Hi. As various different track manufacturers all claim to adhere to NMRA standards does this mean that they are all compatible. I am building in code 83 HO and here in the UK Peco is the easiest to get but there range is quite Limited, no 3 way or slips ect. Is it advisable to stick to one manufacturer or is it ok to mix and match components that suit? Thanks. Chris.by
Everything on my layout is mix and match. I run track and switches from at least five different manufacturers and have had zero compatibility problems, but then I am using code 100 track. I understand that some tracks have a different profile below the rail level, that is embedded within the ties for additional strength or whatever. And of course each brand of sectional track will have its own proprietary method of fastening.But the LION does not use those.
I always use Atlas Code 83 flex track.
Recently, I bought some flex track at a local hobby shop that I had not visited before and I purchased five lengths of flex track. Turned out to be Peco. I had a harder time working with it and the profile of the rails was slightly different than Atlas. But nothing bad came of it.
Rich
You can mix and match as you like as long as the rail is the same code size. As a general rule, the code indicates the height of the rail in thousandths. (Code 83 = 0.083 inches high.) You will encounter differences in the thickness of the ties and should shim the thinner ones up (Micro Engineering) to match the thicker ones (Atlas), at least for about two or three inches. You also do not want to spike or nail the track close to the joints of different track because you could pull the thinner ties down and make a hump or vertical kink at the joint.
The most critical part is to make sure the tops and inside edges of the rails are smooth with no differences at the joints of different manufacturers track.
I use Micro Engineering code 83 rail joiners and solder those joints.
I use Atlas with Peco track all the time, and have mixed Shinahara turnouts in with it, keeping the above points in mind at all times, and I have not had any problems at all.
Using the various code 83 products, the height of rail will be the same, and the gauge between the rails as well. What will differ is tie thickness and rail cross section. Atlas is thicker through the web, and has a wider base, than Micro Engineering, and Shinohara/Walthers is in between. Atlas ties are also taller than the others. I haven’t used Peco, but have heard it has its own peculiarities.
If you go with varying the manufacturers of track, try different brands of joiners for compatibility. I like Atlas N scale code 80 joiners for most code 83 applications. The rail base on Atlas and Shinohara/Walthers 83 needs a bit of a chamfer (with one quick stroke of a mill file) for the code 80 joiners to slide on, but they seem to be easy to use across different brands overall.
Though NMRA RP-15.1 lists dimensions for rail of various scales and codes, these are recommended practices, and I’ve found that there are slight variations between manufacturers. On my home layout, I use primarily Peco code 83 American-style track, but for a couple of diamond crossings at angles Peco doesn’t make, I’ve relied on Walthers code 83. I find it impossible to get Peco’s rail joiners onto Walthers’ rail, and Walthers’ rail joiners slip loosely on Peco track. So for these transition joints, I use Walthers joiners and solder them on the Peco side. Where a gap is necessary, I cut one slightly farther down the track after soldering the joiner. I slightly file the railhead if I feel any unevenness in the join afterward.
There are also tricks you can do to mix track of different codes, such as flattening one side of a rail joiner and soldering the smaller-code track on top of it. The reason to bother doing this is because it makes a more realistic looking layout to use lighter rail on sidings and little-used branches than your main. But it’s not absolutely necessary, and using the same track together whenever possible will make assembling your layout a lot easier.
As Steven says, there are slight variations among different manufacturers. Trust me, the rails on the Peco flex track was ever so slightly higher than the rails on the Atlas flex track. Or maybe it just appears that way if the ties are slightly thicker. Either way. Whatever.
Rich
Hi all. Thanks for all your advice, I will definitely be looking at all manufacturers track options. Thanks for the alignment tips, top and inside edges must align. I will be very carefull of joins between different track makes. Again a big thanks to all who replied, this is exactly the information I was after. Thanks. Chris.
As long as the track gauge is 16.5mm you can mix and match commercial products with wild abandon. Connecting the various brands and rail sizes might require some inventiveness, but it can be done.
As far as limited availability of certain components, there is only one ultimate solution. Learn to hand-lay specialwork and roll your own. No need to wonder if brand X makes component Y - just grab the rail, ties and spiking pliers and attack with great gusto. Then, while your friend down the street is waiting for that backordered (fillintheblank) you can lay that curving yard throat of three way switches, all routes curving left, operationally check it and press on.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with handlaid specialwork, including puzzle palaces of multiple slip switches)