I have documented a previous thread about starting a new modular layout. I was struggling with whether to use Atlas or Peco Turnouts. I have decided probably to give the Atlas Code 100 turnouts “a shot.” I may regret it. I know that I will have the following problems:
I am going to have to switch the throwbar on the Atlas Custom Line turnout because of 2 inch track spacing on the mainline. I spoke with an Atlas representative via email and he shared with me that switching the throwbar was not " a big deal." You just pry both tabs at the points with a small screwdriver or your finger nail and release the throwbar. He also told me that you could purchase from Atlas replacement throwbars if one broke. THAT DOESN’T SOUND GOOD TO ME??? I am also concerned about maintaining the gauge on the points if one is successful in changing the throwbar to the other side to install the Caboose Industries ground throws. Have any of you done this on your Atlas Custom Line turnouts. Please share your wealth of previous experience with this process. I would be eternally grateful.
I am still concerned about the frog on the Atlas turnout. The last time I ran an Athearn Chessie GP-35 over one, the engine light would flicker. I never had that kind of problem with a Peco InsulFrog turnout. Have any of you had a problem with running equipment over the frog of an Atlas Custom Line turnout. I would appreciate honest and frank responses to what you encountered and what you did about this concern on your personal layouts.
Maybe I am overly concerned with all of this. But this layout will be a switching layout and I want to enjoy operation- not maintenance. Please help me with your honesty with these and any other concerns that you have with Atlas Custom Line Code 100 turnouts.
OK, now I’M confused. I have 2 customlines that need new throw bars. I E-mailed Atlas and they told me they are NOT available separately. Someone on the Atlas forum said they are.[%-)] Do you have that persons name that told you this or a part #???
Changing the throw bar is EZ if you do it before you lay the turnout. You don’t have to worry about them staying in gauge. The plastic tabs that hold the point rails can be bent down a bit when your doing this. That will help hold the points a little more snug.
I even thought about replacing the throw bars with PC board tie bars and rivets from Fast Tracks. They ARE the weak point on an Atlas.
I’ve had to flip the throw bar on many Atlas turnouts with no adverse effect. I did buy some extras from Atlas just in case, but never had to use them - if the turnout isn’t REALLY old, the plastic is more than plyable enough to withstand the change-over.
As for the headlight flicker - I’ve never had an issue providing the wheels and track were clean and adjusted. When the front truck is on the frog, the rear truck is on the points. The points pick up power two ways - that cheap pressed rivet or by pressing against the stock rail … neither of which is very reliable. On all my Atlas turnouts, I solder short flexible lengths of wire between the thin point rail and the adjacent stock rail thus ensuring the points have a solid power connection. Never had a problem since.
Simple solution. Spend the money, invest in Tortoise switch machines (or equivilant) and give life to those dead frogs. No more headlight flicker and solid performance. No way around it.
His words were: If by any chance you should break a Code 100 throw bar, replacements are available from Atlas (Item #500001, Throw Bar for HO Switch Points, $1.50 for a package of 6 plus shipping).
Jim Miller
Atlas Model Railroad Co., Inc. and Atlas O, LLC
378 Florence Ave.
Hillside, NJ 07205
USA
(908) 687-9590 jmiller@AtlasO.com
There are a lot of varying opinions on the whwole Atlas vs. Peco issue, but I’ll give you my experiences, and let you judge.
I began scale model railroading in the 1950s, with brass rail stapled to fiber tie strips. Reliable, but prone to warping, and with all the cleaning issues of brass rail. After a hiatus from railroading in the mid-Sixties, I started out again, as many do, with Atlas Code 100 Custom-line switches. After a brief foray into the Shinohara Code 70 world in the 70s and 80s (successful, but expensive and not really durable, as well as not allowing flanges larger than RP25), I came back to the Atlas. This went on for quite a while, until I started having problems with them:
The points: Too flimsy, and pivoted with these really ugly rivets, which over time start to lose electrical conductivity. They also are usually wide in gauge when closed.
Guard rails: The check gauge is way too wide. They don’t perform their fuction of pulling wheels clear of the frog point, and require a filler piece of styrene be glued onto theior faces to narrow the check gauge and correct the problem.
4): Frogs (plastic): rounded points, required by the wide guard rail check gauge to try to prevent wheels “picking” the frog point. Shallow filler in the between-rail space, to prevent wheels dropping in the overly-wide gap between the closure rails and the point, which causes cars/locos with deep flanges to bounce up when crossing the frog, thus contributing to derailments.
Frogs (metal): These cast metal frogs are unpowered, which causes any short-wheelbase loco to stall when crossing them at slow speed. To power the frogs requires extra wiring. They are also often not level with the other rails, which can cause any unsprung steam engine to rock ‘n’ roll, and sometimes derail. Filler issues still present.&
Thank you so much for your wonderful advice. I wanted to limit wiring. But I think the Peco is the answer. I am doing a modular layout. I had thought about the Peco Cd 83. If money is more, I do not mind paying if less problems of maintenance. I think it is worth it. What are your thoughts about the fragile nature of code 83? I move a great deal because of my career. Would code 83 be too fragile for a lot of moving? Otherwise, Peco cd 83 looks as best option. If fragileness is a concern, then we go to the Peco Cd 100 insulfrog and do the wiring. Please respond with your expertise.
It is the Peco electrofrogs that require additional gaps/insulated joiners and wiring. An insulfrog should just drop in with no special wiring. The insulfrogs are the ones with the issue of shorting across frogs area. Easily fixed with some finger nail polish - but it makes the “dead” area bigger.
WCU boy: First off I don’t think the breaking of throwbar rods on Atlas switiches is an issue. In nearly 50 years of experience with these switches I have never even heard of this happening. That includes extensive use with hopped up aftermarket switch machines intended to give the turnout a real snap.
As noted by others the real weak point of these turnouts is the hinge, and when and if problems develop, the jumper wire is your easiest cure.
The isolated frog will give contact problems with short wheel base equipment or operations at low speed. I operate “old time” equipment so this is a real issue for small steam engines with limited pickup area.(and this is defintely a lack of contact issue rather than shorting out, as meters indicate an open circuit, not a short) You indicated that you are planning a switching layout, so this may be an issue for you when operating over ganged turnouts at very slow speeds.
The problem can be fixed with a ground throw or switch machines with extra contacts, or with the snap relay used with the standard Atlas switch machine. If you look at either side of the metal frog, you will see small holes which are placed there to allow you to attach a contact to the frog, which you can wire to aline polarity of the frog with the direction it is thrown in. these contact strips and screws to secure them are sold separately by Atlas,(sorry don’t have the part # to hand, but I have bought them separately from Atlas in the past) or included in the snap relay. Several of the Atlas manuals illustrate how to do this, and a call to Atlas should also get you the info you need. At any rate this system eliminates the dead frog.
What I would suggest is trying a turnout or two of both makes. This will allow you to evaluate what you like and don’t like about both. At any rate you’ll probably experiment with many types of wiring and turnout set ups over the years
I seriously fretted the Atlas vs Peco issue before I started my layout.
I was told that Peco’s are available for not much more than Atlas, but it seems to me the comparison was only valid if you paid too much for Atlas and got a real good deal on Peco. Comparing retail to retail and discount to discount, Atlas switches seem MUCH less expensive.
I ended up purchasing a couple Alas turnouts and installing them into an old layout I was playing with to test them. They seemed to work just fine with my limited selection of locomotives.
I also operate regularly on a layout which has some Peco electrofrog turnouts. I do believe the Peco’s look better. I also believe cars and engines roll over them with less clunking and rocking.
I found Atlas turnouts much easier to get than Peco. There is a good LHS nearby where they made an initial large order for me, but they always have a few turnouts of each type available.
In the end, I selected Atlas and saved $$$ and aggrevation. So far, I am still happy with my choice. When I installed the turnouts, I did add jumpers from each point to it’s stock rail - I used about 1.5 inches of 30-gauge stranded decoder wire in a loop which lives in a 3/8 inch hole drilled through the bench below each point. So far, I have not been tempted to try to power the frogs at all.
I used caboose industry ground throws. I did try turning the throwbars around on a couple turnouts, and it is doable. If you’re careful, you wont break anything. I found a better solution, however. I actually trimmed off the T shaped end of the throw bar, and used a short length of floral wire to link the throw bar to the ground throw. I bent the wire in a U shape, with one end poking up through the hole in the center of the throw between the points, and the other leg of the U poking up through the hole in the ground throw. I had to enlarge the hole in the ground throw slightly wit
After on and off modeling since the 1950’s using mostly Atlas turnouts, I decided-after much research-on using Peco Electrofrog Code 83 #4 & #6 for my “retirement” layout. They look great and operation is silky smooth. I could not be happier with these switches and highly recommend them.
I’d be more than happy to e-mail you a picture of the jumper wire installation … IF I had an e-mail address to send it to (none in your profile) !!! [;)]
There are a lot of great posts here from very knowledgable people, but ultimatly, it is your choice. The best advice I’ve seen, and whould also suggest, is to purchase a couple of each, maybe even “used” ones from off Eb*y, to test. Used ones will give some idea of wear characteristices(maybe unreliable-because you don’t know actual “wear”).
Now, My [2c], I use ONLY Atlas code 100 switches, (with the exception of 3-way and curved), and I have never had a problem with switching tie bars or electrical contact. I model in HO scale, 90% Modern Diesel(1949-1990’s), 7% Electric(AEM-7’s), and 3% Post-War Steam(Pennsy K4-“Excursion train”. I think a lot of the problems that some people have is with using their older production models. Most newer products DO conform to RP-25 standards, and have little or no issues with flange depth clearance. As for some Atlas switches being “out of Gauge”, well, I guess that could be, I have never experianced it. Another consideration is Are you using DC or DCC? with DCC you MUST make sure you don’t accidentally create a short cuircut that could damage your VERY expensive Booster or Signal Generator. IMHO Atlas switches are foolproof, on the other hand, my shinohara curved turnouts are a bugger to use with DCC, I almost changed my track plan after several days of “figuring” how to make them work without fry’n my decoders.
The above comments are strictly my OPINION, and should be used at your own discretion.
An afterthought, Are you modeling for Function or for Apperance? I think I saw in your post that you move around a bit, If you’re modeling for Apperance, you might consider Shinohara/Walthers code 83, they do look good, but seem fragile. If you are modeling for Function, and you DO move around a good bit, SERIOUSLY consider Atlas code 100. Worst case senerio, you completely ruin a $12.00(in my area) switch, and replace it with no hassl
Just tap the hole carefully with a 2-56 tap and insert a short brass screw from the bottom side. Wrap a wire under the screw head and tighten it. Cut or grind off any screw shank that protrudes up from the eyelet. The frogs appear to be aluminum - won’t take solder. Sometimes they come loose too. Just glue them back in and check the height with a straight edge.
Have you considered Micro-Engineering turnouts? They snap like Pecos and dont rely on a mechanical connection for point electrification like the Pecos do. They also include a switch stand (albeit simple) and have correct NA geometries. To top it off, they run about 17-20 dollars each.
Keep in mind ME turnouts are very fragile - I had a few and gave up after rails popped up from ties (scale-sized plastic spikes) and loose point rails.
Every time I ride Amtrak to Chicago, you wouldn’t believe the “clunking and rocking” you get over mainline turnouts, especially on NS. [swg] I think the clunking and rocking noise is quite prototypical, as long as everything stays on the rails.
I’m using Atlas code 83 wood-tie flextrack and the #505-506 Atlas code 83 no. 6 Super-track turnouts exclusively on my layout. Also using Caboose Industry (N scale) #206S ground throws on them. I agree with a prior post that cost, availability and support (Atlas’ Customer Service) has sold me on this approach.
While the new Peco 83-line is awfully tempting, it is certainly high-$$$ compared to Atlas’ KISS approach. In my case I already had 16 of the Super-track turnouts and a whole case of Atlas flextrack on hand when I started my layout, so a no-brainer with regards to keeping with Atlas. However, YMMV so if you have the cash Peco’s new code 83 may be in your ballpark.
Just keep in mind that there is quite a few large, basement-filling layouts out there operating just fine with Atlas products - you have to decide where you want to invest the greater percentage of your budget. Me, I’d rather spend it on buildings, scenery and more rolling stock.