Is it time to update N Trak Standards...???

[Midniteflyer]

Atlas Code 55 track is way too delicate to use for modules. Even the code 80 stuff is not good. We did a hammer test on Atlas vs. Peco code 55........... 1 easy blow and the Atlas was scrap............ 12 blows to the Peco and it was still not damaged. Modules take exstreme abuse in transportation to shows. That is why we use all Peco track and turnouts.

[Mark5]

We did a hammer test on Atlas vs. Peco code 55...........

I do that to all my locos. None of them work any more.

[MTLJoe]

I too never understood why Atlas was made the bad guy in this.  I won't get into the pizza cutter issue, that's a hornet's nest I prefer not to stick my johnson in ;D.  We did try including both for a time but the overwhelming response was negative...but things are changing.  I can say specifically that during my tenure here, getting a single wheel set in place has been on my hot list.  I don't make decisions, just make suggestions, the adults here have to balance stuff I am not privy to and allocate resources.   But I can report that we are doing new wheels.  The 36" edition was shown on the RPO car and that will be followed soon by the new 33" wheel. Hopefully those will see the light of day by the Fall, peace will reign on Railwire, Dogs and Cats will get along, and that stinky fish will be put to bed.

Joe


 

Atlas will never ever admit it, but they goofed with their code 55 trackage not taking MT "pizza cutters" and "hertitage equiptment.

If I recall correctly, it was actually a manufacturing constraint that kept them from using smaller plastic nubs to hold the rail to the ties. Could they have worked on it and found a solution? Probably. Would it have delayed the release and cost them more money than it might have been worth? Possibly. Perhaps they just figured they were making a finer-scale product, and people who wanted to use it would do what it took?

At least Atlas put a product on the market that conformed to the applicable standards. I still love how Atlas gets vilified for this whole thing when MT is the company that had been producing out-of-standard wheelsets for so many years. Not much could be forseen about the people wanting to run their vintage steamers, but I feel MT should have tooled up new wheelsets when the NMRA standards were published. After all, plastic wheelsets go into nearly every single thing they produce in N scale, so I would think that would be the easiest tooling cost to amortize. MT's prices are always higher than the average for N scale rolling stock (and I'm sure we all know why), and they still have consistent hot sellers...so who would care if any given car costs 13 cents more because it had NMRA standard wheelsets?

Maybe now that Joe is part of this Lion's den, he can shed some light on this?

[John]

Hopefully those will see the light of day by the Fall, peace will reign on Railwire, Dogs and Cats will get along, and that stinky fish will be put to bed.

PTL .. PTL .. PTL .. hell hath frozen over

[Sokramiketes]

Atlas Code 55 track is way too delicate to use for modules. Even the code 80 stuff is not good. We did a hammer test on Atlas vs. Peco code 55........... 1 easy blow and the Atlas was scrap............ 12 blows to the Peco and it was still not damaged. Modules take exstreme abuse in transportation to shows. That is why we use all Peco track and turnouts.

I can't imagine what hitting track with a hammer is supposed to simulate, but the Atlas track on my modules seems to be surviving pretty well.   ??? Maybe it's just our group of careful guys?  Well... except for one instance of a clear cut forest simulation...   :-[  But, we don't feel the need to test all our trees with a hammer to try to plan for a module falling on its face... 

[AlkemScaleModels]

Atlas Code 55 track is way too delicate to use for modules. Even the code 80 stuff is not good. We did a hammer test on Atlas vs. Peco code 55........... 1 easy blow and the Atlas was scrap............ 12 blows to the Peco and it was still not damaged. Modules take exstreme abuse in transportation to shows. That is why we use all Peco track and turnouts.

I would venture to guess that the scenery and structures are much more vulnerable than the track. 

But I know what you mean, when a show is over, many NTRAKers tend to treat the modules like cord wood, especially modules that belong to the clubs or others.  After several bad experiences with others handling my models, I pretty much do the tear down by myself now.

[sd40-blue]

I don't think we (N-Trak community) have even scratched the surface of using the 35+ year old standards. It seems that most modules, especially recent builds, have been built with a nudge toward operations. When was the last time, other than a newbie, you saw a P.O.F.F. being built?

Then trend in home layouts has been toward ops for years. Round robin groups that meet at different layouts to "work" them is commonplace. No matter how big, small, oNe-Trak subdivision or not we still seem to just chase our tail. Roundy - Round is still king! I know the idea from way back was, "you gotta keep'em moving for the public".

I think the train show going public is ready to be shown what can be done in running a MODEL RAILROAD.

Pizza cutters, 1.5" spacing, Green Line and code 80 is fine with me! I guess I better start working on some car cards

[GonzoCRFan]

I too never understood why Atlas was made the bad guy in this.  I won't get into the pizza cutter issue, that's a hornet's nest I prefer not to stick my johnson in ;D.  We did try including both for a time but the overwhelming response was negative...

I know you guys were including both, and I personally thought that was a good move. Was the response so negative because people felt they were paying for something they didn't need? I'm curious because some people never seem to think about resale value...I was always able to sell batches of 100 MT wheelsets on Ebay that were left over from my low-pro upgrades to help recoup some of the cost...the people who didn't want the low-pros could have done the same, if they wanted to go to more trouble than complaining about it...

[MTLJoe]

I think it was change.  For years we had a huge collector's following and with that the good and bad.  I mean, to have a business where you know that a very large percentage of your product is going to be sold sight un-seen is rare.  And, you have to consider that market when making business decisions.  When we made the change over we supplied dealers with bags of wheels for the folks who wanted the lpw.  Not sure what was done with them...sold, given away or stuck under a counter...no control over that.  There was an additional cost to do both sets, in plastic and packaging, but the the vast majority of the feed back we got..."keep the HPW"  Atlas code 55 not withstanding, the wheel works well for the average modeler who was using code 80 track...and even the other brands of code55...the Atlas track was the one where the large flange became a serious issue on the boards.  Hopefully, the new wheels will temper some of the anger (something I never figured out) and we can get on with the business of having fun. ;D

Joe

I know you guys were including both, and I personally thought that was a good move. Was the response so negative because people felt they were paying for something they didn't need? I'm curious because some people never seem to think about resale value...I was always able to sell batches of 100 MT wheelsets on Ebay that were left over from my low-pro upgrades to help recoup some of the cost...the people who didn't want the low-pros could have done the same, if they wanted to go to more trouble than complaining about it...

[asciibaron]

The problem with starting something new is that you're competing against a very well established standard.

Think about the sony minidisc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiniDisc

It was a better solution, but because there were other, widely established standards, it never caught on.

i have miniDisc in my music studio - i love it.  and betamax, and HDdvd, and well, you get the point. 

it would be impossible to compete against N-trak.  interface modules would do well - have it a "branch" off of ntrak and you could gain some traction

[Robbman]

Atlas will never ever admit it, but they goofed with their code 55 trackage not taking MT "pizza cutters" and "hertitage equiptment.

Tell me abou it... I was so mad when my 2009 designed and built motherboard didn't support VESA, ISA and all the other decades old legacy standards that have been completely surpassed.  I mean who in thier right mind would build something and NOT have it designed for 30 year old standards :

[bicknell]

I've told Micro-Trains this several times before, but the $0.10 version for the peanut gallery.

The NRMA specifies a range of acceptable flange depths, that is there is a minimum, and a maximum.

MT "Pizza Cutters" are over the maximum, which is why they hit things like Atlas track.

MT "Low Profile" wheels are darn close to the minimum.

For some reason MT swung full tilt from one end of the spectrum to the other.  Not only did they pick up the problems the smallest flanges cause, but they also subjected their customer base to the maximum swing in performance characteristics.

I have advocated they come up with a "Medium Profile" wheel, a flange right smack dab in the middle.   Most other wheels are somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of the way through the range, that is, just under the middle size.  I suspect this would eliminate the interference issues with Atlas track, while providing a little more reliability that low-pros.  Thus a one size fits all wheel.

Based on the recent comments, I'm crossing my fingers.  It could be a really good for everyone.

[wcfn100]

[quote  author=leo]I have advocated they come up with a "Medium Profile" wheel, a flange right smack dab in the middle.   Most other wheels are somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of the way through the range, that is, just under the middle size.  I suspect this would eliminate the interference issues with Atlas track, while providing a little more reliability that low-pros.  Thus a one size fits all wheel.[/quote]

If MT doesn't use a proper profile, it doesn't matter what size the flanges are.  Even a medium flange will pick points etc. if it has a razor edge.

Jason

[asciibaron]

and thus why i own NO MT cars.  besides the compromised ride height for the pizza cutters, there seems to be an inability of the company to understand a scale modeling customer exists who wants to run the damn things.  i don't collect pretty things, i am a railroad modeler.  that's why i buy trains to run them like a scaled down railroad.

it's like MT looks at N scale as the toy scale.

[bicknell]

Now now.  Shipshure is turning the titanic, er, super tanker.   ;D

This is just a hunch, but I suspect the tooling cost for wheels is higher than one might suspect, as I'm relatively positive a high degree of precision is involved and a mold will likely make more than one.

RP-25 contoured, perhaps 0.020-0.022 inch flange depth.  Man, that would be a home run, and likely work really well.  I'm going to keep my fingers crossed.

I hope I don't come across as one of the "angry ones" about this; but it is a very important issue to me.  I think the "pizza cutters" are holding back the industry as a whole.  After the Atlas Code 55 issue, who's going to make Code 30 fine scale track and deal with the same sort of flack?  Be it NTrak eventually using Code 55, or folks making some great home layouts with code 25, 30, and 40 track, it's going to take cars that work out of the box to get there.  People don't want to have to swap wheels at the price points we're paying.  And sadly, even once this issue is behind us, it will be years before enough rolling stock cycles to have new innovation happen.