Obviously the gauge of current Z-Scale track is out of proportion. (track 1) It looks much to high compared with the prototype. Why didn't Marklin or MT make there rails lower in the beginning? I don't know but the rails might become to small to handle. (track 2) (The Track in this picture is not to scale) A solution came in my mind when I saw a picture of Peco Flex Track: You can see that they added another non-visible small rim embedded in the ties. This makes the rail bigger and solves the problem! (track 3) What do you guys think?
For better operations, manufacturers such as Marklin and MTL have built in 'room' for better traction to the rails. This means higher track and larger flanges. If they had gone to scale from the beginning, likely many would not have stayed with Z scale since derails would be more common. Due to the size of Z, when going for proto rail and proto flanges, you must have excellent track work or cars will easily come off the rail. As Z matures, I see there being more of a demand for true scale track. As the track narrows, we will need to see flanges on locos and cars narrow as well. What I have found is that weathering the rail hides the fact it is too tall. Paint the rail rust brown and then take a step back. The rail profile narrows considerably. This little trick has made a huge difference on my layouts. Rob Kluz
That's what I am doing: painting the rails. It looks better with some paint. But on pictures you still see that the rail is not at the correct height. Well, Märklin invented Z-scale in an era that all rails in all scales were to high. And still, large manufacturers like Minitrix and Fleischmann make ugly rails. That is why I do not use Minitrix rails anymore for my N-scale layout. Peco looks better. But for Z, it doesn't matter what you buy...
I agree with weathering the track. Anything from spraying the whole thing with a rattle can of rust color to detailing the tie plates and hand painting each tie makes it better in all scales. Couldn't say about the rail size. Some modelers hand lay code 40, so it should be possible. I think it might be some manufacturing or shipping issue. Marketing, probably.
I have handlayed some code 40, and Z Scale stuff runs just fine over it. I think that a Peco style code 40 rail would be great for Z Scale, but what would it take to get them to make it? -Robert
Yeah, that is what Z needs. A Code 40 track system. With lap turnouts, curved turnouts, and double-slips - not just flextrack and regular turnouts. And even 40 is equivalent to 55 in N or 100 in HO - large rail. I wonder if that method of hiding part of the rail in the ties could allow commercial Code 30 track? You'd probably have to eliminate the "spike heads" on the inside (to be able to clear the flanges) and just use the part of the rail inside the ties to hold it in.
