Type of track?

[TrainLegend150]

Hello! I was just wondering what type of track is the best for HO model railroading? I was thinking about using Atlas track instead of Bachmann EZ track for a short time, but now I'm not so sure.

[jonathan]

TL150,

There is nothing wrong with using a mixture of different types of track.  I have used EZ track, Atlas, Rocco, AHM... whatever I had on hand.  This is economical,  Properly laid and soldered, most types of track will play well together.  I tend to stay away of steel track. Cleanliness and conductivity is an issue with steel track.  Flex track is my favorite, but have used sectional track with no problems.

Regards,

Jonathan

[phillyreading]

I do a little work in H.O. and Atlas nickel silver track has been good enuff for me.
Other brands of track might be more expensive, especially if you are using a brand with plastic roadbed attached, seems to be almost double the price of regular track.
Terminal wires are sold by at least two companies, these can have the little track connectors attached as well.

Lee F.

[Doneldon]

Legend-

What is the best track? I don't know, because that decision is based on a number of factors which vary from modeler to modeler. So ... the best track is the one which best serves the plans of a given modeler. For example, if you just want a simple oval, perhaps with a couple of spurs that you'll set up and take down between operating sessions, sectional track is your choice. It should probably have roadbed attached because that track holds together over time better than sectional track alone. Bare bones sectional track will loosen over several constructions leading to derailments and electrical conductivity problems. If your temporary layout is to be on the floor (not a good idea at all) be sure to use track with attached roadbed as it will help a little to keep your moving parts, especially locomotives, up out of the dirt and lint which will eventually gum up the works of any floor layout. Bachmann EZ Track is an excellent choice for roadbed attached track because it is durable, looks pretty good and has a wide range of accessory pieces. Appearance wise, nothing beats well done hand-laid track. But the worker must be competent and meticulous, traits which few newbies have had an opportunity to develop. It also takes much longer to build than other options. For perhaps the best (there's that word again) compromise between speed, appearance and reliability, look seriously at flex track. It's especially useful if you need to fudge a curve a little or build something unconventional. And sectional track is always an option though I wouldn't recommend it for a permanent layout because it is expensive and has too many electron robbing joints.

However, type of track is just the beginning of your track decisions, or perhaps the end. That is to say, there are several other decisions which you must make before you decide on track and those decisions may decide your track style decision for you. For example, you need to consider manufacturer, material and size, called "code" in model railroad parlance. Of these, manufacturer is probably the easiest.

Every major model railroad manufacturer makes well designed and well made track. Which you choose will be directed by your choices of rail material, code and available pieces. That's because different manufacturers sell slightly different products. Most is easily compatible with other brands with a bit of adaptation but it's probably easiest over all to use one brand primarily if not exclusively. As you select code, material and availability you'll find yourself led to one brand or another. For example, the layout you plan may call for certain sizes of turnouts (commonly called "switches" in model railroad vernacular) or crossings. Since every manufacturer has a slightly different assortment of such items you may find that your manufacturer choice is limited to one or two. Yes, you can adapt Bachmann track to Peco switches but you'll probably find things go more smoothly, and look a little better, if only one style of crosstie, rail height and tie spacing is used. And that goes for all of the other possible pairings between manufacturers, too.

Size is an important consideration. Most model railroad rails in the past, and most of what is shipped with train sets today, is called Code 100 rail. That means that the rail is 100/1000" high, or .1 inch. However, that rail would be 7.25 inches high on the prototype, which is HUGE. Only the heaviest rails on big-time mainlines is that big, so Code 100 can look inordinately large and out of scale, especially for sidings and spurs. Recently, Code 87 (87/1000") has become very popular. It still accommodates the oversize flanges on most model railroad wheels, while looking more like real rails. It works out to about 6.25 inches, which is still pretty big but not quite so obviously so. Code 70 (5") is a great size. It still scales to roughly the size of commonly used rails on real railroads but its appearance isn't a distraction in our mini worlds. There is also Code 55 (4") and even smaller sizes but those are typically used only by specialists for things like narrow gauge railroads or meticulously scaled railroads. The smaller sizes, which aren't used much compared to their beefier counterparts, have quite limited arrays of specialized parts like turnouts and crossings, reflecting the limited market they inhabit. You can choose any of these sizes you want. After all, this is your railroad and you get to make the decisions. But I would urge you, as a new modeler, to go no smaller than Code 70 for sure, and probably Code 87 would be better. You might also consider using Code 87 or Code 70 for mainlines, with small rails for sidings, spurs and yards. Even the 12 inches to the foot railroads use this technique to save money on their track. You, on the other hand, won't necessarily save any money using smaller rail for side tracks, but you will benefit from the better, more prototypical (real) appearance.

What your rails are made of is very important because different materials have different appearance and electrical conductivity characteristics. Steel rail (sometimes called "alloy") is used very little because steel isn't a great conductor of electricity and it rusts. Nothing looks quite as real as rusty steel but its operational characteristics relegate it to the cheapest train sets. Frankly, it shouldn't be consideredas an option. The same goes for aluminum which has wide usage in large scale railroads due to its excellent conductivity and naturally conductive surface oxidation, but is basically unheard of in HO. The same can be said of stainless rail. That brings us to the two heavy hitters, brass and nickel-silver. Brass wins hands down on the conductivity ruler, with n-s not even a close second. However, brass has two major drawbacks: The first is appearance. It just doesn't look like steel rails until it ages a whole lot. Really old, oxidized brass rail can stand in for rusted steel quite well but that great age patina doesn't just form on the web (vertical part) and foot (base, of course) of the rail; it also forms on the railhead where the train wheels make contact. And, unlike aluminum, brass oxidation is a very poor conductor of electricity. So brass rail can be a maintenance headache verging on nightmare. It's a real problem over time because, unlike the tops of the rails, the places where the rails come together cannot be cleaned which can lead to dead spots and the need to add lots of new feeders.

Bottom line? A few confident recommendations I can make are to stick with nickel-silver rail and either Code 83 or Code 70 track. I prefer flex track with quality components from Peco or Shinohara (sold by Walthers) on cork roadbed which has loose ballast applied and stabilized. Should you follow that recipe? I doubt it unless your goals and budget are the same as mine which they almost certainly are not. But I hope I have explored your options and the features of each in enough detail that you can zero in on what you want and need. (As in larger life, those two words have become synonymous for model railroaders.)

Good luck with your model railroading and welcome to the hobby. Keep us up to date on your progress and don't hesitate to come here with your questions and the things you have learned.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                     -- D

[Desertdweller]

Regardless of the style of track you choose, I strongly suggest you use nickle-silver rail.
As has been pointed out, this stuff is more corrosion-resistant than brass or steel.

Even more importantly, it is a material you can easily solder to, not the case with steel or aluminum.

If you have to use something other than N-S rail, brass would be a good second choice.
You will need to keep it clean, but it will take solder very well.

Les

[rogertra]

The best track?

Handlaid!

[Bucksco]

On the Bachmann online forum the best track is EZ Track!

[rbryce1]

On the Bachmann online forum the best track is EZ Track!

I'll drink to that ! 

[Desertdweller]

Ha, ha!

Of course.

It's what I use anyway.

Les

[Ken G Price]

Even I have some of the Bachmann track on the layout.

[Jhanecker2]

I like Bachmann E-Z track  for  mainline track  where the attached roadbed makes sense . For yards and terminals where  elevated roadbed is not necessary  ,  code 100  Atlas,  Peco ,or Shinora makes more sense .
Nickel silver  is probably the easiest to keep clean and in E-Z  track has the most different types of track , though I  have  steel EZ track  and also a limited amount  Power-Lock  track  that I am planning to use up.
Good Luck with whatever you decide upon.J2.

[rogertra]

Commercial track?

Code 83 and code 70 nicklesilver and No. 6 switches as a minimum. Currently I'm using the newer Atlas switches and I'm reasonably happy with them.