is this N scale track i have?

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

im still blindly muddling along laying track on the 4x8 best as i can but ive found
out i have 2 kinds/brands of track.

i thouhgt i only had atlas standard N track but last night i was in shop feeling along with my finger for any bad places and i found one. some of you know im legally blind and for some dumb reason still trying to have a N scale RR anyway i find both sections are in joiner correctly its just this one section is bigger by about 1/32 and the top of the rail is very square. its a well built track
and has good profile from ends too. but does not mate to atlas without filing a bit.

i came in and gave magnifying glass to lesia and she says after looking at it. its “minitrain” i asked several times if she was sure its not minitrix. she says minitrains is what it says.

do i have some other scale/guage track here? if so im going to have to remove about 30 peices as i did not realize and find this before .ive scaled things back so i can have something in a RR by going with manual turnouts and very few blocks my sight issues are sure fouling me up bad enough without this .

ever hear of mintrains brand of track?

thank you guys, john

2

I haven’t heard of that brand, but the problem you may be having is that the two tracks may be different “codes” of rail. One may be code 80 for example and the other code 55. That would make the rail height difference you described.

3

different code . i bet so. i was just worried it was some other scale/guage.

to a well sighted person this track is much beefier and very square on top. nice track but not when its mixed in with the atlas.

thank you very much for the info. john

4

Beefier huh? Sounds like it’s a different code alright.

A different scale or guage would make the rail further apart or closer together. If height and beefyness is the only real differences then I’d say the code of rail is off.

You’ll still have to address the code difference issue as trains don’t run well on rough tracks, but it can be done.

5

i agree with pcarrell on this one.

6

as other people said it is probbably the code issue…

7

John,you have my admiration.I’m 54 and my sight has somewhat dimmed with time and I find this most annoying at times,so I’m much impressed by your determination.Should you need any info,please post your requests at will and I,along with many others,will be much pleased to help you.

Now for your track height problem…you have a couple of options here.First,I suggest that you find out how many of both track gauges you have on hand.It might not be worthed the effort for only a few pieces that are different.

Filing the track to mate with another one is one solution,but 1/32 in. is much for N scale and I feel that your trains may have a bumpy ride unless filing is done on a sufficient length to reduce the height difference to a very smooth change.

My way would be to shim the adjoining tracks to proper height so that very little filing is required after.I use different lenghts of paper that I install in staggered fashion to ensure proper seating of the track with a very gentle climb to the next track.Once I’ve determined the thicknesses and placements of the paper shims,I remove them then soak them with carpenter’s glue and reinstall them.Then I glue both tracks,taking care to align them laterally,and I put a straight weight over the joint and let dry overnight.Glue will shift slowly as needed,leaving firmly held and aligned track track joint.Since the joiners don’t fit,I solder the joint later to ensure good conductivity.It may not be everyone’s way to do,but this has worked fine for me.