any advantage to useing code 100 for hidden trackage ?

Model Railroader Layouts and layout building
1

aim to build a heliix and after reading every thing I could find I caught a opinion of useing code 100 HO in hidden trackage like a helix ,but didnt grasp a reason except maybe its a bit more reliable or is it just that its cheaper or maybe both ? not looking for a argument just a mild opinion as I have my track order standing bye and the code 100 is a buck a pc cheaper[*-)]…oh my still being built plan is useing code 83 for main ,but not being excided about hidden trackage is there an advantage other than cost to useing code 100 in there ??? thanks Jerry

2

I do not feel Atlas code 100 is any more ‘reliable’ than code 83, but it is a lot cheaper!

Jim

3

As Jim said, no advantage to using Code100 in hidden or staging areas other than it is a LOT cheaper. Almost all of my staging is done with C100.

Larry

4

At my club, all our visible track is all handlaid code 83 and 70. Hidden and staging track is Atlas Code100 flextrack. It’s cheap, and a heck of a lot faster and easier than handlaying the hidden track. Since it’s hidden, the appearance of the large code100 rails is not an issue.

5

thanks guys thats about what I figured but just in case I ask. now is bending the code 100 going to be an issue compared to c83 on the 28 " radius helix curve ive planed ? just a note its an oblong helix to keep that tite rad. helix @ 2% or less plus the 1% for the rad. drag . any how bending no more difficult ? Jerry

6

Bending is no more difficult than Code83, it should not be a problem for you.

Larry

7

You could always use Bachmann 28"R track with the roadbed attached, wouldn’t need to worry about cork roadbed and laying track on a curve. Kato 28.75"R code 83 would work too.

8

True, for those who eat off fine china with sterling silver utensils, and light the designer logs in their fireplaces with rolled up currency. For those of us on a budget, a little bird told me the best reason to use Code 100 where the sun don’t shine…

CHEEP!!!

My own netherworld is all code 100 - including some brass-rail flex where locomotives won’t run (back-in staging) and even stick rail laid directly on pine planks without any ties or roadbed. Once out in the visible world, let’s hear it for Code 83 - on concrete ties. (It’s a prototype thing.)

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - on Atlas flex with hand-laid specialwork)

9

I have code 100 on all staging tracks and helix. Also have a bit still left on the mainline, as the layout was started in 1983 and was pretty much all built with code 100 in those days. Some has been replaced with 83, but not all of it, and I am not about to tear into a finished area just to use code 83.

Bob

10

thanks to all, order is in the works…Jerry

11

I agree, totally.

12

Atlas Code100 is about the bendiest flex track I’ve ever worked with. Nothing to worry about there.

The quality stuff like Micro Engineering flextrack is much better looking but also much tighter in the plastic tie strips and as a result stiffer and far more difficult to bend and straighten. I’ve used ME code 70 and 55 on a layout before, and you have to very carefully and slowly bend each piece into the curve you want it, and use a long straightedge to try to lay out straight track. The appearance of the track is definately worth it though.

However the entire point of this thread is about hidden track where only function, not appearance, is an issue, and you can’t beat code100 flex for cost and ease of use.

13

I am starting my layout and really noticed how much I can save by using code 100 vs code 83. I planned on using code 83 because that is what I have been seeing guys use. What are the major differences of 100 vs 83. I would like to build my layout somewhat to look real but if it is going to save me a lot of $$$ I might as well use code 100.

Would like some other opinions on this. Dont mean to thread jack.

14

I recommend using Code 100 for hidden areas only. The actual rail size is very over scale. Code 83 is closer to what a reasonably heavy mainline track should be. Secondary tracks should realistically be Code 70 and even Code 55 for light spur trackage. Since the “Code” number is the actual height of the rail in thousands of an inch, that’s half the size of “standard” code 100.

Obviously this all gets to be personal preference, but if you want realistic track, the above guidelines are a pretty safe approximation.

15

For close up photography the rail size, spike detail, tie plates make a big difference. For actually looking at it from a normal distance you probably won’t notice it. One thing to remember is that the wheels are oversized as well and we all live with that (well except for the proto guys).

Enjoy

Paul

16

Thanks IronRooster. This is mostly for entertainment for myself and my sons and not much as in shooting pics to be in Model Railroader. LOL

Most of the people that would see it wont be able to tell the difference without giving a 9 week class on it. Just wanting something to look somewhat real without alot of $$$ plus spending time with my sons doing this.

Thanks