I’m about to launch my first HO layout after years in N scale. I’ve been reading about the merits and drawbacks of the various brands of track, but the discussion doesn’t often make side-by-side comparisons of tie shape, size, and spacing, spike detail, and so on. What pictures I’ve been able to find online aren’t sufficiently close up to help me decide, either. Whose (code 83 and smaller) track looks more like the real thing? Bonus question: is there any problem in HO scale comparable to the issue of deep flanges on N code 55–might I have to restrict my purchases of rolling stock or replace wheelsets? Thanks for your opinions.
There’s an underlying assumption in your question that all prototype track looks the same. It doesn’t even come close. Appearance of track varies significantly depending on region, specific railroad standards, use, type of traffic, era, and so on. As the modeling scale gets larger, these differences are easier to model and easier to see in the model.
Typical HO code 83 track is only a reasonable model for main line track of the last 50-60 years using wood ties - some more accurate models than others. Central Valley tie strips do differentiate appearance somewhat by offering “branch line” tie strips as well as main line. Although I haven’t specifically looked at my samples, I have been told Micro Engineering narrow gauge flex track - at least the newer batches - does not have tie plate detail in order to be more realistic.
In commonly available code 83 flex track track with plastic ties, there is Atlas, Peco, Walters (Shinohara), ME, and Central Valley tie strips (you install your own rail). You may find some Model Power still available, although this is no longer in production. This is not too long a list to examine a stick of each, and make your choice based on your personal preference. And you can mix and match.
The Atlas has taller ties than the other brands to match up to their code 100 track. Atlas track also has by far the most propensity to straighten itself after being curved. The spri
EDIT- I was apparently typing my response at the same time as Fred above, so some of the ideas are duplicated…
I’ve used Atlas, Shinohara/Walthers and Micro Engineering (ME). The ME spike detail is by far the most realistic, plus their ties have a somewhat random look.
I’d rate the Shinohara/Walthers behind ME since the spike detail is oversized in comparison, but it’s otherwise similar (note - in the US Walthers sells the code 83 line under its own brand while code 70 is sold under Shinohara).
Atlas 83 has used several different molds for its ties. The one currently available has the largest spikes of the above brands, and its ties are very regularly spaced and aligned. It is too “perfect” for prototype track. When it comes to mixing brands, note also that Atlas ties are thicker than the others to allow easier use with Atlas code 100, which can cause problems if the brands with thinner ties aren’t shimmed.
While not flex track, the Central Valley tie strips are easy to use and provide realistic tie/spike detail that works well with Micro Engineering and Shinohara/Walthers track. They’re seff-gauging plastic strips ready to have rail installed.
Fortunately no. Some older HO equipment used deep flanges, especially stuff imported from Europe. Nearly all current North American prototype equipment has flanges that will operate on code 55 track.
Erosebud,
Regardless of what brand of flex track that is chosen you may want to consider using “RibbonRail Track Gauges.” These make the formation of curves much easier, particularly if you use ME track, and is also a great help when soldering rail joints as it not only keeps things in gauge but also acts as a heat sink.
I’ve used all the major brands discussed on this thread and really have no specific preference, to me they all look generally the same once installed and weathered.
Wayne
I wouldn’t be overly concerned here. At normal viewing distances. I personally don’t notice the the details except for G track.
Enjoy
Paul
I’ll go to the opposite extreme. NO flex track is an accurate model of present-day mainline tracklaying practice. Why? No anticreepers.
(Okay. Only the most obsesso of rivetcounters will even know to look for them, never mind notice their absence. Just making a point.)
One thing no one has mentioned is the prevalence in new (and even not-so-new) prototype work, of concrete ties. Of course, in HO flex track they all come with `concrete plastic color’ hardware. (Personally, I’ve never seen grey-white Pandrol clips.)
Which leads to the final idea. Careful detail painting will add loads to the appearance of any track, whether flex or hand-laid. Without it, no nickel-silver rail on plastic ties product will ever look like my friendly, neighborhood Class 1.
(One quick example. I could look at the ties and tell you if the line ran DMUs. If it did, there would be a line of grease right down the track centerline - leakage from the torque converters and axle-mounted gear boxes. Grease about an inch from the spikeheads was the hallmark of a track used by EMUs, but the catenary was a more obvious giveaway.)
Chuck (Modeling Centra Japan in September, 1964 - with DMU, EMU and concrete ties)
Central Valley’s 8’6" mainline tie strip includes this detail. While it’s not flextrack, it’s almost as easy to use.
Truth time - my prototype never used 'em.[:-^]
One other thing my prototype did, which makes it necessary for me to slide ties on any flex I use, is to put two very closely spaced (as in, not quite touching) ties under each rail joint - joints squared as in British practice, not staggered US style. I don’t add fake joiners or notch the railheads, but the paired ties are one of the obvious, `This is Japan,’ details whose absence would grate on my sensibilities.
I even put two close-spaced wooden ties at the (simulated) rail joints of my concrete-tie track, in order to get the `look’ of the prototype. There are already lengths of CWR in place, and replacement ties on the ballast slope where those wood ties will be removed. Installation is scheduled for the first weekend in October. (Check my signature for the reason why that will never happen.)
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - TTTO 24/30)
LIONS use Model Power HO Code 100 flex track. It is the cheapest I can get, and it is not a springy as Atlas and will hold the curve until I tack it down. I always solder the next stick on before I finis bending the first.
As a point of interest, I have ripped up some track in rather inaccessible places and will replace it with lengths of track that have been soldered together on the bench so that I can have access to both ends, then I will only have to fight in a few tacks in the middle… Or at least this is my plan 
A few observations on the subject:
How much do you value realism?
How much are you willing to pay for realism?
How much extra work do you want to do to achieve this realism?
All flex track operates well. The real issue is cost and appearance. If appearance is your primary concern and you are willing to spend money and time on it, go with the Central Valley tie strips. If appearance is important but you want to spend money but less time on it, go with Micro Engineering Flex. These two are noticeably better than the other brands when it come to fine details.
I would echo an earlier recommendation that you buy a stick of all of the competing brands that you considering and compare for yourself.
one man’s fine scale is another’s unnecessary expense…
I did the comparison and I use ME flex…
Of course your mileage may vary,
Guy