Code 30 Rail - Is it for real?

[Maletrain]

For what it's worth, code 40 rail is about the right height for N scale class 1 railroad mainline, at a scale 6.4" high, while code 55 is scale 8.8".  I think that is noticeable in photography, but we are so used to it as modelers that I don't think anybody goes beyond thinking that it looks better than that code 80 track with the Euro ties. 

I took the opportunity to measure some rail with an old caboose sitting on it in Cambridge, MD, and it would scale out to code 22 in N scale.  That may have been a siding when it was in use, but it is right beside the old passenger station, not off in some boat yard.

[wazzou]

I'd just love them to utilize the same embedded bullet proof design with proper US spaced ties and finer spike detail.
There HO code 83 track line is beautiful.
I think PECO turnouts have more than doubled in price since I remember buying a bunch of the C55 ones 20 years ago.
My next layout will be handlaid TO's utilizing the FT jigs.

[davefoxx]

I’ve built several layouts out of Atlas Code 55 track and have had no problems with fragility.  What are y’all doing to your track that you’re so worried about robustness?  Standing on it?!

DFF

[peteski]

I’ve built several layouts out of Atlas Code 55 track and have had no problems with fragility.  What are y’all doing to your track that you’re so worried about robustness?  Standing on it?!

DFF

No, we clean the track using a belt sander with 60 grit belt! 
Like I said, I'm a belt & suspenders kind of person. I like robust solutions. The design is already proven, why not use it.  I don't think it costs any more to have the track embedded in the tie strip than it does to have the spikes molded around the rail's foot.

[wazzou]

I’ve built several layouts out of Atlas Code 55 track and have had no problems with fragility.  What are y’all doing to your track that you’re so worried about robustness?  Standing on it?!

DFF

The tab connections underneath break, they generally aren't straight, the nickel wears off the top of the rails, the frog angles aren't what they claim...am I forgetting anything?

[narrowminded]

I’ve built several layouts out of Atlas Code 55 track and have had no problems with fragility.  What are y’all doing to your track that you’re so worried about robustness?  Standing on it?!

DFF

I agree that the track is sufficiently made and decent looking and would have no concern using it in a layout.   I also agree with those who find the turnouts to be lacking as outlined.   And to me, the real disappointment is, I can't find anything about those troubles that would be so difficult or costly to fix. 

[CRL]

Atlas track simply isn’t stable due to the sliding rail being loose causing out of gauge problems, especially if your layout is not in temperature controlled space. Micro Engineering track is stable, but somewhat fragile and can pop out of it’s spikes during temperature changes. It looks good and if all you need is #6 turnouts (or you scratch build) and your space is temperature controlled, go for it.

[robert3985]

Atlas track simply isn’t stable due to the sliding rail being loose causing out of gauge problems, especially if your layout is not in temperature controlled space. Micro Engineering track is stable, but somewhat fragile and can pop out of it’s spikes during temperature changes. It looks good and if all you need is #6 turnouts (or you scratch build) and your space is temperature controlled, go for it.

Having used both Railcraft C70, C55 and C40 and Micro Engineering with its larger spikeheads...and building both modules and a sectional layout which got transported to various distant cities for shows and stored in unheated garages and storage units for months at a time...I have NEVER had a problem with either RailCraft or Micro Engineering flex track popping out of its spikes.  NEVER.  So, I disagree with you about rails popping out of the spikes on Micro Engineering flex, because I have never seen it happen in over 30 years of use in much less than ideal conditions.

Micro Engineering's spikeheads on their current iteration of N-scale flextrack are much bigger than spikeheads on flextrack produced from their first injection molds, nearly as large as the first generation of Atlas 55, but without a loose rail.  Also, Micro Engineering's ties are thicker than Atlas 55's.  Comparing them side to side, the Micro Engineering flex seems more durable than the Atlas, not at all "fragile".

The track I've had the most problems with because of expansion/contraction is any code 80 flex...particularly Atlas, which would pop out of its spikeheads, or kink like crazy when it got overheated at a show venue sitting in direct sunlight with no air conditioning, particularly on modules whose builders had only spiked the track down.  My own RailCraft flex in the identical conditions at the same shows, NEVER kinked or popped out, and neither did any other RailCraft flex being used in the module setup.  That was one of the things that converted everybody in the club to start using it rather than Atlas or Peco C80 flex.

So, with my first-hand experience with Micro Engineering, RailCraft, Atlas and Peco track, I am going to say that your contention that Micro Engineering flextrack has a propensity to "pop out of it's spikes" because of temperature changes is a spurious rumor.

On the other hand, I've had rails pulled out of their spikeheads a couple of times, but it was because of transportation problems, bad road conditions and it happened to both my RailCraft/Micro Engineering track and other modules using Atlas and Peco C80.

In any case, expansion gaps need to be cut every 6' or so in ANY track you use to avoid expansion/contraction problems.

Atlas C55 track with its floppy rail architecture also has a problem if you cut gaps in the floppy rail, which needs to be done regularly because of electrical and DCC signal requirements.  It will misalign on straights, and develop both misalignment and a kink if the gap is cut when it's laid on a curve.  Micro Engineering flex, on the other hand, because of its much tighter rail gripping on both rails, does not have that problem.

Also, if you run narrow, low profile metal wheelsets, the Atlas floppy rail may shift enough to cause narrow treaded wheels to derail.  Micro Engineering doesn't do that.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[CRL]

The ME code 55 track I witnessed popping out of the spikes from temperature changes had very small spike detail and the ties seemed rather thin, so it’s possible it may have been some of the 1st generation flex track you described. That soured me on the ME flex and I’ve not tried any of their newer flex since LHS doesn’t stock it. You’re right about Atlas code 80, but I stopped using that crap years ago when Peco code 80 became more readily available. Peco code 80 didn’t exhibit the problems of the Atlas code 80, and so I switched exclusively to Peco code 55 when it came out. It’s a pleasure to work with and runs beautifully.

[Chris333]

I ain't reading this whole thing...  But yeah Atlas C55 flex has a problem with the loose rail being way too loose and possibly folding over. Their Z scale flex is the same. Don't remember this problem before the mold broke. I ended up using all my left over flex just for the rails. From now on it's ME flex only for me.

[peteski]

@robert3985 ?  What were the results of your conversation with Peco at the NTS?

@robert3985

Hey Bob,  you did post a lengthy comment, but did not address this the question a above.  Inquiry minds would like to know.

[robert3985]

@robert3985 ?  What were the results of your conversation with Peco at the NTS?

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to make it Salt Lake City for the convention.  So...opportunity missed! 

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[sirenwerks]

So I was perusing this thread, because track is in my future finally, and saw the reference to this post - Railcraft vs. ME c40 ? In it was a link to a Brit firm, Finetrax. I imagine I'll hear yelps when it comes to the "spike" detail, but has anyone ever looked at it or tried it? I can't see it looking worse than Atlas track in regards to the spikes and they do have a nice selection of turnouts.


Honestly, I'm thinking I should just learn to hand lay. With the option Atlas's 'issues' and ME's questionable availability and only one turnout option, I'm thinking it would be better to hand lay - in terms of economy, aesthetics, reliability, and satisfaction.

[rodsup9000]

ME's questionable availability

 
  I only remember one time when ME code 55 was not readily available, and the one time was, while getting new molds made due to failure of the mold that were being used. I've used over 100 bundles (6 pieces per bundle) on my layout so far and have never had a problem getting it.   





   Now if I were just getting ready to start building a layout, I would use all ME track and build all my turnouts with fixtures like "Fast Track's". When I started building my layout, the only code 55 turnouts were ME's. I wanted #12's for anywhere the mainline went through the diverging side of the turnouts, so I had to build my own. When Atlas released their line of turnouts, I started using them for the easy way out to get the layout done. It not done yet though.

[Mark5]

Would love to see PECO offer an N scale line of track based on North American practice and to NMRA standards (like PECO's HO Code 83 line).

But ... it has been years now and not a peep out of PECO.

Mark