Atlas and Z-Scale

[Denver Road Doug]

@Atlas Paul

 This one is part "are we there yet" and part "what's next?"... 

First, any more info/update on the turnouts and crossing mentioned a month or two back?   I think we extrapolated from "turnout and matching crossing" that the turnout has to be a number 5.  That is assuming geometries matching the N line.

And, would that turnout work with existing C55 switch machines?   I presume the chances of seeing a number 11 or number 7 turnout depends heavily on how well the flex and first round of turnouts do?    A #5 doesn't do much on my interest level meter since sharp turnouts are everywhere in Z, but the 7 and especially the 11 would really move the needle.

Anything planned outside of track?   I know AZL has some crossover of product line for freight cars, but there is still a ton of possibilities in that realm. (especially if you pull from across your multiple scales and not just N)   And of course locomotives could be a huge splash.

[narrowminded]

I would love to see turnouts, especially small #4 or #5, as well as some crossing pieces, for use with Nn3 trackage.  And then tie spacing appropriate for Nn3!     And then come and lay it for me!   OK, just some switches and crossings.  I can snip out ties.  

With these small 4 wheel locos plastic frogs will not work.  Same with long crossing insulators as seen on code 80 N track.   The wheelbase can be shorter than the insulator so it's a guaranteed stall if they are made like that.  Thanks for all you do!

[sirenwerks]

I would love to see turnouts, especially small #4 or #5, as well as some crossing pieces, for use with Nn3 trackage.  And then tie spacing appropriate for Nn3! 

But that's not Z scale.  Get your own thread.

[Teditor]

Turnouts are indeed the item most needed and not in sharp configurations, Z being so small would really benefit from #7 up, there are already sharp ones that personally I have steered away from due to there operating (or lack of) characteristics.

Ted (Teditor) Freeman
From the land Down Under where Z is still spelt Z!

[nkalanaga]

Even the Marklin turnouts aren't that sharp in Z.  490 mm, 19.3 inches, is a nice curve at that scale.  But, yes, a North American style turnout would be good to have.

And, like Narrowminded, Nn3 tie spacing would also be nice.  It wouldn't be that big a stretch for Atlas, since the rail and gauge would be the same.

[narrowminded]

Even the Marklin turnouts aren't that sharp in Z.  490 mm, 19.3 inches, is a nice curve at that scale.  But, yes, a North American style turnout would be good to have.

And, like Narrowminded, Nn3 tie spacing would also be nice.  It wouldn't be that big a stretch for Atlas, since the rail and gauge would be the same.

I was kidding about the tie spacing (although it WOULD be nice).  I'm just hoping for some good choices in turnouts and crossing tracks.  I wouldn't mind mating stuff without the roadbed but not sure if that's doable with reliability in these small sizes.  Anxious to see.

[bbussey]

You always can roll your own!    It isn't that hard once you build your first couple and it ends up being more economical.

[narrowminded]

You always can roll your own!    It isn't that hard once you build your first couple and it ends up being more economical.

Actually I will likely do that anyway.   But it would be nice to be able to purchase a reasonable quality and reasonably priced product, too.  And even more to the point, if Atlas is to succeed with their track they will need to flush the line out with some of these things and I was trying to add another voice to encourage that.  And that's a win for all.

I see the idea of not having a minimally complete line kinda' like selling new cars WITHOUT the wheels, leaving that fundamental component up to the customer to buy elsewhere and then, adding insult to injury, they have to drill the bolt pattern to fit.   BTW, I have already purchased some of their track both to see it (I liked what I saw) and also to support the effort with some actual dollars.  Afterall, it's the dollars that count and I think a full line with Atlas behind it could succeed.

[Denver Road Doug]

Turnouts are indeed the item most needed and not in sharp configurations, Z being so small would really benefit from #7 up, there are already sharp ones that personally I have steered away from due to there operating (or lack of) characteristics.

Well, I can't say that I've steered away from sharp turnouts, as my current layout-in-progress benefits.     And I know there's apparently an unwritten rule in the model railroad industry that--despite what everyone says they want--sharp turnouts shall be first.   But to go to the trouble of placing Atlas track, I would want to have turnouts that looked good amongst my modern rolling stock and especially some nice long #11's for passing sidings would be a game changer in Z.   The rub is...I'm not sure that the game will change enough, fast enough.   So I'm not blindly flailing about and falling tantrum-style to the floor here.  I'm simply stating that I would love to see these products personally and finances permitting will buy them.   

Looking at rolling stock, I would like to see Atlas do the ACF Coalveyors, just about any modern boxcar, covered hopper or gon, 89ft flats, and tank cars (Kaolin, 20.7K, 25.5K) from their N stuff.  Other items could be coalporters, 5161 LO's, and stack cars. (oh, and making those BLMA spine cars z-scale would be killer)   For locos, I would love to see Atlas do their entire Dash 8 line, GP15-1, GE Dash 7's, SD60/M's and really any of their various modern EMD road switchers. (including GP60's if you expand outside of N)   Of course the MP15 or Genset switchers would be revolutionary.   

[strummer]

There was a thread, last year, I believe, that asked what "we" thought it would take for Z scale to "grow up" and be taken seriously. A good portion of those chiming in (myself included) spoke to the need of decent track, and especially some larger (#7 and above) turnouts.

I don't remember right off if the question was posed before the Atlas Flex track announcement, or immediately after.

Anyway, it seems the items mentioned then are still needing to be produced...if some of them do indeed become available, we may see Z do what N has done; become a "serious" modeling scale...

Mark in (wet...90+" since October!) Oregon

[Chris333]

When they do the turnouts, they will just be code55 so no dice for me 

[nkalanaga]

Bryan:  I did lay my own, except for three in the narrow gauge staging yard, which was laid with Marklin turnouts and Peco track.  They work, but Nn3 would have a better chance of attracting manufacturers with more modelers, and a better chance of attracting modelers with ready to use track.

Handlaying Z/Nn3 turnouts is exactly like N, so not that big a pain.  Dual gauge is pain, but they work.  And I doubt that Atlas would even consider that!

[Denver Road Doug]

Well, I can report that "Atlas March 2017 Z Scale Announcements" did not appear yesterday on their Facebook page.   

I think leveraging Z track as narrow gauge N is a fine idea.   It would cool if there was a good way to make the ties wider with a snap point to break off the ends for Z.   I would be good with that.   Spacing would still be off but at least the width would be better.   (it seems to me that narrow guage ties tend to appear wider, no?  Not much of an area of interest for me so I could be wrong about that.)

[narrowminded]

Well, I can report that "Atlas March 2017 Z Scale Announcements" did not appear yesterday on their Facebook page.   

I think leveraging Z track as narrow gauge N is a fine idea.   It would cool if there was a good way to make the ties wider with a snap point to break off the ends for Z.   I would be good with that.   Spacing would still be off but at least the width would be better.   (it seems to me that narrow guage ties tend to appear wider, no?  Not much of an area of interest for me so I could be wrong about that.)

The spacing is off but the width really isn't bad. According to the Nn3 manual which offers the D&RGW specs as a standard of sorts has the tie width at 6'-6" (.4875") with 21" (.131") spacing.  Atlas Z track is .495" (6'-7 3/16") at .092" (14.72") spacing and MT flex is about the same.   And then there's Fast Tracks that puts Nn3 tie width at .535" wide (7'-1 9/16") and at 20" (.125") spacing.  So really what happens is there's a whole bunch of specs that will be right depending on the prototype. 

I think for my purposes, if it was a small mine application (or maybe logging) that I was trying to put together at the least pain, I might be OK with using something like Atlas flex and snipping out every other tie.  That results in a visibly different spacing (29 - 7/16"), lighter construction, and about 1/2 again the spacing of standard N track ties.  Might make a visibly acceptable track for that purpose.  And then there's always laying your own.

[peteski]

And then there's always laying your own.

Bob G. would be proud!