Guys, Can anyone supply me with a picture of some Atlas Code 55 track ties and some Micro Engineering code 55 track ties side by side? Not concerned about the rails, just the ties. I thought I remember reading that the ME ties are a little bigger than the Atlas, and before I go and buy more track, I wanted to know this for sure. Thanks for the help! Mike
Sho'nuff. I have both kinds, though I use ME flex exclusively with Atlas turnouts, but when I started in N, one of my first purchases was a piece on Atlas C55 N flex: ME is on the left, Atlas is on the right. The ME ties are a tiny bit bigger, but laid end-to-end with Atlas flex, I can guarantee you that the tie and rail height match exactly. ME C55 track with concrete ties is another story. The concrete ties are .020" taller than the wooden ties. I prefer ME mainly because you can get them pre-weathered, as I did, and that they're not "springy" like Atlas, so you can shape them and leave them flat on the layout if you want to run trains on a test basis.
Also,don't fail to notice the ME actually has tie plates..I use ME exclusively..REAL pain to work with,but well worth the effort..
Cool, thanks a ton guys! From the looks of it (and I could be wrong), but the ME track seems to be just a bit longer than the Atlas. The height and width look the same though. And the tie plates and smaller spike heads look really good. :thumbs_up: Thanks again! Mike
Wow, I never noticed the tie plates. I've been using Atlas code 55, but am considering switching to ME for my industrial areas. I haven't worked with ME code 55, so I don't know how it compares, but the Atlas being springy is a pain when you need to gap tracks on any kind curve. I do have one section of ME flex, and it appears that the ties are a wee bit longer than Atlas. ME's ties appear to be offset ever so slightly. The offset is only noticeable because it flips sides at the mid point of the flex track piece.
