New track types

[rbryce1]

Is there any plans in the works for Bachmann to make curved turnouts or 3-way turnouts?

[electrical whiz kid]

Peco makes a really good quality curved turnout.  I have used Peco track for a long time-I am moving up to code 70 and 83, and Peco still covers a lot of my needs.  Give their catalogue on line a shout.  One thing I found rather odd was their crossing in code 70-it is in code 75.  No problem, just some adjustment, but their top of the line" stuff is really nice looking, as is the rest of their offerings.
RichieC.

[rbryce1]

I had built our entire Christmas layout, which included 3 sets of tracks using all Bachmann track.  I have been laying out the permanent layout using Bachmann track as well, as I still have a bit left over, but I am finding I can do a lot more in many areas with flex track, as Bachmann does not always have a track section which will work for some of my conditions.  How hard is it to use both on the same layout?  Looks like all I would need to do is cut off the end of the Bachmann plastic roadbed where it joins with the next section and continue with cork or other roadbed.  Is it that easy or are there hidden problems with this.

Bob

[Jerrys HO]

Bob

I know the discussion of flex track and ez track has came up in the past. Do a search on this as there was a difference on using ho cork roadbed to match up. I believe someone posted O gauge roadbed was a perfect height for mating flex to ez track.

Jerry

[Doneldon]

rb-

You are exactly correct in your belief that you can match EZ Track and flex track. Just be sure to use Code 100 flex track or
else you'll have to either use dual code rail joiners, solder your EZ to flex rail joints or solder Code 83 flex to the tops
of Code 100 rail joiners but just slide them on to the EZ Track. That's not hard to do but it's easiest if you just use Code 100 from
the start.
                 -- D

[rogertra]

rb-

You are exactly correct in your belief that you can match EZ Track and flex track. Just be sure to use Code 100 flex track or
else you'll have to either use dual code rail joiners, solder your EZ to flex rail joints or solder Code 83 flex to the tops
of Code 100 rail joiners but just slide them on to the EZ Track. That's not hard to do but it's easiest if you just use Code 100 from
the start.
                 -- D

I always advise people NOT to use Code 100 as it's too big and not prototype and please, don't quote the NYC(?) use of the equivalent of Code 100 as that was a very rare exception to the rule.  These days, with the way better quality products on the market, there's no need to go the clunky Code 100 route.

[ryeguyisme]

I like code 100 because I can bury ties in ballast more. But I mix 83 with 100 because most the track I got was pennies on the dollar and I'm not about waste it.

Transition rail joiners are expensive $3-4 for a 20 pack. I just take a regular joined and cut slits in the top middle and when I join the railheads together I bend it, make it flush and solder it in

[Doneldon]

always advise people NOT to use Code 100 as it's too big and not prototype

Roger-

I don't recommend Code 100, either, nor did I do so here. I merely pointed out that, as long as he hasstarted with Code
100 EZ Track, it would be easiest to match it up with Code 100 flex track. And that's true!
                                                                                                                                          -- D

[rbryce1]

Actually, I prefer using Code 100, as I do not wish to have to deal with certain components which reportedly will not run on Code 83 or Code 70 track, like my Riverossi Steam Engine due to deep wheel flanges.  I don't know what all will not run on Code 83 or Code 70, but I sure know what will run on Code 100...everything!

Personally, I cannot tell the difference between the model and the prototype regarding the height of the rails, as my eyes are not calibrated in .001" increments, or even 010" increments, and I also understand even some of the real railroads used taller rails on the main lines so they would last longer.

But even if they do, don't, didn't or wouldn't, as Doneldon stated, since I have started with Code 100 and I intend to keep Code 100, I will definitely be using Code 100 throughout,.

My concern is how well Bachmann Code 100 track plays well with the other brands of Code 100 flextrak, or even sectional track, for that matter, for conditions where Bachmann just doesn't have a solution to my situation.

[rbryce1]

Bob

I know the discussion of flex track and ez track has came up in the past. Do a search on this as there was a difference on using ho cork roadbed to match up. I believe someone posted O gauge roadbed was a perfect height for mating flex to ez track.

Jerry

Interesting response Jerry.  I'll do that.  That is just the info I was searhing for, to see if I would have any issues with different brands.  Seems like the rails will not be the problem, but maybe the roadbed will.

[rogertra]

always advise people NOT to use Code 100 as it's too big and not prototype

Roger-

I don't recommend Code 100, either, nor did I do so here. I merely pointed out that, as long as he hasstarted with Code
100 EZ Track, it would be easiest to match it up with Code 100 flex track. And that's true!
                                                                                                                                          -- D

Of course.  I didn't mean to imply anything else.