Will Minitrax Steamers run on Peco code 55

[CodyO]

I`m wondering if my Minitrax 2-10-0 will handle the peco code 55 I`m debating on going with
I think I`m going with it as this wont be a deal breaker

[Lemosteam]

Cody, no not without flange reduction!

[CodyO]

Thats what I figured but hey there`s no dumb questions!! right?!

Reasn I asked is I was told that inbetween the rails of peco code 55 its more like code 80
I know that peco code 55 is just 80 buried deeper in the ties just was unsure if it was true about the between the rails

[Kiasutha]

Uhh, might you want to re-consider that...?
As far as I know, one of the reasons people use Peco 55 is because Minitrix steam WILL run
on it without flange reduction.
I just tested a decapod on a piece I have and it seemed to work just fine...

[CoalPorter]

I am voting that it will work. My first layout used PECo code 55 and I don't recall
any issues with flanges on any product. Remember P c55 is not constructed like any
other track - it is really like code 80 with the ties cast higher and there are no spike
heads that stick up anywhere.

[peteski]

I'm also pretty sure that any of the older N scale models (like Minitrix or Arnold Rapido) will run just fine. That is because Peco C55 track doesn't have spikes molded on the inside of the rails.  So unless the flange is deeper than 0.055" then the loco will run just fine.

[Lemosteam]

Duhh.  Cody I'm sory, I thought your post stated Atlas code 55.   Apologies for the misleading response. I agree with the others...

[CodyO]

all good thanks guys!!

[nkalanaga]

Unmodified MiniTrix will usually run on Micro-Engineering code 55.  I ran F units that way for years.  On the other hand, Arnold's early stuff won't, but as far as I know, will run on Peco.

[Micke C]

I`m wondering if my Minitrax 2-10-0 will handle the peco code 55 I`m debating on going with
I think I`m going with it as this wont be a deal breaker

My experience is that Peco c55 handles "European" flanges. I´ve got a lot of stuff (Fleischmann, Arnold, Minitrix...) on my swedish modules without problems.  On the other hand none of it runs without noise or rattling on my Atlas c55 on my US-modules...

//Micke C - http://crawfordjct.blogspot.se/

[robert3985]

Although I don't want to start a war, seems kinda counter-intuitive to base the choice of what track to use solely on whether a certain, really old and outdated engine will run on it. 

Peco 55 may as well be code 80 because the ties are the same proportion and spacing as most code 80 trackage...which is to say (kindly) way out of proportion for any realistic looking trackage. Visually, they look virtually identical to each other because your eye picks up on the ties rather than simply the height of the rail.

If you've got a whole pot full o' old, giant-flanged European shtuff to run, then by all means go with trackage that will accommodate it.  However, if you've only got one or two old, giant-flanged European manufactured engines that will be running on your new layout, I would highly consider going with more realistic looking trackage...meaning Atlas 55 or a combination of ME flex and Atlas 55 turnouts.

Just sayin'....

[pnolan48]

It will run on Peco 55. Mine did for years. One of the best early steamers.

When I built the Portsmouth Branch in 2002, I went with Atlas C55, not knowing about the spike head issue. Man, was I upset! Then I realized I had all of 5 "good" locos were affected. As I had perhaps 20 locos then, and perhaps 200 now, I realized it wasn't a very big deal, as Bob Gilmore has suggested. I had one Minitrix K4 turned down by a friend, but it still didn't run anywhere near as well as the new steam coming out. I never bothered with the 2-10-0, as the misaligned cylinders always looked bad to me.

A bigger deal was that I had just converted about 200 cars to MicroTrains, with too-large flanges. So I converted them to Accumates, which exploded. And converted them back to MT lo-pros.

That was a waste of time and money. Going with Atlas C55 was the best decision I made about track--although I haven't needed much of it over, say, the past three years.

[CodyO]

I dont want to wait for atlas 55 me and my dad are building this layout and trying to get as much finish in the next 8 months before I go to the air force plus peco has a nice range of switches and I dont see what makes atlas 55 so much better

I like peco 55 and this would be the only engine that I have worries about was just curious if it would run on it wouldn`t be a deal breaker

[pnolan48]

I like the Peco switches too! I used about 200' of the C55 on a previous layout, and really liked it, especially for nearly flawless performance.

[peteski]

I like the Peco switches too! I used about 200' of the C55 on a previous layout, and really liked it, especially for nearly flawless performance.

]

IMO, their single and double slip switches look especially realistic (much more so than any other brands I've seen).  Of course the tie spacing is still the issue.