# Track Code Importance



## psychotrshman (Jul 19, 2011)

How important of a consideration is the track code? My understanding is that its the rail height. Does this have a lot of effect on what can and can't run on it? Is a smaller code better than a larger one or vice versa? Should I put much thought into the code when I'm planning the layout, or is this something I can worry about once I start buying track? Thanks in advance for your thoughts.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

Older stuff may require code 100 track, new stuff is supposed to run on the lower track profiles.


----------



## sstlaure (Oct 12, 2010)

The smaller rails look more prototypical, but it you want maximum flexibility in rolling stock, I'd go with Code 100. Seems like there are more types of turnouts available for Code 83, but I haven't run into any problems finding what I needed in Code 100. I believe Code 100 is cheaper. The best deal I've found on flextrack is available at trainworld.com.


----------



## Gansett (Apr 8, 2011)

My hat's off to anyone who can visual tell the difference between code 100 and code 83 track. 17/1000's? Visually? Using the color of the ties is cheating.


----------



## sstlaure (Oct 12, 2010)

That's my opinion too Jack...that's why I went with Code100. It's also the ties - Code83 has smaller ties (again, just a little more prototypical looking.) 

If you're really looking for realism you'll combine the different size tracks using transitions.... (Think Code100 mainline and Code83 (or smaller) industrial spurs, etc.) 

Typically real RR mainlines are made with the highest weight rated rails to allow maximum flexibility as to what can travel those rails whereas spurs are designed just for the loads they will see.


----------



## tyconator (May 5, 2011)

Very true indeed. Branchlines or industrial spurs run lighter rail and even lighter in sidings.If you plan on doing layout and have funds to use much newer equipment(Athearn, P1/2K, Wm. K. Walthers, etc) you'll be fine. I say code 83 for mainline/yards and 70 for sidings and spurs. Another thing is to HO roadbed on mainlines and N roadbed on the sidings or what not or directly on the base.


----------



## sstlaure (Oct 12, 2010)

I'm using Code100 everywhere, but on my spurs I won't put sub-roadbed and will ballast lighter than a mainline would be. This gives the look of the lighter duty spurs/sidings but without having to worry about certain cars not working.


----------



## jzrouterman (Nov 27, 2010)

JackC said:


> My hat's off to anyone who can visual tell the difference between code 100 and code 83 track. 17/1000's? Visually? Using the color of the ties is cheating.


I agree. I use code 100. But be that as it may, a while back I ordered a couple of pieces of flex track and wasn't paying attention and accidentally ordered code 83. I've never used code 83 before so this was somewhat of a learning experience. This is some strange track.

I nail my track rather than gluing it. The nail holes on code 83 track are on the under side of it, rather than the top as on code 100. So I used a drill bit the same size as the track holes and drilled them all the way through. I then installed both pieces like I would code 100. I used these pieces in a yard. I didn't have any of the special track joiners that connect both codes together so I just used the regular Atlas universal joiners. I've gone back and fourth with cars and engines over the joint time and again and never have had any real problem other than a slight clicking sound whenever anything rolls across the joint, but then too, I layed it all straight. Plus while in the yard the train moves very slow.

Now whether this has made the difference I don't know. So what do I think of code 83? It's okay, but it's really not my cup of tea. I like code 100 better, if for nothing more, the thicker ties, the nail holes are visable and it just seems a little simpler to lay. As far as the color of the ties go, It didn't matter, as before I installed them I painted both peices the same color as my code 100, so other than the wider tie size difference, both codes look alike. 

Routerman


----------

