Hello
I really like the look of Gargraves and Atlas O gauge track over Fastrack.
Is one of them better than the other? Pros and cons?
Thanks
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
It's a matter of opinion and the subject of frequent discussion on the Forum. My preference is Atlas O because I like the solid nickel-silver rail and closer-to-scale-sized ties. I mount the track on cork roadbed with Atlas O track screws.
MELGAR
I doubt you will notice a difference performance wise. It mostly comes down to what “looks” nicer to you. That and the cost as Atlas is the more expensive of the two. FYI...I did my whole 8 x 25 foot five track mainline layout with Atlas track and Ross Switches. Works flawlessly and I love how it looks. But that’s just me. BigRail
Melgar is right. A matter of opinion. Atlas looks great but is pricey and when it comes to switches you are limited to what they make. I have used Gar Graves track since 1967. I was using their switches in the beginning but back in the eighties I switched to Ross switches. They offer more choices on switches. Plus Ross is the Cadillac of switches. Paul 2
Did the same as Paul 2. Gargraves track and switches, then changed to Ross switches. Why be stuck with certain curves. Gargraves is cheaper, made in America and always available. Love Rosses curved switches and three and four way to save space. Don
I think the Atlas track is actually sturdier, but is often difficult to obtain, or at least it used to be. There used to be lots of complaints about Atlas track non-availability.
Gargraves is easy to obtain and costs less than Atlas.
scale rail posted:Did the same as Paul 2. Gargraves track and switches, then changed to Ross switches. Why be stuck with certain curves. Gargraves is cheaper, made in America and always available. Love Rosses curved switches and three and four way to save space. Don
Doesn't Steve at Ross make his own switches in America too?
George
BigRail posted:I doubt you will notice a difference performance wise. It mostly comes down to what “looks” nicer to you. That and the cost as Atlas is the more expensive of the two. FYI...I did my whole 8 x 25 foot five track mainline layout with Atlas track and Ross Switches. Works flawlessly and I love how it looks. But that’s just me. BigRail
I believe Atlas track is superior for the reasons stated above. Ross switches can be made to work with Atlas. They are the same profile. So, if you want any fancy switches from Ross that Atlas doesn't have, you can use them. There are two ways to mate a Ross switch to Atlas. 1) Gargraves makes an Atlas track adapter pin that will work with both Ross and Gargraves. I have found them to be very fragile, so I switched to option #2. 2) Use a Dremel cutoff wheel to trim off the lower flange of the Ross rail. This is the part that goes in the ties. Then, an Atlas rail joiner will fit over the remaining part of the Ross rail and mate to the Atlas rail.
George
Yes Ross switches are made in America.....Paul 2
Gargraves flex and Ross switches
We started out with Gargraves. For new alignments, however, we use Atlas. Turnouts are all Ross. To connect Atlas to Ross turnouts, you need to remove the stringers between the last two ties on the end of the Ross turnout and either move or remove the end tie. Then you can use the Atlas joiners. For Gargraves track you need to shave out the webbing that holds the rail into the Gargraves tie and use Atlas joiners. Works great. The new Atlas flex has one running rail fixed in place which should be on the outside of the curve so you can better manage cutting the other rails.
Gargraves Atlas connection.
Both work well with Ross switches. I like the Atlas track because of its closer to scale plastic ties and "T" rail.
Gargraves track is available in both flexible and sectional pieces, however, if you're going for sectional I would use Ross or Atlas.
I'm not a big fan of Atlas switches for a number of reasons, if you search the forum you'll see why.
I have an all Ross turnout, with a mix of Ross and gargraves sectional track layout. If I had to do it all over again I’d use atlas sectional with rose turnouts
Atlas track (I like the look.) , and a mix of Atlas and Ross turnouts.
For me Atlas track looks the best, and I really like the solid rail vs tubular. I also think the ties look more realistic with atlas.
I use all atlas track, and mostly atlas switches, with a few Ross specialty switches.
I've done two major layouts with Atlas track. I wouldn't use any other.
But, if there are future layouts, I would probably replace the Atlas switches with Ross.
Phil68 posted:Hello
I really like the look of Gargraves and Atlas O gauge track over Fastrack.
Is one of them better than the other? Pros and cons?
Thanks
I like the look of GarGraves track and Ross switches. The real wood ties look good and beefy. Although the Atlas ties are closer to scale, they are a little spindly looking. Probably due to the over-sized rail they have to use for 3-rail.
Remember, it's not how you feel, it's how you look. And GarGraves/Ross look mahvelous!!! 
Gargraves track and Ross Switches - the "Lexus" of switches (Mercedes is too unreliable).
Hal
Special application switches. Ross 3-way.
On my second layout this one 18 x 40 using all Gargraves Flex with sectional curves and Ross turnouts and nothing as a roadbed laying the track over homasote with no problems.
Mike CT posted:Special application switches. Ross 3-way.
I don’t want to hijack the thread, but I would really like to know your technique for ballasting and weathering your track. It’s outstanding, Mike.
I used Gargraves trackage and Ross turnouts, all with wood ties, for my 8' by 24' layout because I liked the looks.
Rider Sandman posted:Mike CT posted:Special application switches. Ross 3-way.
I don’t want to hijack the thread, but I would really like to know your technique for ballasting and weathering your track. It’s outstanding, Mike.
Ballast, Brummy's rubber crum ballast, used by the Fort Pitt High-railers. Weathering done with an air brush and Testors acrylic Railroad tie brown. Top of rail cleaned with Scotch Brite pads.
https://youtu.be/ggHKygUPn8g. Here a video I made last October connecting Atlas track to a Ross switch. Very easy. I use both Atlas, Ross track.
Mike CT posted:Rider Sandman posted:Mike CT posted:Special application switches. Ross 3-way.
I don’t want to hijack the thread, but I would really like to know your technique for ballasting and weathering your track. It’s outstanding, Mike.
Ballast, Brummy's rubber crum ballast, used by the Fort Pitt High-railers. Weathering done with an air brush and Testors acrylic Railroad tie brown. Top of rail cleaned with Scotch Brite pads.
Thanks, Mike. I have spare pieces of track (Atlas) and will experiment. If mine can come out anywhere close to yours, I’ll be thrilled. Thanks again for the help.
Neither, both are , ah.
Tube rail or "I" rail?
Day & night.
MTH Scale Trax, if you can find all the pieces to buy at once? 
I always love to read the Atlas v. Ross threads. As I am still in a basic planning stage of a layout, I am still undecided on which I like more. Ross has tons more switches and they work so well, but Atlas is more scale-looking.
If I may ask, for those who have Ross switches and Atlas track together on the same layout, could you post some more pics please? I am not sure how well the look together. If I choose to use Atlas flex and curves with Ross switches, I want them to good. I have yet to see good photos of the two mixes for me to decide.
Thank you all for great input.
All are good. Go with the one you like the best. I like Atlas track because of the solid nickel-silver rails and it looks good to me, I also use Atlas switches. Personally, I think the Ross switches go pretty well with the Atlas track, ones I have seen anyway. Especially after ballasting.
We have two sections of our layout. The main portion uses gargraves straights Ross curves and switches. The other portion used atlas. The main portion rarely has any issue with operation due to track. The portion that used atlas rarely runs without problems.
Ross and GG. If you are concerned about scale appearance go two rail scale. Otherwise Ross and GG.
Atlas ties do have worn out looking wood surface but are no way near scale size, and at times have availability issues. Assortment is limited. Problems not so limited. Atlas track it's self has a street price about double of GarGraves.
Atlas 3r track could be considered more durable if rough and tumble is your environment.
If you have a moist train room GG offers stainless steel rail.
Previously I had spent several years building with Atlas only until availability and pricing became questionable.
My deciding factor; Ross and GG proudly Made In America. Availability--today or tomorrow.
The best thing about using Gargraves track and Ross Custom switches is the service both companies provide. My layout is 32 years old and was built with Gargraves track, Ross Custom switches, Midwest cork roadbed and Tortoise switch machines. After 32 years of service one of my mainline switches needed a new throwbar. So, I carefully packed it up and sent it to Steve at Ross Switches. It will be fixed and returned at no cost. Nobody I know fixes a 32 year old product free including the return shipping. The variety, availability, service and reliability of Ross Turnouts is legendary, plus they look great. The Gargraves Phantom rail is easy to cut, bend and install. The Tortoise switch machines will never derail if thrown in the correct direction and they give you the opportunity to have bi-color LED's show you the route on your control panel. If I had to start fresh today, I would do exactly as I did in the fall of 1987.
Ross and Gargraves is a really good option for modern 3-rail. The price is pretty good too. Gargraves makes lots of adapter pins and has ready made packets of screws. Always pre-drill your ties and don't over tighten. Ross makes track too and has some interesting radius options available.
For tubular track, Ross makes switches too. I just bought a Ross Standard Gauge switch. Ross is considered the only option for the standard gauge crowd.
George
The only "problem," if you can call it that, is that Ross doesn't make switches in O36.
Like Carl, I'm deep in the planning stages. I'm loathe to build a new layout with O31. Even some train set locos now require O36. And although many MTH locos are advertised as being able to run on O31, I find that they are gauged "tight," and have little play in the side rods. Having rubber tires on opposite sides of the same axle doesn't help. I find they run with noticeably less straining/slowing on slightly larger curves. Unfortunately given my space, I can't get the operational variety I want using O42. So I do nothing. 
I'm not looking for anything fancy. Just basic left and right switches. These would be a drop-in replacement for Fasttrack, great for folks who are graduating from train sets and want to get up off the floor. Ross is also much quieter than Fasttrack-- you can hear yourself think!
So I encourage all of you: Please, please write Steve at Ross Custom Switches. (Contact info is on their website.) Ask him to make his excellent switches-- at least a basic left and right-- in O36. Please!!
"One. One track system to rule them all!"
Ted, Have you tried to fudge in an 042 switch in your 036 circle? It would be a very minor "X" offset to the tangent.
Not to get off track from the original topic, but yes. I'm a prolific user of SCARM and I know for at least some of the designs I'm considering, O42 won't work. I admit that I'm cramming 5 lbs. into a 2-lb bag. With more than 40 switches in 18 x 11.5, I absolutely need the most reliable switches I can get.
O31 was the original "toy train" curve. But I don't like the way some RailKing steam locos run on O31, and visually the curves are very sharp. Even Lionel decided that O36 was a better idea when they introduced Super O back in 1957! I just can't see building an extensive permanent layout with smaller curves than are included in a basic train set. Where would that leave me for the future?
Someday if I post my designs you'll see why I need to keep everything consistent at O36. I'm pretty sure if Ross offered this size I would already be in construction. Since they don't, I bought a handful of Atlas switches to test. They came from eBay because everyone was out of stock! Their boxes are all different, so I suspect they're not all the same generation/design. I know from a friend's layout that the earliest Atlas switches had issues. I'm actually planning to set up a test loop and subject my equipment to an extended trial. With all of the switches built into my routes, even one derailment per 100 passes going into the points is too many. Reliability is key!!
"One. One track system to rule them all!"
Not every derailment on a switch should be blamed on the switch. I had one on my Ross switch, and it was always the same car. It ended up being the truck on that car. It was not obvious at all. The car tracked on the rest of the layout fine and even went over a crossover without problems. I ended up disassembling and reassembling the truck making sure everything was square, and my problem went away.
Also, switch problems can usually be fixed and once fixed, will not cause problems again. It's usually a matter of making sure the switch is level, on an even base and is operating properly and then making sure the tension and throw of the switch machine is correct.
George
Phil68, Thanks for asking this question. I currently have Fastrack layout but hope to make new larger layout in the not to distant future. I want to use the Ross switches for my industrial layout and was wondering what track to use with them.
Thank you to all who responded with your thoughtful insights.
Tom
Ted S posted:Not to get off track from the original topic, but yes. I'm a prolific user of SCARM and I know for at least some of the designs I'm considering, O42 won't work. I admit that I'm cramming 5 lbs. into a 2-lb bag. With more than 40 switches in 18 x 11.5, I absolutely need the most reliable switches I can get.
O31 was the original "toy train" curve. But I don't like the way some RailKing steam locos run on O31, and visually the curves are very sharp. Even Lionel decided that O36 was a better idea when they introduced Super O back in 1957! I just can't see building an extensive permanent layout with smaller curves than are included in a basic train set. Where would that leave me for the future?
Someday if I post my designs you'll see why I need to keep everything consistent at O36. I'm pretty sure if Ross offered this size I would already be in construction. Since they don't, I bought a handful of Atlas switches to test. They came from eBay because everyone was out of stock!
"One. One track system to rule them all!"
I dream far bigger than O-36 switches. I currently have an N-scale layout with Atlas #10 switches, and are they ever fantastic! The bigger the switch, the better trains LOOK and PERFORM on them!
On the other hand, I've had to learn to compromise big time since taking up O-gauge. Reality bites, and O-gauge gives one a stark reality lesson really quick. I would LOVE to have an O-gauge layout with #10 switches, but that probably ain't gonna' happen (ever), ya' know what I mean?
I currently have an MTH RealTrax layout with O-72 switches, and they are far more satisfying than anything smaller. My trains run through them without a hiccup and look fairly decent in the process. And perform much better than anything smaller, I'm sure.
My advice: If O-36 is the most you have room for, then so be it. But if anyway possible, try and design for the absolute biggest switches you can fit into your design - you'll never, ever regret it!
And okay - I agree 110% - I'd vote for RCS to make O-36 switches, too. I think it would be FANTASTIC to be able to duplicate Lionel Super-O Dealer Layouts with GarGraves/Ross trackage! 
Paul, how big is your layout room? How long are your straightaways??
Just like so many other Americans, years ago I escaped the cold of the rust belt for the Land of No Basements. I'm also a part of the New Urbanism--no McMansion for me. Zero lot line brownstone. Every dollar I don't spend on grounds, I can spend on trains. And I can walk to work! The downside is, I'm pretty much limited to a Spare Room Railroad.
I had a wide-radius design in mind when I bought the house. I did concentric ovals and "open doughnut" modular style layouts for years. But I'm done with it. The last layout I started building along those lines, I didn't even finish because I knew I would be bored with it in a week. Yes, I know about car cards, prototypical operation, etc. But the O27 "L" we had as kids was more fun, and frankly more interesting to look at. To get real variety, continuous action, alternate routes, etc. in 18 x 11, we're talking O42 and probably less. That IS the reality.
Smaller curves preclude the use of scale equipment. I don't want On30, or 19th Century teakettles. I want Berkshires. Hudsons. Maybe even a GG1! I never had a problem with the appearance of Postwar trains, or Plasticville for that matter. They went together like ham and eggs. Twenty-five years ago, I abandoned traditional O because I wanted trains that ran realistically. Smooth, slow speed operation that no postwar steam loco could deliver. Heck, even a lot of the "scale" trains disappointed me, because they didn't perform like scale models that I experienced in HO. Thanks to Railking with PS3 and LionChief Plus, now I can get scale performance in a handy "toy train" size. A good choice in control systems too. The key decision point is the track.
Men's belts have holes about an inch apart. Like most of us, this time of year I gain a little weight. I wear size 30", and to me one hole either way makes a LOT of difference. Now think about how that applies to your train room... The scale guys are lucky. 72" and 80" are only 8" apart. But at the other end of the spectrum, going from O31 to O42 is a 35% increase! It makes it hard to find a happy medium. Atlas jumped right into that niche. But then its Chinese subcontractors let me down with spotty reliability and availability. I agree that very sharp curves ARE inherently more derailment-prone. Which is a good reason to use O36 if it fits, instead of O31. And also, to buy the best-engineered, most trouble-free switches on the market.
I guess all I'm saying is that, as more Americans follow me to the Land of No Basements, they will be building more O36-sized Spare Room Railroads, and fewer O72 basement empires. I'm convinced that there's an unmet need here. Really hoping that Ross will step up!
"One. One track system to rule them all!"
