Moving slowly through my “last layout” I am ready to begin some track laying. I have two helix’s leading to an underside yard and train storage. I have quantities of Code 83 and Code 100 track and turnouts from the previous layout.
Just to reasure myself using the Code 100 in the Helix and Hidden areas might insure better performance and less derailments.
True or False?
If your track is well laid there shouldn’t be any difference in reliability between code 100 and 83. On the other hand, I would use the code 100 in the helix and hidden areas and the more “prototypical” looking code 83 for the display areas.
Joe
Thanks Joe-
That’s what I had in mind but, no use in discarding all of that 100. I prefer 83 for the rest of the layout.
Larry
Just make sure the transition between the code 100 track and the code 83 track is smooth with no bumps. Do some research on transition rail joiners and joints. I would solder the rail joiners at all transitions to make sure they stayed in line.
Georgia Trains: our club layout is pretty similar to that. All the visible trackage is code 83 or 70 handlaid, but hidden track uses Atlas Code 100 flex.
I have five staging areas, all hidden, and they are all laid with code 100 rail. There is no point in throwing out good track. I even have the mainline leads from the staging areas in code 100 running to an area where I transistion into code 83, but in locations where I can reach the joints easy for any adjustment. Has worked like a champ for many years with no problems.
Bob
My ‘Netherworld’ of hidden staging and thoroughfares is being laid with Atlas Code 100 (some of it being re-laid for the fourth time) and Code 100 specialwork. The visible world main track is going to be laid with Atlas Code 83, including quite a bit on concrete ties. Since the railhead-to-tie-bottom dimension of Atlas Code 100 and their Code 83 is the same, I simply connected them end-to-end with Atlas Universal rail joiners. The flex is anchored with latex caulk. I put a pile of steel angle iron across the joints between codes to assure that the railheads came out level - which they did, after the caulk set. That test section was laid two years ago, and has been in trouble-free operation ever since.
Any rolling stock that is happy on Code 83 will be happy on Code 100. Unfortunately, some rolling stock that runs on Code 100 may have issues with Code 83. If all of your wheels conform to NMRA RP-25, this won’t be a problem.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Thanks for all the comments to all. I am defintily going to use all of my left over code 100 and I have to even purchase additional track to complete the hidden area.
I am intrested in the use of latex caulk to anchor the flex track. Have you used the caulk previously? I like that idea over the use of Elmers glue. It seems the caulk may have more sound deading qualities than the glue and especially nails.
After reading about it when I first joined the MR Forums, I started laying track with latex caulk when I started building my ‘last in this lifetime’ layout about four years ago - wow, how time flies!
My right-of-way, from the bottom up, consists of cookie-cut plywood (or steel studs laid rain-gutter fashion, supporting tangents in the Netherworld,) a layer of caulk, thin (9mm) extruded foam (aka fan-fold underlayment, used under vinyl or metal siding,) a layer of grey caulk, a cardboard track template the width of the ties on top, another layer of grey caulk, then the flex track ties or wooden ties under hand-laid specialwork. None of my first-laid track, in service for 49 months now, has given me an iota of trouble, and my layout space is subject to extreme temperature changes and, usually, extremely low humidity.
If you call up my home page (click my name to the left) and type “latex caulk” into the Search block you’ll get sixteen pages of links to posts in threads on the subject. Just the first page pretty much covers everything you might want to know about using latex caulk - not my posts, but the threads in which they’re imbedded.
Hope this has been helpful.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with track and roadbed stuck together with latex caulk)