's Switch-It? The latest thing in switch controllers is Tam Valley's DCC controllers for inexpensive RC servos... but by the time you finish purchasing enough controllers and accessory stuff you're still spending some significant dinero, leading me to wonder whether it wouldn't be wiser to spend more and go with the proven, reliable Tortoises... Thoughts? The older Atlas under-the-table controllers are cheap ($6.99 at some train store), and would work with my LS-150s, but they make no provisions for powering the frog. The new ones, which have a built in relay, are much more expensive -- almost as much as a Tortoise! -- but they seem to have acquired a poor reputation. True? I'm also trying to figure out how to manually control the rest of the turnouts (lots of #7s in yards). After ripping out the Unitrack over appearance issues, I'm not about to install those gigantic ground throws... which are nearly seven feet tall in N scale! ... which leaves me with what alternatives? The manual systems (such as Blue Point and Humpyard) are almost as expensive as Tortoises. Anything else available? From my background (long ago) in radio-control gliders, I know there's a ton of potentially useful and cheap RC stuff available (push rods, bell cranks, etc.) that could be used to control turnouts manually. Surprisingly, I can't find any evidence that model railroaders have actually tried using this stuff. Do you know of anyone who's done so? Your views and suggestions will be very much appreciated! -- Bryan
Greetings ! Not too sure about most of your questions, but I do want to say welcome to Atlas Code 55. I too recently commited to this type of track due to the vast selection of Switches versus Atlas Code 80 which is somewhat limited in Switches. I like to use higher speed switches all over just because of the smooth operation being the result. Although my layout is still in the planning mode, it is exciting to know that the realism of Atlas Code 55 will far exceed the Code 80, especially after weathering. Now, these are just my opinions as I do not want to get the 55 vs. 80 debate started again. All in all, no matter what track you ride on, N scale is still the best size to do it on, again, welcome to Atlas Code 55. fatalxsunrider43
From what we'd seen in the past, I thought your Unitrack looked pretty good. Will eb waiting to see some photos of this changeover. Boxcab E50
I have had a few early Atlas C55 #5's play up, with one having the rail beyond the frog coming off, but none of the #7's. The notable problem to me is the looseness of the switch rails where they connect to the throw bar on the #5's but only some of them. I don't have any #10's. I have 18 mainline turnouts controlled by Switch-it's operating Tortoises and chose these as I wanted local panel control using single push buttons whilst having the DCC control option for macros. If the Tortoises are not constantly powered they will back off slightly but I haven't seen mine do so to the extent of opening the switches. There is significant gearing in a Tortoise mechanism and it takes a little force to manually operate them when un-powered. Maybe in scales large than N where the switch opening is greater? Whilst I use Tortoises for the mainline I went initially with Blue Points for the small yard with the intent of grouping the control knobs together on the fascia. After fiddling with pushrods, and annoyance of two BP's placed side by side, I simply went with the servos using a Tam Valley Depot Octopus II controller and indicated push buttons (two servos are connected to one output in a crossover). A SPDT microswitch double-sided taped to the side of the servo power the frogs. So far they have worked well. Can't comment- haven't considered them. As mentioned above, I used the servos in place of Blue Points but the 4 turnouts in question are #5's in a non-ladder arrangement. If you have a ladder arrangement with #7's (use a 2" section between each to give a 1-1/4" track center) you have more space between the throwbars and the Blue Points would work well in this situation. The pushrods and clevises are not expensive. The other option would be creating your own controllers using slide or toggle switches attached to the fascia. There are many variations out there but they take time to build and adjust. You need to decide on what your time is worth and buy accordingly. Used the pushrods on the Blue Points for the siding turnouts on the layout. They are straight driven from the fascia so no cranks or bends needed. The down side to the pushrod method is the number of pieces needed to operate the turnout increases the more you need to navigate under the layout - cranks, clevis, etc. If you can post a layout plan and it will give us something to further comment and suggest on.
Code 55 will be most satisfying. Code 55 is by far the best choice so long as you can't cut a Chicago-style pizza with the flanges. Atlas track also is better sized than Micro Engineering or Peco track. If you run modern steam models or diesels, you should be fine. I also would steer away from #5 turnouts. #7's are my personal favorite--they look great and can create a shorter ladder than a #10, though #10's are more like real-life frog angles--and if you paint and weather it just right, including individual ties, the results can look like real track, even though code 55 is still fairly heavy. BTW, for turnout control, may I suggest Caboose Industries ground throws? They're easy to install & use and are very inexpensive. Plus there's nothin' quite like the feeling of manually throwing a switchstand! Here's what you can do with Atlas track: If done right, it can almost look like code 40!:tb-biggrin:
I really like the looks of my Atlas code 55. However, all my purchases are now done through my LHS. I don't leave the store without testing the electrical continuity of the turnouts. I've had 6 bad #5's and two bad #7's. Another good reason to purchase from the LHS instead of the internet!
This is absolutely not true. It depends on if you shop around or you’re a “one stop shopper”. I bought and returned over $300 worth of tortoises after I discovered how much I could cut costs. I have 46 turnouts, all are DCC controled. I have to leave for work at the moment, but I’d love to elaborate when I have more time.
Depedning on the size of the layout and how many devices you have to control, stationary decoders, occupancy detectors and signals, one cost efficitent way to do that is with a rr-circuits Tower 64 unit. While at first it seems more expensive, in the end it isn't because you can configure to your needs. It has controller cards for all of the above that can be mixed and matched. As far as costs go, if you are running DCC, and you want to use TorToise machines, the best overall decoder for that is the DCC Specialties Hare and Wabbit series. But they are not cheap, but with them you get lots of capability not found in the NCE, Lenz of Digitrax offerings. One feature is the auto-throw that senses incomming trains and will throw the turnout automatically so you do not foul the points, and after a while, the turnout resets itself to the original position. In addition, there is an issue from time to time of the Tortoise throwing a temporary short as it moves across its internal points, the Hare protects against this and still has an output to power the frogs. It all boils down to the age old axiom, you get what you pay for. A better solution if you are cash limited at this time, is to get all of the machines for your layout and set them up with out using DCC for control and just have facia switches or buttons. When the cash reserves allow, you can add a quality stationary decoder or 2 at a time and blend the capabilities in over time. In either case, you need to decide what level of DCC integration you want to have in your solution, and that, more than anything will point you to the right solution. Do you want to implement routes? Are you planning on having them live with the stationary decoder or will they be stored in your DCC Command unit? Do you want to add siganlling down the road, then that means you have to make other adjustments now, like setting up your wiring for occupancy detection. Then you need to make sure the detectors, stationary decoders and signal accesories can all talk together. This is the strong point of the Tower 64 unit, all these different functions live in daughterboards in the system and communicate with each other directly inside the unit. Now I am not trying to force your hand, just wanting to share a different perspective because I did something similar without the long range planning. And when it looked at the cost of doing it twice, and the time and effort to pull out the first configuration, re-wire and the install a new configuration and all of the programming, well I think you get what I mean. But the hidden cost, is the time you spend trying to make things works that do not have the features and maintaining that. I say this because as you move more functionality to DCC, you want DCC to do more and more. So rather than worry about Atlas ot Tortoise machines now, you really should be looking at what it is you want DCC to do now, and say 5 years from now. There is another old axiom, plan your work and work your plan. Understand what you are going to need and select your components based on satisfying those needs. In the end, it may cost a little more, but you have what you wanted. And I gaurantee that it will still be less cost than having to pull it all out, and do it again. I have been there and done that.
Hello Bryan, I use airplane control cables for my PECO C55 turnouts. As they have the in-build point locking mechanism I do not need to worry about any kind of switch or additional locking device, which makes construction very easy. See this thread for additional info and pictures. http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?t=80011 Cheers Dirk
I wish I had the self confidence to do that. Maybe when I expand around the room. Hmmm, then again, maybe not. Good luck and I am sure you will overcome all of the issues.
This hasn't been a problem for some time. The contact arrangement on the circuit board now is break before make, at least back as far as July '05 manufacture date. The first version/s did have the break and make at the same position, or even overlapping, allowing a momentary short to occur and there was a common modification made to the tracks on the circuit board to prevent this.
I use tortoise machines with the digitrax SE8c board. It will control 8 turnouts and 32 signal heads. I have it set up to control signals at the throw of the turnout. I am pretty sure the board will work with Lenz and NCE. I think it is similar to the rrcircuits board mentioned earlier in this thread. It can throw turnouts either through the dcc or it has inputs for push button control. I did a lot of research, and chose the SE8c. I am definitely happy with this solution!
