“serious” modelers from the 1940s (How to Run a Model RR) that are more into “operation” than looks. (note the signals)
2 Likes
“From the 1940s”. That’s 85 years ago. Doubt that you would see something like that built nowadays.
Rich
1 Like
In the 40’s everything was built from near scratch, modelers, even groups working on club layouts had to choose their priorities. Note the outside 3rd rail in the photo, just as non prototypical as no scenery.
While the term “serious modelers” has some sort of negative connotation to many, we don’t have a better term for those who are at a more advanced level of activity and standard in their pursuit of the hobby.
I am more than tired of all the “kumbaya” nonsense in this hobby and in the whole world today.
It is just a fact, some people are interested in a higher level of realism, some are not - and that is fine. But it is not an excuse to criticize those who are and who choose to talk about it.
There has not hardly been a “serious” topic on the modeling side of this forum in months. I have nothing to contribute to these “not so serious” discussions.
As for track, Atlas code 83 is not dramatically out of scale when compared to Walthers, Peco, ME or whatever, and makes an effective model when well sceniced.
Unitrak on the other hand is what it is, very expensive train set track.
The last sectional track on the market that had a reasonable prototypical appearance with a roadbed look was TruScale Ready Track. If you don’t know what that is, look it up.
Sheldon
1 Like
Wow, you said it better than I ever could. Kudos to you!
As for the state of the forum, it is disappointing that it is more about social media and less about modeling. I had hoped for better.
Rich
1 Like
perhaps not on the floor where you stepped over the track, but perhaps spend more/less $$ on track and save $$ on scenery and structures to focus on operation.
the other extreme, if you’re more into modeling, is to spend more $$ on track, scenery and structures, as well as time, for a moe realistic looking layout.
1 Like
Nonsense. There are no track nails in my Atlas track, and I don’t use the low quality cork on the market these days, and I’m tired of hearing about people who “change their mind” and have to redo stuff. That is what 14 year olds with 4x8 layouts do - experiment and learn.
Smart modelers do not ballast or paint track, yes I paint my track, until they have completely tested it.
Do what you want, stop criticizing those with higher standards and/or more advanced skills.
Sheldon
2 Likes
i always feel diminished when reading Sheldon’s posts that what i do is not up to his standards
1 Like
Why feel diminished? I think he brings a healthy dose of reality to the discussion.
Rich
1 Like
Why would you judge yourself against me? I have 55 years of experiance in this hobby and there are lots of people with higher standards then mine. I do what satisfies me, you should do what satisfies you. That is kind of the point of this hobby.
Sheldon
5 Likes
Phew! Lots of contrasting opinions here. My original question was whether Atlas is cheaper than Unitrack. I sure enjoy the discussion here, though. I’m a newbie to modeling, but have several other avocations that engender equally passionate discussions. You into guitars? Go post about Martin vs Taylor or Fender vs Gibson. Astronomy? OMG, the passionate battles over refractors vs reflectors or PixInsight vs AstroPixel Processor. I’m also trying to learn Spanish, so I’m treated to the Duolongo or Babbel camps explaining their program is so obviously better. Thanks for the many ideas you’re all offering. Rule #1 seems to rule supreme! Can anyone help me convince my neighbors that I’m running a model railroad, not just playing with trains?
1 Like
Why would you care what your neighbors think?
Sheldon
2 Likes
Cheaper or not, it is an apples to oranges comparison.
As a music lover and sound engineer who has no personal musical talent, I can full well appreciate the details of a guitar discussion but am in no way qualified to comment…
And I know considerably less about astronomy…
But model train track, I know a bit about that…
Sheldon
2 Likes
wjstix,
I took a minute and re-read your comments in this thread. Seems to me you put a lot of effort into analyzing the OP’s “position” in the hobby, and making a lot of recommendations for him, and for people in general who are at various “levels” of the hobby.
I don’t do that, I have no interest in trying to get into other peoples heads and tell them what is best for them.
I explain what I do and why, I explain what I have observed in 55 years of modeling and 10 years behind the counter of a model train store. It is up to the reader to digest that and decide if it is useful to them or not.
Sheldon
1 Like
why are you saying what you have no interest in? why waste your breath?
1 Like
To explain to wjstix my different approach in how I respond on this forum. He constantly challenges my responses as not being “sensitive” or “inclusive” or “understanding”, just as he challenged Rich in the same way for using that “terrible” term “serious modeler”. I do my best to politely, but directly deal in facts and empirical experiences. But I am not dancing around worrying about how each individual might “feel” about what I say.
1 Like
Oh I see. I wasn’t even thinking of the technicalities.
3 Likes
I use both Atlas turnouts and sectional track. This way I get the track arrow straight or curves perfect I also use ME track in certain areas.
3 Likes
Agreed. I use whatever suits my fancy at the time. The sectional track gets an evenly laid curve without any real effort. Flex track wherever things don’t line up perfectly. Hand laid track when I’m in the mood looks even better. Hand laid track really lends itself to putting down roadbed, starting the scenery, then coming back and laying the track.
I haven’t used the roadbed included sectional track because it costs more than I want to pay, and looks worse than any of the other choices.
Even in O gauge, the Atlas sectional track is much nicer looking than the MTH or Lionel Fastrack. But if I’m doing a temp layout (most of the time), I have a supply of 027 and O tubular track that works just fine. Could easily pretty up the tubular track by adding ties and ballast, but that’s only going to happen if I’m going to build scenery.
But it’s a personal choice, and what I choose others would not.
Fred W
1 Like
OK. So I just actually looked at a major online MRR retailer in order to try to put a comparison together. While you may have to buy larger quantities than needed going either route (i.e. a box of cork roadbed vs 9" of cork roadbed), I parsed the numbers down to the cost for 9" of straight track (8-15/16" in Unitrack). A two pack of Unitrack, which gets you all 3 - roadbed, track, ballast, costs $4.50 per 9" piece of track. 9" worth of cork roadbed, a 9" piece of Atlas track (based on the price per 6 pk), and a spitballed amount of ballast cost, gets you to $2.50 for 9" of Atlas finished.
$4.50 vs $2.50
Unitrack being roughly double the final cost, I would call a big difference.
Now, going back and re-reading this thread (and shaking my head as I do so), there may be a middle ground that is being overlooked. In my formative years in the hobby, I can’t tell you how many layouts I had put together that was section track laid directly on the OSB tabletop. If as wjstix says, you need to test and potentially change your track layout you can do so with ease. Once you have thoroughly tested it and are happy with the alignment, AND WANT TO, then mark the position and remove it, lay cork/foam/homasote/whatever, and re-lay and ballast, again IF YOU WANT TO.
2 Likes
OK a couple of quick comments / replies:
First, the OP identifies themselves as a “newbie”. Building a first layout, using something like Unitrack will make it easier for them to get started. Laying cork roadbed, cutting rails on curves, soldering wiring to rails, etc. are skills a newbie may not have.
Second, about that “serious modeller” stuff. I’ve used Atlas and Walthers code 83 flextrack on previous layouts. On my latest layout, I went with Unitrack in part because their code 83 rail is noticeably thinner than the other brands - about 1/2 as wide as some brands. That makes the track look more realistic, and allows me to use thinner ‘semi-scale’ wheelsets that won’t work on Atlas or Walthers code 83, which makes the cars look more realistic. So I guess you could say I did it because I’m a “serious” model railroader who want’s a realistic looking layout.
But, based solely on my track selection, even though I paint the rails and ties and weather the ballast, and add ballast along the outside, etc., I’m not a “serious” model railroader. That’s the point I was making. It’s fine to say you like this product or this method, but I don’t give someone else the right to judge the “seriousness” of what I’m doing.
BTW, I assume Norm Charbonneau, whose layout was featured in the June 2025 MR cover story, is also not a “serious” modeler due to his track choice?
3 Likes