Loaded Question: Why should I use "X" code track on my layout?

[OkieRick]

I'm using 69 code on the first layout.  Actually it will have 100 and 83. Besides me, who decides what code and why?  Era?  Location?  RR use?

Rick

[Tylerf]

Well I don't know of all the reasons but on the real railroads the higher the pound(or code) of rail the more it can handle. So main lines always have the highest code of rail then sidings can either e the same or slightly smaller then branch lines and spurs are the smallest. Along with rail size, tie spacing usually changes(ie, heavier rail gets closer spaced ties, than lighter rail which is more spread out) for the most part it's all about use and how much use a section of track will have to handle. Now I don't know what railroads use what kinds of codes or weight of rail but that's a small bit of research that can be done on the Internet along with finding out what weight of real rail is equivlent to which code of track which I'm also not sure of. Anyways, to make your layout look as real as Possible( at least when it comes to track) just use code 100 for main line and major sidings and code 83 for lesser sidings and spurs. Also it looks even better when the main line is elevated higher than the rest of the track work and have spurs at almost ground level with sidings in between.

[Yampa Bob]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_tracks

I use Code 100, it's a bit more durable than 83, and similar to weight of rails used in this area.

Many prefer 83 for its more "scale like" appearance. Some feel 100 is "ugly", but as Forrest Gump says: "Ugly is as ugly does". 

Advocates of Code 83 use words like "professional", "serious", "dedicated", and "knowledgeable" to support their preference. Guess I lose on all counts. Just thought I'd toss those in before someone else does. 

As long as it complies with "Rule Number One", I'm happy.

[rustyrails]

"Code" is just a measure of the height of the rail in thousands of an inch.  Soooo, code 100 rail is 100/1000 or 1/10th inch high.  A lot of (most?) commercial track is code 100, but code 83 has been gaining in popularity for the past 10 years or so and is widely available.  Code 100 rail represents about the heaviest rail you would ever find in the real world.  One reason to lay your own track is to be able to use smaller, more prototypical rail.  In HO, code 70 is popular among the lay-it-yourself crowd.  My personal opinion is that once the rail is painted and the track ballasted, it's hard to tell the difference between code 100 and code 83 track. 
Rusty

[jward]

rail does not scale down well in the smaller scales. code 100 rail is larger than the largest rail used in this country, which i believe was 152 lb rail. this was used on extremely high density railroads like the pennsy where many heavy trains ran. 152 lb rail is no longer made, but it was strong enough to support the track even under the atrocious conditions of penn central in the 1970s.

i am not sure exactly what code 83 scales out to, but it is more typical of the sizes of rail used to-day on mainlines.

code 70 would be typical of the rail used on branch lines in the present day, and rail often used on mainlines in the early 1900s.

that said it is a matter of prefereence what you use. code 100 is commonly used in sectional track, though atlas has a line of code 83 sectional and roadbed track.

for those who lay their own rail, like me, code 83 is easier to work with.
code 70 is not much different than code 83 in that respect. and rail sizes smaller than code 70 usually require soldering to ties made of pc board.

[pdlethbridge]

who makes code 69 rail? There's code 100, 83, 70, and 55 (in N gauge.

[ebtnut]

Just a little history for background.  Code 100 rail was the de facto standard for HO since at least the 1940's.  Yes, it scales out a bit larger than the heaviest main line rail used, 152 lb. on parts of the PRR.  All of the track, wheel, and flangeway HO NMRA standards are based on using code 100 rail.  Code 70 rail was just coming into the hobby when I got started back in the late 1960's - it was developed primarily by and for the HOn3 narrow gaugers, and it represents rail of aboug 100 lb.  A lot of railroads used 100 lb. rail on their main lines through the 1940's.  Code 83, which represents about 130 lb. rail, came available in the 1970's, and represents most main line rail up to today.  It comes down to a matter of how close to scale you want your track to be.  A lot of folks still choose to use code 100, and will paint the rail to help reduce its visual size.  Go with what you are comfortable with. 

[OkieRick]

I knew the Code numbers referred to the height in 100ths of an inch but have been reading about layouts in this code and that code.  I don't have a quarrel with "political correctness in prototypical-ity" and those who strive for it.  At the show I went to last weekend I was rolling by a vendor while he was asking a guy, "what code track are you using?"

I have on hand 100 and 83. My 3' flex-track is 100 as is all my older Atlas.  The new Atlas in 83 including 10 #6 and #8 turnouts is 83. I don't want to be laughed at by all my friends for using 100 for siding of a 1930s coaling tower, water tank and sand tower because "they" said it was a no-no in some magazine.

PD, there ain't no code 69 track.  I was using that number hypermetahoricaly....or something.

Thanks for the input.

Rick

[Jim Banner]

who makes code 69 rail?

Interestingly enough,  both Dudley and Delaware, Lakawana and Western rail were 6" high in the real world which would be .069" in H0.  I suppose there could be an ultra perfectionist out there somewhere, busy modeling the DL&W and shaving down code 70 rail to the "correct" code 69.

There is a compilation of American rail sizes at:

http://www.icrr.net/rails.htm

If you start analyzing these rail sizes, you may notice for example that the error from using code 100 to represent 155 pound rail is smaller than the error from using code 70 rail to represent 85 pound rail, a size used on many railroads at one time or another.  Bottom line,  sooner or later you either have to make compromises or you have to make your own rail.  Personally, I am a member of the "paint it black and nobody will notice" school of thought.

Jim

[RAM]

Rick for you code 100 would work fine.  If I understand you, you want to run trains more than you want details.  code 100 has been around since the start of HO.  It will stand up and run for years.

[CNE Runner]

I model the latter part of the 19th century and am enamored with Peco products - so I went with Peco Code 75. Actually Code 75 rail is too heavy for that time period; but what the hey? I didn't want to use lighter rail for the sidings (KISS principle).

Ray

[OkieRick]

Is anyone still using their old brass track?  I plan on using mine, I have too much not to.

Rick

[Jim Banner]

About one third of my H0 layout is brass track.  From an operating and cleaning point of view, I cannot tell any difference between brass, nickel silver or steel track since I started using a tiny amount of oil on the rails.

In 0_N30 I am hand laying brass rail, including stub switches made from old Atlas and Atlas style turnouts.  It is all code 100 which works out to 75 pound rail in 0 scale.

Jim