Bachmann EZ Track System , Anyone use it ?

[fifer]

We are just curious as the system looks pretty well made and seems to have quite a few parts available.
Any thoughts?

Mike

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I used to sell a ton of it 10 years ago at MBK.

People love it because it does 80% of what Unitrack does, but at 50% of the price.

The problems I've found all have to do with either the lack of decent switches and with its durability. The hooks that it uses to join itself together aren't nearly as reliable and durable as the unijoiners, and unlike a unijoiner, if it breaks, the whole piece of track is shot (because they're not replaceable).

That said, the fact that they offer 3' straight sections was pretty cool.

[PAL_Houston]

When I got into N-scale in 2005 or so, the reason was a Bachmann set I got for a gift.  I thought the track was junk, and the only pieces of that set that I kept were the the power track, power pack, and the rheostat, which I use to test locos on.  The power pack and rheostat are pretty good, I thought.

[brokemoto]

The straight and curved pieces are allright, for the most part. You do find a defective piece more than rarely.  The only solution is to take out that piece and replace it. If you plan to use this, I would buy one extra package of each type of track piece that you plan to use.  For example, if you need four packages of  eleven inch curves  and two of seventeen, I would buy five and three, respectively.  I have run across a defective piece here and there.  Trying to work it failed, but replacing it would end the continuity or derailment problem.

The first generation #4 turnouts were horrid.  More than a few locomotives and wheelsets on rolling stock used to pick the points. In addition, they would lose contact frequently when thrown for the diverging route. The second generation #4 turnouts are  an improvement.  Fewer locomotives pick the points.  The electrical contact when thrown for the diverging route is still not consistent, but it is better than before.  The other curious thing about the #4s is the long diverging route.  It takes a few extra pieces of track and some extra real estate for some uses, such as trying to connect parallel trackage or for a passing track.

The worst offenders for picking the points are LL SWs and Bachpersonn doodlebugs running in reverse.  But then, LL SWs like to pick the frogs of Atlas #6s, as well.

Depending on that for which you want to use it, it is mostly allright.  Remember that the rule against putting a turnout right after a curve applies in seven no trump for the #4 turnouts; there will be frequent derailments on the diverging route if you violate it.  In addition, be prepared for more than infrequent stalling on the diverging route.

It is not that difficult to adapt PECO turnouts to the E-Z TRAK.  You will enjoy more reliability that way.

I can not comment on the #6 turnouts, the crossovers or the junctions, as I have not used them. 

[CodyO]

My first N scale set up was a bachmannEZ track set up
I would have to say it is good and did work very well for me when I used but now it's just all sitting in a box in my room

[OHCR 4218]

I have had EZ track since it came out, I had both HO and N scale and the only problem I have ever had with it was the clips breaking. I currently only use it on my desk for testing. I keep mine in a tool box and only get it out when I need it, but when I do it always works.

Brandon

[brokemoto]

One other positive about it is that it does offer you a variety of curve radii in the three size categories of curves:  sharp, conventional and broad.  If you think back to your HO days, you will, of course, recall that those radii were 23" and less, 24"-29" and 30" or better, respectively.   In N, those would be:  12,5" and less, 13"-15,8" and 16,3" or better, respectively.

For some time, the only curve radii available  in N scale sectional track were two sharp (11" and 9,75") and one broad (19").  There were no conventional curve sections available.  I suppose that HO had it worse, as the only available curve sections in that scale for years were all in the sharp category:  15", 18" and 22".

There is no 9,75 section in the E-Z TRAK line, it starts at 11,25; the equivalent of 20,7 in HO.  If you consider that the standard range for sharp curves is 8,2"-12,5", (based on the HO standard of 15"-23"), this falls at the higher end of the sharp category.  The 12,5" piece also falls at the higher end of the sharp category (22,9" in HO).  There are two radii in the conventional  category:  the 14" and 15,5" (25,7 and 28,5 in HO).  Thus you get one at the lower end of the conventional category and one in the middle.  Finally, you get two in the broad category, 17,5 and 19 (32,1 and 34,9 in HO).

As anyone can see, you do get quite a selection in N from Bachpersonn.  Yes, I know, Kato also gives you quite a selection.  Kato even gives you a selection over the whole spectrum of the sharp category, from something like 7"-10" (12,9-18,3 in HO) in addition to the 9,75 and 11 inch sections.  I have never tried to connect Kato to B-mann, but I seem to recall that someone mentioned that he did so.  He had to do some surgery to the Bachmann and nail down all of the sections well, but he did state that once he was finished, everything functioned well.  It is not difficult to connect the Atlas sectional to the B-mann.  And yes, I know, you can set your own radii with flex, but, as someone did mention in this topic, sometimes, you do want the curves to be more exact than you can make them with flex.

I have made a pike from an N-TRAK module to which I added ends to render a dogbone style track plan.  I made the first ends with Atlas 9,75 track and PECO medium radius electrofrogs.  It was fine, as long as I operated only the smallest power on it.  When I tried to operate B-mann 2-8-0s on it, they climbed the curves, in places.  The use of S-curves caused even more derailments.  Other power, such as Kato 2-8-2s and Atlas Shays would go around it, but did not like it.  Some locomotives and rolling stock with body mounts would also cause derailments. CONCLUSION:  As long as all that you want to run is the smallest power and 40 truck mounted shorter rolling stock (think B-mann shorty passenger cars, or less), 9,75 curves are allright.  DUH!

 As I have the space, the next step was to try 11" curves.  That was better.  More of the equipment would operate well.  I used the B-mann E-Z TRAK. The curved sections worked allright, once I swapped out  a few defective pieces.   Still, there were some problems on the S-curves and with the turnouts.  The MP USRA light steam still refused to operate, though.  The problem appears to be in the drawbar design:  it lifts the tender, the locomotive, or both, from the track.  It was mostly electrical on the turnouts, but there were some problems with certain locomotives' and rolling stock's picking the points when set for the diverging route.  Many of the derailment problems were due to putting the turnouts right off a curve.

Phase three uses Kato UNITRAK.  I had shied from this due to the Asiatic tie spacing.  In truth, it is not that bad looking.  I graduated to conventional curves (13,75) and used the UNITRAK #4 turnouts.  Much better, but there are problems with the UNITRAK #4.  Some power and rolling stock picked the points when set on the MAIN .  The addition of a small section of straight addressed the problem.  I have had no electrical problems with the UNITRAK #4s.

The EZ TRAK sections are good, with the caveat on individual pieces simply being defective.  The turnouts, do, however,  still need work.