I have moved down to N scale from HO mainly because in my room size I want to run longer trains in the same size space. The lay out is an L shape about 12 by 17 feet and generally 3 feet deep. I am still on the fence of what type of track to use either code 80 or 55 and have a bunch of questions on the track.
How well do the tortoise switch machines work with N scale Atlas turnouts? I was going to use atlas mainly because I can afford them better then Peco.
What is the performance of Code 55 vs Code 80 Track? Does a lot of rolling stock have issue with the smaller rail of Code 55? Are there more derailments since the rail is smaller and less survace area for the flange of the wheel to apply pressure to stay on the tracks, especially on a curve?
What brands of rolling stock and engines do not work well with code 55 because of the lower profile of rail?
I had some track issues on my HO layout with the flex rail, where after I laid a section, the sliding rail moved a bit and I didn’t know it and when the next section was placed, & I had to cut the existing rail, I ended up cutting the rail about an 1/16 to 1/8 short and a gapped formed and I didn’t know it. This happend mostly on the curves. where the inner rail is always longer then the exterior rail. What is the best way to prevent this?
I was orginally thinking that I would Code 80 but Atlass has a much larger selection of Code 55 radius curves and was thinking about using them since the snap track would solve my problem above and then just use the flex for straight aways and little bends in the track path. My really only concern then was the wheels and performance of the smaller track.
When I built my 10’X14’ N scale layout, I used Micro Engineering code 70, preweathered flex track. If I were building it today, I’d use Atlas code 55. It looks good and the rail height is closer to scale and they have a variety of turnouts available, Micro Engineering only offers #6’s. The Atlas requires painting, but that’s a small price to pay.
The issue with the code 55 is the flange depth of some rolling stock. The tabs the clamp the rails to the ties are large enough to contact the flanges. Microtrains now includes low profile wheel sets with all their products. It’s not really an issue with motive power or rolling stock with metal wheel sets.
Properly gaged and weighted cars will run fine on code 55. I run 40 plus car trains on my layout with metal wheel sets on all the cars with no problems.
When joining flex track for a curve, I prefer to solder two sections together while they’re laying straight, then form the curve, letting the inner rail extend. Then I’ll cut the rail to meet the next section on a straight run. It prevents kinking in the curve. I don’t cut ties out at rails joints either. I like to trim the clamping tabs of the ties and insert the rail joiners over the ties. It requires a quick hand when soldering, but a good iron and some flux speeds the process and prevents heat damage to the ties.
I’m currently ‘playing’ with Code 80 in using several lenghts of flex to get the hang of soldering & using flex track.
From what I’ve learned so far, Tomix N-scale engines, specifically the Thomas the Tank engines have a problem with code 55. I do not know if this is true for all their engines, but could be. They hit every rail and make a nice little machine gun noise as they drive over everything thup-a-thup-a-thup-a style.
However the Kato and Bachmann engines have had no issues and I’m sure other will chime in with all the other brands that work as well. I believe the ones that have the most problem with Code 55 are the japan only models from Tomix that many of us crazy types import using eBay or others.
The best success I’ve had with making a wide sweeping curve with flex track is what was said above. Solder the track together while straight, bend to shape, and then cut off the end. Though occasionaly in my experiments I’ve snapped off a multitude of ties because the soldered joint/rail joiner will slide and then start ripping off the ties if you just gung ho bend it real quick without looking (oops)
I’d recommend either getting a few pieces and doing some test runs and see if it works for you before going the multiple pieces route. When I was younger my friend and I built a HO track using a book & buying the pieces they said to buy. We didn’t solder (didn’t know any better) but derailment was king on a lot of that because of all the little expansion spots especially in the winter when things tend to shrink up (non-climate control garage)
When soldering flex track into curves I found that the above method yielded poor results for me. I found that by soldering the beginning of the curve to it’s adjacent straight track, then bending and securing it (latex caulk ROCKS) about 99% of the section of flex track, then removing a tie, clipping the long rail short to match the other rail, slipping the joiner and next flex track section on and soldering it all up before securing it the rest of the way and moving on works well for me. You should end up with curves like this: http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j319/pcarrell/Autumns%20Ridge/7-17-074.jpg
As to your other questions…
It’s mostly older loco’s and rolling stock that have pizza cutters (oversized flanges) that have most of the issues with wheels hitting the spikes on the ties of the Atlas code 55. This is not an issues for the Atlas code 80. The problem is the oversized flanges, not the track. The Atlas code 55 track meets NMRA RP25 specs for flange depth. Cars are an easy fix. Just throw in your favorite low profile wheelsets and the problem goes away. Older loco’s need to have the wheels sets changed out (see Northwest Shortline Co. for help on that) or you can just mill down the flanges. Provided that this issuse is addessed you should have many miles of troublefree running. Most newer equipment is already RP25 compliant and so there are no problems to start with.
Atlas code 55 track works well with Tortise switches and Atlas has an under table switch machine available thats made just for that track. You can also go with Caboose Industries ground throws or you can do the old push-pull cable for manual control options.
Not wanting to thread jack but one thing I always wondered, can you use the Tortise machines + the caboose throws to make it ‘look real’ but still be lazy and not get up if you don’t want too?
For ‘fake’ switch stands there are cheaper, and more realistic looking things you can use. It seems I remember an earring stud with a sequin as one. Here is another example: http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=1974
The Caboose Industry throws are huge. scalewise, in order to be useable, if you are using Torti, you don’t need that.
You wouldn’t want to use the ground throws along with a tortise as the one would work against the other. As Jeff said, make a fake ground throw if you want to go with the tortise.
