Bachmann Online Forum

Discussion Boards => HO => Topic started by: mdmeyers1982 on January 08, 2012, 05:27:29 PM

Title: Atlas Flex Track differences??
Post by: mdmeyers1982 on January 08, 2012, 05:27:29 PM
I am currently browsing e-bay for track... it seems that Flex Track is the best value for buying in bulk... however I am seeing "Code 100, Code 83, Code 80" Etc .. Which is the best one and why?? I'm a bit confused on this.  ???

Trying to plot out a new layout, and I think Flex Track may work a bit better for me than the EZ Track I currently own...

Thanks!
-Mike
Title: Re: Atlas Flex Track differences??
Post by: ebtbob on January 08, 2012, 09:00:31 PM
MD,

      The rail on any track is measured by code,  code 70,  code 83,  code 100,  etc.   The larger the number,  the larger the rail,  vertically.    Code 100 is the type of rail that is included in most sets,  either as snap track or EZ track,  track inbedded in plastic road bed.
       I have been using code 100 track for more years than I wish to remember.   I got into this wonderful hobby back in the late 1950s.   What I know about code 100 is that it is much more forgiving in regards to derailments if it is not put down just right.   Also,  as you get into this hobby and managed to end up with older equipment(from the 50s,  60s,  or 70s) said equipment may have oversized flanges on the wheels.   Code 100 allows you to run any thing made.   If you choose code 83,  you will have to stay away from code 83 or smaller code rail as oversized flanges will bounce on the rail's "spikes" and on turnouts.
       Code 83 is a bit more realistic looking but you have to be more diligent when laying your track to avoid derailments.
Title: Re: Atlas Flex Track differences??
Post by: on30gn15 on January 09, 2012, 12:10:49 AM
Quote from: mdmeyers1982 on January 08, 2012, 05:27:29 PMWhich is the best one and why??
That is one of those "It depends on what you are doing" answers.
The numbers are height of rail in thousandths of an inch. Code 100 is 100thousandths of an inch, aka 1/10 inch tall.

Real world rail comes in different sizes, which implies different strengths, usually measured by how much it weighs per yard/3ft.
And of course the different weights will be taller/bulkier the heavier the rail.

Heavier rail allows use of heavier cars. And some cars nowadays are in the 100 ton range - that's a bit more than 1860's trains with their little 28ft long wooden cars which ran on rail as light as 55lbs/yard - a far cry from today's 60ft plus cars on 132lb rail.

Modern mainline rail can be as much as 130 pounds per yard, and will be taller than lighter rail used in older industrial spurs.

Different codes of model rail allow representation of different sizes of real rail.

See for real world info  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_profile#Rail_weights_and_sizes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_profile#Rail_weights_and_sizes)

Now, there is also the thing of that as time has passed higher/finer manufacturing standards have allowed manufacturers to reduce the over-scale flanges on model RR wheels.
In real world wheel flanges are about 1 inch wide.
Model wheel flanges are still bigger than scale but have gotten smaller over the decades.
Imagine trying to keep N scale trains on track with a wheel flange of 1/160 inch!