Author Topic: Hello again...  (Read 1733 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

hunter_alexander

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +2
Hello again...
« on: January 01, 2016, 10:49:47 PM »
0
Greetings all again. Sort of hard to do this.

Been a long time since I posted, but was lurking the last few years. Horrible divorce and no interest in much of anything for the last few years other than the bottom of a bottle. Doing tons better now.

Anyways, sold all my O gauge Lionel, but kept some of my N scale stuff. Re-reading Chris333 Erie layout build sparked a long lost interest.

So with that said, I am contemplating starting a layout. I have the HCD already. 36x80. Pretty much all set, but thinking about track.

You all have always been pretty cool with me and honest, so I need advice. Since I am sort of starting out again.

Plans are this... any rolling stock I get will immediately get FMV wheelsets.

I was thinking peco c55 but then thought about atlas c55.

Then of course I read about the bullet proof and pretty much flaw free operation of kato unitrack.

I have fallen in love with the look of perfect trackwork, detail of Chris333 but I know I could never do my own turnouts.
 
If anyone remembers me, I model the NYC.

Im going to try to be a more prolific poster.

Btw, I still love this site, even with all the asshats! lol

eja

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 909
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +39
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2016, 11:52:41 PM »
0
Happy New Year and welcome back.

I had a similar track issues when I finally moved from the armchair layout to the real thing. I went with Kato.  I know it tie spacing is not USA prototypical, it's rail height is not prototypical and the ballast is well, let's say not correct but it can be easily made to look OK in my mind.  Yea, the rigid geometry can be annoying but there are ways to deal with that too.  (Thanks Mike Fifer for your tutorials.)

I am quite pleased with my decision because it works ! And I don't have to spend a lot of time chasing down electrical issues.

nkalanaga

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6671
  • Respect: +288
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #2 on: January 02, 2016, 12:47:07 AM »
0
Starting out, especially in a limited space, on what is probably a portable layout, I'd second the UniTrack.  It's quick, reliable, and almost indestructible.  I don't like the looks of it, personally, but my railroads have always been more railfan than operator oriented.

I probably wouldn't go with Peco, simply because their turnouts don't play well with modern American wheelsets, without a lot of tinkering with the flangeways.  The standards are just a little too loose.  I have that problem with my staging yard, have heard others discuss it, and haven't heard similar concerns about UniTrack.

Once your railroad is running, and your interests are clear, you can always build another layout, with whatever track you want, knowing that your equipment has been thoroughly tested.

N Kalanaga
Be well

Philip H

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 7428
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +488
    • Layout Progress Blog
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2016, 09:44:04 AM »
0
Welcome back.
 
Been there and done that on the divorce. Trains kept me out of the bottle. Glad you are climbing back.

Have you looked at Atlas Tru-track? Code 65 rail, slightly better ballast look, bullet proof once set up. Only downside is they don't have all the parts and options Kato has.

If you do go unitrack look at @Dave Vollmer's Juniata Division - his unitrack is really not noticeable - and his treatment looks fabulous in person.
Philip H.
Chief Everything Officer
Baton Rouge Southern RR - Mount Rainier Division.

"Yes there are somethings that are "off;" but hey, so what." ~ Wyatt

"I'm trying to have less cranial rectal inversion with this." - Ed K.

"There's more to MRR life than the Wheezy & Nowheresville." C855B

hunter_alexander

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +2
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2016, 10:33:36 AM »
0
Thanks all. Yes, I thought about the atlas true track but the lack of certain items will keep me away from using it. Although I do love the look of it better than the Kato track.

I thought Daves layout was make with Atlas code 80 and peco turnouts?


muktown128

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 574
  • Respect: +33
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2016, 12:13:36 PM »
0
I'm pretty sure @Dave Vollmer Juniata Division is Atlas code 80 on the original section and Atlas code 55 on the Enola yard extension.

@davidgray1974 uses Kato Unitrack on his layout. He has posted many photos here of his layout under construction and you can see the Unitrack and how good it looks after ballasting.


Philip H

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 7428
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +488
    • Layout Progress Blog
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2016, 12:21:29 PM »
0
Philip H.
Chief Everything Officer
Baton Rouge Southern RR - Mount Rainier Division.

"Yes there are somethings that are "off;" but hey, so what." ~ Wyatt

"I'm trying to have less cranial rectal inversion with this." - Ed K.

"There's more to MRR life than the Wheezy & Nowheresville." C855B

muktown128

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 574
  • Respect: +33
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2016, 01:18:58 PM »
0
Philip,

It appears we're both correct.  From what I have read in other posts, @Dave Vollmer has used both Atlas code 80 and Kato Unitrack.  The Unitrack replaced some Atlas code 80 flex track. 

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=34670.msg402759#msg402759.

I don't know if he has replaced all of the original code 80 with Unitrack or not.  I have not actually seen his layout in person.  I'm just going by what he has posted about it.

Anyway, going back to the original question, I would agree that Kato Unitrack would be the most reliable for operation and can be made to look pretty good with paint and ballast as shown by the other posts in the thread in the link above.

Regards,
Scott

GaryHinshaw

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 5497
  • Respect: +636
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #8 on: January 02, 2016, 02:28:59 PM »
0
@davidgray1974 uses Kato Unitrack on his layout. He has posted many photos here of his layout under construction and you can see the Unitrack and how good it looks after ballasting.

Exactly, see for example this post.   :drool:
« Last Edit: January 02, 2016, 02:30:35 PM by GaryHinshaw »

tom mann

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 10668
  • Representing The Railwire on The Railwire
  • Respect: +720
    • http://www.chicagoswitching.com
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2016, 05:08:48 PM »
0
Exactly, see for example this post.   :drool:


You know, what makes that look really good is the flowing track work.  This is harder to get with Unitrack.

hunter_alexander

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +2
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2016, 05:25:37 PM »
0
You know, what makes that look really good is the flowing track work.  This is harder to get with Unitrack.

That was one of my thoughts, but could be possible to use some larger radius unitrack pieces to make a transition curve.

Have to work on the plan.

pdx1955

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 438
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +174
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2016, 06:26:28 PM »
0
You'll have to freely play with the successive Unitrak radii so you can step in and out of curves smoothly. As long as the radii all have the same number of pieces per circle (or multiple of) you'll be able connect everything up without cutting pieces. Cutting isn't that difficult either (cut the middle out so you preserve the ends), so I'd let the plan dictate the track instead of the other way around.

Peter
Peter

"No one ever died because of a bad question, but bad assumptions can kill"

Nato

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2090
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +64
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2016, 01:51:46 AM »
0
               :|  Yes welcome back. I would go with the Unitrack for durability, A recent article in if I remember MR.  or one of the N Scale Rags (er a  mags) on how to improve this track including using KATO ballast. Nate Goodman (Nato). Salt Lake, Utah.  :|

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8925
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +3975
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #13 on: January 03, 2016, 07:33:25 PM »
0
My layout was built with Atlas code 80 flex and Peco code 80 turnouts.  Later on I replaced a few trouble spots with Unitrack.  Now there's actually a mix of Atlas and Peco code 80, Unitrack, and Atlas code 55 all over the layout.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

Member SlimRail Modular Colorado Narrow Gauge
http://www.slimrail.net/

hunter_alexander

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +2
Re: Hello again...
« Reply #14 on: January 03, 2016, 07:54:33 PM »
0
My layout was built with Atlas code 80 flex and Peco code 80 turnouts.  Later on I replaced a few trouble spots with Unitrack.  Now there's actually a mix of Atlas and Peco code 80, Unitrack, and Atlas code 55 all over the layout.

Haha, yeah, I re-read your entire layout thread. You have quite the eclectic mix. I definitely understand the trepidation of replacing all the original trackwork. I still think you could do it and have it turn out awesome. Just need to take your time, make sure that before you lay your track that the roadbed is super smooth. Even if it takes a while to sand it smooth after taking the old track up.