| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Roget
|
 Posted - 11/02/2009 : 20:30:49
|
I am trying to determine the pro's & con's of using flex track almost exclusively for my layout.
I am planning on using Atlas code 55.
I like the idea of not having to be tied to the sectional track radius & not having so many joints, but wonder if I will encounter problems I have not anticipated.
Which will be easier to work with and give me the best results?
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Thanx
|
| YCDBSOYA |
Country: USA
| Posts: 41 |
|
|
MichaelWinicki
|
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 20:37:57
|
I did exactly what you're contemplating... Just code 55 switches and flex track. Not one inch of sectional track.
I think in a lot of ways flex track is easier and faster, plus you have far fewer rail connectors to worry about.
For curves, just solder two sections together.
|
Edited by - MichaelWinicki on 11/02/2009 20:39:13 |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1209 |
 |
|
|
Spookshow
|
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 20:42:06
|
It depends on how good you are at layout planning. I tend to make my layouts up on the fly and by the seat of my pants - and sectional track is much easier to deal with in that regard. Modelers with better planning skills may prefer to go the non-sectional route 
Cheers,
-Mark
|
| http://www.spookshow.net/trainstuff.html |
Edited by - Spookshow on 11/02/2009 23:35:35 |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 5062 |
|
|
|
DJCONWAY
|
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 21:24:41
|
Roget,
First Welcome to the forum. You are going to get pages of opinions on this one, put on your asbestos shorts , its going to get hot.
Just a few of my ideas.
Sectional track:
Pro - easy to get a layout up and running.
pro - easy to change.
con - fixed angles for curves 15 - 30 - 45 - 60 - 90 degree curves are all too frequent in published plans.
con - no easments going into the curves.
con - fixed lengths, make it hard to get irregular shapes to close with fiddeling with a lot of short pieces.
con - too many joints. Every joint is a potental point for mis-alinement leading to derailing.
Flex track:
pro - unlimited radius selections, from around 7.5" to what ever you you want and everythin in between.
pro - easments into curves
pro - curves can be any angle from 0 to 360 and beyond (think helix)
pro - fewer joints
con - joints on curves will kink, unless you solder the connections.
con - joints on curves can get out of gauge if you are not careful when setting them up.
con - you need to cut one rail to get the ends even
pro - you can cut the rail to any length needed
con - there is a bit of a learning curve.
These just a few points, I'm sure others will chime in.
I switched to flex track in 1968 while I was in HO, I then went to hand spiked track. I tried hand spiking in N scale but went back to flex track with Atlas switches, because it took so long to make switches and N scale layouts tend to get complex in a hurry. The flexability of hand spiked track can not be beat but the cost is in time and effort. Flex track offers many of the benefits of hand spiked without the hours of labor.
|
| Do your part buy stuff! |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 2092 |
|
|
|
Lou D
|
Posted - 11/02/2009 : 22:01:42
|
I guess I can say I've never really owned a sectional track RR,save for the ones I played with as a little gomer..AS soon as I became interested in actually building a RR in the 70's,I went right to flex.Easments,fewer track joints,better looking,more reliable,far more "flexible" in track planning..Other than the fact that it needs to be permanent,and requires a little skill to install,I see no other downsides compared to sectional..
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3416 |
|
|
|
leikec
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 00:43:51
|
I love Atlas c55 sectional track; I'd use it again in a minute. I have nothing against flex track, and I do use it at times, but the Atlas c55 track is wonderful.
I've been limited to a portable layout the last few years, and the c55 sectional track never gave me a bit of trouble (other than a few minor turnout problems). I never had problems with conductivity due to loose rail joiners. The Atlas c55 joiners fit very tight, and the "fitter" sections of track (where the layout sections met)worked just fine--I never had to replace the rail joiners on those sections.
My only beef with Atlas c55 track is that I don't like replacing wheelsets in my older freight cars.
There are half sections of sectional curves available in the c55 line, so track planning curvature isn't limited to 22.5 degree increments, and different radius sections can be combined to put easements into curves (and I'll readily admit that I'm way too stupid to design a true decreasing-radius/variable-easement curve...even if I decided to switch to flex track tomorrow).
It would make sense for you to buy a few pieces of flex track and try it. You'll never know if it is right for you until you try it out yourself. I'm a big believer in sectional track, but I do understand why other other (more dedicated) modelers use flex track. Eliminating as many rail joiners as possible isn't a bad thing, but I'm very comfortable using sectional track without worrying about conductivity problems based on my previous experience.
Jeff C
|
Edited by - leikec on 11/03/2009 00:45:38 |
|
Country:
| Posts: 1102 |
|
|
|
trainforfun
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 08:11:24
|
I use a mix of flex and allready made turnouts . Sometimes I put a piece of sectional tracks inserted between flex where I know I will put a turnout in the future . I use a piece having the same lenght and curve so it's a lot easier for the future and I don't have to wait for the turnout to arrive to start running trains for other adjustment .
I sometimes put 3 sectional curves , the 2 end pieces solder to the flex , the midle one free to be removed . That way the radius is nicer and does not tend to make a kink when I change for the turnout .
|
Louis
|
|
Country: Canada
| Posts: 802 |
|
|
|
jagged ben
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 12:22:31
|
Of course it does not have to be an all or nothing choice...
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 613 |
|
|
|
CBQ Fan
|
Posted - 11/03/2009 : 19:45:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spookshow
It depends on how good you are at layout planning. I tend to make my layouts up on the fly and by the seat of my pants - and sectional track is much easier to deal with in that regard. Modelers with better planning skills may prefer to go the non-sectional route
Cheers,
-Mark
I thought I was the only one out there who built a railroad that way! Build as big a table as you can and see where the track fits later!!
|
Brian
Way of the Zephyr |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1290 |
|
|
|
mmagliaro
|
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 21:17:34
|
Well, I'm going to swim against the tide of experience here.
Ever since I got past my early HO days, I never used sectional track. All my N
work has been with flex. BUT... When I do it over, I would use sectional track
in a heartbeat for anywhere that is hidden, and here's why. Rigidity.
Unless I need a radius that the sectional stuff can't cover, those rigid sections
will fit together to make absolutely uniform, rigid curves. I'd solder all the joints
and dress them off with a jewelers file anyway, so I'm not concerned about
the extra joints.
Templates, track guides, Tracksetta gauges ---- all wonderful things. But
a sectional-track curve, unless you really hose up the joints, would make a very trouble-free
curve. So I think I will go that route next time for hidden areas.
Where you can see it, I wouldn't want all those joints. It just looks too toy-like.
|
-- Max
N Scale steam for the masses |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3366 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Atlas Model Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Rules
FAQ
Register
