I am planning a small HO switching layout. The question is the choice of track. I have used Walthers (Shinohara) Code 83 before with satisfactory results. However, two recent articles on switching layouts in the most recent Model Raailroad Planning 2005 both report using Peco code 75. How do you choose between these two brands (or, indeed, other options)?
Thanks for any suggestions. Mark Schupack
I don't know if the Peco 75 fits US prototype or not, but the size is a step in the right direction, if "switching layout" implies industrial trackage. For modern era layouts code 83 is roughly scale for class 1 mainline trackage. For transition era and branchline layouts code 70 is a better mainline choice.
Code 70 and code 55 will look better for industrial trackage, but there isn't a wide range of code 55 RTR, while there is a fair selection of turnouts and track in codde 70. Use flextrack rather than sectional track and you'll avoid all those extra rail joints and probably look better. Or your track will
Basically, what track system do you like seeing as your track. You should tend to stay away from sectional track as it is more just to quickly build and teardown a track pattern rather than good looking and well running trackwork. Personally, I much prefer laying my own track rather than even using flextrack and discrete turnouts as the trackwork looks a lot better and if you need a #5 turnout, you can build it without any problems. Laying your own rail isn't hard to do, more timeconsuming than anything else but that is the reason why we play in this hobby than anything else.
-- Why isn't there an Ozone Hole at the NORTH Pole?
Well, you're no longer stuck with Code 75 - Peco now has Code 83 made specifically for the US market!
???
Hardly something to be stuck with - the size (75) is a step in the right direction for industrial trackage compared to 83; and why go code 83 when there's lots of code 70 choices that'll look better?
In theory yes, but what's also important is the rail profile and the width of the top of the rail. In this respect the Peco code 83 is smaller than the Walthers/Shinohara code 83 and looks much better. It looks better than their code 75 IMHO. This is then a double plus as the ties etc also are correct for US prototype.
On the other hand the Peco code 75 is an excellent product and there's more choice. The code 83 range will be expanded to eventually include (almost) everything that's currently available in code 75.
Cheers,
Colin
I still vote for code 70.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required