Curve orientation for Atlas N-scale code-55 flex?

[mark.hinds]

I have been vacillating between Atlas and Micro-Engineering N-scale code-55 flex for my code-55 layout test section. 

QUESTION:  Does anyone have operating experience (!!!) with the 2 alternative orientations possible when using Atlas code-55 on a curve?  By this I mean putting the loose rail on the outside of the curve as opposed to the inside of the curve.  Note that this affects the effective track gauge slightly, per my experiments.  So wider or narrower gauge on a curve? 

(No need for advice on the other differences between the 2 brands; just this). 

Thanks in advance,
MH

[CNR5529]

Wide gauge is better in a curve, as it will reduce the likelihood of flanges binding on longer wheelbase rolling stock. This is also what we do on the real RR in certain applications

Btw, what orientation produces wide gauge, for future reference?

[Mark W]

If there is a difference, it's negligible.  I operate about 12 scale miles of mainline, never once bothered to worry about which rail goes where when laying, never once had an issue with gauge on curves; and I love to run long trains.

[wcfn100]

If there is a difference, it's negligible.  I operate about 12 scale miles of mainline, never once bothered to worry about which rail goes where when laying, never once had an issue with gauge on curves; and I love to run long trains.

I think your broad curves negate any effect. 

Jason

[Mark W]

True, minimum radius is 22 inches.  Though even on my old layouts with radius down to 11 inches, rail orientation is never something I worried about and never experienced an issue with. 

[wcfn100]

True, minimum radius is 22 inches.  Though even on my old layouts with radius down to 11 inches, rail orientation is never something I worried about and never experienced an issue with.

I've never had issues either but we've covered this here before.  The change in gauge is measurable.  I would guess at some point with longer wheelbase equipment having the sliding rail to the outside would help.

Jason

[mmagliaro]

Loose rail on the OUTSIDE... go for the wider gauge!
I put down Atlas code 80 flex years ago and did not always do this, and steam locomotives climbed out of 18" radius curves because the gauge squeezed narrow with the sliding rail on the inside.

For diesels, it never made a whit of difference, but even the venerable a Kato Mikado, which can handle very tight curves,
 would climb out until I corrected the track problem.

I don't think Atlas code 55 is as loosey goosey on the gauge as the old code 80 stuff, but don't take the chance.

[thomasjmdavis]

On my last layout I mixed them by accident- 1 inside and 1 outside- on a long, curved, section.  Whether it related to that or not, the only kink in the trackage of that layout developed where the 2 tracks met, and solder, rail joiners, track nails and glue never, really, solved the issue.  I would get the joint together, and 3 months or 6 months later, it would develop just enough of an issue to derail some of my less dependable rolling stock and the occasional (non Kato) locomotive. 

The other annoying part was that I could back a Kato powered Super Chief or El Cap through it, with no issues.  But some other equipment might derail in either direction.  This led me to the conclusion that Kato equipment is more forgiving than most.

[davefoxx]

I generally put the loose rail in Atlas flextrack to the inside, because then you are only cutting off a piece of the inside (loose) rail and still retaining the 30" of outer (fixed) rail and ties.  If you put the loose rail to the outside, you will have to cut down the inside (fixed) rail plus cut back ties to the length of the outer (loose) rail, which in essence, means you get less track for your buck.

On the Seaboard Central 2.0, I used Atlas flextrack down to a 10" radius (loose rail on the inside) with no gauge problems.

Hope this helps,
DFF

[CNR5529]

I generally put the loose rail in Atlas flextrack to the inside, because then you are only cutting off a piece of the inside (loose) rail and still retaining the 30" of outer (fixed) rail and ties.  If you put the loose rail to the outside, you will have to cut down the inside (fixed) rail plus cut back ties to the length of the outer (loose) rail, which in essence, means you get less track for your buck.

I'm afraid that the statement isn't quite right. You end up with one 30" length of rail on the outside and a slightly shorter length of rail on the inside, no matter what the orientation is (the delta depending of course on the radius of the curve). The difference is the tie spacing is larger when the fixed rail is on the inside, and the tie spacing is smaller when the fixed rail is on the outside, so you need to remove a few ties the one way. But you don't get less track, as you still have 30" of rail on the outside.

I would still install the track so that you end up with a wider gauge, particularly if you are running long wheelbase vehicles (steam locos for example) on tighter radii curves.

[MK]

Atlas, in their catalog, recommends loose rail on the inside curve.  Of course, they didn't say why.