I am new to model railroading and I have bachmann ez track ho, set up with my mrc prodigy advanced dcc and was wondering if it would be better to switch to code 83 or code 100 track or is it possible to just stick with the ez track. I saw bachmann has some new track coming out in january for dcc and am wondering what is best thanx
EZ track is simple to use, however it does have a limited number of pieces. You’d be better off going with flex track and you’re favorite brand of turnouts.
Nick
The type of track that you use ultimately is up to you. However there are certain situations to help you decide. If you want authenticity, I’d recomend Atlas Code 87 for main lines and Code 70 from any firm for sidings. However, Atlas Code 100 would work just fine and would be just as believable as any other rail size. You also, unlike Bachmann’s EZ-Track, you aren’t limited to a small number of track sections. Atlas Flex track works fine aswell.
I have a similar question: I currently use Atlas Code 100 track and turnouts, which is what I grew up on with my dad’s layout, but have a few problems with it. As I’ve “remembered” all the fun I had and delved further into superdetailing, weathering and more expenive RTR cars like the Genesis line, I’ve noticed that my Code 100 track doesn’t like the “fine scale” wheel sets. I’ve been thinking about replacing all my track with something more prototypical. Are there any recommendations?
Micro Engineering looks the best. More expensive, but good looking. Atlas, Peco and Shinohara all make flex in code 83 that looks lots better than the code 100 stuff.
It has to be said, no matter what Scale, Gauge or Code track you use, you
will continue to have derailments if:
- You dont lay your track correctly.
- You dont drive your Locomotive & train at Prototypical speeds.
I also use Code 100 thru out my Layout and suffered numerus derailments
with Finescale Wheels, My Grandchilren had D/rails all the time.
Eventually I bit the bullet and went looking for faults in my Tracklaying, I
didnt have to go far believe me, Im getting toward the end now and you can
see where I have and have not relayed most of my track.
It works, be patient, tack care, you`ll reap the rewards.
Regards,
Nobody’s said it yet, but I’d avoid EZ Track (or any ‘sectional’ track) simply because it IS sectional. Many, many more joints involved. Each one a possible point of problems from electrical conductivity to simple alignment.
I’d suggest some variety of flextrack for this reason, as well as all of the valid points made above.
I myself am in the process of transferring from code 100 flex to code 83, for appearance reasons. But code 100 certainly served me well for many years. I can’t say the same of my “sectional” days where I had far more problems with derailments, ‘dead’ electrical spots, etc.
As with most things BETTER and BEST are very relative to ones own needs, skills, and desires.
EZ track will be much EZier to work with. As others have pointed out there are limited pieces available which limits the layout shape possibilities. Code 83 track is more delicate but looks better. Code 100 had been the “Industry Default” for over 40 years. Either 83 or 100 has sectional track in a wide assortment of different pieces, from many vendors, and in mass quantities. Code 83 does have a few profile issues between the vendors. That is, while the rail height may be the same the shape of the rail varies more and some is wider than others, but nothing that can’t be overcome. There is flex track available in both code 83 and 100. If you decide to make the leap into flex track be ready to add some new tools (track cutter, files, knives) to your collection. I was a modeler for 6 years before I tried my first flex track and even then I only used it as a substitute for 4 sections of straight track. When I started using it for curves, I ruined quite a few pieces before I figured it out. Of course I was in N-scale at the time so it was a bit more difficult than the HO. It is more difficult to use but nothing to be afraid of.
SO having said that:
-
If you only need a simple layout and want it to go together easy - stay with the EZ-track.
-
If you want to expand in the future - move away from the EZ track.
-
If you want a lot more flexibility with the layout arrangement you can make - switch to the code 83 or code 100.
-
If you want it to look better and don’t mind it being less rugged choose code 83.
-
If you want the greatest flexibility in the layou
I have a similar question as well. Greetings all, newbie here, and I mean NEW! I am new to the hobby as well. I have a Bachmann set and I am wondering if I can use the Code 100 track from Atlas with the Bachmann trains (probably a *** stupid question) but not sure if I would need an Atlas controller as well…
Thanks, Joel
Welcome, Joel.
Regular track is compatible across brand lines. Track with integral roadbed, like Bachman’s EZ-Track, or Life Like’s Power-Lock are proprietary, so the brands are not compatible.
Controllers (both DCC and straight DC) are also compatible with any track. Some any controller with work with any track.
Nick
Use flexitracks from Micro Engineering or Peco, they are easy to use, economical and can be tailored to suit your track plans. You can plan more realistic sweeping curves than set tracks. Set tracks have fixed radius and are usually designed for their set plans.
Cheers
Cliff
http://cliffordconceicao3310.fotopic.net/c328807.html
Go to www.bachmanntrains.com and look at the EZ Track pieces now available in N and HO.
Lee
G’day, Y’all,
After reading the Turtle something or another layout in MRR, I finished my Atlas track plan 19 by gluing the track down rather than nailing it, wasting a couple of packets of the tiny nails. But for the first time in my life, I’ve been able to get long sections of “straight” track. It really is better than nails.
Udrija, since you are new to this, you might want to do a small layout using an Atlas (or other track maker’s) plan which tells you how much track you need. In fact, on the Atlas website, you can order exactly the track you’ll need in either code 83 or 100. Start with something simple and work at getting it right. Buy lots of books on the subject of layout and read how it has been done in the past. Don’t try to re-invent the wheel. After you have built a simple one, a big one is somewhat easier. But remember the article on the Ohio Southern in MRR a few months ago? Dude’s been working on it for a quarter of a century and he still hasn’t gotten to the point where he has ballasted the track. The bigger you go, the longer it takes (and more money) to finish it. For someone new, starting a huge layout is almost a guaranteed waste of time and money.
Make sure you paint the track with rail brown and even code 100 starts looking better immediately. Ballast it and you, and especially your guests, won’t notice that it may be too heavy a rail for what would really be there.
Ever seen a really well scenicked O gauge pike? It’ll make you forget it is three rail because when everything seems to fit, the effect proves that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Which reminds me, at this time of the year I sure do miss the American Flyer and Lionel train displays at Rich’s and Davison’s department stores in Atlanta that I saw in the early 1950s as a youngster.
Jock Ellis
Cumming, GA US of A
Georgia Association of Railway Passengers
Look at the different manufacturer products, there are multiple suppliers of track. Sectional track means more connections which increases the risk of poor electrical connection. You mentioned you are using DCC, minimizing track joints is important. 3 foot flex track sections are even soldered together at intervals because of the desire to avoid joints. This is a key in the thought process on going sectional or not going. And if you are starting out new with the track, consider what everyone else has already said, look close at code 83 instead of 100.