Wow...I really like your technique of combining the 2 sections of track for the bridge. Awesomely simple, yet I don't think I would have ever come up with that idea. I am going to file this idea away for my next big layout, although I will be using flex-track instead of sectional on mine.
Great work with all of it!

I like the new announcements. Enjoy watching Bachmann overcome it's reputation from the 80s of questionable quality.
Would love to have one of the Penn Central GG1s - would have liked to have seen an Amtrak version but we can't have everything. The new structures are fantastic.
As always, I moan the new prices, but that's reality in the current economic age. Bachmann does, in my view, work to offer more product for less $$ than other manufacturers. Proof of that for me is the DD40AX - that's a lot of locomotive for under $100.

Have never done one (yet), but you might want to consider if your pit will be located  where it can be seen. If it's buried inside your roundhouse, a simple black painted area between the tracks that 'suggest' an inspection pit might be sufficient.

Quote from: Penn_senseless on July 15, 2013, 12:59:47 PM
( I dont use ebay).

And I was just thinking "maybe ebay" when I started reading your post. 

Any train shows in your area or fairly close by? Sometimes it's amazing what you can find at those things. Train shows and ebay pretty much run my railroad.

[/quote]
Where is Champ Decals now that we really need them?
                                                                                                        -- D

[/quote]

Amen to that. Definitely a vacuum waiting to be filled there. Seems like all the decals I look for at Microscale are either out of stock or discontinued.

I ran into a near disaster at a State Fair 3 years ago, displaying a layout that would run 12 hours a day (my first experience at this BTW).
The layout, while indoors, was situated very close to a large open roll-up door, which of course subjected it to the dust of thousands of Fair-goers.
Early on, I ran into running problems on various sections of track. Cleaning with brite-boys and alcohol helped a little, but not for long - I was constantly working trying to keep track clean.
I remembered I had some Labelle 105 track conditioner in my bag. I had never used it, but I thought what could it hurt at this point? I stopped operations, cleaned all track thoroughly with alcohol, then applied the 105, going over it once more to remove the excess.
I swear it was a miracle - the trains ran like new and kept running all day. Crazy thing was, at the end of the day...well, check that, not even halfway through the day...the track itself looked filthy. So the operating procedure from that point was to clean the track at the start of each day, apply some 105, and run all day. The stuff is touted as "improving conductivity". Don't know about that, only know it saved my rear and I'm sold on the stuff. On my home layout, I'll rub a cloth dampened with 105 around the track occasionally, then be sure to buff off the excess, because it is oily, like clipper oil, and it will affect traction if too much is left on the rail.

jdbrock - you may have figured this out already, but thought I'd post since I've been working on a similar project, that requires removal of the flywheels from a Blue Box motor.
MicroMark sells a handy little tool for this that I ordered but have not had a chance to actually try out yet - although I did use it to remove some plastic u-joints from a shaft.
Hear is a link: http://www.micromark.com/wheel-and-gear-remover,9767.html

Jonathan - just an opinion, but in viewing your photos (great photos BTW and what an outstanding model) it looks like a well-used old Ford as it is.
Of course you are the one that knows the look you want, but had I viewed them without a story, I would have been completely impressed.

Quote from: jbrock27 on April 26, 2013, 12:32:59 PMNext one will be all plywood base .

I second the extruded foam base suggestion. My current layout is built out of that and I wish I'd started with that in the first place. Extremely lightweight but strong, and rigid enough that a plywood base really isn't mandatory. I use two layers of 2" foam. The bottom layer is the 'base' and the track is on the top layer. I've also carved out a river and used extra foam to build mountains. It's pretty easy to work with.

Quote from: jbrock27 on April 20, 2013, 02:09:20 PM
Fair question JW.
It is because of looks and I want to had another 2ft of area, do the scenery up right etc.  Thanks again for the tip on the Atlas piers, bc I just bought some for the revamp.  Trust me, I am no hurry to do it  tomorrow.   Will continue to have some fun with what is there, then take on the new project.  What I have now, is mostly what I put together when I was like, 10 years old.  I am also going to integrate some nickel silver track that everyone raves about, along with some 22R curves and road bed, ballast.  Right now, no roadbed and an original poor choice of using particle board.  You see no pictures bc except for how the trains run on the track, it would be an embarrassement to me.  I have done a lot of learning though and that is cool

I made the same poor choice of particle board on my first layout. But this layout has been priceless in the things I have learned building it and I'm sure you are finding that out too. Likewise my second layout upped the bar another few notches. Best part is you're having fun - and I don't think you ever have the 'perfect' layout.

I would put it this way: comparing code 83 to code 100 side by side, yes you can see the difference. That is to say, focusing directly on the track itself and nothing else.
However, seen in the context of the entire layout the difference becomes negligible "in my opinion". You're looking at the trains, you're taking in the scene and how it tells a story. If the track itself is weathered properly and isn't standing out in all its nickel plated glory, who is really going to see it?
So yes, to each his own and I respect wanting to get everything as close to scale as possible, but that's my perspective.

Quote from: jbrock27 on April 06, 2013, 06:13:44 PM
Thus far, I've had good luck changing out talgos for car mounted wheel sets of both plastic axle and metal axle type, both with plastic wheels.  While they probably add more crud to the track, I have not yet found the need to go on a rampage and replace them with metal wheels.   I have to say, I do like the metal axles better.  But metal and plastic axle both run fine.  Getting the couplers body mounted, to me, has been the bigger of the 2 pluses.

You are about where I'm at - I'm trying to get metal wheelsets on everything but the cost keeps that goal in the distance. If I could stop acquiring old stuff that need new wheels it would help, but you know how that goes 
I do have the couplers under control though. I obsess about the metal wheels but the plastic will do.

[/quote]

I find that those older cars should have their wheelsets changed out to something with a better contour. this is even more important than having all metal wheels. those wheelsets with the extra large flanges are usually of very poor quality, often out of guage and cause a whole host of derailment problems. I refuse to run them on my layout for those reasons.
[/quote]

Oh I agree wholeheartedly with you, and I do change to a better contour (metal if I have it) as a rule. That said, there are a handful of old 'historic' pieces I have (mostly old locos) that would be problematic to change out the wheels on. I don't run them much, but I like to be able to run them if I like.
Funny thing, I was out for a walk today along a stretch of CSX mainline and as I was checking out the tracks it just jumped out at me that they looked exactly like Code 100 (proportionally of course   ).

Quote from: jbrock27 on April 05, 2013, 10:02:36 PM
I'll add that 'standards' can be dictated by resources.

Yes, definitely. And never forget it is YOUR railroad, and the only rule is that you must enjoy it  

I'll make a plug for Code 100 track though - I find if you have a percentage of older equipment with less than desirable flange contours, it can be more forgiving for running.
I started using it for that reason (and it was less impactful on resources) and have stuck with it. Compared to Code 83, the 83 looks better - but it's not something I notice.

Just to close this out - DD40AX arrived today 

Although a bit nervous performing surgery on the brand-new beast, it went just fine and it's running great! Thanks guys.