What Code Rail Do You Recommend?

[texdon]

I am trying to decide between code 100, code 83, and code 70 rail for the layout I am planning to start this fall.  Any opinions or recommendations?

[JohnR]

Are you hand laying track? Or using flex?  If flex, are you looking at On30 flex or HO flex? 

What is the nature/theme of your planned railroad?

-John

[lvrr325]

I guess that depends on what sort of railroad you're trying to model, if you're not set on a specific prototype, you may as well just go with code 100 or code 83 that are readily available in ready to use track products. 

[mabloodhound]

I know that Harold Minkiwtz settled on HO code83 after handlaying a lot of On30 track.   He liked the look of the HO tie spacing better.   I'll be using the Atlas Code83 also.   The lighter rail is better looking.
However, the On30 purists will tell you that the ME or Peco On30 ties are better looking.   So it's really up to your own eye.
Oh, also the Atlas HO is cheaper!
It's your RR, enjoy it.

[Kevin Strong]

In O scale, code 100 rail scales out to 75-pound rail, code 83 to 55-pound rail, and code 70 to 35-pound rail.

Code 70 would be far too light for anything like the 2-8-0, 4-6-0, or 2-6-6-2, etc. Most narrow gauge railroads replaced their 35 - 40-pound rail fairly early on because it was just too light for the locomotives that they needed to pull any kind of decent train.

That leaves code 83 and 100, both of which are plausible from a prototypical perspective. 75-pound rail would be "heavy duty" in terms of narrow gauge, and given the typically light-duty nature of the 30" railroads most On30'ers build, probably just a bit extreme. Code 83 (55-pound) would probably be most apropos for a 30" gauge line with the locos and traffic typical of an On30 railroad.

Later,

K

[NarrowMinded]

Really depends on what looks good to you I think code 100 HO looks good, some people snip off every other tie to get a wider tie spacing I like the peco on30 code 100 as well, but for
If I really had to choose one though it would
Be ho code 100 and that's because I can usually find any switch, track, crossover etc. on the self at any time at my local hobby shops

NM

[texdon]

Thanks for the comments.  I think I will go with code 83.  I am convinced that code 70 would be too small, and I like the slightly smaller code 83.  I am still debating between ME On30 and HO.  I agree that HO track would be pretty easy to obtain locally (I live in Houston), and I have previous layout experience with HO.  I intend to use flextrack rather than hand laid track.  I am curious about trying hand laid, but I really don't want to take the time.  I might go with the ME On30 as the layout will be small and the cost difference will be tolerable.

This layout is sort of an experiment in narrow gauge.  We are empty nesting and living in a rented town house near downtown Houston while we figure out what we want to do for the longer term.  This layout will be pretty simple as space is limited to a 6'x14' area in a spare bedroom, and I want to get the layout built and running quickly.  I am planning to do a "wild west" theme using a large loop with a couple of staging tracks on one side and a small town on the other side of the layout.  The town will have a passing siding and a couple of spurs for limited switching.  I will probably opt for high plains rather than mountains at this point.   

[Woody Elmore]

A friend has an SPNG module in O scale. He uses code 70 rail for mainline and has sidings with code 55 rail. He says the sizes are spot on for the light trackage found on the SPNG. I have no idea if he's right or wrong but his equipment has no trouble with the trackage. I think he glued down the code 55 which he uses in a few sidings.

[hminky]

I know that Harold Minkiwtz settled on HO code83 after handlaying a lot of On30 track.   He liked the look of the HO tie spacing better.   I'll be using the Atlas Code83 also.   The lighter rail is better looking.
However, the On30 purists will tell you that the ME or Peco On30 ties are better looking.   So it's really up to your own eye.
Oh, also the Atlas HO is cheaper!
It's your RR, enjoy it.

Actually I was just going to where I am modeling now. The HO track does look like narrow gauge track but in a different scale. The on30 Bachmann equipment looks like three foot narrow gauge on the HO track if you correct the gauge/scale anomaly.



On30 will never look like US narrow gauge, been there done that.

Harold

[Mike_AA9ZY]

Harold, your website always leaves me with food for thought. It seems to get better every time I visit.

[Kevin Strong]

On30 will never look like US narrow gauge, been there done that.

It's not going to look like the 3' gauge prototypes with which most of us are familiar, no. That's the same motivation which brought about 1:20.3 as the "appropriate" scale for 3' gauge running on 45mm track. Having done a lot of modeling in 1:24 on that track, the models never looked quite "right" for 3' gauge, but they were decidedly narrow gauge. (And in truth, you could only tell when looking head on. From the side you'd never be able to tell the difference.) The same's true for On30. It's not intended to replace "proper" On3 models, which is pretty much why most of the models are not of specific 3' gauge prototypes. On30 lends itself well to more backwoods, shoestring narrow gauge operations, though, and does carry the look of many of the lesser-known, smaller 3' gauge lines very well. They typically ran the smaller locos and smaller rolling stock.

Later,

K

[Mike_AA9ZY]

That's the look I want for my layout. I intend to use Code 83 ME track and switches in the front and Atlas Code 83 elsewhere.

[texdon]

I am also going to use ME Code 83 turnouts and flextrack in the visible parts of my layout.  I cast the die on that over the weekend and ordered the track.

[ebtbob]

Good Morning All,

        I think you need to consider four points when trying to determin what type of On30 track to use on your railroad.
         First,  what type of railroad are planning?   My On30 railroad is a cheap man's On3 with bigger engines and at least two freight cars longer than the standard Bachmann equipment.   I run 2-8-2s,  2-8-0s,  4-6-0s,  and a 2-6-6-2.
        Secondly,  how dependable do you want your track in respect to derailments etc?  Code 100 track is very forgiving and will serve you best.  Dependability decreases with code size.   This a fact that has been shared here on this forum as well as in the magazines.   David Barrow,  down in Texas,  tore out his original Cat Mountain with code 83 rail and went to code 100 for the purposes of reducing derailments.   Anyone who has ever seen my two model railroads,  HO and On30 know that I use code 100 and we do not have derailments unless a turnout is set wrong,  or the occational car with truck problems.
         Thirdly - Turnouts.   What is available?   If you end up using HO scale track then their are many options.
         Fourth is just plain old,  how do you want your track to look?   Peco On30 track,  looks to me to be a European prototype(considering it comes from England).   It has wider ties and the ties are further apart.   Here is a picture from an On30 module I owned at one time equipped with Peco track and turnouts.



Here is a picture from my On30 layout using Micro Engineering code 100 flextrack.   The turnouts are made from Peco HO scale code 100 turnouts with most of the plastic ties cut off and then remounted on wood ties.   Of course this was done before I knew about Litco On30 turnouts which are in the same price range as Peco HO scale turnouts and - in my opinion - are the nicest code 100 On30 turnouts available.   Micro Engineering,  while offering code 100 flex track in On30 only makes code 83 and code 70 turnouts.