Seems to me that by the time you add cork base and more ballast, Kato and Atlas may be pretty similar in price. The flexibility, appearance, and adaptability of Atlas is another story, of course. But strictly on price, is there a big difference , all in?
itâs hard for me to imagine doing a layout with sectional track.
5 Likes
What @gregc said plus appearance. âActualâ ballast looks so much better, IMO, than molded plastic ballast.
4 Likes
Iâm using HO for this comparison, but it is similar for N.
A cork base is not strictly necessary. But if you want it, it is often $1 a yard. Maybe $2 if you only need a small quantity so buy it individually. 3ft of Atlas flextrack is $8. A thing of ballast might be $10, but it will go much much further than 3ft. So ~$10.
According to my calculations, a straight Kato Unitrack for 3ft is ~$9. But remember, you donât have the flexibility here, so youâll be forced to have more leftovers and build your layout around available track geometries, which adds cost. With flextrack, you can limit leftover pieces since you can reuse them anywhere â not so with roadbed-combo track. Those extra costs are not included.
Then there are the non-cost things to account: far greater flexibility with Atlas (literally â flextrack is something I couldnât imagine making a layout without anymore. If youâre not doing a temporary layout, I personally donât see a reason to use sectional track.), better look and scenic options, and far more options in the long run should you want to change or update something. Whether those matter to you is up for you to decide. Personally, even if it is $1 more per 3ft, the flexibility is well-worth that and is ultimately cheaper in the long run.
7 Likes
Welcome aboard, @Elephant
2 Likes
Well it depends on what you use for roadbed and ballast. Kato is a fixed cost. But if you bulk buy cork and cut it yourself you might be able to save some money. Use something other than small packages of model railroad ballast.
What it really comes down to, is what you want to do. If you want the ease of using Kato or other sectional track then go ahead. You can always fill in special places with some flex track/roadbed/ballast if needed.
Even though I use flex track I keep some rail and ties on hand. Because some places are easier with hand laid track.
Paul
2 Likes
I have been told over and over by other model railroaders; Rule #1: Itâs your railroad, do what you want to!
But, full disclosure, I like flex track and the actual ballast. 
2 Likes
I prefer Atlas True Track code 65 for my N scale layout. Track is track, pretty much.
2 Likes
Which is why I use Atlas N scale code 65 and add my own ballast over it.
2 Likes
Iâve used both, donât know in the end if thereâs really much difference in price. Comes down more to ease of construction and easy reliable operation with Kato. Donât have to worry about the subroadbed warping and kinking the track, no electrical problems. Plus, with flat-top benchwork, you can try out an idea and see if it works before making it permanent. Iâve had several situations where I was able to easily correct a problem with Kato track that would have been a chore with glued-down cork and flextrack.
Appearance in either is how much you want to put into it. Flex track with black ties and shiny rails and gray monotone ballast isnât especially realistic. With Unitrack, I like to color the sides of the rails with Neo-Lube (from the Micro-Mark catalogue) which gives the rails a flat dark gray color. Then I paint some of the ties brown and ârail tie brownâ (which is more of a dark gray). A wash of water/alcohol and a little black paint or India ink can make the Kato ballast look much better.
BTW not sure of your scale, but Kato HO Unitrack has code 83 rails that are very thin - I can use code .088 âsemi-scaleâ wheels with no problem. The rails are about half as wide as Atlas code 83, Walthers is about half-way between the two.
3 Likes
A few cents from an old school modelerâŚ
If you are building a realistic model railroad, its flex track, roadbed, and ballast or âlay your ownâ.
If you a building a toy train layout (ala Lionel / Flyer / Marx), then sectional track is the way to go.
I realize many folks do use Kato Unitrack, but the end result is - IMO - just not comparable to flex track, roadbed, and ballast.
3 Likes
I give Atlas code 65 True Track the edge for my layout (N scale) since it includes a nice and realistic ballast bed that you can add your own ballast on top of. My layout goes through some rolling hills of Piedmont Georgia, so the track does need some lift on my particular layout. Atlas code 65 True Track does this quite nicely/uniformly.
3 Likes
I do find the Atlas code 65 True Track to be realistic.
Iâd say thereâs a pretty big difference between Lionel O track with three big tinplate rails and very few ties compared to Unitrack HO with near-scale width code 83 rail, ties with woodgrain detail, and ballast that can be added to and colored to make it even more realistic.
When I started in the hobby (1971), âseriousâ model railroaders hand-laid track (code 100) on wood ties. Flex track was seen as maybe a tiny step above Atlas snap-track - both were really just for beginners or kidsâŚâtoy train layoutsâ as it were.
I do think since the OP calls themselves a ânewbieâ, they might be better with Kato or one of the other âclick tracksâ. I have to wonder how many folks tried model railroading but quit because of the difficulty of doing the cork - track - ballast set-up.
1 Like
Exactly. Sectional track like Atlas True Track code 65 is great for layouts that are going to be based in a bit of a hilly or more vigorous terrain. It saves a lot of hassle.
1 Like
Just a minor linguistic pointâŚâsectional trackâ usually refers to model track that has ties and rail, made to specific length straights and curve radii. Atlas Snap-Track for example. Normally, one would lay cork or other roadbed for the track to rest on, and add ballast to it.
Track made with an integral ballast strip under the ties (whether itâs meant to actually represent ballast, like Kato or Atlas, or made to be ballasted over, like Bachmann), is generally called âclick trackâ, since the track pieces click together to make a solid connection.
Since the OP is a self-described ânewbieâ, I would recommend click track. Note too that in N scale, Kato has a huge array of different Unitrack pieces - wood or concrete ties, single and double track, crossings, crossovers, even curved piece with built-in superelevation.
1 Like
Like I wrote, Iâm an âold schoolâ modeler. Sometimes I fail to realize its a totally new world out there, in so many aspects.
That said, I do subscribe to the mantraâŚâItâs my railroad and Iâll do what I wantâ. So whatever anybody does is just fine, and know that I do appreciate that they are in the hobby!
2 Likes
Being an old school American Flyer guy as a kid, I used American Flyer track on a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood on my basement floor.
When I transitioned into HO scale in 2004 after a long layoff, I used sectional track on a 4x 8 sheet of plywood on four 2 x 4 legs, no ballast or scenery.
Then, I got serious and built a larger layout with Atlas flex track, Woodland Scenics foam roadbed and ballast, and finished it with ground cover and some trees and bushes.
Later, I built an even bigger layout with yards and sidings with flex track, cork roadbed, real stone ballast, lots of realistic scenery and a fully prototypical look and design.
No serious modeler is going to use sectional track, fake ballast, etc. mainly because it doesnât look prototypical and it is too restrictive. But, there is room for everybody, at all skill levels in this hobby, from newbies to experienced modelers to seasoned veterans.
In the end, Rule #1 does apply.
Rich
2 Likes
Ya but thereâs that attitude again that I think can cripple our hobbyâŚâus âseriousâ model railroaders do blah-blah-blah and everyone else is just playing with toy trainsâ. I think Atlas track, with itâs super-wide ties, super-wide rails, and big nails in the middle of the ties, doesnât look all that realistic - even if youâre not using âfakeâ ballast (which I assume means youâre using actual crushed rock?).
I find Unitrack less restrictive actually. Someone glues down cork roadbed, glues track on top of it, then ballasts itâŚthen realizes it would work much better if the track were 2" farther from the edge of the backdrop. Gonna take a lot of work to tear all that up and start over. With Unitrack you can try everything out first, and only make it permanent when youâre sure itâs right.
2 Likes
Nope, I was referring to Unitrack.
Didnât say that. Itâs not an attitude, itâs a distinction between âserious modelersâ - - that is, those of us who are trying to replicate the prototype in some way and those of us who simply enjoy ârunning trainsâ. Itâs not meant as an indictment of anyone in the hobby who is not a rivet counter.
As I said previously, there is room for everybody, at all skill levels, in this hobby from newbies to experienced modelers to seasoned veterans. The notion that newbies exit the hobby or never even take up the hobby because of elitist attitudes is simply not true. How would anyone even know that to be true unless a survey were taken? Seasoned modelers is a reference to those of us who take up the hobby and take it to a higher level. That happens in every hobby and, for that matter, every sport and every endeavor. It is simply a progression by those with more intense interest as opposed to those with more casual interest.
Rich
2 Likes