|
|
 Posted - March 22 2007 : 11:18:35 AM
|
This is from the Atlas site and it explains the differences between the two most popular types of HO-scale track...
What's the difference between Atlas HO Code 83 and Code 100 track?
Literally, the code of a piece of track is the height of the rail in thousandths of an inch (meaning code 83 rail is .083" high; code 100 rail is .100" high). The significant difference lies in the physical appearance of the two types of track. Atlas Code 83 track has fine, brown ties whereas Code 100 has slightly thicker black ties. Because of its accuracy (and the color of the ties), Code 83 is more prototypical, and therefore more realistic than Code 100. Code 83 is known as a finer-scale track, and is the choice of discerning modelers. Atlas carries a full line of both Code 100 and Code 83 products.
Tony Cook
HO-Scale Trains Resource
http://ho-scaletrains.net
|
Country:  USA ~
Posts: 1658 ~
Member Since: December 03 2005 ~
Last Visit: February 07 2010
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 22 2007 : 9:06:11 PM
|
| Thanks !
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 33 ~
Member Since: January 28 2007 ~
Last Visit: July 21 2012
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 23 2007 : 12:52:36 AM
|
one thing...
Code 83 track is not very "deep flange" friendly.
The older locos' and rollingstock have those big flanges. My Riv-Rossi cars and loco's are subject to "tie-tapping" if you know what I mean.
Lesson learned: Atlas Code 83 rail is not identical to Peco Code 83 rail.
By a smigin, Peco is teeny bit taller and narrower.
Stick to one brand of Code 83, if venturing that way.
ZZzz
I don't have a one track mind. It depends on the turn-out.
"I love your catenary!"
Is that a power-trip or just another pick-up line?
|
Country:  Canada ~
Posts: 1124 ~
Member Since: December 15 2006 ~
Last Visit: January 30 2023
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 23 2007 : 11:18:40 AM
|
I agree with Zebrails on the "tie-tapping" problem on any deep flange wheels. From what I experienced with Code 83, virtually all older AHM locos and cars are subject to trouble...as well as others of a "vintage" age.
Now on the reverse, going back to Code 100 I've found that my scale wheels do not negotiate the Code 100 turnouts without derailing.
Has anyone else experienced this scale wheel difficulty on Code 100 track?
Tony Cook
HO-Scale Trains Resource
http://ho-scaletrains.net
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 1658 ~
Member Since: December 03 2005 ~
Last Visit: February 07 2010
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 23 2007 : 3:06:27 PM
|
Tony,
Sorry to say, my locos with scale wheels seem to run just fine over my Atlas snap track switches. These are the ones that come with the twin coil motors. I have used Walthers Trainline, Athearn blue box, L.L. p1k and Bachmann Spectrums in addition to my huge collection of standard issue models and ancient stuff.
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 713 ~
Member Since: May 03 2006 ~
Last Visit: May 06 2024
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - March 24 2007 : 7:55:43 PM
|
I have locos that tap on code 100, but just some of my Tycos. I'm thinking that on Tyco the tapping wheels are the plastic ones, on the diesel drivers and that they become worn and run deeper and hit the ties or the flange becomes deeper like it was turning on a lathe. [V]
Alco Fan
Edited by - Alco Fan on March 24 2007 7:57:29 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2496 ~
Member Since: August 03 2006 ~
Last Visit: December 06 2021
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - April 10 2007 : 9:55:25 PM
|
Here are pictures for side by side comparison of code 83 and code 100 track. Both examples are Atlas brand. Track in left photo is code 83 and track to right is code 100. The code 100 is from the 80's. The newer code 100 has smaller tie spikes just like the code 83.
Edited by - Brianstyco on August 22 2007 2:59:08 PM
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 2507 ~
Member Since: January 31 2006 ~
Last Visit: October 21 2017
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - April 15 2007 : 12:33:49 PM
|
Although Code 83 is more prototypical - for me personally, my rolling stock (old Tyco Era or new Athearn RTR) tends to derail quite a bit more on its turnouts than with my Atlas Code 100. Never experienced the Tie-Tapping problem, so I'll count myself lucky. I stick with Code 100, mainly because that's the trackage I started out with eons ago and have the most supply of. I have yet to see someone visit my layout, measure the height of my rails, and snort "that ain't prototype track." [:D] Okay, my fiance does ... but I selectively ignore those comments. [}:)]
I like caffeine and a chainsaw ...
|
|
Country: USA ~
Posts: 141 ~
Member Since: January 06 2007 ~
Last Visit: February 05 2011
|
Alert Moderator
|
|
|
|
Posted - August 22 2007 : 6:31:33 PM
|
quote:I have yet to see someone visit my layout, measure the height of my rails, and snort "that ain't prototype track." [:D] Okay, my fiance does ... but I selectively ignore those comments. [}:)]
Originally posted by HOScale Model Railroader - April 15 2007 : 5:33:49 PM
|
They'd be wrong, too. Back in the 50s, the Pennsy had a few stretches of high iron that scaled out to...drum roll please...C100 in HO scale.[^] [:p] Gotta love the Pennsy.
|
|
|
Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Forum Admins & Mods
Register
