Which track?

[mabel]

I am about to start with my loft layout (24' x 12') after years of planning....... I am looking for advice on which make of track to use. A pro's and con's list would be good. I have used Peco code 100 for decades, time for change!

Thanks,

Tony

[Gilbert]

I've been very pleased with my Peco C83 - not ideal as a test track for some BR 4mm prototypes - I run occasionally but great for HO.

Chris

[dave_long]

Depends how much money you have. ME code 70 is beautiful but expensive, there's Shinohara code 70 and 83 good but the c70 turnouts are a pain with DCC. Peco code 83 is becoming a very good standard, code 75 still good.

 

Code 100 still has its place if well detailed.

 

Regards

[AndrewC]

If you are talking HO I'd stick with the Peco 83. ME may look good but it's a pain in the ass to use. Hard to get a good flowing curve. Very fragile as the spike detail is beautiful but the rail will rip up way too easily. The last batch I had before finally giving up on it had massive amounts of flash on the ties. Took around 10 mins to clean up a yard of track.

 

There is also Tillig. Looks nice but I have no personal experience with it.

[298]

It also depends on the era and location that you're modelling, as an early era shortline would use really spindly rail. If only Peco were to do something lighter than code 83...

[trisonic]

I like ME C70 - it is a little harder to work with than Peco (!) on curves. Ideal for a shortline or shunty/switching  plank. The points/switches/turnouts  are very good however - much better than Peco.

To be honest I haven’t seen a “flash” problem like Andrew has but I may have just been lucky. All ME rail seems to be too yellow for my eyes (until grimed up when it becomes much less noticeable).

 

Over here Peco is stupidly expensive......I’d be inclined to use it in the UK and make my own turnouts.

 

Trust this helps you a little.

 

Best, Pete.

[Northpoint]

The other thing is the track geometry - Peco code 83 and the US brands have a different geometry to Peco code 75/100.

 

The finer Peco tracks can also be more fragile especially in a situation wher the layout is moved (taken to shows for example) and there is the risk that the track can get damged - the rail can shear away from the sleeper base if the rail end is caught on something.

 

However, assuming your loft layout is more permanent, this shouldn't be a problem.

[shortliner]

*That said, the leak which has come through the bathroom floor and the garage ceiling onto my 3/4" ply sub roadbed causing it to swell and delaminate would be a disaster even for tinplate track and wheel standards. What a lovely discovery that was last night. Good job I had made no further progress, else I would be more p***ed off that I am already.

 

My sincere sympathy - what a dreadful thing to happen!

[w124bob]

I use Peco code 83 with dead frog #5 turnouts just put lots of droppers if going DCC, the new fishplates with droppers from Peco (PL81) help for us cack handed solderers. My Bachmann 45tonner will creep through all points and is the test loco I always use. Big long Bowser C630 also copes with the tighter radius of the #5 turnout without problems, no steam so can't really comment on running qualities other than a stray Pannier tank has been round the layout with out problems. If you can afford too (space wise) use longer points , as for live frogs friend uses a frog juicer with out issues. I keep meaning to try threading code 75 rail onto code 83 sleeper bases as I have lots of offcuts of both. Clean track and wheels are far more likely to improve running than any track laying  issues. 

[alastairb]

I use Peco Code 83 on my garage layout. For me it gives a good compromise, it looks North American (to my eyes at least and certainly compared to any other European track brand) is fairly readily available in UK and is easy to lay and very reliable. I note some posters on other threads are critical of it, but other than the rail height and the standard Peco stamped switch rails I can't see too much wrong with it.

[mabel]

Thanks for all of the input chaps. DCC isnt on my radar so no worries there, and Im not really a staunch rivet counter either. Andy's Proto 87 stuff looks very nice, but I dont have the patience, dexterity or eyesight !

Peco 83 looks to be the track of choice then.....Its just a shame they make blo*dy awful (looking) points. That two piece switch blade always has looked dreadfull..

Cheers,

Tony

[dave_long]

Check out the Shinohara/Walthers Code 83 turnouts, good alternative to Peco if you want Code 83. 

http://www.scalelink.co.uk/acatalog/Shinohara_Pointwork___HO__Code_83_DCC_ready.html

[298]

Thanks for all of the input chaps. DCC isnt on my radar so no worries there

Tony

Whether you use DCC or not, I think there is only one way to wire a layout- properly.

 

Perhaps it is a combination of being in a hurry to get up and running, or Manufacturers trying to make their products easy to use and understandable, but all DCC will do is highlight compromises that aren't necessarily a problem for analogue, such as momentary gaps or shorts.

[Parthia27]

Depends on period you are going to model and the type of prototype you are modelling. If you are doing a modern mainline theme I would go for Peco Code 83 flex with Central Valley or Fastracks hand laid turnouts. For branchlines or industrial tracks Code 70 or even Code 55 track is better. I would use ME without hesitation, harder to lay but looks brilliant if ballasted and weathered appropriately. The major downside of ME is that they only offer #6 turnouts. If more variety is required then use Shionara Code 70 Turnouts or handlay. That's my opinion fwiw.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

[EmporiaSub]

I use a mixture of Peco Code 83 on the main, with ME Code 70 and 55 on spurs and sidings.

Turnouts are a mixture of Peco Code 83 and ME Code 70, both #6.

As I model a rural branchline in the 1960's, I would love to use more of the ME stuff, but (and there is always a but...!) it is not easy to bend more than once,

hence why I continue with the Peco track on the main.

[Andy Reichert]

There is one aspect of PECO code 83 that does make it instantly recognizable on a layout if you are familiar with prototype track.

 

That is the two huge oversize head ties that are around the throw bar. They stand out from 10 ft away. The problem with removing and replacing them is that the equal spacing of the rest of the ties does not continue through the gap. So any better sized replacements don't fit the tie spacing and that can show up too unless you can replace all the short ties on the toe end as well.

 

Andy

[Andy Reichert]

Depends on period you are going to model and the type of prototype you are modelling. If you are doing a modern mainline theme I would go for Peco Code 83 flex with Central Valley or Fastracks hand laid turnouts. For branchlines or industrial tracks Code 70 or even Code 55 track is better. I would use ME without hesitation, harder to lay but looks brilliant if ballasted and weathered appropriately. The major downside of ME is that they only offer #6 turnouts. If more variety is required then use Shionara Code 70 Turnouts or handlay. That's my opinion fwiw.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

 

I would find it difficult to mix Central Valley and Fast Tracks in the same visible portion of a layout. The former are highly detailed and the latter completely undetailed.

 

Andy

[highpeak]

I don't think Parthia27 was advocating mixing CV and Fast Tracks, but you have a valid point. I think the eye would be confused by the sudden absence of detail on the Fast Tracks turnouts or, for that matter, plain track set next to either CV or Peco track. If you used Fast Tracks for everything, at least you'd have consistency, the eye can then perhaps accept the absence of tie plates and so on, but as soon as the adjacent piece of track has them then the suspension of belief ends.

The CV products are worth a look, very nice moulding and some useful detailing components. The plain track is no more difficult to get on with than most flexible track, if anything I find it a bit easier to use. You can do all the weathering on the bench before you lay it. I use cork roadbed and use MEK (bought in big cans from hardware stores like Lowe's) to glue the tie strips down, then a mix of Barge cement and MEK to lay the rail.

Andy has some interesting kits for turnouts using CV components, for an interesting hybrid approach you could look at the way Joe Fugate uses the CV turnout bases as a jig to incorporate the strength of PCB ties in strategic locations http://siskiyou-railfan.net/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?5125 I've tried this approach and it works well, the PCB ties can be disguised by adding tie plate detail from the discarded CV ties, which can also take care of disguising the gaps in the PCB ties.

One thing that will lift any kind of turnout is to add some details such as the various braces and so on that you can see in prototype pictures. Andy has some good components for that, Details West sells some useful castings in both white metal and plastic, CV has a detailing kit that includes a switch stand (old-style, be prepared for back injury complaints from your brakemen). And this is pretty easy detailing work even if you are using a ready made turnout.
Dr. Gerbil-Fritter had a thread showing some upgrades to a Peco turnout at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/81956-dr-gerbil-fritters-does-track/, he used a Details West casting, you could do the same with a laminated etch that Andy has on his site. Either approach (though some have said that the master for the D-W castings may be past its best) will remove the headache from making your own frog/crossing assembly.

Just be aware that fiddling with track can become addictive and it isn't as hard as you might think. With the right components you don't even need to go near a soldering iron.

Usual disclaimer applies for all products mentioned.

[F-UnitMad]

 

 

....take care when laying it to make sure that it goes down flat and true - no kinks (sideways or vertically)....

 

Just like what I didn't do....

 

 

Okay, it's O Scale which helps... and I'll be totally shot down for using utterly the wrong track (Peco Code 124BH) but it sure turned heads...

[Parthia27]

I would find it difficult to mix Central Valley and Fast Tracks in the same visible portion of a layout. The former are highly detailed and the latter completely undetailed.

 

Andy

 

When did I say that you should mix the two?

 

I did forget to say that I would sometimes add detail to the Fast Tracks or any hand built turnouts when they could not be blended in with the rest of the track using weathering and detailing, which I have done successfully before.

 

On the next layout I hope to build I will need to hand-build a diamond crossing which will be used to connect ME code 82 and 70 track (facing code 83 turnouts off a main onto a code 70 scissor crossing each feeding a code 70 industrial siding).

 

So, will I detail the crossing? No.

 

Do I need to detail the crossing? Not necessarily.

 

Why? When the track is weathered and 'blended' together the detailing will disappear to all but the most critical observers.

 

Anyway I hope this answers you Andy, and I hope I have not caused the OP any confusion.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

[Parthia27]

Having read the OPs question again, I'll try to summarise the HO track options I believe are available, I have excluded Peco Code 75 and 100, Tillig and other European based track though this does not mean they cannot be used. I have also excluded any Code 100 tracks made for the US market. This is not a "thou shalt choose this" post, just a list of options and pros and cons to consider as I see them, other forum members please feel free to add to this and include any of the pros and cons given in previous posts which I have missed:

 

1 Hand-laid Track

 

Probably the cheapest and most flexible option available, biggest cost is in buying tools and gauges, track may require detailing, resources and tools and components available from companies such as Fast Tracks, Central Valley Products, Proto 87 Stores, Peco, Individulay, and others.

 

Pros - cheap, you can build the track to the exact configuration you require, easy to adopt fine scale standards such as Proto 87, very rewarding if you can manage to take this route, can be limited to the production of hand laid turnouts / kits to combine with commercially available track of the same rail size such as ME, Peco, Shinohara etc.

 

Cons - requires some level of skill in soldering and precision working, takes time and preparation, track can lack the detail of some commercially available offerings, be prepared to learn from mistakes as often making mistakes is the way you learn.

 

2 Peco Code 83

 

Certainly the most readily available commercial product in the UK which is built for the US model railroader. Limited to Code 83 at the moment. 

 

Pros - good range of turnouts and crossovers, durable, easy to work with, relatively cheap on this side of pond, concrete and wooden tie options available, electrofrog and insulfrog options offered. Excellent for those who just want to get track down and trains running. DCC friendly Turnouts.

 

Cons - only one rail size, appearance of turnout operating spring is an issue for some, prototype fidelity.

 

2 Atlas Code 83

 

Believe it used to be the most readily available Code 83 product in US. Now seems to be hard to get hold of based on posts I have seen on other forums. I cannot say what the pros and cons are for this product as I have no experience in using it, others may wish to add their opinions.

 

3 Shinohara Code 70

 

Detailed range of Code 70 Track suitable for branch line, secondary and older era mainline use. This is an established brand made by Walthers which is popular in the US. I am not sure as to the availability and price of this track in the UK other than it can be obtained through Scalelink UK. Code 100 track also available. I cannot say what the pros and cons are for this product as I have no experience in using it, others may wish to add their opinions.

 

4 Micro Engineering Code 70 and Code 82

 

Detailed Code 70 and Code 82 Track. Established long running brand which is popular in the US, not readily available through any UK retailer as far as I know at this moment in time. Can be ordered fro US through MB Klein and others but incurs high freight and import duty if bought in bulk.

 

Pros - highly detailed, good range of supporting components (pins, track joiners etc), compatible with similar sized track from Peco and Shinohara, "DCC Friendly" Turnouts.

 

Cons - more fragile than other makes, turnouts limited to #6 only in both Code 70 and 82, expensive compared to other brands.

 

5 Bespoke Track Systems - Components and Tools to Simplify Production of Hand Laid Track or Detail Track.

 

A wide range of components, track kits and tools are available from suppliers such as Proto 87 Stores, Central Valley Products, Micro Engineering, Fast Tracks Peco Individulay. There are too many Pros and Cons to list when considering these products. All bring something to the party to increase the fidelity of the track available to the modeller. Some folk also offer a turnout construction service though others are better informed than me in this area as it is a route I have never followed. Proto 87 Stores is run by Andy Reichert who is also a member of this forum and offers an innovative range of components for not just Proto 87 modellers. Though I have not used Proto 87 products, though I would like to try to do so one day, I have used Fast Tracks, CVP and Peco Individulay products with great sucess from time to time.

 

I hope I have missed nothing out, though I'm sure I have. Hopefully have not shown any bias towards any particular brand or approach. FWIW I would say go with what you feel most comfortable with and just enjoy your layout.

 

Cheers

 

Chris

[Andy Reichert]

You did that on purpose, though. I reckon it took you longer than it would have taken if you had laid it flat...

 

As for the BH, a bit more grass and who will know?

 

Smoked presumably?

 

Andy