Since I have the chance to start again I was wondering what the experience is with code 55 track? What are the pros and cons. Any special considerations? Do I have to switch wheels on rolling stock? Any comments are appreciated. Now is my time to switch to code 55 if I am going to do it. Thanks Tom
I had been a Micro Engineering code 70 user - but any new expansions are being done with Atlas 55. The Atlas is "super" flexy, where as the ME track is rigid. You will need to go to a lower profile wheel if you have older rolling stock (I have some that dates back to the 1970's). The other major problem (for me anyway) is that many of my older locomotives won't operate on the Atlas track. The Atlas turnouts do not have a "spring" in them to hold position like the ME turnouts, but seem to be very reliable.
Tim All my rolling stock (including steamers) has been acquired new in the last 2 years. Do you think I may have change the wheels? Tom
Some of the posts and threads here on TB have discussed this very issue. Judging from what's been said you may have to change out Athearn's new Challenger wheels...exception being the drivers. Other units and cars have been mentioned as well. You might try going back into the previous postings...a little reasearch goes along way. I like what I see with Code 55 but I typically use the Code 80 for my mainline and may consider the lighter rail for sidings and etc. Check out the similar threads posted below...well maybe not. I just took a look and nothing has jumped up regarding code 55. Go figure?
Depends on your layout. I run 30 - 38 cars in a train. I also have 2% grades. I found it more important to get good running, hence code 80. I have to paint the rails though to help tone down the look but at my level of track laying ability that was the answer for me. There are alot of variables such as train length, grades, viewing height, personal skill level of track laying, your operaters talent ( code is easier for the new guys in our group), to look at to make your own choice. Both work well, just code 55 requires just that much better track work and the new guys have huge derailments with it. Can you tell one of my round group has code 55 ( not my favorite).
I did a search again using "code track" and searching title only and got several good threads. Many are now several years old. I wonder what the current experience is? LADiver has excellent comments - thanks. Tom
This is probably your only time to switch, you are very lucky! The cost of a few plastic wheels, and maybe having engine wheels turned professionally, is far outweighed by the extremely nice looking Code 55 track. Go fer it!
Ok, let me see if I can pull off a summarized review. With most of the equipment produced today you won't have any trouble with wheel replacement. There has been some talk about Micro-trains pizza cutter wheels presenting problems through some of the switches. The new low profile wheels are perfect for code 55 and in most cases should a problem arrive you can switch them out. Older locomotives may have problems running the Code 55...again if they are sporting deep flanged wheels. Most locomotives purchased in the last 10 years should sport the lower profile flanges. My own research says the way has been cleared to use code 55 exclusively on your layout. I wish I had known that when I was building my current layout. I might have passed on the code 80. For now it works well for me and looks good enough for "Blind Scale". Shucks I can't see it anyway...not without some kind of magnification. I'd go for it. Seriously.
Rick, Tony Thanks for the very positive support. Another question about code 55. In reading threads it seems the Atlas code 55 flex is worth using. Would there be any difficulty connecting it to Micro Engineering code 55 turnouts? I suppose there should not be a problem as all code 55 track should have the same standard size? Along the same vein code 55 flex Atlas to Micro Engineering code 55 should join without problems? Tom
It is worth mentioning that Peco Code 55 track displays a code 55 appearance to the outside, while maintaining a larger flange clearance. I don't know how much larger their flange clearance is as compared to Atlas code 55, but I do remember reading that the wheels on the new Athearn Challenger locomotives were fine on Peco code 55, but would bump the ties on Atlas Code 55. This does not mean that Peco Code 55 is the right choice for you: some folks do not like the tie spacing on Peco track, and the Atlas turnouts really do look beautiful. I'm just a novice still using Code 80, so I am just an observer to any debate that might exist between the Peco and Atlas track types. I believe you mentioned that all of your N-Scale rolling stock was purchased recently. If so, then most (if not all) of your rolling stock has low profile wheelsets (or, in the case of Micro Trains cars, has the option to install the low profile wheelsets that were included). You might want to "eyeball" the flanges on your current rolling stock to confirm if indeed all your pieces do have low profile wheelsets. Besides your track laying ability, you might also want to consider what you want to do, and what your layout needs are. If space constraints will force you to use sharp radius turns (sharper than 15"), or if you will need to have rapid grade transitions, you might want to consider a track option (Code 80 or Peco Code 55) that will allow you to use the "pizza cutters". One poster to the N-Scale (it may have been the dear and now-departed LongTrain) mentioned how he liked to be able to back long freight trains into the points of a turnout, without suffering a derailment, and for that reason he liked the pizza cutters.
MICRO ENGINEERING CODE 55 Having over 100 steam loco's, some dating back to late 60's, with large flanges, I have no problems on ME code 55 track. If I were to go to the trouble to turn flanges down, I would use ME code 40. Rodney
Carl All my rolling stock is new in last 2 years. Good point about the micro trains. Curves are min 18". No rapid grade transitions. Is not ME Code 55 somewhat less flexible than Atlas55. Rodney thanks - how do you find ME code 55? Tom
Code 55 Rail I have just built a new layout using 55 and if you have MT trucks or if you used the MT bulk packs to convert couplers you will now have to change wheels again, as you need low profile wheels which MT are not. It also has been said about the turnouts not having a spring in them which is right but if you use tortoise machines that is no problem. I was going to use Atlas machines until I tried one and found how flimsy it was, the arm kept bending rather than moving like it should so I went to the Tortoise and am glad I did.
Tom, I have purchased cars recently that still have interference with Atlas code 55. Generally I am having luck with using needle nose pliers to "pinch" the rail joint where the code 70 and 55 meet - some have made a transition track by filing down the code 70 to meet the code 55. The Atlas and Micro Engineering code 55 rail appears to be the same, so no problems connecting them directly. I would probably still use the old code 80 track, but the tie size and spacing just drives me nuts. When ME came out with the code 70 weathered track, it was just great looking. Only wish the ME turnouts weren't so finicky, because I actually prefer the ME "spring" which holds the turnout in position when you select the route. On the other hand, the Atlas 55 looks wonderful especially after painting the rail. And the "longer" turnouts Atlas has in 55 are great if you have the extra space to use them. EDIT: Another plus for Atlas is that you can find it in stock almost anywhere - ME track can be hard to find at times...
Code 55 Turnouts Just a word of caution if you decide to use Atlas 55 turnouts. I used 32 turnouts in the last couple of months and I had a couple that had open circuits between the rail and tie bars. Here I am wondering what the problem was until I got the meter out and found no power in a section of the switch. This was only in two switches both right hand #5
Tom, ME is not as flexible as Atlas and I like this now that I laid over 500 feet(with about 600 more to go) of it. You get it to the shape you need and it stays put. On curves where a joint is, it work better in my opion than Atlas. I've used the weathered rail, and it just looks awsome laid down. I also used about 60 of there #6 turnouts in my yard, that I rebuilt for DCC. I use #11 scratchbuilt turnouts on the main. I had my LHS odered it for me. I odered 50 18' bundels of it and LHS got it direct from ME. You could call ME yourself and oder it of have your LHS get for you. I talked to ME about 6 months ago, and there DCC ready turnout was on the drawing board and should be released soon. Rodney
Personally, I would definitely go with code 55. I would not use Peco because of the European look of the ties, but it does not bother some people. I did get a couple of their turnouts to try and they work flawlessly. I suggest you get some of each brand you are considering to compare them yourself. That is what I did and here is what I discovered: Atlas and ME code 55 can be mixed and matched without any trouble. The ME turnouts that I got did not work good without some fine tuning. The Atlas turnouts(all #7's & #10's) worked great and I really like the looks of the #10's. I love the look of the ME weathered flextrack and I like how it stays curved, but I had trouble making smooth curves with it. Another plus for ME is you can get concrete ties. On my layout, I will defnitely use Atlas turnouts and I will probably use a mix of Atlas and ME flextrack.
