Happy Tuesday all!
I currently model O [Lionel Fastrack] and N [Atlas/Kato Track] scale, and am considering a modular HO scale layout. What brand of track do you recommend? What brand of turnouts [I’ll use ground throws], and why?
Thanks in advance for offering your opinions/experiences!
Dan
As far as track, Atlas and Micro Engineering nickle-silver. For turnouts, I’m a Fast Tracks (FT) fan. Smooth and more realistic looking; without the ugly and noisy insulated frog and rivets.
I purchase my FT turnouts and crossings from eBay. They come already assembled, painted, and wired and are about the same cost as a Peco turnout.
And, since you will be using ground throws, Caboose Industries makes the 220S ground throw for switching the polarity of the Fast Track turnouts.
Tom
Are you looking at a track with attached roadbed (like Fasttrack) or seperate track/roadbed?
When I returned to the hobby I went to a MRR store where the owner had a piece of flex track from several different manufacturers glued to a piece of wood hanging on the wall. I ended up choosing Walthers/Shinohara track and turnouts for two reasons. One I liked the look of it and the other was I preferred the stay where you put it flex properties of it verses the springy type flex of other brands. I also liked all the curved turnouts that Walthers has, it can be a space saver on a layout. I have many on my layout.
It is really a personal preference thing so look at it all and decide.
Brent[C):-)]
Hello,
I like Micro Engineering track,
Holds its curve, more realistic scale size, and can be had for about the same price of Atlas track and their turnouts cost less than Peco turnouts.
For HO, I use Atlas code 100. It’s cheap and from a normal viewing distance, looks as good as anything else.
Enjoy
Paul
Dan,
My old layout had Atlas code 100 flex track and Atlas ‘Customline’ turnouts for the most part. A few Shinohara curved turnouts as well. It was rock solid operation and the cost was very reasonable. Our club layout has the same combination of track and performs equally as well.
The new layout that is being built has Atlas code 83 flex track and Atlas code 83 turnouts, with some Walthers-Shinohara code 83 trackage as well.
Two friends have basically Walthers-Shinohara code 83 flex track and turnouts(with a few Peco turnouts). All of these products will perform well if you lay your track with care!
That said, I do like the ‘look’ of M-E track, but the high cost/availability and the limited selection of turnouts(#6 left & right) really turned me off.
Peco has a nice line of American style code 83 track, but again the cost may scare you off.
If you are looking for an integrated track/roadbed system, the Kato code 83 Unitrack system is nice, but is limited in turnout selection again. If you go with the Bachmann code 100 EZ Track system, there is more flexibility. Just make sure you buy the ‘grey’ roadbed trackage with n/s rail. The ‘black’ roadbed trackage has steel rail. I have a test track of Bachmann E-Z Track and it works fine for my test track at the workshop bench.
Jim
I’m looking for a more prototypical look for this project. Thanks Joe!
Great suggestions from all; thank you!
I was thinking about ME due to their pre-weathered track. I met the PECO guys at Grand Rails and they seem to have good products; albeit expensive. You guys gave me a lot to consider; thank you again!
Dan
Don`t use the weathered track…it will not take solder well…I use the non-weathered track and then air brush it after all track work and wiring is done.
I’ve only used Atlas code 100 flex track and PECO turnouts exclusively.
If you are using foam board for the top of the layout you should seriously consider Peco turnouts. The turnout motor attaches directly to the turnout and is powered by 3 wires. If you want directional lights there is an auxillialy switch which attaches to the turnout motor also powered with 3 wires.
The reason I mentioned the foam is because you install this from the top and you need about an inch deep hole for both motors.
I’ve never installed a slow motion switch machine but it is done from underneath the layout and that was enough reason for me to pick Peco. Plus they also have linkage that has to be propoerly aligned.
Actually you can’t go wrong with what you choose. It all works. It just comes down to personal preference as you can tell from the variety of answers…
Good Luck
Bob
Joe, there are several varieties, as you now know. I don’t know if you are aware of Proto 87? If you are really keen on good looks, and fidelity to the real world in scale, it doesn’t come much better. It is costly. There’s also always laying track yourself with ties you cut and glue into place.
I use Altas Code 83, but I also have Peco Code 83, both rails and turnouts. I have made my own turnouts as well. If you place them properly, all of them perform well, barring the odd glitch or error in assembly.
You have expressed an interest in the Micro Engineering tracks. Many love it. It does require some learning though, to fashion the curves. It is ‘stiff’ flex track that doesn’t bend into a nice curve easily unless you have some experience, maybe some forms against which you can press the ties to get it to bend properly. It is worse with the pre-weathered track because the paint acts like fine sand paper against the spikeheads. That stuff is a bear to bend.
Crandell
Good to know about the ME track; thanks!
Dan
Since you already use Unitrack for N, you know the advantages it has. I’d go with the HO Unitrack for your new layout. It uses narrow-profile code 83 track that looks quite realistic, and allows you to test things out and make changes.
The LION (if you have not guessed by now) does it differently.
Yup, him uses Model Power flex track. Why? It is cheaper than Atlas, it also holds a curve while you work it. The ties are a bit finer too. And oh yes, did I tell you it is much cheaper. The only stinger on that price is Trainworld only sells it by the 100 track box. But then my layout gobbled up three of those boxes so I have no complaint coming to me.
Did I say ROAR
It is very much a personal preference thing.
I go with Walthers for three reasons:
The tie thickness varies between different types of track. This difference in thickness can cause track railhead height to be different. For Walthers structures that use track (roundhouse, turntable, transfer table) I recommend you use only walthers so the heads line up properly. Otherwise you’ll be doing some sanding on the ties.
I like the live frogs on the walther’s brand turnouts. (Good for my 0-6-0 and 0-4-0 switchers)
I need double slips for my passenger terminal.
Warning: Walthers brand is pricey. My double slip turnouts were $80 EACH!
Like LION, I used Model Power (actually GT from Italy) Code 83 flex track for my current HO layout mainly because it was significantly less expensive than any other brand of track. I was pleased to find that it looks quite nice, too. Unfortunately, I think I also bought the last of it from Trainworld a while back as they had no 100-piece boxes left and could only dig up a couple of 25 piece boxes. I have noticed that Trainworld no longer includes Model Power Code 83 flex track in their ads although they still offer Code 100. I recommend building your own turnouts using PC board ties and Fastrack tools and jigs. Though I did buy a #6 frog/point filing tool, I chose to make my own jigs out of plywood (again to save money). It is amazing how much better trains track through these handlaid turnouts than through commercially produced turnouts on my old layout. Plus, I like seeing the look of disbelief on people’s faces when I tell them I built every single turnout on my layout (about 50). Best yet, I learned to build curved turnouts and could also build any desired diverging angle. You need a #5 1/2 turnout? Build one! It also proved less expensive to obtain rail stock for my turnouts by breaking the rails out of pieces of flex track rather than to buy bare rail in bulk.
I decided on Atlas code 83 flextrack and Walthers-Shinohara DCC friendly turnouts (including isolated frogs that can be made live via my Tortoise switch machine aux connections), plus a couple of Atlas crossings, on cork roadbed. As someone noted, the tie thickness is different (Atlas code 83 is more like code 100 top of rail height, so a shim (0.015" syrene or a piece of the turnout box cardboard) under each turnout is adviseable but relatively easy to include to get the rails aligned vertically. I really liked the W-S turnouts selection, using curved ones plus #'s 5,6, and 8 in various places. I had my track plan finalized, and ordered most of the turnouts during the Walthers Jan-Feb annual track sale (get their flyer if you don’t) at about 19% off (MBKlein, modeltrainstuff.com, prices are usually somewhat better, if they have the ones you want). My LHS, not so close, had few turnouts in stock and the flex price was very high. I bought the flex from MBKlein, where price for 25 pieces (I think I bought 75 or 100) was pretty good.
I plan to paint and ballast the track/roadbed, so the ties visual (color) mismatch will not be an issue for me. If I remember correctly, many note that the Atlas and ME flextrack behave differently when curved, the Atlas being very flexible and the ME, I believe (I haven’t used it), requiring more of an energenic bending, which it then tends to hold. People like both, but you may want to consider whether that issue would affect your decision. The specifics are covered in some older threads. I found the trakc pretty easy to lay, using caulk as many do for both the cork roadbed to plywood as well as the track to cork.
I had only one problem so far (with several months of running) with a W-S turnout, where one of the internal jumpers to an outlet (diverging) rail was not connected. It was easy to remedy with an extra feeder jumper to that piece of track. I should have continuity tested e
There was an issue with Walthers/Shinohara curved turnouts about six or eight years ago. Nice turnouts, but their advertised inner course radius was high by about two or three inches over what they turned out to be on my layout, and others reported the same dismaying experiences. I don’t know if it has been fixed, or if it extended on either side of the six #7.5’s I bought, but they were all the same; about 22" inner course radius rather than whatever it was they said it was. I had to butcher all of mine to widen them so that they came close, but never actually met, the minimums I had hoped they would meet for my plan.
So, take this for what it is worth: if you think you might like to try a hand-laid turnout from a reputable seller, and it is of the Fast Tracks kind, try a curved one if you need one. I can guarantee you will be happy with it. I am not the handiest person, but I made several of their #8 turnouts using their method and jigs, and soon realized that I could generalize the technique to virtually any other turnout I could ever want. So, I built two without templates, only the NMRA metal track gauge, and they both worked remarkably well. In fact, the curved #9-or-so was good enough that I lifted it intact from the roadbed when I tore down my last layout and I have it working for me on the new one.
Crandell
One brand of track you rarely see mentioned is Precision Scale Co (P.S.C.) – a line of flex track (not easy to bend, and rather like Micro Engineering in that respect). It also looks a little like ME track.
The one product that PSC offers that is unusual is flex track with a superelevation build into the ties (plastic nubs that extend below the tie) – to transition to flat you could nip off the nubs progressively or super elevate the next piece of track in the normal manner using tape or strips of wood and transition to flat. I use ME or left over Atlas for my tangents, and PSC for the main line curves.
Dave Nelson