Peco vs. Atlas Turnouts

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

It has been recommended to me by more than one modeler to use Peco turnouts as much as possible. Assuming Peco is better (I’m new at this)… what is it exactly that makes them better than Atlas?
JaRRell

Thank you all for the information. I better understand the mechanical differences in the two but, as usual, the electrical part has me a bit confused. I don’t understand the difference between a powered (is that the correct word?) and an unpowered one, whether they’re Peco or Atlas. Is this a reference to the turnout opening or closing with an electrical switch vs. being manually thrown? Or does it mean there is electricity continuing through the turnout from the tracks on one end to track on the other end of the turnout? What would be the reason a person would choose a “Electrofrog” rather than an “Insulfrog” type? I’m using DCC.
Again, thanks for the education!
JaRRell

2

I can’t comment Atlas’s regular turnouts as I haven’t used any yet but their “Snapswitch” types are cheap and their quality matches their price.

Now I use only Peco turnouts.More expensive indeed,but well designed and reliable.You can get them in both “Electrofrog” or “Insulfrog” types to suit your needs.

3

Peco are smoother to run over, and make less “clickity clack”. But they are expensive. Almost twice as much as the atlas. My layout uses all atlas and as long as you have them hooked up to a switch machine so the points dont move, they work fine. I have almost 50 atlas turnouts on my layout and the only derailment problems I have are with out of guage wheels or the occasional low coupler. I’d say save your $$$ and go with Atlas.

4

I’ve used both Peco and Atlas and am currently using all Atlas remote controlled turnouts on my N scale layout. HO products should be similar.

The Atlas points sometimes don’t like to stay closed and cause derailments. The tips of the points are almost always a little blunt and a few minutes with a small file will improve the reliablity immensely. File the tip to a sharper point and also file the top corner of the point at a slight angle. This prevents the wheels from picking the points. Also check the stock rails where the points contact them. You might need to put a little recess in the stock rail for the points to close into, or enlarge the recess if it’s already there. This usually doesn’t affect the straight through operation but dramatically improves the diverging route reliability.

Peco has internal springs that keep pressure on the points to hold them tight to the stock rails. The Peco switch machines are similar in operation to the Atlas and the points ‘snap’ over and stay closed. Some modelers who use Peco with slow-motion machines like Tortoise remove the internal springs so the points will move in a slow, realistic fashion and not ‘snap’ over. The Tortoise is designed to hold the points against the rails.

The Peco machines also have an accessory switch that adds additional contacts for controling panel lights, signal lights or power routing. Atlas doesn’t have an accessory switch that is integral with the switch motor, although they have separate extra cost relays that can provide additional contacts. When wired together with the switch machine, they can perform functions like the Peco machines and switches, but not as well.

The Peco turnouts also seem to have better, smoother action at the pivots of the points. Atlas turnouts sometimes wear rapidly there and it makes the turnout sloppy. It usually doesn’t cause derailments, but it can. Murphy’s Law will apply. These pivot points can often be tightened up by lightly hammering on the r

5

First of all, Darrell, Atlas now makes turnouts without the machine on the side. You no longer have to have those unsightly black monsters along side your turnouts.

With the Atlas (undermounted) machine, you no longer have to worry about the points falling away from the stock rails since the machine will hold them tightly in place.

I fear you are confusing the two. It is the Peco machines that require an adaptor in order to power accessories (eg: panel lights, signal lights, etc). NOT the Atlas machines.

[quote]
QUOTE: Many modelers also think the Peco turnouts look better and are more prototypical. They do look good and they don’t have big, black machines hanging off the side of them. There are no known methods to properly disguise an Atlas switch machi

6

HO Scale.

I’ve had the “traditional” Atlas code 100 turnouts. Quality is not that great. The “switchpoints” (the rails that move) are thin stamped sheet metal. After a while they become misaligned with use. Filing the end points helps. The price is good, but I would never recommend them to modelers that run trains frequently.

I also own Peco turnouts. Big difference in price and quality. Both higher. Switch points are thicker and less prone to warping or misalignment. That spring does make a big difference. I’m about to build a layout and want to minimize problems. Price is an issue nowadays, but my attitude has always been “Pay a little more now, for less of a hassle later”. I plan on going with mostly Peco “American” Code 83.

Our good friends in England “Got it Right!” with these turnouts.

Several years back my wife’s cousin built a layout. All of his turnouts were Atlas. He ran long trains 3 to 5 times a week. Within a year the turnouts became derailment and electrical trouble spots.

In all fairness, I’ve heard more positive feedback about the Atlas Code 83 turnouts, but I don’t own any. Would be good for those of you that have these turnouts to post your feedback about them.

Cheers.

7

I have both on my layout and the Peco does appear to be a better made product. However, I have had problems with the rail configuration at the frog on about 30% of my Peco’s. The rails at the frog in some cases are too close and cause a short circuit to occur when metal wheels are used.

As a clarification, I am using the Peco Insulfrogs

8

Hmmm… well that is interesting. Thanks for the information WilmJunc.
JaRRell

9

I have some atlas switches that are over ten years old and have been on three lay outs and still work fine,I had one peco switch and it lasted all of one month,then I had to solder jumpers on it.[xx(]
[#ditto][#ditto]
JIM

10

We have both Peco and Atlas turnouts on our HO scale club layout. Peco turnouts are machines to much closer tolerances than Atlas and are much higher quality. Atlas point rails, for example, are usually stamped. Peco’s point rails are machined. Peco frogs are shorter than Atlas and don’t have a big blob of plastic on the frog to cause dead spots.

Contrary to what one person wrote above, we have never had a short on a Peco turnout when using metal wheels on anything. Peco’s are power-routing turnouts, which means that the frog polarity changes according to the way the turnout is thrown. Atlas frogs stay the same polarity-- that’s why they have so much plastic covering the rails to prevent shorts.

Peco turnouts to not need a motor of any type if they are close enough for you to reach and throw by hand, because they have a locking mechanism and are easily thrown by hand. Atlas must have a motor or ground throw to hold them in place.

As far as cost is concerned, I have found Peco’s to be just as cheap as Atlas Custom Line turnouts if purchased from http://www.cchobbies.com

Sorry, but this is for HO scale only. I have no experience with N scale turnouts, but the Atlas ones I have seen appear to be very poorly made.

11

Well, I have both Peco and Atlas code 100 turnouts on my layout. I have had a lot of electrical problems with the Atlas product and I have experienced the dreaded metal wheel shorting effect on the Peco product. A little nail polish or paint applied in the right place takes care of the wheel shorting problem. The Atlas electirical problems seem to stem from the rivets used to hold the points to the rest of the turnout. They get sloppy and loose contact. This problem is worse when running DCC since the decorder tends to shut down and “reboot”. With DC the locomotives flywheels will often “coast” it right through the resulting dead area. You will get all kinds of responses to a question like this so be prepared. Just remember, unless you are handlaying your own turnouts, you get what you pay for.

Cheers,

12

I’am sorry about upsitting any one,that was on peco I had,it might of been a bad one its been a number of years ago,My pockets are not deep enough for pecos.I guess they are just fine

JIM

13

The wheel shorting issue is one of the reasons why there are electrofrog turnouts. Basically wider wheel treads cause a short circuit at the frog where the rails of opposite polarities are right next to each other and the gap is momentarily bridged by the wheel. In regular DC no problem, in DCC the booster trips. Solutions are to isolate the frog by double gapping or to use electroforg turnouts and power route the frog.

Jarrell, you will want to study switch wiring so that you have it cold. Know about: power routing turnouts, dead frogs, powered frogs, where to gap etc. It isn’t that hard (if you can do photography, you can do switch wiring). Once you have the theory, it all is a matter of deciding which will work best for you. I use the electrofrog, but it is more work…

Look at Allan Gartners “wiring for dcc” site for some basics as well as Joe Fugates DCC thread. Everyone refers to Allan’s site, but it is important to remember that he is on the extreme end of the DCC spectrum…Many people don’t go to the lengths that he does and have reliable DCC layouts.

As for the turnouts, I think you know how I feel about this. IMHO Peco are just a better product, higher tolerances, better materials, solid instead of stamped rails etc…Most of the problems people have on layouts in terms of derailments are caused by turnouts… I have never regretted buying the higher quality and not having to think about it again…Did you regret your Nikon???

14

I’ve got both Atlas and Peco machines, code 100, on my HO layout. I’ve also just installed some Peco switch machines under some old Shinohara 3-way turnouts.

NEITHER of these turnouts/switch machine combinations contains the extra contacts for signals or indicators. (For the Atlas, I’m using the standard surface-mount snap-switch motors.) Both are AC/DC powered twin-coil systems. From my experience, both of them work a lot better with a capacitive discharge circuit than with straight transformer power.

Atlas does make an under-the-table mount, but it only has about a 1-inch, maybe 1.5-inch, shaft. The machine itself must be mounted horizontally, and it’s a good 4-5 inches long. With this short shaft, it can not be mounted beneath a 2-inch foam layout without a lot of hollowing out. It seems to be designed for 3/4-inch plywood with roadbed, and nothing thicker.

The Peco system connects the points to the switch machine with a rigid bar linkage. Atlas uses a thin springy wire. To manually throw the Atlas, you need to puhe little lever built-in to the top of the machine. To manually throw the Peco, you can just puhe points over and the switch machine will follow. The idea of inverting the Atlas machine is interesting, but if you do that, you will not be able to manually throw the turnout - it will be electrical-throw only. Likewise,the Atlas below-the-table can not be thrown except with power.

The Peco switch motors fasten solidly to the bottom of the Peco turnouts. This makes alignment a non-issue, and provides a very solid throw every time.

If it were not for the cost, I’d use all Pecos. They really are that much better. Still, I can’t complain about my Atlas turnouts. In fact, I have a lot of old brass-track snap switches from the 60’s. I’ve bought manual snap switches in NS for my layout, and I am re-using the 40-year-old switch machines. They’re free, “pre-weathered,” and I haven’t found a bad one yet.

15

DCC FORUM CLINIC link … http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?page=1&TOPIC_ID=36389

16

Lol… “…Did you regret your Nikon???”
Heck no, you get what you pay for… [;)]
JaRRell

17
18

Thanks Joe, I’ll read it!
JaRRell

19

Thanks for the comments and opinions. I have a lot of reading to do. I just came back from the LHS and I was looking at the ONE Peco switch they had in stock. To my inexperienced eyes, laying it on the counter beside an Atlas switch, the Peco seemed to be more … what would be the right words… more solid and its movement a bit more… heck… more exact, I guess you could say. I like the way the throw bar (I think that might be what its called) clicked into place.
But hey, I did see the price and I can understand why a lot of people use the Atlas… [:)]
JaRRell

20

There seems to be a lot of ‘mis-information’ here:

ATLAS

o - Code 100 ‘Customline’ turnouts do not have switch machines with them. And the
current production has ‘metal’ frogs(for at least 20 years now). Really old turnouts
had plastic frogs like the train set ‘Snap Switches’ do. The last time I can remember
a Customline turnout with plastic frogs was in 1969(in the black cardboard box,
remember?). The Atlas turnout is DCC friendly.

o - The ‘down side’ of Atlas turnouts is the loose rivets, and the stamped points. Both
are fixed by a little ‘up front’ work before they are laid.

o - The code 83 line has both ‘Customline’ and ‘Super Switch’ versions.

PECO

o - The code 100 line is available in ‘Eletcrofrog’ and Insulfrog’ designs. The
Electrofrog version has sold metal frogs and needs to be ‘gapped’. They is not
DCC ‘friendly’. The Insulfrog has an insulated plastic frog, and is ‘sorta’ DCC
friendly. PECO has a nice ‘spring locking’ feature for the points - no need to mount
a ground throw.

o - As mentioned, the plastic insulating near the top of the frog area is not very
wide, and sometimes engine wheels will ‘short’ across the two divirging rails. Some
folks use ‘nail polish’ to paint that area if a problem arises. Also the code 100 line
is not US prototype in appearance(but not too bad).

o - Code 83 - new ‘American’ prototype looking line of turnouts. Available in both
Electrofrog and Insulfrog - just not a lot of various ‘geometries’ available yet. Also,
these new turnouts are ‘pricey’ - I have not played with them, but I would expect the
same quality as the code 100 line. Also the same possible problems in the frog
area on the Insulfrog versions.

The modular club I used to belong to use