In the last couple days I’ve read a few remarks that Atlas and Peco track doesn’t match up 100%. What do you guys think? I was leaning toward Atlas track with Peco turnouts.
Thanks,
Aaron
There is a slight difference in rail height and width of the rail foot between Atlas and Peco code 83 HO scale track. Atlas code 83 rail joiners fit loosely on Peco track, and Peco rail joiners won’t fit onto Atlas track.
I use Atlas code 83 flex track, Peco code 83 turnouts and Atlas code 100 rail joiners on my practice layout. I haven’t had any discernible problems related to track compatibility or rail joiners, but it was suggested I try N scale rail joiners. I have the luxury of trying this since it’s only a practice layout, but I certainly want to resolve the issue by the time I’m ready for my real layout.
I’m running steam and diesel – admittedly the diesel has zero problems compared to the steam, which finds any irregularities in my track work. So far, these irregularities have been the turnout frogs catching front trucks on the steam locos, but a little filing has fixed the problem.
Experiment, if you can, to see what works for you.
bump
I have ONE Peco turnout on my layout, which connects up to code 83 Atlas and code 70 Shinohara track.
ONE Peco, ZERO problems with it.
If you’re going to use Peco turnouts, I would suggest just going with Peco flex-track. You’re already committed to the most expensive items anyway (Peco turnouts vs Atlas) and you’re guaranteed compatibility.