# Code 83 vs. Code 100



## scaleddown (Mar 13, 2014)

Any opinions regarding code 83 vs. code 100? I seems that 83 looks more authentic and true to scale, but which is better for your set in regards to long term use, which is easier to work with and which vendor offers the best product? Not too excited about E-Z track. Does the cork beds look normal with the 83? Any additional thoughts are welcomed.


----------



## rrgrassi (May 3, 2012)

Cork and ballasting look good with code 83 and code 100. Code 100 rail it a bit taller than code 83, allowing for older equipment with deep flanges to operate. Also code100 matches the new 144 lb rail used on modern mainlines.


----------



## Gansett (Apr 8, 2011)

Code 100 is 17 thousands taller than code 83, can you see the difference in 17 thousands from a few feet away? I can't.
There is also a difference in tie spacing and color between code 100 and code 83. If one of your friends is a rivet counter and mentions that your track isn't accurate to your era my advice is to find a new friend.


----------



## dlplost (Oct 14, 2012)

Code 83 is more true to scale. Other than that there is no difference in longevity or performance. Both have been around for a long time so availability is about the same for each. Whether you chose 100 or 83 is entirely up to you. Most popular brand is the PECO.
It seems to be a little better quality than the others.


----------



## ravex1049 (Dec 19, 2011)

rrgrassi said:


> matches the new 144 lb rail used on modern mainlines.


What does this mean? 144lbs per foot of rail?


----------



## wingnut163 (Jan 3, 2013)

it means just what it says.

one foot of rail weights 144 lbs.


----------



## Gansett (Apr 8, 2011)

Per foot? Thought it was per yard?


----------



## dlplost (Oct 14, 2012)

POUNDS PER YARD.
144 pound rail weighs 144 pounds per Yard. (3 feet)


----------



## tr1 (Mar 9, 2013)

*code 100 VS code 83*

code 100 is taller than code 83. Code 83 is more prototypical size wise. It's up too you. It's a horse a piece. IMHO. Good luck with your. Choice
tr1


----------



## scaleddown (Mar 13, 2014)

This site is a gold mine. Thanks for the input folks, I really appreciate it. I feel that hundreds of hours will be saved by just reading the various threads.


----------



## Joefrumjersey (Apr 16, 2013)

Operation wise, there is no difference, appearance wise, It depends on what looks right to you. 
On my previous layout, I used what leftover code 100 I had and code 83. I couldn't tell the difference, once the track was painted and ballasted. On my current layout, I used what code 83 I had left over, and code 70. This time around compared to code 70, the code 83 looked "clunky" to me, even though the size difference between Code 70 and code 83 is less than the difference between code 83 and code 100.

joe


----------



## scaleddown (Mar 13, 2014)

However, the more I read the more I study and the more I study the more I know and the more I know the more I forget, so why study? Time to start laying some track.


----------



## packnrat (Feb 26, 2014)

saw the 87 on the thread.
has any out there done the proto 87 deal of gluing down the rail?
works?
lasts?
worth the cash?

or just :rippedhand:

:dunno:


.


----------



## Joefrumjersey (Apr 16, 2013)

packnrat said:


> saw the 87 on the thread.
> has any out there done the proto 87 deal of gluing down the rail?
> works?
> lasts?
> ...


Don't know, but I'm going to try it, along with a Central Valley switch kit or two.


----------



## packnrat (Feb 26, 2014)

i am gearing up to start a small shelf rr and like what i see.. 
of what i can see, eyes are not what they used to be. 
nor are my stubs, those things that used to be called fingers.
might give it a try on part, if not all of the layout.


----------



## DDA40Xman (Sep 1, 2013)

I think EZ Track is getting a bum rap. I have a lot and I'm very happy so far. It's great for throwing together a layout to see if I like it. Changes can be made quickly. The grandkids can make their own layouts and have a lot of fun doing it, it's EZ.

The Remote switches (18" radius) are problematic with light cars, but #5 & #6 switches plus several #6 crossovers have been very clean. I'll likey go conventional on my big layout in the garage.

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk


----------



## packnrat (Feb 26, 2014)

for me even on a old steam era short line no turnouts with a ratting number smaller than a six.
in real life that is very tight.

now if i had the place and cash. main line all the way smallest number if one even could be put to it would be a twenty.
what can i say used to belong to a club, min rad for the main was something like 50 in.
would like to get back into said....but over two hr drive to get there ( and very bad roads) and my work is too varied in days and hrs, to work in free time on a reg deal.


----------

