In David Barrow’s series of articles on domino modules in Model Railroader within the last two years, he alluded that he did not like to use code 83 track with the modules. He prefered to use code 100 track because the code 83 had vertical deflections after he glued the track to the lauan plywood. What does he mean by this? Does the glue make the code 83 ties rise up and down after gluing? Have any of you experienced this problem with gluing code 83 track to your roadbed that you are using or have used. Please explain the problem to me which David is alluding to. I would appreciate some honest responses.
I think it’s a jab at political correctness. I think he’s referring to derailments.
Apparently David doesn’t like code 83 spiked directly to Luan Plywood. His preferences for code 100 is apparently for it’s higher resistance to deforming when spiking into 1/2" wood roadbed. David does not like Homosote as it deforms from moisture absorption!
When I told him wood was too noisy, he responded “Railroads are supposed to be noisy!”.
Knowing his penchant for ‘double profile’ roadbed, I subbed dual cork - ‘HO’ on top of ‘O’ gauge (as I wanted Sound) which has worked out marvelously.
If the track was laid level in the first place, Code 100 and Code 83 have equal performance - and, under ordinary HO rolling stock, no vertical deflection that can be measured without very sensitive precision instruments.
I have been using Atlas code 83 flex, and haven’t noticed any deflection or derailment problems. OTOH, if you use a real spike maul to hand-lay your HO track, Code 83 rail will develop vertical kinks sooner than Code 100. That, it seems to me, is a good excuse for learning the proper technique.
At various times, I have hand-laid Code 100, Code 83 and Code 70. I learned not to try to spike directly into plywood. Soft pine, homasote, and, presently, cardstock over foam are easy to spike, so a gentle touch will do it.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with flex and hand-laid specialwork)