# Atlas Code 100 Snap Track and DCC - Opinions?



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

OK, I'm putting my first DCC layout together soon (4 x 8 table & about 75' of track including 10 Atlas code 100 remote snap switches). I'm going to power the switches with MRC 1370 AC power & Circuitron Snapper CD's. I have two MRC 1370's so I am going to power 5 switches with one power pack and 5 switches with the other using the accessory terminals. I will be using stranded 16 AWG for the bus wires and solid 20 AWG for the feeder wires connected with 905 suitcase connectors. I have Atlas code 100 snap track sections that will be used with rail joiners from a previous temporary DC layout. I'll be using a NCE Power Cab system (2 amp) along with an additional NCE Pro Cab to run two trains (inner loop with yard and a main outer loop). I plan on soldering the rail joiners to create longer 3' sections of track that I'll then solder a feeder to each section. Plan on having the bus wires less than 25 feet and the feeders as short as possible. 

Looking for feedback as to whether the above makes sense and some recommendations?


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

Anyone please? Looking for input on my plan.

Thanks


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

It sounds great but as far as the MRC throwing the switches, I have no clue. The snap switches are fairly sharp, maybe a number 3 1/2 and if you have the sectional and are happy with it, use it. The NCE Power Cab is great and worth every cent. You do seem to be packing in a lot of stuff for a 4X8 but that is fine. Do you have a track plan for the layout that you could post?


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Welcome to the forum. Please be patient with us. Since model
railroading is a hobby for most of us, sometimes we don't check in on the forum for a couple of days.

I don't see any problem with Atlas snap track, if properly soldered together as you indicated. However, the Atlas Snap switches are problematic. I speak from experience. I inherited a 4x8 layout with Atlas snap switches. I have spent much time working with them, trying to get them to give power to all of my locos, all of the time, every time. I do not recommend them.

The problem is that any brief interruption of power to the loco causes problems with the DCC decoders. I should also point out that all of my locos are steamers. Steamers are known for being more finicky about track than are diesels. The only diesel that I have (belonged to my kids) runs great on my layout.

I have heard that the Atlas Custom Line turnouts are better, but I don't have any to compare. Many on this forum will recommend Peco turnouts. I don't have any, so I can't comment on them, either.


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

The 16 Ga buss is good but I don't think you need it. It is handy for a connection point for your feeders which I consider too large. 22 Ga is easier to solder and hide. Either will work but it seems you are going the max on everything. Why the Pro Cab, the Power cab will do it. Post the track plan, please.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Bwells said:


> The 16 Ga buss is good but I don't think you need it. It is handy for a connection point for your feeders which I consider too large. 22 Ga is easier to solder and hide. Either will work but it seems you are going the max on everything.


I used 14 gauge wire for my buss, because I got it (in multiple colors) cheaper from Home Depot than I could get smaller gauge wire from other sources.


----------



## tr1 (Mar 9, 2013)

*a little bit of money here or there adds up after a while!*

Patrick1,
Code 100 track is ok,I suppose.. it matches the code height of your turnouts. It is probably not as costly as the other choices that are out there.
#1.) Be sure you add your drop wires before you or choose to weather your rails.
You can add drop wires to the bottom of the rails,it helps in hiding the solder connections,If you are so inclined to do so?
#2.)Brass rails are a little more problematic with oxidation. More maintenance for trouble free conductivity.Nickel silver rails should help with those maintenance issues(cleaning mostly.)
I would recommend nickel silver rails in three foot sections. And solder on drop wires before any weathering is attempted.
#3.) It's your railroad,your in charge. I encourage you to save some money when it is possible for you to do so!
And, good luck now with your new hobby! 
Regards,tr1


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

Thanks for all of your input. I have heard similar concerns regarding Atlas Snap-Track turnouts in terms of reliability. I think mine are the standard #6 that have the 18" radius. If I were to replace them with Peco turnouts, what part number (left & right) would closely match this radius? I would prefer to go with turnouts that have above the table machines for ease of installation. I've also heard about the "spring" issue on the Peco turnouts...what is the answer on this and do I need the insulated frogs? Seems that no turnout is totally trouble-free. Here is a .pdf of my layout.


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

Patrick1 said:


> Thanks for all of your input. I have heard similar concerns regarding Atlas Snap-Track turnouts in terms of reliability. I think mine are the standard #6 that have the 18" radius. If I were to replace them with Peco turnouts, what part number (left & right) would closely match this radius? I would prefer to go with turnouts that have above the table machines for ease of installation. I've also heard about the "spring" issue on the Peco turnouts...what is the answer on this and do I need the insulated frogs? Seems that no turnout is totally trouble-free. Here is a .pdf of my layout.


Sorry, here is the layout...it's jpeg.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Welcome, Patrick. I'll second the call for patience. There aren't a lot of us who obsessively watch for new posts and respond as quickly as possible.

I think the advice on track and turnouts you've received so far is spot on. Nothing wrong with Atlas Code 100 snap track (beyond the limitations posed by sectional track geometry). Their snap switches are at the low end of the quality scale. Their Custom Line is better, and MicroEngineering, Peco, and Walthers-Shinohara at the top. Unfortunately, the geometry of each is different, so you can't just swap them out.

Power is a pet peeve of mine. I think most people grossly over-engineer their electrical work. Potentially, you could run that entire layout on a single pair of AWG22 feeders connected right to your NCE command station and not solder a single joint. My son's much larger layout is working just fine with no more than that. What is your risk tolerance? Personally, I think you're way into overkill. Solder your rail joints, and use a terminal strip to attach 3-4 sets of feeders in the 18-20 AWG range at roughly equidistant points on your layout, and that will be more than sufficient for the size layout you are contemplating.

I also think your power supplies to the turnouts will be way in excess of requirements. Each Snapper will power 5-10 switch machines in simultaneous operation. How many do you really expect to have in simultaneous operation. I'm betting you'll average around one. Even if you're using your DCC to line routes, you still probably won't have all 10 in operation at once. Connect the snapper to the accessory bus of your NCE unit (if available), or use a single transformer.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Patrick1 said:


> Thanks for all of your input. I have heard similar concerns regarding Atlas Snap-Track turnouts in terms of reliability. I think mine are the standard #6 that have the 18" radius. If I were to replace them with Peco turnouts, what part number (left & right) would closely match this radius? I would prefer to go with turnouts that have above the table machines for ease of installation. I've also heard about the "spring" issue on the Peco turnouts...what is the answer on this and do I need the insulated frogs? Seems that no turnout is totally trouble-free. Here is a .pdf of my layout.


As I noted above, the geometry of the Peco's is different. A #6 actually has a straight diverging leg; Atlas Snap Switches have a curved diverging leg (on an 18" radius, with an available 22" radius in Code 83). Trying to substitute turnouts would involve a complete redesign. That said, the turnouts in the diagram don't look like Snap Switches to me -- their diverging leg is usually shorter than the straight one.

You don't NEED insulated or powered frogs. The wiring for powered frogs is a little more complicated, but insulated frogs work just fine for most applications (unless you have a lot of very short locos without multiple wheel pickup).

Peco turnouts do have a spring, which is very useful in applications that don't provide positive pressure on the points (manual throws, usually). Powered applications generally keep enough pressure on the points that the spring is unnecessary. I'd hesitate to call it an "issue" though, just something that you may want to modify if you do go with Pecos.


----------



## DavefromMD (Jul 25, 2013)

What you have sounds very close to what I have. 4 x 8, Atlas nickel silver code 100 snap track and switches, NCE Power cab. I commonly run 3 trains, 2 with sound; and sometimes 4 (2 with sound) with just the power cab and never draw more than 1 amp.

My wiring is mostly 16, 18, or 20 gauge (depending on what I have) connected to terminal sections. I have no soldered joints. I run 3 connections to each of my 2 ovals, and 2 connections to my spur with numerous sidings inside the ovals that has numerous sidings.

I run my 4 remote switches off a single DC power pack accessory connection.

I have no issues.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I'll toss in some comments on Peco turnouts.

I have 20 plus Peco Insulfrogs on my room size DCC
layout.

Peco uses the terms Small, medium and large
to describe the 'radius'.

Small is an approximation of an Atlas #4
Medium would be their # 6
Large is close to their # 8.

Go with Insulfrog. Unless you have 4 wheel
power pickup locos there is not problem with
DC or DCC power.

You will be very pleased with Peco quality. You
just do not have derails on Peco turnouts.

The 'spring' you've heard about is standard on
the Pecos. It locks the points in place. You
would remove it only if you use the stall motor
type point power.

You can have trackside point motors with Peco.

Here are options for point motors.

http://rail.siliconjunction.info/peco_mount.html

Don


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

DavefromMD said:


> What you have sounds very close to what I have. 4 x 8, Atlas nickel silver code 100 snap track and switches, NCE Power cab. I think the booster is overkill. I commonly run 3 trains, 2 with sound; and sometimes 4 (2 with sound) with just the power cab and never draw more than 1 amp.
> 
> My wiring is mostly 16 and 18 gauge connected to terminal sections. I have no soldered joints. I run 3 connections to each of my 2 ovals, and 2 connections to my spur with numerous sidings inside the ovals that has numerous sidings.
> 
> ...


Is there anything that you did to ensure your Atlas switches were problem free? Seems that a lot of people experience problems with them.


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

Your snap switches are much sharper than a #6 and a #4. You may be able to use your twin coil solenoids from the snap and put them on an Atlas Mark IV turnout or a Peco. The two 1.5" pieces of track on the left and right of the main is going to put you real close to the edge of the table. Your track plan appears to be drawn using the snap turnouts as you can see in blue the diverging track is longer due to the 1/3 piece the switch came with. If you go with #4's it will mean a complete redraw as the geometry will be different.


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

CTValleyRR said:


> Welcome, Patrick. I'll second the call for patience. There aren't a lot of us who obsessively watch for new posts and respond as quickly as possible.
> 
> I think the advice on track and turnouts you've received so far is spot on. Nothing wrong with Atlas Code 100 snap track (beyond the limitations posed by sectional track geometry). Their snap switches are at the low end of the quality scale. Their Custom Line is better, and MicroEngineering, Peco, and Walthers-Shinohara at the top. Unfortunately, the geometry of each is different, so you can't just swap them out.
> 
> ...


That makes perfect sense. Even with my grandson running one cab and me the other would only require 2 to 3 turnouts being thrown at any one time...maybe. I'll cut back on the Snapper. Question: If I don't solder rail joiners and use feeders to a bus, how do you ensure good electrical contact between 75 sections of track?


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

Bwells said:


> Your snap switches are much sharper than a #6 and a #4. You may be able to use your twin coil solenoids from the snap and put them on an Atlas Mark IV turnout or a Peco. The two 1.5" pieces of track on the left and right of the main is going to put you real close to the edge of the table. Your track plan appears to be drawn using the snap turnouts as you can see in blue the diverging track is longer due to the 1/3 piece the switch came with. If you go with #4's it will mean a complete redraw as the geometry will be different.


The plan I am using is the HO-TT-9 out of the Atlas track plan book. I have to believe that they are using standard Atlas turnouts in all of their plans or at least I hope so. The switches I am using are 18" radius not #6 as I previously indicated.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Patrick1 said:


> That makes perfect sense. Even with my grandson running one cab and me the other would only require 2 to 3 turnouts being thrown at any one time...maybe. I'll cut back on the Snapper. Question: If I don't solder rail joiners and use feeders to a bus, how do you ensure good electrical contact between 75 sections of track?


Ensure? You don't. That's what I mean by your risk tolerance. If the possibility of one day having a part of your layout that requires tweaking to restore electrical contact bothers you, then by all means, solder the joints. I would call soldered joiners a "best practice", but not a "requirement".

On the other hand, I've had several layouts in my day (including two of my sons) and haven't routinely soldered joints. In the 20 cumulative years of those layouts' existence, I can count the number of times that a joint has failed to conduct on the fingers of one hand. It's not that hard to solder an individual joint that is giving you trouble, and leave the rest with just the mechanical connection. So you have to weigh the certainty of investing additional effort and money against the likelihood of it happening.

I'm not telling you NOT to solder them, by any means. My personal opinion would be to solder most of the rail joints (in fact, I recommended it in my original post), because that also gives you structural rigidity in addition to conductivity, but it's not essential. Odds are good that your layout will work just fine if you don't.


----------



## DavefromMD (Jul 25, 2013)

> Is there anything that you did to ensure your Atlas switches were problem free? Seems that a lot of people experience problems with them.


No and haven't had any real problems. Just make sure they move freely and fully to each side and that the points (the moving part) go snugly against the rail.



> If I don't solder rail joiners and use feeders to a bus, how do you ensure good electrical contact between 75 sections of track?


I have never soldered a joint and have had virtually no issues. Every once in awhile one piece of track becomes dead. A bit of pushing together from the surrounding pieces always corrects it. It is extremely rare that it happens.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Patrick1 said:


> Is there anything that you did to ensure your Atlas switches were problem free? Seems that a lot of people experience problems with them.


I'm not sure that there is.

(1) Atlas Snap Switches are a poor design for running trains. The curved frog area can lead to derailments - a couple of my cars like to pick the frog. 
(2) There are some design flaws that make them unreliable -- i.e. how the moving rails are connected -- they loosen over time, and can lose electrical contact or lead to derailments.
(3) Their consistency of construction is not good (insulated area of frog varies in thickness -- sometimes too small, and loco wheels contact both rails and short out.)

The link below has a lot of information on the differences between Atlas Snap Switches and Atlas Custom Line turnouts -- which might be a reasonably-priced alternative.

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/p/216204/2381306.aspx
.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

Patrick1 said:


> If I don't solder rail joiners and use feeders to a bus, how do you ensure good electrical contact between 75 sections of track?


I solder all of my track sections together -- EXCEPT the turnouts -- just in case I need to remove one for repairs or replacement. I only have one pair of feeders for each track section. The turnouts get power trough unsoldered rail joiners. I have 17 turnouts on my layout. Just this week, i had the first case (in 3 years of running) of a turnout failing to receive power (probably due to a loose rail joiner). It only took me about 20 minutes to get out the tools and solder a new feeder to that turnout -- problem fixed.)


----------



## santafealltheway (Nov 27, 2012)

Patrick1 said:


> OK, I'm putting my first DCC layout together soon (4 x 8 table & about 75' of track including 10 Atlas code 100 remote snap switches). I'm going to power the switches with MRC 1370 AC power & Circuitron Snapper CD's. I have two MRC 1370's so I am going to power 5 switches with one power pack and 5 switches with the other using the accessory terminals. I will be using stranded 16 AWG for the bus wires and solid 20 AWG for the feeder wires connected with 905 suitcase connectors. I have Atlas code 100 snap track sections that will be used with rail joiners from a previous temporary DC layout. I'll be using a NCE Power Cab system (2 amp) along with an additional NCE Pro Cab to run two trains (inner loop with yard and a main outer loop). I plan on soldering the rail joiners to create longer 3' sections of track that I'll then solder a feeder to each section. Plan on having the bus wires less than 25 feet and the feeders as short as possible.
> 
> Looking for feedback as to whether the above makes sense and some recommendations?


I would really re-think the atlas switches. I started with them, and now they are all in the trash. I would say 8 out of the 10 or so I had were faulty, or wore out in a matter of two or three months. It was an expensive lesson. I'm not saying they are ALL crap, or un-usable, i'm just saying PECO turnouts are waaayyyyyyy better, and I wish I had just bought the PECO turnouts from the beginning. They 'lock' in place when you flick the points. Over all just better quality. I haven't had a SINGLE turnout caused derailment since I made the switch. for me, the cost vs reliability is a no brainer.


----------



## DavefromMD (Jul 25, 2013)

Don't over complicate it. Keep it simple.
Here's how I wired my 4 x 8.
From the Power cab connection to a pair of 4 gang terminal connectors on the side of my benchwork near the one end of the layout - one wire to each. 
From there I ran a connection to a terminal section on each oval.
From the terminal I ran another pair of wires to a pair of 4 gang terminal connectors under the middle of the platform.
From those I ran wires to the far end of each oval connecting to terminal sections, to the back of the ovals to terminal sections, and 2 connections to my spur inside the ovals.
Very simple. No bus and drops. No power issues.


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

Hi Patrick I'd also throw my hat in the direction of Peco switches, they are really ultra reliable. The twin coil motor just clips on underneath or can be used on top of the board.

The other point I'd make is that you really don't need a ProCab as a second throttle, go for for one of their dedicated throttles at about half the price. The ProCab is just a PowerCab without the power, there's just one extra feature.

Good luck.


----------



## Patrick1 (Jan 21, 2017)

Cycleops said:


> Hi Patrick I'd also throw my hat in the direction of Peco switches, they are really ultra reliable. The twin coil motor just clips on underneath or can be used on top of the board.
> 
> The other point I'd make is that you really don't need a ProCab as a second throttle, go for for one of their dedicated throttles at about half the price. The ProCab is just a PowerCab without the power, there's just one extra feature.
> 
> Good luck.


On the Peco switches...which ones would best match the Atlas snap switches (18" radius) that have the on top twin coils? Is there a kit that includes everything like the Atlas remote switches do?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Patrick1 said:


> On the Peco switches...which ones would best match the Atlas snap switches (18" radius) that have the on top twin coils? Is there a kit that includes everything like the Atlas remote switches do?


Nothing matches snap switches with a curved diverging leg (except curved turnouts, that is, but they won't do it for you). That's one reason snap switches can have performance problems. Better quality turnouts have a straight diverging leg, more like the prototype.

Most turnouts don't come with bundled motors because there are so many options, the manufacturers recognize that most people want to choose their own. The Atlas twin coil solenoids are big, ugly, loud, and easy to burn out. I would recommend either a manual throw (Caboose Industries, for example), Peco's own motor, Circuitron's Tortoise motors, or miniature servos from Tam Valley Depot. Except for the manual throws, the others mount UNDER the layout and work by threading a wire up through the throwbar of the turnout. Most of us like that option much better than that big piece of plastic sitting beside the track.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

As accurately stated, by CTvalley, you can't directly
replace Atlas turnouts with other makes. The measurements
and geometry are different.

While you can use most any turnout point motor with
Peco turnouts I prefer their PL10 attached directly under
the Peco turnout. This does require that you 'dig' an
approximate 1 " square hole to accomodate the twin
coil unit, but you eliminate alignment problems. They do
also have top of layout motors. You could use the
Atlas twin coil motors but they would require you
to stabilize them so they don't move.

Peco turnouts have a locking 'spring'. This is useful
for twin coil motors, but must be removed for 
stall motor units.

Don


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*What Scale?*



Patrick1 said:


> OK, I'm putting my first DCC layout together soon (4 x 8 table & about 75' of track including 10 Atlas code 100 remote snap switches). I'm going to power the switches with MRC 1370 AC power & Circuitron Snapper CD's. I have two MRC 1370's so I am going to power 5 switches with one power pack and 5 switches with the other using the accessory terminals. I will be using stranded 16 AWG for the bus wires and solid 20 AWG for the feeder wires connected with 905 suitcase connectors. I have Atlas code 100 snap track sections that will be used with rail joiners from a previous temporary DC layout. I'll be using a NCE Power Cab system (2 amp) along with an additional NCE Pro Cab to run two trains (inner loop with yard and a main outer loop). I plan on soldering the rail joiners to create longer 3' sections of track that I'll then solder a feeder to each section. Plan on having the bus wires less than 25 feet and the feeders as short as possible.
> 
> Looking for feedback as to whether the above makes sense and some recommendations?


Patrick1;

I didn't see any mention of scale in either the text above or on your info profile. HO-scale and N-scale Atlas turnouts have one important difference. The HO version contains a very sharp curve and the N version has a gentle, broad curve. This makes a difference regarding derailments, but electrically the two are pretty similar.
I don't like Atlas turnouts. Or, for that matter any turnout with a plastic frog. This is particularly true when using DCC. As already mentioned, momentary loss of power on the plastic frog is a bigger problem with DCC than with DC. 
I model in N-scale, and I make my own turnouts from scratch. I make them with isolated, "live," (electrically powered) metal, frogs. If, like most folks, you prefer to buy, rather than build, turnouts; then I recommend Peco brand "Electrofrog" turnouts. They have a metal frog that can be connected as a "live" frog, and I recommend connecting it that way. Peco has a twin coil switch machine (better than Atlas) that can be used with your proposed electrical system.

good luck;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:

Photo of one of my turnouts;


----------



## Bwells (Mar 30, 2014)

Patrick: you mentioned you had the turnouts as well as the sectional. Go with that and your original design. Get a sheet of ply and some 1X4 and build a frame, screw the ply down and throw it on a couple sawhorses. Lay the track as per your drawing, it is sectional so it should go quick and hold it's shape. Although the turnouts are remote, you can still work them manually with your finger so don't bother hooking them up yet. Attach a couple alligator clips some where from a transformer and run it. You have everything so use it. If later on you decide something different, that is also fine. Just do it!!!


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

DavefromMD said:


> Don't over complicate it. Keep it simple.
> Here's how I wired my 4 x 8.
> From the Power cab connection to a pair of 4 gang terminal connectors on the side of my benchwork near the one end of the layout - one wire to each.
> From there I ran a connection to a terminal section on each oval.
> ...





Bwells said:


> Patrick: you mentioned you had the turnouts as well as the sectional. Go with that and your original design. Get a sheet of ply and some 1X4 and build a frame, screw the ply down and throw it on a couple sawhorses. Lay the track as per your drawing, it is sectional so it should go quick and hold it's shape. Although the turnouts are remote, you can still work them manually with your finger so don't bother hooking them up yet. Attach a couple alligator clips some where from a transformer and run it. You have everything so use it. If later on you decide something different, that is also fine. Just do it!!!


 I respect the advice of all my friends here, but sometimes things tend to balloon a little quickly. PECO, Walthers, Shinohara are all great products no question. It isn't the end of the world if you use Atlas snap switches. I've been using them for 4 decades and doing just fine, and I would wager my 4x8 layout runs more hours per week than most.


----------



## MtRR75 (Nov 27, 2013)

traction fan said:


> I didn't see any mention of scale in either the text above or on your info profile. HO-scale and N-scale Atlas turnouts have one important difference........


In Post #1, Patrick mentioned Atlas code 100 track, indicating that he is using HO scale products. The tallest N-scale track that Atlas makes is Code 80.


----------

