track realism

[jsdranger]

Which track offers the most, (rails, ties and roadbed), but looks the most realistic?

Or

Is it better to purchase track without and roadbed (atlas), add the cork or another style roadbed beneath the track and lay balast across the track?

From a time and effort standpoint it would seem that bachmann track, with the attached roadbed or a similar track type, is easiest.  but how real will it compare to the track you add the ballast to?

Thanks

[jonathan]

Whether snap track, flex track, or EZ track, the 'realism' is gained through scenery and wheathering, like paint and ballast.  I have used multiple kinds of track on my layout.  Once the rails and ties are weathered, and ballast is added, you can't tell the difference among the brands.  EZ track takes less ballast to cover the molded roadbed.

Code 100 track has rails that are bit too tall for the prototype.  Code 83 rail is closer to the right height.  Again, once the scenery is added, it's hard to tell the difference.  I now have a preference for the Code 100 track because I can run my older equipment on it, the ones with large wheel flanges.

Code 83 track has smaller ties that are closer together.  It gives a better illusion of distance (how far the train is travelling).

It's really a matter of what your needs are and what readily available.

Not a sermon, just an opinion.

Regards,

Jonathan

[rogertra]

Whether snap track, flex track, or EZ track, the 'realism' is gained through scenery and wheathering, like paint and ballast.  I have used multiple kinds of track on my layout.  Once the rails and ties are weathered, and ballast is added, you can't tell the difference among the brands.  EZ track takes less ballast to cover the molded roadbed.

Code 100 track has rails that are bit too tall for the prototype.  Code 83 rail is closer to the right height.  Again, once the scenery is added, it's hard to tell the difference.  I now have a preference for the Code 100 track because I can run my older equipment on it, the ones with large wheel flanges.

Code 83 track has smaller ties that are closer together.  It gives a better illusion of distance (how far the train is travelling).

Beg to differ. 

You can always tell the difference between "scale" track, codes 55, 70 & 83 and the various forms of code 100 snap track, EZ Track or any other of the track systems with the molded plastic ballast, no matter how hard you try to disguise it.  People who say that painting the plastic ballast or painting code 100 rail disguises what it really is are, frankly, deluding themselves.

EZ Track et al all look like, how can I tactfully put it?  Not scale model railroading track?

If you want really realistic track you have only a few choices.  Micro Engineering code 55, 70 and 83 weathered track is probably best, followed by hand laid track followed by the quality brands of code 80 and code 70 flex track.

[mabloodhound]

Micro Engineering track is among the best but the pre-weathered stuff can be a bear to work with.   Don't turn away from the Atlas code 83 flex track, it works fine and is cheaper.   There's a lot of personal preferences in choosing track as you'll see in the following posts.

[Doneldon]

Ranger-

Any combination of track and roadbed can be made to look and operate great, and any combination can end up being a disaster. What it comes down to, from my perspective, is three things: cost, the work/time commitment and appearance. I don't include operational factors because any thing you put in has to work right or it's pointless to do it at all. Trust me. You want bullet-proof track.

Sectional track with roadbed attached is plenty expensive and it doesn't look very good unless you put quite a bit of time, but not necessarily a lot of money, into making it look good. This will include painting the rails, adding loose ballast to the plastic roadbed, and weathering the whole kit and caboodle. Left as is it offers no options about how your track looks: it will all be gray or black. Prefab sectional track functions quite well without a lot of adjustments but it has many joints, any and all of which might become problematic at conducting electricity from one rail to the next. On the other hand, it goes down quickly, is serviceable and looks okay if you aren't interested in going with detailed track. It is possible to cut custom lengths of track to make things fit but your turnout and curvature options are limited to what's available. Yes, you can splice in flex track for special curves but then you will pretty much have to add ballast to tie things together.

A second option, and a very good one for those who have the time and interest, is hand laid track. This offers the greatest number of options in appearance, rail size, ballast color and tie material, and an endless array of custom curvatures and turnouts. It is the most time consuming option, a significant concern for layouts larger than the frequently seen 4'x8'. It does pay off with great appearance, customization opportunity and operation when done well. One way to speed things up substantially is to use prefab flex track in yards, helices, tunnels and places which cannot be easily seen. For the very serious modeler, hand laid track is probably the best choice. It is certainly the most economical option.

Flex track on cork, foam or sticky asphalt roadbed is something of a compromise between prefab sectional track and hand laid. It goes down fast, is easy to do well, allows for a high degree of customization (but not as much as hand laid), and offers reasonable cost. It isn't absolutely necessary to apply ballast but not doing so will result in a non-prototypical appearance like unballasted attached roadbed track. This method opens up many choices of manufacturer, rail size and tie appearance. An additional roadbed option is Homasote but that can become quite expensive and it is vulnerable to humidity changes if not carefully sealed. Some purists scoff at flex track the same as they scoff at sectional track. There are many manufacturers of flex track and related materials so you'll want to check prices with a number of retailers and online sellers to find the best price for what you want. Don't forget to price turnouts, too, as they will cost more than the flex track itself.

I hope my presentation about the three basic ways to build track is clear and helpful. I suppose that it's obvious that I think flex track is the way to go but I want to be clear that applies only to me. It may or may not be the right solution for you. I wrote quite a lot but the big job is yours: You must weigh my information and the info and opinions of the other posters and decide how it all plays out for you. Only you know how much time and energy you have to put into this endeavor, what your finances are like, what you want your track to look like and how soon you want to see trains rolling down the right-of-way. Remember, only you are the expert on what you want. Good luck and have fun.

                                                                                                                              -- D

[jsdranger]

Wow, thats alot of info.  Thanks to you all for this information.  Gives me much to think about and alot of different ways of doing things.

the one question i have from all of this than becomes.  is the cork or roadbed necassary for flex track or even if i was to use atlas track.  Can i lay this track straight onto a plywood or styrofaom surface than apply ballast throughout, or do i need the roadbed or is it really up to my discretion whether or not i put in roadbed.

does the roadbed provide any significant advantages other than quieting the train as it runs across the tracks?  is the roadbed used to just raise the track above the landscaping.

what are the significant advantages to the roadbed and conversely, the disadvantages?

Thanks again, the info is great in helping me determine the route i want to take for my next track build

[mabloodhound]

Roadbed IS NOT necessary; you can attach it right to the plywood (use an adhesive caulk),   Probably the main disadvantage is the sound transmission but that may be negligible when using the caulk.
Roadbed under track is supposed to mimic what the prototype does with ballasting and in many cases it does.   But if you look at photos of yard track you won't see any raised roadbeds.   You can even run mainlines without raising them up and with proper ballasting they will look fine.
So the choice is up to you.   If you want to see a large On30 layout done directly on plywood, look at this one (there's over 350 pages of posts so far in 4 volumes): http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=32687&whichpage=56

[richg]

One thing to remember, hand laid track, even if proper scale, not code 100,  is not realistic at all.
Looks good and flows very nicely. Hand laid turnouts are also very nice and work very well.
Our club has mostly code 100 hand laid track/turnouts with some prefab added the past four or five years and definitely looks more realistic but still grossly over size if you want to be honest.
Most any model railroad layouts do not have realistic looking track work. Go look at a real railroad. Ok, continuously welded track work does look more like model railroad layouts.
Yes, I am talking about counting most of the rivets in this case. The choice is yours but be honest with yourself.
I listen to a train going by in my area and I hear a lot of rail clicks. Do you hear any rail clicks on your layout? I don't. I have code 100 with stub turnouts on my layout, circa 1890. Definitely not realistic for any time period.

Rich

[jsdranger]

Obviously any product that is shrunk to size and has plastic on it will never look completely real, but how close can things come. 

I am actually looking at going with atlas Code 83 track for my future layout  As of now i am in the planning stages using anyrail track planner.  pretty cool product too.  hopefully i will have a nice layout 14' long and 12' wide in the form on an L with 3 intertwining tracks, some loading docks train stations, hopefully a sport complex if i can find a nice HO scale football stadium of some sort or just build my own if possible.

Is there a better track to go with than the atlas code 83.  i realize that its all in the personal preference but since i am relatively new and am only using E-Z track right now i am looking for opinions on track

[Doneldon]

ranger-

I haven't heard many complaints about Atlas track. It does have the advantage of offering about any kind of turnout, crossing or other specialty piece you can imagine. Plus, it's about the least expensive, other than Model Power which doesn't look so great to my eyes. I've used Shinohara in the past but I plan to go to Micro Engineering track in the future. Many modelers prefer Peco. I've seen their products and they seem to be excellent quality.

I guess the long and the short of it is that it's pretty hard to go wrong with any of the major brands. There are some significant cost differences but I suggest that you decide based on rail size and material; brown, black or concrete ties; and weathered or not and then see who makes what you want. Also, if your LHS is less than full service, you might want to consider what they sell for those times that you just have to get a particular item and you don't want to wait for delivery. I'm lucky in having three excellent train stores within reach, and I try to patronize them, but I generally make big purchases like a bunch of track online. I suspect that's true for lots of us.

                                                                                                                              -- D

[ebtnut]

I've laid a lot of track over the years of all types.  Back in the days when the flex track options were pretty much Atlas Code 100 with the oversize ties, hand-laying gave the best appearance.  My current layout in On3 is hand-laid Code 100 and Code 83 except in the tunnels where I used flex for quick work.  Today, if I were to go back to HO I'd use the Atlas, Walthers, or Micro-Engineering Code 83 flex for main line work and Code 70 for yards and secondary lines.  With ballast and painting of the rails, it looks very good.  I have tried using the pre-weathered rail and found that having to use a Dremel and wire brush any place I needed to solder was more hassle than I needed.  As for roadbed, virtually all railroads had some degree of subroadbed grading for drainage purposes.  Having some kind of roadbed (cork, asphalt, whatever) helps mimic that.  Yes, yards can be essentially laid on the flat surface, and your scenery and ballasting can get you to the final appearance you want. 

[jward]

regarding the use of roadbed under track....

i haven't used roadbed under my track in HO since they stopped making pine roadbed. for me and my handlaid track, anything less doesn't seem to hold spikes well.

i lay my track on pine board, because of the ease of spiking into it. using sectional or flex track, you can lay directly to foam or plywood as well. if you do spike your track to plywood, it helps to predrill holes in the plywood that are a slightly smaller diameter than the spike itself. this lets you drive the spike into the plywood without bending it. as an example, if you are using atlas track nails, you'd predrill your holes with a #60 drill bit in a pin vise. believe it or not, when you factor in the amount of track spikes you are not bending and having to remove, predrilling holes is actually faster than trying to drive them without predrilled holes.

[ebtnut]

I always used Homasote for my roadbed since it holds spikes well and you don't have to pre-drill the holes.  I cut the Homasote to width, then cut the roadbed angle on either side.  Then I slotted the Homasote about 3/4 the way through about every inch or so (you can slot 3 or 4 lengths at a time) so it will bend easily.  Now, for the subroadbed I use splines cut from 1x4 or 1x6 lumber.  The splines are about 3/16" thick.  There are 3 splines per track, space with blocks to bring the overall width to the same as the Homasote (about 2" in HO).  The splines are assembled with a good hot glue gun. Now all of this requires a decent table saw of course.  Also, do all your Homasote cutting outdoors - that grey dust will go EVERYWHERE in the house. 

[jward]

alot of people swear by homasote. i am one of the ones who swear at it. it's main drawback is that is absorbes moisture. if you have a climate and humidity controlled area to work with you shouldn't have problems. i've not been that lucky,

homasote is also good for spiking premade track to. like ebt said, the spikes go in easy. for me, the drawback to that is that i handlay my track. my spikes not only hold the track down, they hold the rails in guage. i've found that homasote doesn't hold the small spikes i use well enough to keep the track in guage. most of you will never have this problem, but in my case it precludes the use of homasote under even the most favourable conditions.

for most people, the moisture issue could be something to worry about, especially with most of the glues and paints used for scenery being water based. if anybody has found a good cheap way to seal homasote from moisture, i'd love to hear how you did it.

[Doneldon]

Jeff-

There are lots of cheap ways to seal Homasote -- most any alkyd paint or varnish will do it. Kilz will do it, too, but it leaves it white. That's fine if a heavy coat of ballast is coming but not if the paint is to be the top layer on the roadbed. The problem with your question is the easy part. Yes, one can spray paint or varnish on the Homasote but the job is pointless unless every little bit is covered. That isn't easy to do and you probably won't find out that the Homasote isn't perfectly sealed until it swells or contracts some time after it's been installed. Then try to locate the problem area and repair it. Ugh!

I haven't tried this, but perhaps one could dip Homasote in penetrating oil, or even boiled Linseed oil. That should seal it, once it's dry, and it wouldn't be expensive. It would be pretty messy, though, and I'm not sure how long it would take to dry. There shouldn't be any problems with gluing ballast once the roadbed is dry. No smell, either, unless something like Watco oil is used. That's a great product for wood but it might smell for quite a while once it has soaked into something as porous as Homasote.
                                                                                                                                                          -- D