# Which track do you recommend



## Panther (Oct 5, 2015)

which brand of track is considered the best for a good layout, with reliability, and good looks.

Dan


----------



## Tony35 (Mar 18, 2016)

I hear Kato unitrack is very good, but looks can be tough to get right
I used Atlas track for a couple reasons 1) I had some already 2) its what the LHS stocked
But it all really comes down to how well you install it for good quality running
HTH YMMV


----------



## Panther (Oct 5, 2015)

Do you use any flex track at all ?
Dan


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

I used to use Peco's code55 but be aware its not compatible with other makes of code55, the rail is half buried in the tie base. Atlas may be better and more accurate but Peco points possibly more reliable.

Unitrack is good and reliable but you're stuck with their geometry plus its very expensive.

You'll get a variety of opinions on here. If you want the most realistic looks you can't beat code55 ballasted. 

Remember older stuff with larger flanges won't be happy on such fine track.


----------



## Tony35 (Mar 18, 2016)

Panther said:


> Do you use any flex track at all ?
> Dan


Lots of it
Can be a pain to get the joints on a curve lined up


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Track types*



Panther said:


> which brand of track is considered the best for a good layout, with reliability, and good looks.
> 
> Dan


Panther;

There are three basic types of track available. Within each of the three general types are several different brands, and different "codes". Let's get the code thing out of the way first. When track is advertised as "code 80", or "code 55", or "code some other number"; the number simply tells the height of the rail measured in 1000ths of an inch. Thus code 80 rail is 80/1000" high. Code 55 rail is 55/1000" high etc. So, why would anyone care? Basically because of appearance. If you scaled code 80 rail up to N-scale feet and inches, it would be over a foot tall. That's much taller than any real rail ever made. The smaller code 55 rail simply looks more realistic. Another advantage of using say, Atlas code 55 flex track, instead of Atlas code 80 flex track is that the ties, as well as the rails, look more like real railroad track. This is because the length of the ties and the spacing between ties, is much closer to real track's equivalent dimensions.
So code differences are all about the looks of the track. Either code 55, or code 80 track will work with nearly any N-scale locomotives or cars. The "nearly" in that last sentence, refers to some 30+years old N-scale equipment that had grossly oversize flanges on their wheels. These were nicknamed "pizza cutters." You are not likely to encounter them unless you buy some used, and really old, cars. Even then, the wheels could be replaced with current "Low profile" types that do not have the huge flanges. Very old locomotives, with these giant flanges, would not be practical to use on code55 track though. Since these old locos were absolute "dogs" as far as running quality,
I would not wish them on you, or anyone else, anyhow! 
This ability to tolerate "pizza cutter" wheels; and lower cost, are the only advantages of code 80 track. Most N-scale modelers prefer code 55.

O.K. so much for rail codes. What about those three types of track?

The three types are:

1) "sectional track" this is the most common type of track, and is the type included with many train sets. The track comes in rigid curved, and short straight sections. It's just the track, with no plastic roadbed attached. Atlas is, far and away, the most popular brand of sectional track. It comes in 5" straight sections and curved sections in 9-3/4", 11", and 19" radii.

2) "roadbed track" is another form of sectional track, but it comes with plastic roadbed attached. The plastic roadbed is supposed to simulate the crushed rock "ballast" found under real railroad track. The roadbed also locks together and this makes it handy for quickly setting up various track arrangements, on a table, to see if you like them. It is very good for temporary set ups, like an around the Christmas tree display. Roadbed track is sold under several trade names, like "Unitrack" (made by Kato), and EZ-track (made by Bachman). The disadvantages of roadbed track are limited available shapes of track sections, and much higher cost. Among the various brands of roadbed track, Kato's Unitrack is the best quality, and offers more shapes than other brands. It is possible to join some roadbed track to other types of track, with some modification. 

3) "Flex track". This track comes in long (approx.30") straight sections which are flexible; unlike sectional and roadbed track. These long track pieces can be bent to any curve or used as straight track. Flex track is also cheaper than either sectional, or roadbed track. Its flexibility, and lower cost, make flex track by far, the most popular type of track among experienced modelers.

Fine layouts have been built with all three (and sometimes a mixture of) these three type of track. No type is "good", or "bad" they are simply different from each other. Different modelers have different preferences about track (and many other things!) Any of the types will work. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. You asked for recommendations, so I'll give mine. I recommend code55 flex track. My own personal favorite is the code55 flex track made by Micro Engineering Co. Based on its general quality, and very realistic appearance. However, since you are a beginner, I'm going to suggest you start with either Atlas, or Peco code 55 flex track. For turnouts (track switches) I strongly recommend Peco. They are much better made, and much more reliable than Atlas. 

good luck, and welcome!

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Joints in flex track on curves.*



Tony35 said:


> Lots of it
> Can be a pain to get the joints on a curve lined up


 Tony35;

I don't know if you're already doing this, or not, but it's much easier to solder the rail joints on flextrack that will be used in a curve; when the flex sections are still straight. Next, cut away a few of the molded plastic "spikes" on ether side of the rail joints. The long, assembled, section of flex track can now be formed into the desired curve. This is a lot easier than laying two pieces of flex track onto a curve and then trying to join them. If, using either method, you find that the rails go "out of gauge" (too close, or too wide) it can be corrected by setting them in their proper place with a NMRA track gauge, and holding them there with spikes, super glue, or PC ties.

regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## fulsom56 (Sep 18, 2015)

When I researched my choices on what track to use I knew I wanted to go with what looked the most realistic. Code 55 flex track, to me, was the logical choice. What brand? Pico, Atlas, or Micro Engineering? Pico is well known for it's quality as are there turnouts. Atlas is also good. I went with Micro Engineering weathered flex track because it looks very realistic, it's already weathered (although you need to clean the weathering off the top of the rails), & I like the fact that it stays where you want it once you set a curve to your preferred radius (unlike the Atlas). 
With that said, I also went with M.E. turnouts, at first, & found them to be a royal pain in the butt. Now I buy Atlas turnouts which I find to be better quality, better selection & they line up perfectly with the M.E. flex track.


----------



## Overkast (Jan 16, 2015)

traction fan gave about as comprehensive of a write-up as possible on the matter. One additional note I want to add in regards to this:


traction fan said:


> However, since you are a beginner, I'm going to suggest you start with either Atlas, or Peco code 55 flex track. For turnouts (track switches) I strongly recommend Peco. They are much better made, and much more reliable than Atlas.


...is that Peco track sleepers (the wooden ties) have spacing that is prototypical to European track. Atlas and Micro-Engineering track's sleeper spacing is prototypical to U.S. track. So if you pair some Peco turnouts with Atlas or M.E. track, the subtle difference in sleeper spacing at the joints may bother you if you're OCD about prototypical looks.


----------



## Tony35 (Mar 18, 2016)

traction fan said:


> Tony35;
> 
> I don't know if you're already doing this, or not, but it's much easier to solder the rail joints on flextrack that will be used in a curve; when the flex sections are still straight. Next, cut away a few of the molded plastic "spikes" on ether side of the rail joints. The long, assembled, section of flex track can now be formed into the desired curve. This is a lot easier than laying two pieces of flex track onto a curve and then trying to join them. If, using either method, you find that the rails go "out of gauge" (too close, or too wide) it can be corrected by setting them in their proper place with a NMRA track gauge, and holding them there with spikes, super glue, or PC ties.
> 
> ...


Did that on a couple joints but ended up just putting curved pieces in where it got tighter, quick and easy plus I had all the curved pieces that needed to be used anyway so a win win for me


----------



## Panther (Oct 5, 2015)

Thank you all. I believe I have all of the info I need to make the right choice. I think I will go with Micro Engineering Co. 55 Flex track.
One other question. Does anyone make a track bed, that is already finished, or is the cork bed the only way to start ?
OR is something else preferred ?

Dan


----------



## Tony35 (Mar 18, 2016)

WS makes foam roadbed but you will have to finish it as the name says foam


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Roadbed*



Panther said:


> Thank you all. I believe I have all of the info I need to make the right choice. I think I will go with Micro Engineering Co. 55 Flex track.
> One other question. Does anyone make a track bed, that is already finished, or is the cork bed the only way to start ?
> OR is something else preferred ?
> 
> Dan


 Panther;

I don't know of any commercial roadbed that is "finished" in the sense of having ballast already on it. The closest to that would be the roadbed type of track. The rigid. plastic, roadbed attached to the bottom of this track is supposed to look like ballast, but the resemblance is poor, at best. In fact some modelers who use roadbed track actually end up adding ballast over the plastic stuff to look more realistic.
Since you are using flex track, the roadbed, and the ballast will be separate items from the actual track.
Atlas's cork, and Woodland Scenic's foam, flexible roadbeds are the most popular. Between the two, foam has the advantage of being easier to form curves with. I would not characterize cork as being difficult on curves either, the foam is just super-flexible.
Another type of commercially available roadbed is "Homabed" a pre-cut, somewhat flexible, form of the pressed paper insulation material, "Homasote." 
Personally, I no longer use any of the above. I prefer to cut my own roadbed from 1/8" Luan plywood. I first used this as a strong, rigid, base for my scratch-built turnouts. I liked it so much, I just started using it under all my track. 
By the way, I said I preferred, and used, Micro Engineering code55 flex track. That's true, for visible track. I use plain old Atlas, butt ugly, code 80 flex for the large amount of hidden track on the layout. It works just as well, it's a lot cheaper, and if you can't see it, looks don't matter. Also I don't pay extra for the "Weathered" track. This is probably another turnout related preference. My turnouts are soldered together, and the expensive "weathering" has to be sanded off the rail to allow soldering. Also I paint my ties, and rails anyhow, so the weathered rail seemed like a pointless expense to me. 

Regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Micro Engineering turnouts*



fulsom56 said:


> When I researched my choices on what track to use I knew I wanted to go with what looked the most realistic. Code 55 flex track, to me, was the logical choice. What brand? Pico, Atlas, or Micro Engineering? Pico is well known for it's quality as are there turnouts. Atlas is also good. I went with Micro Engineering weathered flex track because it looks very realistic, it's already weathered (although you need to clean the weathering off the top of the rails), & I like the fact that it stays where you want it once you set a curve to your preferred radius (unlike the Atlas).
> With that said, I also went with M.E. turnouts, at first, & found them to be a royal pain in the butt. Now I buy Atlas turnouts which I find to be better quality, better selection & they line up perfectly with the M.E. flex track.


 fulsom56:

I'm curious, what kind of R.P.I.T.B. problems did you have with the Micro Engineering turnouts? I've never owned any of their turnouts, but I use their flex track, and their trestle and bridge kits, all of which I consider excellent. I have heard others say they also had a bad opinion of M E turnouts, and I'm wondering what's wrong with them? The only problem I can see, offhand, is a dismal selection! #6 right, and #6 left! that's not much of a product line.

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------

