Archived board. This is a read-only archive of the Fast Tracks forums, active 2004–2016. Posting closed in May 2016; the board was preserved as a static site in 2026. Some images were lost before archiving and are marked where they appeared.

Fast Tracks

Model Railroading Discussion Forums

Return To The Fast Tracks Website

The Fast Tracks discussion forums have been closed. Click Here for more information.
It is currently Thu Aug 06, 2026 12:00 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Public Discussions » HO Scale Discussions

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]



Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 1 of 1
  [ 5 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Chesticus
 Post subject: Lower staging
PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 12:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:54 pm
Posts: 8
Just looking for some advice here.

I am building my lower staging soon. Would you suggest using code 100 turnouts and flex track for this area. It will not be hidden so that is not an issue, but I have heard that code 83 is a little delicate. And since I am using ME flex track on the visible mainline (the stuff I will be scenicing), I am concidering using atlas turnouts and flex track. But if it does not really matter then I will go ahead and build the turnouts with my jigs.

just wanted to get some thoughts.

JRL
Top
 Profile  
 
jdm_com_au
 Post subject: Re: Lower staging
PostPosted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:31 am
Posts: 190
Location: Melbourne, Australia
I use ME code 70 and I don't consider that fragile, so I wouldn't be concerned about code 83.

_________________
Now waiting for a better currency exchange rate before I order. :D
Top
 Profile  
 
emccamey
 Post subject: Re: Lower staging
PostPosted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 5:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:48 am
Posts: 365
Location: East Texas - USA
It's not the rail that's 'fragile'. ME flex track is 'delicate' and more demanding in curving. Fine detail and a great choice for the visible main. For staging (and hidden tracks), use of Atlas code 83 is easy, quick, and inexpensive. Less detail, but very serviceable. You'll get better trunouts and quality by using the FT construction (and less expensive than purchased turnouts). Matching the code 83 ME rail used in the FT constructed turnouts to the Atlas code 83 rail in the flex track (two differing rail profiles) is not a real big issue - just a bit of filing at the joints. Stay with the ME code 83 rail for the visible mains - but learn to 'work it' in making curves.

-ed-

_________________
-ed mccamey-
COSLAR RR - http://www.coslar.us/
NMRA Standards and Conformance Department
PROTO & FINE Scale Coordinator
I estimate I have about 5 pounds of coupler springs somewhere in the vicinity of my workbench.
Top
 Profile  
 
Chesticus
 Post subject: Re: Lower staging
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 2:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:54 pm
Posts: 8
Thanks for the input. I have decided to go ahead and build the turnouts and file/fit them to altlas flex. The lower staging is 22inch off of the ground so it will not be a visual problem. And I can save a little money on the atlas flex. however, all of the modeled scenes I will be using ME cd 83. I have used it a little, and it is hard to work with. But, you can't bea tthe way it looks. I am hoping, as time goes on, that it will get easier to work with as I gain experience with it. I wish some people who have experience with ti would post some links to the"how to."

Thanks for the advice

JRL
Top
 Profile  
 
emccamey
 Post subject: Re: Lower staging
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:48 am
Posts: 365
Location: East Texas - USA
Chesticus (!empty($user->lang['WROTE'])) ? $user->lang['WROTE'] : ucwords(strtolower(str_replace('_', ' ', 'WROTE'))):
I will be using ME cd 83. I have used it a little, and it is hard to work with. But, you can't bea tthe way it looks. I am hoping, as time goes on, that it will get easier to work with as I gain experience with it. I wish some people who have experience with ti would post some links to the"how to."
Thanks for the advice JRL


JRL,

The ME flex handling has been well discussed on the yahoo groups. The "handlaidtrack", the "LayoutConstruction", and the "ldsig" yahoo groups lists have all got archives of threads discussing ways of handling and forming ME flex.

-ed-

_________________
-ed mccamey-
COSLAR RR - http://www.coslar.us/
NMRA Standards and Conformance Department
PROTO & FINE Scale Coordinator
I estimate I have about 5 pounds of coupler springs somewhere in the vicinity of my workbench.
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 1 of 1
  [ 5 posts ] 

Board index » Public Discussions » HO Scale Discussions

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group