FastTrack is great but tubular maybe better

Classic Toy Trains Forum
21

It always amazes me that a BB that is so dedicated to the operation of Lionel Trains still has the majority of the people standing in the corner of a track system that was designed in 1915. I stated this time and time again, companies do not work backwards. Products designed in 2003 (FasTrack) can not be any worse than something made in 1915.

I am an operator and some like me choose to blend Lionel Trains with scale structures (like ALL Lionel showroom layouts of the past/present). I am not defending FasTrack, just trying to remove the blinders that a majority of the operators here have.

  1. Off the shelf look. Look at the difference between tublar and FT! No comparison. FT is 10x more releastic. “Fixed” up tublar could never look as good as a piece of FT. Does FT have unsightly UTC lockons? Closely spaced ties on FT with balast, and no need for extra $$ and about a hundred hours sticking wooden ties unrealstically next to metal ties and adding 20lbs of balast and glue.

  2. Every look at the tublar closely? The crest of the rails is rounded and thin! Ever look at FT? Its flat and wide! FT simply offers 10x better surface area for the rollers (all 3 rails). Check out a Lionel passenger car. Put it on FT and see the lights stop “flickering”.

  3. Radius and other options. Starts out at a much more realistic 36" curve. 5" doesn’t sound like much but it is. Does tublar come in 60" or just awesome 84"? 1 3/4" sections? (the list goes on) NO. Does tublar have Wyes? The options are FAR greater and WILL be growing with every passing year.

  4. The FT switches are the best part. NO light bulbs. It is so nice if fixed volatge is not being used on tubular switches. FT switches have LEDs. The truely BEST part is in almost 100 years, Lionel actually produced a switch that is the same height as the track it connects to! What a treat! Instead of seeing a 773 Hudson going over tublar/tublar switch connections and looking like a ro

22

Amazing. I think I’ll stick with “tublar”.

23

I think I’m with you.

24

[#ditto]Me too. Tubular.

25

Not me !! I want to get the Fastrack cause it costs a heck of a lot more & plus it’s very loud !! On top of that, it’s a lot more fun to try to make special sections & it just makes a whole lot more sense to me !! Plus you won’t find it in garbage cans either or see people throwing it away !! I really like it !!

Thanks, John

26

csxt30 - John, Can I have all of your GG track then???

27

Couldn’t agree more with LS1heli. I haven’t used ubular in 50 years so my memory may be weak on its benefits, but fastrack for me has been trouble free. I have a large temporary floor layout ( over 200 feet of track and a dozen switches - both manual and remote) and nothing ever goes wrong. I haven’t even found it to be particularly difficult to make custom pieces and have even drilled small holes in the side of the ballast to install undertrack on/off switches to control power on sidings.

28

Yes Tom, but wouldn’t you rather switch to Fastrak ??!!

Thanks, John

29

you know it’s really all in the eye of the beholder. I’m glad some people feel so strongly about Fasttrack because it’s nice to have options.

Personally, I think when compared to tubular with additonal ties and ballast, Fasttrack looks even more toy like. That plastic fast track road bed is pretty bad. But then again so is Realtrax’s.

Whatever floats your boat. I also stick with tubular until Super O comes back. (probably not in my lifetime unfortunately)!

Mike S.

30

Nothing beats Fastrak for floor layouts. Noise is not an issue when it is on top of carpet, and multiple assembly / dissasembly does not ruin it. The road bed protects the carpet from oil and the track stays together and electrical connections are always solid even on the 2nd or 3rd time it is reassembled.

Jim H

31

Three responses after mine and all they are in regards to is my fast typing. Just the type of responses I would have expected.

I am not defending any track system and I only buy Lionel products so I can’t speak about any of that other “copy cat” equipment. I am just generally tired of the O guage hobby working backwards and people giving others incorrect information (there maybe 28 post but hundreds have read). All it does is send a wrong message to the younger crowd comming in (that older things are better). Younger people are geared torwards the lastest items. New video games for 2006 (not Pac-Man from 1981).

There is nothing wrong when some one is passionate about old Lionel equipment or it’s operation. Do not get me wrong as most of my equipment is postwar and MPC.

I can’t believe the only response to my actual post is that “it’s easy to cut”. Cutting track because it is fun has absolutely nothing to do with operation of a train running over a rail and neither does noise or $ and are all poor excuses. I am interested in running safely and reliably Hudsons, F3s, and Js. Not out in the cold garage cutting pieces with a Dremel tool. I don’t cut pieces any way so that never mattered to me. Also if you buy intelligently from mail order houses FT is not that much more than O gauge. $2.30 vs $1.49. Thats $.81! Not $500.00 like everyone makes it out to be. Most of us here and people who operate do it usually no larger than 8x8 which is an affordably sized pike. I’ll work a coupler hours of OT to get the extra $.81 and better hassle free operation. I have been running O gauge for years. The amount of noise it gives off is about the same. The FT has a more hollow noise. People who use the it’s louder excuse make it sound like the difference is walking from a library to a KISS concert.

Also I thought that the goal of this thread was about operation. About 99.9% operate here. So forget about my comments on the look.

A

32

When you write like you are the authority & your way is the only way, I believe you can expect responses like that. I was also into R/C helis & planes for over 30 yrs. & when I see writings like that, it reminds me why I quit R/C & went back to trains again. My buddy & I were just saying how much we always like the other guys layouts, or the trains they have or the track they use. We don’t believe one is better than another. I had a layout before with traditional track & Gargraves. Now only Gargraves & will put traditional track on the lower level later on. Same with Postwar & MPC & modern, I like it all till I see a writing like that.

And don’t send me a nasty email like some one else did once …

33

“A post stating I prefer to operate tubular and not FT because it reminds me of memories and it’s what I had as a kid would have made me not even write my first post.”

aye yi yi.

Top reason I prefer tubular?

It reminds me of memories of building the Christmas layout with my Dad every year.

Personally, I don’t know that the fact that I consider tubular to be my track of choice for nostalgic reasons makes me a bad guy. I’m in this hobby, not so much because I am attracted to today’s trains, but more so because it has fond memories for me. WhIch is why I only run post war Lionel trains. I grew up with tubular, and for a number of reasons, I like it better.

First reason - stated above.

Another reason - price. I have boxes and boxes of tubular track and switches. I bought some new - mostly o42, o54 and o72 switches for my layout in progress, because all we had as a kid was o31. I have hundreds of feet of tubular track and I have added to it with new tubular which was made 60 years later - sonofagun - they fit like a glove. I’m not going to spend $100.00 on a fast track switch.

Another reason - tubular is considerably more foregiving than fast track. If you need to cheat a bit on a fit - tubular is your friend.

Another reason - fast track is considerably bulkier. Lots less space to work with when you use fast track.

Another reason - I like the sound of tubular. I like to hear my old steamers click clack over tubular track - personal preference.

As for protrounding lockons on tubular, just solder the wires into the track crease from underneath and you’ll never see a lockon.

Fasttrack “ballast” is molded plastic. If you ballast tubular track correctly it looks better - but again - that is just my opinion.

Fast track appears high, which strikes me as needing to build up to it.

All in all, I’m sticking with tubular:

<

34

I own a Model AA, love to take it out and drive it. People always come up to me and say, “they don’t make cars like they used to”. I always answer, “I’m sure glad they don’t”.

I hear you John, even though I still like my tubular. Now if Lionel considered changing the color of the FT roadbed, they might convert me.

Rod

35

Yep, that’s about it. Tubular is my choice too. Lasts a long time. Has memories. Easy to put together, time after time. No roadbed to distract from it’s looks. Runs quiet on carpet. Looks good around the Christmas tree. AND makes fantastic layouts.

36

I totally agree with, and fully endorse, this post. [:D]

37

I’m the guy that made the original observation LS1Heli, so let me elaborate at the risk of annoying someone!

I knew nothing about Lionel a year ago, except the name and reputation. My son gave me a set for last Christmas or was it the one before? However I had had Hornby O gauge clockwork as a child but most of my previous train experience was with a large OO layout(s).

Anyway I loved the track that came with it and when it came to buy a switch I bought a FastTrack one and would have kept on buying a piece or two as funds permitted BUT (they didnt) I found a box full of tubular for $5 so I bought a transition piece and said “I’ll just use this old stuff for a siding”.

Well it wasn’t long before I switched to laying down the tubular first and then finishing off with the FastTrack because running on an uneven floor full of furniture it was much easier to wiggle around chair and table legs and so on, to get the track where I wanted it rather than it making me conform to where it would prefer to go. Out with hacksaw and pliers and away you go, shorter piece? No problem! Insulated section? Ditto.

Another thing too, the steel in the tubular is much more solid, the rails are probably going to last longer, get FastTrack wet and it rusts like the dickens but funnily enough what I like about tubular is the sound it makes, it sounds like rails should complete with ‘clicketty-clack’ over the joins.

However as I said in my original post FastTrack looks great, it goes together without lacerating you, the switches are a marvel and if I had loads of money to spare I’d definitely go for it and then of course I’d also have a proper layout on benchwork too. That aint happening, its carpet central for the foreseeable future.

FastTrack is a wonderful product but tubular is more flexible - quite literally - and the price is right. Bring FastTrack down to the price of tubular and I’ll keep buying it.

38

Fast track looks good but I still say that tubular evokes the traditional feel of a classic toy train layout. There are actually a number of advantages of tubular over fasttrack, the most important to me being that the rails can be easily removed from the metal ties and bent to shape. Also, wood ties can be substituted for the metal ties if you so choose. As well, real ballast instead of plastic ersatz variety, can be added. All in all, the advantages point to tubular.

39

Thor, did you know there’s a difference between American and British “clicketty-clack”? American rails are 39 feet long and laid with staggered joints; so the “clicketty-clack” alternates from side to side. This also gives the cars a tendency to sway rythmically. British rails are 60 feet long and laid with the joints aligned.

Sometimes old American jointed track is taken up, ties and all, for reuse on sidings. But first the joints must be aligned by sliding the rails through the spikes, to make manageable sections. Then they are left that way.

40

About 90 % of the track on FEC here in Florida is 30 or 40 foot sections laid down with concrete ties & welded together, this style seems to be the newer track arrangement, not all railroads do the same thing. Sometimes on sidings there is the old wooden ties but mainline track for FEC is concrete ties, still using the old ballast method for raodbed.

Fastrac may be the newer system but would cost me a lot of money to change over to, also would have to change my layout do to the curve radius differance. Instead of 031 I would be using 036 and instead of 042 I would be using 048 curves.

I am using Lionel tubular track and GarGraves track and will stay with these for now!!

Lee F.