Alrighty it's November and atlas Code 55 turnouts are not yet here, and I've gotten the permission to build a 2 x 4 N scale layout. I'm seeking input on Peco's code 55 track system, is it worth selling the small amount of atlas code 55 possess to switch to peco? Also how compatible is it with DCC?(as I plan on switching to DCC) disclaimer: this is not an atlas bash thread, I'm merely seeking more input on Peco code 55. I'm also about a year and a half into the hobby so I'd prefer to get straight to the point on what I'd have to do to make the layout operational asap. I've also noted atlas' code 80 has come back into stock and may bug fifer for some track. I know peco doesn't have american appearance but that's fine by me as long as it works, and I plan on getting some Deutsche Bahn stuff.(german family and those German steamers are awfully nice). on a side note is there an eta for the atlas code 55 turnouts?(this is just in case) Thank you, beforehand!
I cannot speak of their C55, as all I have used is their larger code rail size. But, that stuff has always been rock solid for me. I would want to believe their C55 is of the same quality.
One thing I couldn't seem to find for the C55track was the insulfrog switches, are C55 ones electro frogs only?
Good question. Perhaps there is information on their web site? Hopefully this link still works for their N scale line: http://www.peco-uk.com/prodtype.asp?strParents=3309,3310&CAT_ID=3315&numRecordPosition=1
There are only a few insulfrogs in Code 55. They are the slip switches. The electrofrogs are fine with DCC as long as you have an insulator joiner on each side if the frog.
I use Peco C55 and electrofrog turnouts exclusively. I chose Peco for their variety (curved, slip, crossover), and for their durability and reliability. I could not build my layout using any other manufacturer. I use a lot of insulated rail joints and I solder 3 feed wires to every turnout. The mass of wiring under the table can be daunting and the effort is time consuming. The reward for the effort is reliable train operation without stalling due to dead frogs. My completed layout has 63 turnouts and so far 40 are operational. I use DCC (Digitrax Zephyr) and JMRI. Overall I am happy with my choice.
Peco Code 55 is rock solid. And the older large flanged stuff runs fine on it too. It is compatible with the code 80 so you can use code 80 in storage yards etc. We use it on our club layout and at home. The Golden State Model Railroad Museum uses it for all there hidden and storage tracks (all visible stuff is hand laid). The electrofrogs are the best way to go but as David said remember to use insulating fish plates/rail joiners on both rails coming out of the frog. With DCC it is also good practice to power the frog separately, this is easy if you are going to use Seep or Tortoise point motors. Peco also sell switches that mount onto their own motors to do this. -James
Apart from the sleeper spacing which you already know, peco code 55 is excellent quality, the code 55 will join straight to the code 80 as most of the rail in the code 55 is buried in the sleepers. We use peco points on our busy club fiddle yard and they take some hammer but just keep on working. Another good thing is peco manufacture sleepers which fit under the fishplates so you get a consistent look. I would definitely go for the electrofrogs as others above had said a little extra wiring but you will get good slow speed over the frogs. Alexander
I have used both Peco C55 and Atlas C55. Albeit the Atlas track is beautiful but often beautiful things can be temperamental and high maintenance and that is the case when comparing Atlas C55 to Peco C55. So yes I prefer the look of Atlas but Atlas does not come close to the robust design of Peco. Peco track can take a real beating and still continue to be operational in many cases. Peco is not ugly the primary problem is with us American prototype model enthusiast and the tie spacing. However there is a lot to be said for how its dressed. A good ballasting and some proper rail color can often put you over the top in trying to achieve "the right look". Under the circumstances I would give the Peco track a good hard look.
I'm building a 21"x42" logging module, designed to be portable, and I'm using Peco C55, primarily because two of my favorite legacy locomotives have deep flanges, and the partner 18x36 module is vintage C80. Here's a few observations: Basic Peco C55 is both solid and thick. I like to airbrush the rail and then paint the ties, as no 'black nylon' tie really looks right, particularly on a small, detailed layout. Given that thickness, you may not want roadbed. By the time you ballast the track, it's already right up there; elevating it further implies a Class 1 main line, not a shortline, logging or industrial layout typical of a 2x4. It is sufficiently stiff that it can be darn difficult to bend tight and keep it smooth, particularly at the joints. Because of that, all the hidden track I have is sectional C80, soldered up. It mates very easily with C80, including some of the tight Peco SL-1 switches that are really, really useful on a tight module. Works fine. You need to use Peco rail joiners, not Atlas. Don't substitute. You'll have a lot of extra work at the joints to get them right, and then put in dummy ties. The C55 electrofrog turnouts are great, because on a small layout you'll have small power moving slowly, and metal frogs help. They come with extra 'dummy' ties, save those, they are very useful. Geometry is very close to a typical Atlas C80#5, I've replaced Atlas with Peco in several places on my larger layout where metal frogs help prevent stalling. Just because they are Peco doesn't mean they are perfect. To make turnouts truly bulletproof, I solder jumpers from the points to the stock rail, before they are ever installed. And I also put jumpers around the stock rails to the Electrofrog frogs, using Tortise switch machine contacts to change the frog polarity. End result though is that I have a rugged and bulletproof portable module that allows a gearhead-equipped steam locomotive to creep around it at about 5mph without stalling. Not that you can't do this with Atlas, just that you can do it with Peco if you choose. My finished track will be near-buried in dirt, cinders, weeds and light ballast, only the rail sides will really be visible. On the existing module, the ties are almost invisible on C80 and most people mis-identify the entire layout as Z scale.
Ok, I'll go looking on youtube just to help reinforce what you guys have told me thus far. I lack soldering skills(haven't got there), SP&S #750 is about as DCC as I get at the moment(money's a bit tight), and it'll be based in vancouver, washington as my SP&S RS1's were based there. I'm things that apply to the turnouts in DCC apply in DC?
The Peco track line is opening a lot of options up for me. I am not a DCC person so that is not an issue for me. What I like is the compactness of some of their switch line and the availability of some turnouts that I cannot find with others. The link to their site did not work but this is a link to there line. Clicking on a turnout will give you a scale footprint with dimensions. http://www.peco-uk.com/page.asp?id=pointplans
I have worked with both and just finished rebuilding some modules for our club with PECO 55. I also built a 3 module city scene that had atlas on the main, but switched to Atlas 55 in the town and yard area. I happen to prefer the looks of the Atlas, but you said that wasn't overly important to you. The PECO is definitely sturdier and the Atlas takes more precision laying and is less forgiving for mistakes. I used hand throws for the Atlas turnouts and they work fine, but take some skill to get them to work right each time. The PECO spring system on the turnouts makes installation easy and operation flawless every time. The take home is each system will work, but the skill level required for an Atlas installation is higher. It is always worth the time to go slow track laying and test, test and test some more on each section so you get it perfect. This will make your future railroading experience pleasurable.
Peco code 55 is bullet proof. For my 2x4 layout I never installed any turnout motors and just switched them manually. The built in springs keep the turnout points where they should be. Like other have said, you just have to insulate two the rails exiting the frogs, and provide power to the track on the other side. I also put down the track before building a trestle to support it. The 8-10” gap was unsupported for about 2 years before I got around to building the trestle. The Peco C55 track is so solid that this didn't matter. I could send my Kato GS4 over it without sagging. I didn't take too many photos of this, but here is one with my NW2s floating in air. The finished trestle.
I used Peco Code 55 for years before switching to Atlas Code 55 primarily for the looks. But I miss Peco's near-indestructibility and the spring-over turnouts that can be operated without external linkages or ground throws. If the tie spacing doesn't bother you, Peco is superb track. One minor issue: the guardrails of the turnouts are spaced a bit wide for NMRA standards. If your wheelsets are all exactly to NMRA gauge, you might find that some will derail at the frog, especially on the very short turnouts, because the wide spacing allows the wheels to pick the point of the frog. There is a very easy fix for this: get some .010-thick by .060 wide styrene strip, cut a piece the length of the guardrail (it's actually plastic on Peco turnouts), and glue it on to the guardrail with some plastic cement. Paint and the problem is gone. Most engines have the wheels gauged just a tad narrow from the factory, which means you probably wouldn't see this problem unless you re-gauged the wheels, but it sometimes pops up on rolling stock that has wheelsets set precisely to gauge. I used to routinely do this fix to my Peco Code 55 turnouts before installing them on the layout, but it may not be necessary unless you notice a problem. John C.
Thank you for more insight guys, I'm really liking the way peco's sounding my only nitpicks are that it's in flex track and one has to do some extra work to get the frogs running. Jd,I have an NMRA N scale gauge. in my fleet I only had one loco with tight wheelsets(a Kato BN SD40) but that loco and the Kato SD40-2's are also gone, I'll check my atlas RS1, Kato NW2, and the other loco's I plan to run on layout. I'll keep that in mind as I move to make my decision. John and boxcab thank you for the links, they should come in handy. I may run out of money next weekend though as there's a train show in puyallup. :teeth:
