E-Z track versus "regular" track

[kporter]

I am pretty much a newbie and have a basic question concerning track.  Is there any advantage to using E-Z track versus "regular" track?  My existing layout is a combination of old style track and some recently installed flex track.  It is mostly working rather well.  The only place I have consistent problems is with the switches.  Are E-Z track switches any better than the "regular" switches.  Is there a brand of switch that y'all consider superior?

Thanks for helping the new guy.

[ninnypooper]

E-Z track of course has the roadbed built in which I have always though was for beginners or for people who just don't want to spend hours making there own bed. There shouldn't be a difference in the way the trains perform. As for the problem you are having there could be many things happening.  first check   to see that the rails are pushed together all the way. no gaps or sudden changes in grade.  EVERYTHING must be perfectly level. the problem could also be with the train. larger locos will not handle an 18" radius turn like the ones in regular switches. I have always used atlas track. they have just about anything you would need.

[Terry Toenges]

You'll probably hear from people on both sides of the fence on this one. I guess it depends on how finicky you are.
I like EZ track. For me, it's much easier to plan layouts because I do it as I go rather than sit down and draw up a plan. The locks on the ends allow this.
I sit down and try layout ideas on the floor.
I'm one of those who doesn't want to spend hours making my own bed.
On the other hand, you have more flexibility with flex track

[Guilford Guy]

For superior switches, I believe the general consensus is Peco.

[BIG BEAR]

          I prefer the ease of EZ Track, it stays together better and is much more stable than regular track.
          there are several sources for layout plans of EZ Track, Bachmann has a new book coming out, (real soon I hope) and some others - via internet.

            Enjoy, Barry

[rogertra]

There's a snob value at play here and, sadly, I'm one of them.  Snob that is.

E Zed track = Toy Trains.

Scale flex track (Code 83 or smaller) or handlaid = Model Railway/road.

[tommy4u2]

Roger
I felt the same as you ez track = toy trains  till I looked at the layout the bachmann built in the photo gallery useing ez track I was impressed enough to change my plans after laying about 50 or 60 feet of flex track and cork road bed with easy track I can get a smoother radius and have alot less derailment problems


http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/gallery/album13?&page=1

[Len]

Personally, I'm taking a liking to the Atlas TruTrack. It has Code83 track, which looks better to my eye, and the track is removable from the roadbed. So if a piece gets damaged I can buy a pack of Atlas Cd83 track and swap out the damaged piece.

And most important of all, 2" straight pieces are available without having to buy a 90deg crossing to get them. This opens up a host of layout plans that just can't be done with EZ-Track because you end up with 2" gaps all over the place.

Len

[Jim Banner]

Although my layout is a mixture of brass, steel and nickel-silver track in sectional, flex and hand laid versions, I keep a good supply of E-Z Track for temporary layouts and love the stuff.

The only parts I have had problems with are the cast metal parts in the E-Z Track turnouts.  Perhaps comparing E-Z Track turnouts to Shinohara and hand laid ones is unfair but bottom line, I like the strength of solid nickel-silver point rails.  For that reason, I ended up replacing the Bachmann turnouts with Atlas snap switches, mounted on the Bachmann bases.  It took a bit of cutting and filing, but they have stayed in gauge in spite of the rough handling they get.

I have never found odd length sections to be much of a problem with E-Z Track.  When I need a piece 2" or longer, I just cut the middle out of a section of E-Z Track and join the ends together.  I join the rails with Atlas rail joiners and solder them.  Then I glue the base pieces together and add a couple of styrene reinforcements underneath out of sight.  The reinforcements are probably not necessary unless your track gets man handled like mine does.  For short sections less than 2", the plastic hooks get in the way.  So I just add a piece of track of the appropriate length to the preceding or next section.  It is easy to add a bit of straight into the middle of a straight section, but a little harder to add a bit of straight or a bit of curve to the end of a curved section.

I use code 100 rail because some of my antique equipment requires it.  So it is not often that I have to replace a piece of track.  But when I do, it is easy to pop the track, ties and all, off the plastic base and install a piece of sectional track instead.  Walthers Goo will hold it in place for a few years or Pliobond will hold it forever.

[mikec069]

From Terry's post "I like EZ track. For me, it's much easier to plan layouts because I do it as I go rather than sit down and draw up a plan. The locks on the ends allow this."

I have to agree with Terry.  My layout keeps changing and to be able to 'rip' apart the track make the changes and put back what needs to be done is so sweet.  I had a old Tyco layout some 30+ years ago and had to cut, lay, and tack the roadbed when all I wanted to do was run the train. 

Thank you E-Z Track

[jaellis]

I too like the EZ track.  The biggest rpoblem I have found is that the roadbed can be unrealisticly high, especailly for yards and such where the roadbed isn't really built up.  As a father of three little kids, if I was laying conventional track I still wouldn't have trains up and running yet, would still be trying to find time to lay track.

The turnouts are also DCC friendly.  Leaving the frogs unpowered I can't 'make' my trains short-out, I have tried.

[grumpy]

I am an easy track fan as you can see from some of my postings. I sure hate laying track on cork roadbed. We should have a forum on EZ Track and the Atlas version.
Don

[SteamGene]

I have no problem with EZ-Track from the prototype aspect.  It has the great advantage this time of year that a temporary layout can be put down on a rug and a train will run on it.  It has the sectional track problem that your layout must conform to the track rather than the track conforming to the layout.   While it has a yard long section now, I just wonder how many EZ-Track people have a need for multiple yard long straight sections.  My layout has very few places where I have three sections of flex track that are all three straight.
My main problem with EZ-Track is, for the novice, it's not easy.  I've got a C&O H7 that says this board is going to light up Christmas day with "We bought junior a train for Christmas and it won't stay on the track."  The plastic connectors grab, but one rail - if not both - are riding over the joint. 
But for folks who have to put up and take down, and know how to assemble the stuff, it's fine.  For a permanent layout, by itself, well, as I said, I'd have to rob a bank. 
Gene

[BaltoOhioRRfan]

When i build my layout i'll be using both EZ Track and Atlas track, EZ Track mostly, but Atlas track for the curves on my street car line(ez track doesnt come tighter then 15) and on non ballasted bridges, i'd be ballasting over the ez track to give it more of a real look.

[Terry Toenges]

jaellis -
For doing yards/towns with EZ Track, I use pieces of 1/4" foam board from Woodland Scenics in 2 layers. That makes it about the right height.
Lay one layer butted up against the road bed. Then lay the second layer over it,
With the second layer, you can butt it up even closer because of the taper of the roadbed.
Then sand off the sharp edge of the top layer to blend it in or fill the gap with putty.
Or the gaps could be drainage ditches.
To transition from rural to yard, taper the ends of the 2 layers of foam and you can try to hide the transition part with scenery or a bridge or something.
In this pic, I didn't have the gaps between the foam and roadbed filled yet, but you can see how the height works out.