So just because it is popular does not make it right. Albert Chief Commissioner. No surprise Auscision say they are having trouble. Their early plastic axle wheels on code track had problems with the back to back being to wide. It would cause derailing trough point frogs. Like Mark, I don't have a problem with 88 wheels. I use Peco universal and streamline code track. I have had no problems using fine scale wheels from Eureka, SDS or Austrains running on Peco code turnouts, including the Peco set track turnouts which are sold to beginners.
Unfortunately set track turnouts are to sharp for many models. The same wheels work well on Peco code 83 and code 75 turnouts. They also work perfectly well on my code 70 and code 55 home made turnouts AMRA standards and turnouts made by others using fast tracks jigs complying to the NMRA standard. Code is the most popular H0 cauge track simply because that is usually all that is stocked by hobby shops.
Posted: 27 Aug Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson. Location: University of Adelaide SA. I totally agree! Somewhat sadly, many at my club believe in the former I also agree, walking around layouts at exhibitions it is easy to pick the rail code, and for the slightly more advanced, it's subsequently easy to pick many of the brands of rail by sight. Simply painting the track does not confuse or distract those of us that can see!
Kevin Martin Chief Train Controller. Location: Melbourne. Same applies to whether or not DCC. Kevin Martin. Ok here is one for the real oldies amongst us does anyone remember old Tri-ang rails they must have been code at least. You could use this rail to make O gauge track and some did too as buying the Tri-ang sections was a lot easier and cheaper than trying to get proper O gauge rail. I remember it well, so any one that complains today about rail size I just show them what went before.
I use code rail Peco and it all works for me, The rail height is up to the individual to use though, those that use the finer rail heights might find in the future when they get older and the eyesight goes a bit that it might have been better to go for the wrong size rail height in the first place. I have nothing but admiration for those that use rails that are almost two pieces of wire.
It looks good, but my old eyes are not getting any sharper so I will stick with what I have and get some running done. Also it allows me to run just about anything on these code rails, so I do not have to worry if something like a locomotive comes with Pizza cutter wheels and deep flanges it does not have to be modified. Wagons and carriages are easy to do, but locomotives are a lot harder especially steam locomotives.
I have altered wheels on locomotives to operate on finer track but it is not for the faint hearted or beginner. Because I am an 'operationalist' the DCC only still features just as many maybe more 'blocks' for detection and signalling purposes as it would have for DC.
Okay to switch between the two I'd need some switches and relays, but for three DC we're talking about 20 solder joints and I could do that in my Saturday morning sleep in, almost before I'd woken up Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
Yes I also have those problems as well and don't forget your mind either, not all of us will still remember everyrthing when they are Thanks all for those replies, yes I'm one of those for whom the eyes and hands are not as nimble or flexible as they once were and I do want reliability. I also didn't want to appear "out of date" either, plus I plan on getting a couple of the Fast Tracks jigs so as to make my own turnouts and maybe later make a few for sale to offset the purchase price.
So I think I will stick with code even though like several have said the smaller codes do look more in keeping with HO. I did have a Marklin layout that boasted 2 engines, 1 steam and 1 electric back about the early 70's for my 2 sons, but that's long gone, don't know how I ever afforded it at the time. Have still got some drawings of K and Ka and a couple of others that I found in a hobby shop on the corner of Gt South and Market roads in Remuera, Auckland.
I was thinking of getting a 6 slip turnout jig that would give me the possibility of being able to make not only the slip variety but also both left and right and a 8 turnout for easier and faster run through on main line turnouts. Bob, you have my admiration and compliments. I am like you, wanting to run trains, with the layout being a close second in terms of its overall utility in the grand scheme So, if you took the better part of 6 years or so to get to your objective, and those 6 years involved construction of a layout so that you could reach your objective of running trains, then you are much more farsighted and disciplined than I.
It was all I could do to get my layout crunched together so that I could run trains, and that was a whole 8 months, with the middle three off for gardening and other summer stuff. Two comments. The trackwork was pretty much done, but the railroad also expanded in space when one son left home, and I got that bedroom next to the layout. I also rebuild sections of trackwork as needed for new industry or operation, so the was the base railroad.
Structures and scenery consumed the next years, although in I can honestly say the layout is pretty much done. Now I work on replacing some structures, and adding some additional scenery enhancements, but operation is the focus. One additional comment: the railroad is three decks, top two were finished, the bottom was staging and unsceniced. My wife commented one day I was wasting all that space on the bottom. What a prophet!! I had two weeks vacation, and I literally lived in the basement, lunch was served from the kitchen above.
Lack some ballasting there today. Would I ever do a project that way again? But it was worth it for the enhanced operation. We had to re work the operating plan a bit so we wouldn't have people walked on, but it was worth it, and again code Life is good.
ONE has to wonder how many code users are actually running 'Pennsy' - or is this just a convenient excuse? Code is closer to the rail size used on the pennsy on one of their mainline stretches I have code left over from previous layouts - so would be stupid not to use it - but all new track is either code 83 or Color me like Bob Miller, - 'Resourcefull'.
Code 83 track. Code vs. Code 83 track views. Order Ascending Order Descending. Member since January From: Southern Colorado posts. Posted by jxtrrx on Thursday, November 8, AM. Posted by selector on Thursday, November 8, PM.
I can't think of a con off hand, but I can think of a pro Posted by markpierce on Thursday, November 8, PM. Occams Razor. Member since June From: Sweden 1, posts. This thread provided me with plenty of info before I decided.
Unless otherwise mentioned it's HO and about the 50's. Ted Marshall. Ted M. Chuck modeling Central Japan in September, Member since January From: Nevada posts. I think some of it depends on what kind of railroad you model and whether you are going to do any model photography. Louis 5, posts. Posted by simon on Thursday, November 8, PM. Posted by twhite on Thursday, November 8, PM. Paul 12, posts. Posted by wjstix on Thursday, November 8, PM.
Member since August 2, posts. Posted by dinwitty on Thursday, November 8, PM. Code 70 cannot. Member since March From: Wausau, Wisconsin 2, posts. Posted by jfugate on Thursday, November 8, PM. Member since June 8, posts. Posted by riogrande on Thursday, November 8, PM. Well said as usual Joe, I think you have every reason to go code 83 - it does look better and the molded in spike detail looks much finer.
I would suggest replacing one section say a passing siding with code 83 and comparing them for a little while before tearing out the whole works. If it looks like you will be happier with the code 83 on the visible layout change it, if you do not perceive much difference don't do it.
I have lots of code 83 flex and switches stock piled for the day I begin building so I have made my choice. When using two different sizes of rail, or two different brands of flex track, you will have to account for uneven joints where the two brands meet.
Even if rail is exactly the same height, the ties may not be. Leveling these joints is not hard to do using shims, transition joiners or some other method, but it does require extra work and some precision work every time Atlas meets Peco. Or, Walthers meets ME. If you are using one size and type of rail for the scenicked part of the layout and another for staging, that's not a big problem. There will only be a handful of uneven joints to work on.
But if you have to go from one size of rail to another frequently, that will require extra time and care. One other thing: if you like to make videos or take photos on the layout, some brands of track have significantly larger spike heads than others, and grossly out-of-scale track can really stand out.
The major visual difference between most code HO track and code 83 is the appearance of the ties and spikes. Rail contour is also often less realistic. Those differences are far more noticeable than the height of the rail. Having said that if I had an operating code layout I wouldn't bother changing the track but starting from new I'd use code The half built layout here is kinda in the no man's land in the middle, it probably depends on how much you like to lay rail and how much track you'd ruin when trying to salvage the code for staging?
Read my blog. I'm retired and I am on a fixed retirement income so I can't afford to go out and spend hundreds of dollars on lots of new track or equipment and even most used model railroading equipment is beyond my meager retirement income, which is sold on E Bay, and the stuff that isn't usually beyond my meager income isn't still there when I get my retirement check as its done been scarfed up and is gone.
So I personally don't see a problem with either using Code or Code 83 track. I would say to each his own. I know a lot of model railroading fans that use either one or the other and also those who use only either one but not the other.
I have used both and in fact the layout I'm building now is not going to be modeled after any particular area or Era. My lay out is just going to be a run of the mill Generic free-lance layout for my own use and benefit. I'm using only what I have available and that I have on hand that I've collected over the past 25 years. Yes there is a small difference in height between the two but I either use a thin plastic or wood shim to match the height difference or I buy those plastic insulating rail couplers that has the height difference sections already built into them for adaptability between the two.
So now I've put my two cents in for all its worth. Anyway have fun in building your own personal layout to what ever standards your own mind conceives. As one replier stated it's Your railroad and you're the boss. Thank you for the comments. I've read that people seem to prefer the Peco Code 83 flextrack. I also read that tie spacing is important.
0コメント