What do you like, Bachmanns E-Z track or regular track? Im thinking it could be easier, and ballast can be added around the edges for a reaslistic look.
Thanks,
Grayson
The Bachmann EZ Track is all I use. Using appropriate scenery and fine ballast it’s hard to tell it from regular track when done properly. I use all nickel silver track on the mainlines and mostly nickel silver on the spurs with a piece of steel track here and there. I hear some saying that they have nothing but problems with it. I say that if it’s put down properly and maintained properly, it will last a long time and give trouble free operation. I have no problems with mine. Most of it is over ten years old.
I like the E-Z tracks themselves but hate the switches. The points are always loose against the stock rails and six wheel truck locos and some types of freight cars aways seem to pick the points. Have you seen this also, Jeffrey, or am I doing something wrong?
My [2c]? Neither choice… If you’re looking for a sectional type track, and don’t want to use separate roadbed, etc. then I would use Kato Unitrack, not EZ Track. I have tried the three main types of plastic roadbed track (Atlas True Track, Bachmann EZ and Kato Uni) and Kato is by far the best. It has a semi-realistic look to it, is Code 83, and the switches are great. Exceptional engineering compared to Atlas or Bachmann switches. Plus, Kato makes matching ballast for the track, so your idea on the track edges will work great.
Word of caution though, it is a bit more expensive (worth it in my opinion), and you have to deal with the strange metric type measurements of the track. You’ll see what I mean if you check the stuff out. Even so, it isn’t that difficult to understand.
It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish, what level of realism you’re seeking and how much (or little) work you’re willing to do to achieve bulletproof track that looks like what the prototype uses.
E-Z Track (and other ‘built on faux ballast bed’ tracks) can be assembled quickly, will form accurate curves without kinks and require no cutting and fitting. OTOH, they are somewhat pricey and, due to their rigidity, do not permit use of proper horizontal or vertical easements.
‘Ties only’ sectional track can also be assembled quickly, requires more care to avoid kinks in curves and is slightly more flexible vertically - which is good if you have grades. It does not lend itself to proper spiral easements and does have a lot of rail joiners (aka potential electrical problems.)
Flexible track is less expensive than sectional track, but is tricky to work with. Once you tame it, it can form proper horizontal and vertical easements and minimizes the number of rail joints. It also allows the use of non-standard (26.5 inch, for example) curve radii.
If I wasn’t comfortable with my own system I’d use flex for straight and spiral easement track, and ties-only sectional track for curves.
What is my system? Flex track, modified as necessary for prototype appearance, with hand-laid specialwork (raw rail on wooden ties.) Properly ballasted and painted, modern flex looks as good as hand-laid track. Building my own turnouts allows me to shape them to the requirements of the track plan without regard to commercial design constraints. However, I wouldn’t recommend this method for a first layout. It takes time and practice to develop hand-assembly skills - but the results are very worthwhile.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
File the switch points so that they blend smoothly with the stock rail and you’ll see a big improvement. Also make sure that the wheels on your locos and cars are centered in the trucks.
I built my last layout using EZ Track and I ended up hating it. Here’s why.
It drove me nuts that the track was too high for the structures. AS you can see, the dock is about 1/4" too low for the freight cars. All the docks were too low as compared to the track.
So I rebuilt the layout to correct to the height.
The process took a long time And when I got done, I had a track that was the height of the docks, or in other words, the same height as flex track is to start with. Except now, the track is plastered solidly into place. The problem is that EZ Track turnouts fail. they are easy to fix, unless you have them plastered into place.
I got tired of the broken turnouts.
IF you are just going to throw track on plywood and don’t care that the cars tower over the docks, EZ Track is okay. But the more realism you want to add, the more EZ Track becomes a liability.
For me, I reached the point where I ripped out a nice layout because I couldn’t stand the problems with the track.
I think I’ll go with E-Z track. I already have some and really like it. Thanks for the help.
What is “Regular track”?
FOR ‘sectional track’ with roadbed KATO seems to consistantly get the most ‘raves’, and Bachmanns EZ track the most complaints, on this forum.
I use neither.
I’M GUESSING Bachmann’s price has something to do with it. Once in place, you’re stuck with it.
Whoops, I made an error. I meant sectional track. I have some of it and really like it.
By “regular track” I mean sectional track, the type with just rails and ties.
Grayson
tomikawaTT :
What is ‘Ties only’ flexible track? I am unfamiliar with it. Who makes it?
Could this be Central Valley tie strips?
I often wonder about the argument that the EZ Track or the Kato Unitrack is pricier than the sectional rail and ties track. I have not run the numbers and don’t intend to, but when you consider the cost of the roadbed, the ballast, the glue, and all the other factors involved with purchasing the sectional track, and then the time involved with laying and wiring it, as opposed to laying and wiring the roadbed track, even if you ballast the edges to blend them in, I wonder if the true total cost isn’t close to a wash.
If you want your EZ to look other than toy track, you have to ballast it. If you want it to match your structures as above, you have to build up the landscape. EZ won’t quite do what you think it should so you will have to cut pieces of track to make them fit
I averaged 45 minutes per turnout with a file to get them to run right. All servicing of turnouts has to be done from underneath (and you will have to) so you’ll have to pull the turnout and surrounding pieces of track up–unless you cut the tabs off. As mentioned above, it doesn’t do elevation changes well.
In short, it is easier in the beginning then gets harder as you try to do more.
Flex on the other hand is far more versatile and easier to work with.
And the Kato Unitrak, which plays to rave reviews? Besides, even spending 45 minutes working on a turnout may still make it all a wash.
The advantage of snap together track (Kato or Bachmann etc) is you can take it apart and make a different layout. If you are going to go with a ballasted track I think you are better off with Peco flex track and Peco turnouts. The flex track and ballast is going to be more demanding and require more work and more tools, more bottles of stuff, more commitment. I had a Bachmann snap together (did not try and ballast it or scenery it or put down structures) and then went to a fairly large (21’ x 13’) Peco wall shelf setup. Both have been satisfying. The pleasure is in building it for me, although I like to run trains too. The way I did things was eductational and I got to experience both systems, but it’s not inexpensive. This is not an inexpensive hobby.
One thing you might want to consider is that later on, if you want to add flex-track, the EZ track is too high for normal HO roadbed (cork or WS). But one of the advantages of EZ track, especially if you’re going to run large wheel-based locomotives, is that they offer radii that are very close to 34"-36", which will accomodate almost any large power or long rolling stock. I started my Yuba River Sub with EZ track fixed wide-radius curves, and on certain sections, especially my wide radius curves on cliffsides, it’s still there. I had to adjust the flex-track to meet the height, but that was fairly simple with using WS foam roadbed–building up the HO roadbed with N scale roadbed underneath.
It’s good stuff, it takes ballasting and weathering very well, and if it isn’t up to Rivet Counter standards, at least I haven’t had any of my big articulateds or my 85’ passenger cars taking a dive off 4’ onto the concrete of my garage floor.
It DOES, however, need a bit more in the feeder-wire department, at least as I’ve found. And soldering the sections together doesn’t hurt, either. I don’t know about the turnouts, since I never used them–I bought the large-radius EZ track simply because I got tired of watching the kinks in my curved flex track, no matter HOW careful I was.
I’ve used it for fixed-radius curves on the Yuba River Sub for the last seven years, and haven’t had any problems at all. Good stuff, IMO.
Tom
Methinks you’ve combined two of my definitions; “ties only SECTIONAL track” (Atlas Snap-Track and its numerous clones) and FLEX track (36", or 1 meter, lengths of track that can be bent.)
When I suggested combining the two I meant (for a typical 180 degree 18’ radius curve) four sections of 18" radius snap-track, with flex attached at the ends to form spiral easements and carry on into the tangents with a minimum number of rail joints.
I’ve long since learned how to force flex track to take a desired radius, a spiral easement or a tangent that doesn’t resemble sidewinder tracks, so I don’t use sectional track.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Gee…why do think Model Railroader magazine used KATO unitrack as opposed to Bachmann or Atlas unitrack in their special series of 4X8 HO construction article. It surely wasn’t because of cost.
Buy what you want though. Its your money/time. Nobody’s gonna laugh at your layout…well except maybe me of course[:)]
I have totally gone into Kato Unitrack.
I even have a Digitrax DS64 via Loconet driving these Kato Unitrack switches with very simple set up. Those switches for me were self contained and dont stall engines on my frogs.
Now when one considers the cost of the Kato Switch combined with a DS64 for each set of 4 switches, plus the power supply for each DS64, it really makes you plan your track to get the last bit of multi-use out of them as possible. Multiply that by 16 switches planned and one understands it is a budgeted hobby, NOT CHEAP.
THen again my neighbors drop 30,000 dollars on a trailer and a lake fishing boat without batting an eye and buy a 50K pickup truck to haul it. but we are off the topic here…
Here have a look at my small corner of the internet and get your Kato Fix:
http://s181.photobucket.com/albums/x173/fallsvalleyrr/
The only thing I have done was file down a rail beyond one frog that was out of gauge and evaluated using woodland scenics for future grades with this track. So far, it is trouble free.
I will say that when I derail on this track, it is because there is a flaw with my wheels, rolling stock or something… not the track. The only thing is the track is too shiney, but I can weather those very easily when the time is correct.
The structures I own will need to be placed onto Midwest Cork Roadbed sections around the foundations so that the docks will match (Or nearly so) the track level with the added benefit of that you can vary the scenery a little bit.
Bottom line, I have evaluated sectional track. Bachmann track is ok for train set but fail over time. They are built too cheaply. I wont even address the other brands of pre-formed sectional track.
Kato Track has satisfied me very much and the only thing I can see with them is lots of feeders due to voltage drop (When 6+ feet from power source) and regular cleaning of the track.
I al