Author Topic: Code 55 versus Code 80  (Read 6620 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5063
  • Respect: +2090
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #30 on: August 18, 2009, 07:45:15 PM »
0
I'm going to try my hand at handlaid switches

Andy's website also has some handy turnout templates:  http://www.proto87.com/handlaid_track_templates.html

Philip H

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9023
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +1791
    • Layout Progress Blog
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #31 on: August 18, 2009, 07:54:51 PM »
0
So does Fast Tracks.  With those PROTO 87 points and frogs, I may have to get into hand laying myself.  Of course, the cognative dissonance of buying N scale points and frogs from a Proto 87 outfit does make my head spin    :-X
Philip H.
Chief Everything Officer
Baton Rouge Southern RR - Mount Rainier Division.


ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5063
  • Respect: +2090
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #32 on: August 18, 2009, 10:16:20 PM »
0
the cognative dissonance of buying N scale points and frogs from a Proto 87 outfit does make my head spin    :-X

Rail is rail, regardless of scale.  (sorry, didn't mean to rhyme... better keep my day job...)

But you can even use the P:87 spikes to hand-lay N-scale track with Code 40 rail on wood ties:


ChrisNH

  • Guest
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #33 on: August 19, 2009, 11:43:54 AM »
0
Wow.. how good is the clearance with those spikes, will most locomotives run on it or does it require turning down wheels?

I assume wheelsets can be found for rolling stock that would work..

Chris

cv_acr

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2684
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +139
    • Canadian Freight Railcar Gallery
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #34 on: August 19, 2009, 01:52:08 PM »
0
I recently picked up some c55 track for my layout I'm starting on. Did I mention its in --HO!!!-- that's right, we have your best looking rail as flex track in HO. HA! So who's moving to HO? :P
Russ

I used code 70 and 55 track on an HO switching layout I did a few years ago. 70 on the "main" tracks and 55 on the industrial spurs.
MicroEngineering flex track and Peco switches.

At my (HO) club, all our visible trackage is handlaid in Code 83 (main) and 70 (sidings & yard tracks) and we use the Atlas code 100 flex in hidden areas. All switches are handlaid, including the code 100 switches in the staging yard.

ednadolski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5063
  • Respect: +2090
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #35 on: August 19, 2009, 04:11:27 PM »
0
Hi Chris, the clearance is at least as good as (probably better than) Micro Engineering code 40 flextrack, so if it runs on that then no reason to think it won't run on the spiked track.  The truck in the pic has the ME lo-profile wheels, I imagine the FVMs would run fine too.

Ed

ChrisNH

  • Guest
Re: Code 55 versus Code 80
« Reply #36 on: August 19, 2009, 04:27:04 PM »
0
the clearance is at least as good as (probably better than) Micro Engineering code 40 flextrack, so if it runs on that then no reason to think it won't run on the spiked track. 

I have been operating under the assumption that if I did N scale code 40 I would need to either solder or glue rail to ties to avoid clearance issues. I think I need to get myself some ME code 40 track and see for myself if there are issues.

I calculated the cost of hand-laid code 40 using PCB ties and it was shockingly high..

Chris