# Code 83 vs. code 100?



## Ethan1526 (Feb 8, 2016)

I've heard of all the codes and I'm not saying the other codes are bad or anything, code 80, 75, and code 50 something, is very rare compared to 83 and 100. That's why I'm not using those in this poll. I'm here to see what you think works better, if you want leave some advice for newcomers about choosing track. Also I will be selling my ez track to get atlas flex and snap track. I need to find out which track is better code 83 or code 100. I have heard that code 100 is more derailment prone, and code 83 is more prototypical.


----------



## sstlaure (Oct 12, 2010)

I would say that Code 100 is less derailment prone and you can run the widest variety of rolling stock...some older rolling stock won't run well on the small size rails.. 

Code 83 is more prototypical in proportions to actual rail.

I knew I'd be running a variety of stock on my layout so I went with Code100 for the flexibility.


----------



## vwrabbit (Oct 14, 2014)

I run 100 as I'm more interested in running smoothly than looking completely prototypical.


----------



## Ethan1526 (Feb 8, 2016)

sstlaure said:


> I would say that Code 100 is less derailment prone and you can run the widest variety of rolling stock...some older rolling stock won't run well on the small size rails..
> 
> Code 83 is more prototypical in proportions to actual rail.
> 
> I knew I'd be running a variety of stock on my layout so I went with Code100 for the flexibility.


So if code 100 is less derailment prone and slightly cheaper, I'll likely use it, plus my grandfather gave me some old rolling stock that I noticed is much tighter than other rolling stock on my temporary ez track (code 100) layout on the floor. I will reconsider code 83. I'm glad I asked before buying thanks for the info.


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

Ethan1526 said:


> So if code 100 is less derailment prone and slightly cheaper, I'll likely use it, plus my grandfather gave me some old rolling stock that I noticed is much tighter than other rolling stock on my temporary ez track (code 100) layout on the floor. I will reconsider code 83. I'm glad I asked before buying thanks for the info.


The only issue you should have with Code 83 is with rolling stock with tall/large flanges - the flanges can end up riding on the ties.

Older US gear and some European gear tend to have this problem.

Other then that I know of no reason why Code 100 should be less prone to derailment.

When I built my current layout I wanted to use Peco Streamline Code 83. A good looking product line that is very well designed.

I sold all my old Code 83 incompatible gear on e-Bay and never looked back.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I used Atlas code 100 flex because it is widely available. It was
the only flex stocked by the local hobby shop. I have no
derail problems with it or my Peco Insulfrog turnouts.

Don


----------



## tkruger (Jan 18, 2009)

Most of my Diesel fleet are older Athearn Blue Box locomotives. The Steam fleet is all Riverossi or Mantua except for 1 locomotive. The rolling stock is primarily old BB kits and Roundhouse kits. For this reason when I built this layout I used code 100. Since that started most of the rolling stock has been converted to newer metal wheels. Other than some of the older steamers I could get by on 83 if I started over.


----------



## Chet (Aug 15, 2014)

I use code 70 rail. After having been in N scale with the grossly oversize rail I chose to go with code 70 because to me it looks so much better and being that my freelance railroad is a short line, and that I run smaller locomotives, I can get away with lighter rail. 










I started the layout hand laying track and turnouts, but finished using Shinohara code 70 track. Most HO scale equipment an the market will run on code 70 as well as code 83. I do have a couple of old (over 20 years old) Riverossi passenger cars that had oversize flanges which did hit the spikes, but a quick wheel change cured that. 

I did take extra time when laying track and turnouts and have no derailment problems (unless some dummy forgets to throw a switch into the proper position) and it has been in operation for over 25 years.


----------



## SDEvo (Nov 24, 2014)

Code 83 for me, it looks bettter when runnig HO and i love the look of more prototypical track. I am even thinking of building my sidings with code 70. Also as a younger modeler (in my 20's) I dont worry about older equipment as most of the stuff I haveIbeen purchasing is newer.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

You left out a 3rd option: "It depends". Which is in most cases a standard answer to "which is better" questions in this hobby.

Speaking purely for myself, I find the more prototypical appearance of Code 83 to be preferable, and I have no operating issues.

As far as the price difference, it depends a lot on whose stuff you buy and where you buy it. For me (and again, this is purely personal preference) I would rather pay a little more and get exactly what I want.


----------



## /6 matt (Jul 7, 2015)

Another item for your consideration. If you ask what the best, most reliable turnout is, the answer by overwhelming majority will be Peco (there are others too, don't let me mislead you) so Peco is what you are probably gonna at least consider using. Why do I bring this up? Because...

Peco code 100 turnouts are modeled after European prototype so the diverging leg is a constant radius curve (kinda like atlas snap switches)

Peco code 83 turnouts are modelled after American prototype meaning after the frog angle (#4,#6,#8 etc.) the diverging leg is straight.

So if you decide to go Peco and care about the shape of your turnouts then this is something that should influence your choice. If not then disregard this.


----------



## bluenavigator (Aug 30, 2015)

Since I got my first HO train set with brass tracks, that was long time ago. I had no problem running train on Code 100. I didn't know anything about Code 83 or 100 back in early 80's. I do not get much of derailment at all. After opening the boxes, full of tracks and stuff couple years ago, I noticed packages said Code 100. I didn't know until I browsed through my old stuff. Turned out that I had been shopping for Code 100 stuff. So I have no problem using them on my layout. Got more locomotives and ran them with no problem. So I am good with Code 100. 

For prototypical, I do not have a problem with that but it is only .017 inch difference between Code 83 and Code 100. That is only a couple hair strands higher. (Blonde hair strand is about .003 while black hair strand is about .006~.007.) So that is no big deal for me. Nobody will run to your layout and say "Hey that is Code 100 so therefore it is not prototypical! That does not look right!" 

If one said that to me, I would ask for eyeball swap!


----------



## /6 matt (Jul 7, 2015)

bluenavigator said:


> Since I got my first HO train set with brass tracks, that was long time ago. I had no problem running train on Code 100. I didn't know anything about Code 83 or 100 back in early 80's. I do not get much of derailment at all. After opening the boxes, full of tracks and stuff couple years ago, I noticed packages said Code 100. I didn't know until I browsed through my old stuff. Turned out that I had been shopping for Code 100 stuff. So I have no problem using them on my layout. Got more locomotives and ran them with no problem. So I am good with Code 100.
> 
> For prototypical, I do not have a problem with that but it is only .017 inch difference between Code 83 and Code 100. That is only a couple hair strands higher. (Blonde hair strand is about .003 while black hair strand is about .006~.007.) So that is no big deal for me. Nobody will run to your layout and say "Hey that is Code 100 so therefore it is not prototypical! That does not look right!"
> 
> If one said that to me, I would ask for eyeball swap!


Bout time somebody said it. I personally can't tell the difference myself. I voted for code 83 cause that's what I run. I run code 83 cause I didn't like the black ties on Atlas code 100 :laugh:

Now in N scale on the other hand, there is a gross difference between code 80 and 55 and you can spot it from a mile away.


----------



## johnfl68 (Feb 1, 2015)

Of course everyone's use and needs are different. 

For me, it seemed most were migrating to using Peco Code 83 turnouts for reliability and detail. Also I needed two 72" runs of bridge track, and the best long runs of bridge track (36" sections) come from Micro Engineering in Code 83.

Since the turnouts and bridge track were going to be in Code 83, it only made sense to do everything in Code 83.

Everyone will have different needs and likes, so worked for me may not work well for others. But at least there are many good choices for everyone.


----------



## Chip (Feb 11, 2016)

I'm running on all code 100, Atlas flex, and Atlas and random sectional track from various manufacturers. "Yugoslavian" and "Austrian" track and turnouts with brass rails I got at garage sales that have been great, if you see em, get em, clean it up a little and it's really good stuff! Atlas turnouts need a little work, they stick up above the level of the rails! Some Locomotives do not like this! Other than that they are ok. Don't have any Peco or Kato yet so can't say.


----------



## tr1 (Mar 9, 2013)

*code55 Realistic rail height and wooden tie spacing*

:Well, when I first started out, code 100 was available in brass with fiber ties ,I got a good deal on code 100 brass turnouts. I thought I was lucky and doing good. My, how times have changed.
I replaced all of the brass rail, I used with, Atlas code 100 nickel silver, And, will stay with the Atlas turnout rail spacing. I do not want to open another can of worms. Weathering the rails, the code 100 does appear somewhat smaller.It's way more realistic
then the "O gauge"rail. 
Regards,tr1


----------



## MikeB (Feb 11, 2016)

I did a search last night about code 83 vs code 100. Found a thread that said code 100 has black ties and code 83 has brown ties. Now this morning I can't find it any more. Is there any truth to that statement? All my track is Atlas black rails 20+ years old.


----------



## highvoltage (Apr 6, 2014)

MikeB said:


> I did a search last night about code 83 vs code 100. Found a thread that said code 100 has black ties and code 83 has brown ties. Now this morning I can't find it any more. Is there any truth to that statement? All my track is Atlas black rails 20+ years old.


It's on the Atlas web site:

http://www.atlasrr.com/layoutfaq.htm


----------



## MikeB (Feb 11, 2016)

Thanks!!!


----------



## mopac (Feb 24, 2011)

If I were buying new track today I would probably buy code 83 track. I like the
brown ties. I started buying stuff for my dream layout over 20 years ago. I am
retired now so the dream layout will be started soon. I have a few other projects
to do first ( a deal I made with the wife). I bought over 130 3ft sections of NS
track many years ago. I have 100 sections of atlas code 100 NS flex, the rest is
model power NS 3ft flex track. I hear the model power track does not flex as well as
the atlas so I will use the model power in straight areas. No biggie. Glad I bought the track a long time ago. I paid $1.29 a stick for the atlas and $.89 for the model
power. Sure is higher cost today. I looked at my old track last month and it still looks
like I bought it yesterday. Now, back to the brown ties. I am going to paint the
rails and ties rust brown so color is mute. Painting turnouts will be tricky so as not
to interfere with smooth operation. My turnouts are atlas (boo, boo). Its what I have
already bought and my old 4 X 8 layout has brass track with model power turnouts
and they still work fine (over 25 years old) so the atlas will work for me. Laying the
track correctly goes a long way. I can run for hours on my old brass lauout without
a derail. All my atlas turnouts are still in package. Peco would be nice but I have bought
over 40 atlas turnouts for $5 to $10 each. All are custom line and mark 2s to mark 4s.
Good enough for me.


----------



## SBRacing (Mar 11, 2015)

I run Atlas Code 100 due to the fact that is what I started off with and had more of. I do like how 83 has brown ties from the factory but nothing a little spray paint and some weathering paint can't do.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

MikeB said:


> I did a search last night about code 83 vs code 100. Found a thread that said code 100 has black ties and code 83 has brown ties. Now this morning I can't find it any more. Is there any truth to that statement? All my track is Atlas black rails 20+ years old.


While true (at least for the major brands), it's nothing to get worked up about. An airbrush or rattle can, some brown paint, a little masking tape, and some newspaper will fix that problem in no time.


----------



## cv_acr (Oct 28, 2011)

.017" doesn't seem like much, but the difference between Code 83 and Code 100 is about 20%, and it actually is noticeable.

For my part, I'm actually building a layout with Code 70 and 55 light rail, and the visual difference between that and Code 83/100 is extreme.

(Also some brands of Code 100 have a slightly funny profile with a rather thick head, so it stands out even more.)


----------

