I was under the impression the fixtures and jigs were for filing the points and frogs. As for me, my goal for my layout is large turnouts for crossovers, such as 10-12s. And yards I'd like to be able to make as many of the turnouts in the throat "one piece." Now if the fixtures are the same as a paper template, I can skip those and use paper.
The jigs are for filing and are incredibly useful. I use the fixtures, but I can see how someone not willing to pay $200 for one could get away with using paper templates - the fixtures definitely cut down on my slop though.
Wonder if the fixtures ever come up on ebay and the like...or maybe one day we can get a "rental" group together, unless there already is one. However the tools for the points and frogs are $52 each, so looking at it all, if I want to do #10 or #12s, might as well buy the whole kit from Fast Tracks.
There is z group in Chicago with a fine HO scale modular layout with handlaid turnouts. A meeber told me he gets by fine with just the filing tools. I got along just fine with paper diagrams and some home made filing tools. What I can't imagine is trying to handlay turnouts withouta resistance solderer. Bill Pearce
Well if you were in the Sacramento area and joined the hand laid track club (not really a club, just a few guys who have pooled resources), there would be jigs available for use in almost all of the product line from Fast Tracks. #5,6,7,8,9,10,12 turnouts are in inventory as well as #4,5,6,8,10 wyes. There are no curved turnouts as of yet. The point is correct that for one or two units, following paper is fine. But for 32 #10 and 24 #12, the jigs were a better solution. And similarly for all of the other sizes. I think between us, we have made about 130 #8's as the largest count of turnouts thus far. But there are still more in the making.
Right now it is just me and two other guys. As I said, it is not anything really organized. We just are good friends pooling the resources.
I just voted on this very interesting 10 year old thread, and thought I would comment on why I voted : "Code 55 is OK, but most modelers are using Code 80 or Peco" My thoughts on N scale Code 55 vs. Code 80 looking forward even further towards future......is that we will continue to have a continuum of modelers, with the two halves of the N scale continuum something like this: * There's no question that Code 55 looks much much much much better, and to really get the look right at a N scale detailed level especially n photos, really requires Code 55 (and even Code 40). By 2015, the seriously committed and skillful modelers among us (of which there are many many) will undoubtedly choose Code 55 if at all possible, and Code 40 if they are hand-laying. * That having been said, by say 2015, 2 years hence, I think there will still continue to be equally numerically large contingent (majority, I think?) of N scale modelers, that for a variety of valid reasons: - goes by the '3 foot' rule, or goes by some variation of Allen McClelland's "good enough" philosophy, or has existing layout with Code 80, or ballasts and weathers Code 80 and it looks "good enough" to them - or requires compatibility for very large legacy N scale fleet with flanges not capable of non-Peco Code 55, or requires N-Trak compatibility, or wants compatibility for guests / club / round-robin group who has legacy flanges - or goes with Peco Code 55 to get a acceptable compromise of the best of both - or is perfectly happy and enjoys the hobby with their Code 80 for any number of other reasons And to be clear, I still think that in years to come, the % of serious modelers moving towards Code 55 will continue to climb and be noticeably higher than today. What will be interesting and unpredictable is when the total % of modelers moving towards Code 55 reaches the approximate 50% or not point. I'm sure we will reach that point sometime, but the real question is, when? (it will all depend on regional, local demographics as well). It will be interesting to see what 2015 and beyond looks like, in terms of the actual magnitude of that swing (or not) towards Code 55. Given the rate of change / technology, who knows...... Very interesting to see the current poll results, thx for starting this thread .
I'm just getting back to model railroading due to an issue with funds and life and I'm at a point where I need to decide on the track. I had bought some code 80 track a couple years ago but I do not like it and what I see of the code 55 I do like. I've read in this thread I think that Micro-Engineering code 55 works with Atlas code 55 turnouts, is it easy to make the connection? Are there any problems still with Atlas code 55?
Currently, the main problem with Atlas track (both Codes 55 and 80) is their unavailability, which according to Atlas should be rectified in the next few months.
OK, will anything bought in the last 5 years be fine on Atlas code 55? I am looking for a recommendation on how to proceed really, mixing product is fine as long as it's not cumbersome, like Micro-Engineering flex track and Atlas turnouts (if they work without much work).
Should be fine. MT was the last hold over of the pizza cutter flanges. Can't remember when they switched to all low profile wheels, then to the new medium profile, which is also code 55 compatible
Most all locos will operate on Atlas code 55, however rolling stock is a different issue, MT's will need the wheels changed to the low profile flanged wheels however most all other will operate without issue, changing the wheels on the MT's is a snap as the existing will just pop out and then pop the new in.
