Using Atlas Code 83 and have a STEP-UP to it from the TT. And step down of course going on the table.
What has anyone done? I am think og filing the Atlas rails down to match heights.
Should I have used another brand track for the approach?
A micrometer shows that the Atlas ties are thicker than the TT ties. xact distance of the Step-up.
Ideas please. Get this one correct and the other (2) are a piece of cake, Yea Right!
Hi George,
I ordered the same turntable, don’t have it yet, but my LHS owner told me that since I was using Atlas code 100 on my mainline and most other places, he told me to use an Atlas “transition track” from code 100 from the code 100 to the code 83 which is what is used on the turntable.
so from the TT to the roundhouse rails will all be code 83.
Atlas makes the “transition track” it’s code 100 on one end, and code 83 on the other. Hope this helps.
Ed
Taper sand the bottom of the ties of the Atlas track - slightly more from the tie closest to the turntable, a little less from the next one, etc. I would not recommend reducing the rail height. The longer the taper the smoother the transition will be.
Or shim up the turntable from underneath to match the Atlas track. Filing the top of a rail head is going to look a little funny if the difference is more than a few thousandths, and makes the rail top a dirt magnet. Again, much easier (IMHO) to do the adjustments on the underside of the track or turntable.
I understand Atlas Code 83 track has thicker ties so it will match Atlas Code 100 track, which would make it higher than most other brands of code 83 track.
My thoughts, your choices
Fred W
The specs I have on the Atlas 130 foot TT is that it uses code 83 rail, so George shouldn’t have to make any changes, or did Atlas change the track code on the latest batch of 130 ft TT’s?
Ed
Thank you for the input.
All of the railroad is code 83 atlas Except for a few (15) Walthes turnouts. The Walthers are the EXACT same thickness as the TT. THe difference is the ties. Since the problem is the Bridge track I can not shim the TT. What I did was Remove the ties from a 2" piece if Atlas sectional track (the parts from their kit) this is the only sectinal on the RR except for some rerailers. That gave me JUST the rails on the lip of the TT NO TIES at all.
This is where the mismatch is between the RAILS from Atlas and the TT from Walthers. That is why i am stumped and may resort to taking rails off a Walthers brand diamond and use that to match the rail heights.
I will mike the rails tomorrow on the 3 tables and find the closest rail hight to mate up to them I guess.
I THOUGHT it was he ties also till I looked at the TT ring again. That was my OOPS in the post wording, sorry! With 60 stops among the 3 tabels this can be a royal pain.
The killer is that A:: the engines EXCEPT the Challenger and the BLI Hudson do not have a problem with the STEP-UP. The trailing truck and the Centipede have a problem and the piolt truck on the Hudson has a problem. The OLD (1968) Y6b AHM could not car it was a jump iy still works fine.
That sounds correct to me - the Walters code 83 track uses a thinner tie than the Atlas code 83 track. As I said, I understand Atlas deliberately made their ties thicker to mate with their code 100 track. With ballast and Atlas products throughout, you would never notice the difference. But when you mix Walters and Atlas code 83 track, you have a vertical mismatch.
In the case of the Walters turnouts, the most common fix I have heard of is to shim the turnout up (post card or similar material underneath) to the matching height. In the case of the turntable, to shim the bridge track up, you would have to shim the turntable base, or remove the bridge track and shim and reinstall the bridge track. Depending on how you installed the turntable and how far along the installation is, shimming the bridge track or the turntable base may be impractical at this point. Which is why I suggested sanding and tapering the ties of the approach tracks. Either of these suggestions avoids the use of “transition tracks” which can be (but don’t have to be) klunky in looks and use.
The longer wheel base (especially if drivers are not sprung) locos will struggle more with a vertical misalignment in the track.
Hope this helps
Fred W
I didn’t realize there was such a difference in the two brands of code 83 track. Thanks for the info, so I’ll know how to correct this problem when I encounter it.
Ed
Fred, I bought some Micro Engineering flex track and will pull up all the lead tracks and roundhouse and garden tracks and relay them. The shimming of the TT is NG the brisdge ie perfect and do not want to mess with it.
The other option was to handlay the tracks. That was not for e since I never did that before and this old dog does not need anymore new tricks.[:)]