I am wondering if any of you folks use Peco flex track? I am using Peco code 83 turnouts in my town area, and am wondering if it would be a better idea to use Peco here instead of Atlas. It seems like it would be an easier time fitting in all of the small sections between turnouts and such. Am I just being lazy? I know Peco costs more, but that isn’t really a concern right now. My track laying and soldering skills are the concern. What is your opinion? Thanks in advance for your time.
Corey,
The club I belong to we are rebuilding a new layout and we use all Peco flextrack & turnouts. The Peco is much easier to work with when laying curves as it stays in the shape you curve it to. Atlas seems to want to spring back straight when you let go of it. Peco is a little stiffer so you need to be careful laying it as it can show small curves laying it straight. We use a flat straight ruler to make sure we have it straight. The Atlas and maybe many other manufactures ties are usually thicker than the Peco turnouts so matching other manufactures flextrack to turnouts will not match & you will need to shim the turnouts.
Barry
Barry, thank you for your reply. I have about twelve turnouts in this area, so not having to shim every joint would be handy. I was also worried about getting the joiners to hold. I know that I’ll try to solder them, but as I said before, my soldering skills are suspect. I would like to have the option of not soldering every single joint. I have very few straight sections, so hopefully I won’t have to worry about getting areas perfectly straight. Thanks again. This is the kind of feedback I’m looking for.
I built my HO scale home layout using Peco code 83 flex track and found it to be a very good product that is easy to work with. Wherever possible, I also used Peco turnouts but had to resort to one Shinohara curved turnout and a couple of Atlas turnouts and crossovers because Peco didn’t make what I needed. The Peco rail foot is slightly narrower than Atlas rail and there is a slight height difference between the two brands.
I fastened all of my track with latex caulking instead of any type of nail to avoid having unsightly nail heads showing. Peco flex track does not have nail holes in the crossties like Atlas and other brands, which was also a plus for appearance.
I use Peco C83 on my current layout. I used Atlas c83 on the one before. The Peco track is for me easier to work with since it’s easier to bend it in to shape, then remove it, ad the latex caulk and then put it back whilst it keeps it’s basic shape. Atlas did not do that.
I’m also happy with the appearance of the Peco track and it looks better in pictures. In real life I can not say that I see much of a difference.
But for me, Peco was the cheapest alternative, I bought it from the UK directly which made it cost half as much as most other alternatives.
Magnus
I can only echo what the others have said, Peco track is very good. I’ve used it before and I can’t say anything bad about it apart from the price. I try to stick to the same brand track when I build a layout, it’s just easier for me in the long run.
I’ve build my layout with flextrack, Roco code 83 at first and now with Peco code 83. Turnouts are Peco turnouts or scratch build. I’ve modified the turnouts to make them more DCC friendly, and for critters.
BTW, the pic shows an older one. For more, look at turnout .
Wolfgang
The main consideration is the appearance of the track. Using the PECO will give a consistancy with the turnouts. This does make a differance if you plan to photograph your layout. If this level of detail is not a concern then buy the Atlas or whatever. At the Tehachapi club in San Diego we use a mix of flex brands. Walthers/Shinohara 83 for main line and Micro Engineering 70 & 55 for yards and spurs. These have smaller spike head detail than the Atlas. We hand lay our turnouts (7 & 9’s) because this gives us greater flexibility in laying out the track to follow the prototype arrangement. As a side we do use Atlas 83 in areas that will not be photographed extensively. We use code 100 in hidden and storage track. PECO large radius turnouts are used in some hidden locations because they are 60-inch radius. This is very convenient for coming off of a continuous radius curve. Their Medium (36") and Small (24") radius turnouts wouls be useful for layouts with those minimum radii.
Pro’s offering comparisons with top brands rate it favorably.- such as…
‘Better consructed’ than Atlas.
Peco 83 is of NMRA desingn and wth more realistic looking ties than their code 100 and 75 products.
Peco Switch machines are 'twin coil design, also under table mounting.
Peco switches are ALL ‘power-routing’, with plastic ‘Insulfrog’ for DCC users, or ‘Electriofrog’ for DC.
All ‘power routing’ switches must be fed from the points, as opposed to ATLAS & ‘DCC friendly’ which have all common rails jumperd & ‘HOT’.
Thank you for your opinions everyone. I think I will have to go with the Peco flex track to build my layout. I will use the Atlas track that I have on the far side where there aren’t many turnouts. This thing is going to get expensive!
The best USA price on Peco code 83 flex track that I found was Cherry Creek Hobbies in Torrington, Wyoming.
Yup, that’s where I bought all of my turnouts from!
I have the code 80 switches Peco SL-396 and SL 395’s. Will the Code 83 Peco work ok with the code 80 switches? I guess I’m surprised their flex track is 83 and not 80.
Thanks,
Mark
Why are we digging up dead threads? David B
And mixing up HO and N scale. The Code 80 is N scale, the Code 83 this thread was talking about is HO scale track.
–Randy