track

There have been some N track threads but you might get a more personal answer if give us some more info about your layout plans. How big, how complicated, how much effort you want to put into it, etc.  My own N scale experience is limited but I found I liked Atlas code 55 turnouts better than Micro engineering( they seemed easier to install, reliable ,and come in more variations. Micro engineering flextrack is stiffer than Atlas so I mixed them depending if stiffness was desired or not in a specific area( curves that hold their curve for example). For a small beginners layout I'd look into Kato unitrack, it is very easy to use and speeds up the process greatly .......DaveB

Track

We’re planning a small bedroom N scale layout basically a dog bone for continuous run with a passing siding or two, a couple of stubs for switching and a short branch line. The bench work will be open grid cookie cutter sub and cork roadbed. I have experience with atlas, micro engineering with previous HO layouts that I have built and had good results with these products but I did have to work the switches of both of these manufacturers to get rid of bugs and these layouts were DC. I am currently building my own layout HO, hand laying the track and using Fast Tracks jigs for my switches and if I may just a little plug for Fast Tracks I have built a little over twenty switches #5, 6, and 8’s. My first looked good but unusable 2nd so so, buy the third I had it nailed down. I really like the consistency switch after switch. So I guess my basic question is for an N scale DCC layout which manufacture provides out of the package on to the layout no tweaking reliably?

Bill

" I guess my basic question

   Hi Bill, I'd probably go with Atlas code 55 in that case. They offer various sized turnouts in straight and curved form, and easy to use flex track.You can see the selection and prices at MB Klein website. If the turnout selection is adequate you might also look into Kato unitrack if you really want to get up and running quickly with no ballast or roadbed problems.....DaveB 

Atlas by far!

Bill,

I model HOn30 and use Atlas code 55  exclusively. I remove every other tie and still have had no problems with it. I have laid about 400 ft of it. But there are a couple things you need to know. Being code 55  your trackwork needs to be good. Its not as forgiving as thicker rail. Also Atlas has problems keeping certain turnouts in stock. right now #5 left and curved right turnouts are hard to find. Atlas tells me everything will be back in stock in August. Might be a good idea to plan ahead due to some turnouts running short and the on going trade rumors.

Ted

Thanks for the responses

Thank you, DaveB and Ted we’ll take a look at Atlas. I’m somewhat surprised nobody mentions Peco maybe there’s not to many N scalers on this forum. I hope others will chime in on this subject as my son and I are getting ready to spend some serious money and I hope to only spend it once, thanks again.

Bill

Peco

Peco is well regarded by some N scalers. I've never used it myself , I wanted to hand lay some of my N scale turnouts and didn't want to figure out how to combine normal code 55 rail with Peco's double based N rail ( their code 55 uses taller rail embedded into the tie strip) If you planned to use only Peco turnouts then it might be a good choice....DaveB

Code 55 would have persuaded me to stay !!!

Long ago, I started off in N scale and I have thought A LOT about going back simply due to the Atlas Code 55 offerings. The bottom line is that a 24" radius turn in N scale fits on something not much larger than a 4x8 board and is a HUGE radius. The Code 55 is actually scale height and looks fairly convincing.

The old Code 80 and pizza cutter wheel flanges are why I left N scale. One day, I was at a train show and I was admiring the etched roofwalks and other refinements now available in N. I could hardly believe it and have always thought about N ever since.

Do it right the first time and you will likely never look at any other scale.  

N Track?

Reviving an old topic...….

I like the look of the code 55 track and have used it a little in the past. Now I am going to build a smaller layout and am looking at Kato Unitrack. While it doesn't carry the same more realistic look of the Atlas code 55, it does have a good reputation for being solid and reliable. Would love to hear from others who have used it.

Unitrack?

  I've run trains on Unitrack layouts and found it very reliable. It's also a lot easier to snap together a small layout than to solder flextrack into shape. I'd consider Unitrack if you are not highly  interested in how it looks in photos as it's hard to make it look as realistic as regular code 55 track and turnouts. My choice would be Atlas code 55 for it's combination of looks, availability of many turnout configuration,user friendliness, , and price.....DaveB

I'm doing mostly T-Trak these

I'm doing mostly T-Trak these days, so KATO Unitrack is what I'm using most. In addition to the wide variety of track available, I'm finding it fairly easy to custom-cut track. I'm using exclusively concrete tie track for my modules, and it's pretty simple to even cut double track pieces down the middle to get single-track pieces. O cut curves into pieces (to make 60 degree corners, for example) as well.

Before that, I made several Bend-Track modules with Atlas Code 55, and was very happy with the performance and appearance...   not to mention they've got a little lug on the outside of the turnout to solder a frog feeder wire to!

PECO is a no-go for me. It's made to NEM, not NMRA standards, and it DOES make a difference in performance, particularly with low-profile wheelsets. Fully 50% or more of LP wheels will pick the turnout unless the flangeways of PECO turnouts are shimmed. It's a big enough source of frustration that many N-Trak clubs have dismantled their all-PECO yards and rebuilt them with Kato Unitrack.

@ barr-ceo Peco nem not nmra

I can't agree with you, I have used Peco code 55 since nearly it exist and now use Fastack semi hanlaid turnouts.

I use low profile wheelset and body mounted  MT couplers with 20 cars lenght cars as a standard.

None car is authorized to roll on the system without low profile wheelset, body mounted couplers and NMRA weigth is a minimum.

The old part of the layout whith Peco turnouts is a port meaning a lot of operations and reverse running all the times.

Never had any troubles or erratic deraillements  even with cascade of turnouts and in reverse

But in N scale you need perfectly laid track and when I say perfectly it's not enough; every piece of  track need to be perfectly aligned and leveled, no kink, a perfect laying but this is also true in bigger scale.

Peco track is  very strong and versatile with a complete line of severals size of tunouts,three way,wye, curved, double slip, single slip, crossing and crossover.

It's not difficult to mate it with ME flextrack or Atlas Flextrack even with piece of track like Atlas or Fast track  turnouts.

There are severals well know N scale layout, like the one of David Popp which use Peco track and don't have reported any troubles.

 The picture show Fastrack turnouts straight and curved, combined with a Peco crossover and a double slip, track is ME code 55 motors are tortoise and hankraft display motors (switchmaster)

You failed to mention whether

You failed to mention whether your PECO turnouts are shimmed..   as I specified.

The other (purely cosmetic) issue with PECO is that the tie size and spacing is all wrong for US 1:160 modelling, as can be seen in the photo of your mixed-brand trackwork above. That's really a minor issue in comparison to the standards problem, though.

I tend to run longer trains.  like 12 five unit Thrall container well cars, MT trucks with Atlas metal wheel sets. EVERY TIME I have a derailment, it's a PECO turnout, unshimmed, at fault. Every time.  They're simply not made to NMRA standard, but to NEM. Don't mix the two. Period.

@ barr- ceo

None of my Peco turnout are shimmed.......

But You give me may be a reason why you have trouble in reverse; but sure if the turnouts are out of gauge cars even locomotives must derails also in foward.

I have a doubt with your cars because  they are Thrall cars

I have friend who run trains in Freemo layout, I participate in Freemo ops even if I'm not a real member and in reverse these cars often derail.

The problems  seems to come from too light car and the wheigh is not on the wheels.

Some Thrall cars have also limited move of the  trucks which catch or touch the side of the car when turning and derails them.

A few years ago in MR, Jim Kelly explained all the troubles he had with these cars and explained all the tuning needed to make them run well.

If the couplers are on the truck, they need to be body mounted, this aid to not put big force on the truck when turning, this is important on long cars and if you use kind of three unit in one car, maining trucks between units, they particulary suffer from the force put on the couplers and on the first truck.

They resolve  also problem by wheighting the cars put shim Under the bolster and keep of materials to obtain more move of the truck.

I use only 40' cars, because  the layout is set in the 40ties, they are all body mounted whith 33 metal wheels most from Atlas, and I use now from a while  low scale profile Wheels from Fox Valley.

I use as a minimum wheight for all my car  the NMRA specification, but many cars are well over wheighted like my real scaled coal loaded hooper, often I had  more than the NMRA wheight specified.

Sure wheight help to stay on track but also slow speed; I put my DCC speed CV on the lowest the locomotive support; in reverse they run slowly in my port,but on the main they run at normal speed.

Thank you all

Appreciate all the input we decided to go with Atlas, reading all the posts it seems that there are pros and cons to all the different systems and one thing for sure as one poster stated code 55 track needs to be almost flawless when laid. We will look at the weight of the cars and bring them up to NMRA standard. One issue with Atlas is availability and right now we are looking for a #2059 RH curved turnout, my son ordered this from Atlas 4 months ago still waiting, sign of the times.

Bill 

" right now we are looking

   Hi Bill    Weird, there's lots of #2058  left hands available but no #2059 right hands. I guess Atlas guessed wrong about demand? Hopefully someone here will have a spare to sell you.....DaveB

Atlas N Scale

I use Atlas Code 80 Flextrack and their Custom #6 turnouts. My minimum radius is 15" (except on my quarry helix which starts at 11.5" and goes to 43"). My layout has 

I can use the 11.5" radius because my layout is set in 1900.

If I were using modern equipment, 60' freight cars and 80' passenger cars and larger diesels, I would set my minimum at 17" - 18" to avoid uncoupling/derailments on curves.

I also had a chuckle during my last open house (Sept 29-30 2018) I had 3-4 people come in and tell me how they were glad to see I was using code 55 track as it looks much more realistic than Code 80. Having painted the track and roadbed with cinnamon brown acrylic paint, it looks much better. Their comments just proved to me that most people cannot tell the difference.

Painted track

Will, you are very much right in your observation of peoples perceptions. I had the same experience with code 100 rail on an HO layout during an open house. I was asked over and over what size rail I was using. Most thought it code 83 and a few thought it was hand laid code 70. I had also done some weathering using a light grey on the ties and india ink-alcohol wash on top of that.

Jack

That's odd...  why do you

That's odd...  why do you keep mentioning "in reverse"? I never said anything about reverse running. In fact, on Atlas code 55 or Kato Unitrack, I can run the entire 12 car (60 unit) train through it all day long,forward or backward, at speed. But as soon as I come to a points-first PECO turnout, things fall apart. No, it's not the cars. It's the turnouts.