Pro's and Con's of Different Track

I use ScaleTrax.  I like it just because I started with it.  I've heard that Gargraves and Atlas track are good also.  Matt

My layout (3RS modeler) is ALL Atlas O solid nickel Silver, and I have modified the turnout guard rails so that I can also operate 2-Rail scale rolling stock.

However, I would also look into MTH "Scale Trax". To be honest, if I had known more about the MTH Scale Trax system, I probably would have used their's instead of the Atlas O. Check out Rich Batista's Scale Trax layout videos.

I'm still partial to GG flex wooden ties and ross turnouts,Tortoise switch machines.

MTH ScaleTrax is probably the most realistic looking track available today.

I forgot to add Scaletrax to the list.  My concern there though, is like the super snap, and that is availability.

I have been leaning towards Atlas, but want to make as well as an informed decision as I can.

Where would one find Rich Batista's videos?

I wonder if anybody could compare all of these price-wise, first with a straight piece and then maybe a remote switch of comparable size?

I have bee trying to do that also, down to price per inch of straights and curves then against switches.  Switches aren't cheap no matter what so I am really not factoring that.  I don't plan on having a plethora of them anyway.

Look up 

'Toy Trains on Tracks' - great endoesement for ScaleTrax.

 Easiest flextrack by far unlike Gargraves (easily kinked) and Atlas.

Personally I too feel that ScaleTrax is the most realistic even though technically, the ties are spaced slightly too far apart. The big difference is the lowest height (profile) of the rails themselves and the less-obtrusive center blade (as opposed to a full-sized rail used on the others) which becomes easy on the eyes in short time. The low profile of the track gives your locomotives & rolling stock a more massive appearance. After awhile, the tie spacing seems perfectly normal.

As for availability, we had no problem acquiring all we needed - first from Trainz for the bulk of the track and switches and later from the aftermarket as we needed more. We had to dismantle our layout last fall and I will probably be offering our track for sale one of these days...

Would agree with the posters above that both Gargraves and Atlas are too bulky and can 'overpower' the trains to a certain degree!

Right-click on these and 'open in new window' for full effect. These give you a couple of views to see the many visual advantages that we proponents of ScaleTrax like.

Do these ties look too far apart?  Also check the top surface of the center blade compared to the outside rails. Do you remember Lionel 'Super O' track from the mid-fifties? ScaleTrax is similar.

CTT had a cost comparison in one of their track planning books. They priced an equal stretch of track from each mfr and came up with something like:

Least expensive - GG

Then came Scaletrax and Realtrax (about the same cost for either system)

Atlas and Lionel Fastrack were more expensive by quite a bit

Ross was the most

The tie spacing with scaletrax bothers me none.  Personally, the spacing on Atlas looks too close for my eye.

I have a mix of Gargraves, Ross, AtlasO, even a section of Lionel SuperO.  It's all good.

If I had it to do over again it would be AtlasO sectional with Ross switches.

I have been using the SuperSnap track and am happy with it. My bias is toward a tinplate layout as I don't have the skill set for a high rail layout. I put pins in all sections and conductivity is good. I am using the SuperSnap for the mainlines and tinplate with extra ties for the yards. This way the mainline looks different than the yard and,equally as important, I can use some of the tinplate track that I already have. The switches are good but not great. There are some dead spots with short locomotives. Also, there are some spots where the center and the ground rails come close and the pick up rollers on some engines spark. This problem is pretty fixable with electrical tape, either liquid or solid. The switches are much better than the Lionel tinplate ones. If I had to do it again I would probably use the Ross tinplate switches. Overall, the SuperSnap is nice track if you want the tubular/tinplate look.

Ed

TexasSP, that was a great question, one I considered asking myself.  This post definitely helps

I agree, and my layout is all Atlas. However, when weathered and ballasted, it comes out fine But, I think I would still rather have ScaleTrax today, especially since it is MUCH more available than ANYTHING from Atlas O lately, and I tend to operate 2-Rail scale pieces too.

I use all Gargraves Flex Track with wood ties and all Ross Switches. I don't think you can beat the appearance or operational qualities. The flex track also gives you the flexibility in your layout design to have custom curves of any radius you want for more realism.  The only "con" I can think of is you may get some difficulty with small radius curves.  If you have the space for large radii curves, go with Gargraves.

.....

Dennis

As far as the "most realistic" track, it could be said it's all in the eye of the beholder.  Of course they all have 3 rails, but that said -- Scaletrax low profile is a plus, but the ties are noticeably too far apart.  Atlas is just about right. 

 I used to walk on an abandoned railroad and tried to figure out the tie spacing.  It turns out there was quite a bit of variation from one tie to another! Now whether this was poor track work back then or common, I don't know.  This was a Reading Railroad line in the Bethlehem, PA area;  no idea how old.

          paul m.

This particular bit irritates me, too. Call me crazy, but I actually think Gargraves looks better than Atlas. I think Atlas' realistically narrow ties with their realistically close spacing makes the too-tall rail look even too-tall-er than it already is. Even though Gargraves ties are too large and too far apart, they match the too-tall rail--so even though everything is a little wrong, it is all wrong together--which somehow makes it appear "right". At least to my eyes. As someone said, realism is in the eye of the beholder, but to me the harmonious proportions of Gargraves win out over the more realistic but ill-proportioned Atlas track.

Scale Trax is the best looking but there is a very limited switch selection and the switches must be gone over before using. 

Atlas my be your personal taste but I think it looks too chunky.  The switches can be problematic. Some people have used Ross switches with Atlas Track. They are in limited supply also.

Ross/Gargraves is the most reliable combination.  Ross track is spiked and doesn't come in flex and is more expensive.  You get what you pay for.  Ross switches are by far the best and most reliable.  Ross also has the best selection of switches, by far.  Ross also has good availability, but not discounted.

With MTH and Atlas switch machines you should probably use the Atlas 6924 Non Derail Circuit board to protect the switch machines.

When the track is fully ballasted the ties will mostly disappear. Many layouts pictured on this forum don't have enough ballast for my taste. Your mileage may vary.

Ross/Gargraves does not rust in a normal basement.  You may need a dehumidifier to protect your trains.

Dan  

WHAT?? Ross switches are in limited supply????   Since when?

      I settled on Atlas O because:

1) I think Atlas O has the most true-to-scale ties.

2) I think the spacing of the ties is the most accurate.

3) It has solid rails, compared with other brands that have hollow rails.

4) The conductivity of nickel silver rails.

5) The woodgrain design in the plastic ties.

6) True "T" shape of the rails.

7) Solid construction. "You can step on it" as someone said.

8) When I saw it ballasted at my LHS, it looked more realistic than any other brand I had seen.

9) Nice variety of switches.

10) Very available here in the New York metro hobby stores.

Just my two cents. Hope it helps.

John Knapp

Erie, not Eerie

Hot Water, I got some of my thought out of order.  Atlas, limited selection and supply.  Ross best selection and readily available. 

Dan 

Charles Ro has so much Atlas O track in stock that he is having a 10% off sale if you buy $500.00 worth!! That's a lot of track!

John Knapp

Erie, not Eerie

I don't think so.  I've had no problem finding Atlas track and it is readily available at a good number of dealers.

Selection (variety of items) is pretty darn good, too!

Well, so far I am seeing all good reasons to go with Atlas or Scaletrax.  I was looking for more selling points to move toward Gargraves or Super Snap.

As for switches be it Atlas or Scaletrax, I don't intend to have a switch heavy setup.  The other consideration is that if I have to, it seems to be that I can get what I need from Ross.  I don't mind tweaking my switches either, as coming from HO, it was almost a necessity with the exception being Peco.

But hey, keep the pro's and con's coming.  In my searching I could not locate a thread like this so my hope is that it will help more than just me.

Hi, I use Atlas track on my home layout with a mixture of Ross and Atlas switches.  The Ross switches mate easily with Atlas track.  I use the Ross curved switches and Atlas switches when I don't need curved switches.  Curved switches save a tremendous amount of space on a small layout.

I don't like either the look or operation of Atlas switch machines.  They are also too big for tight yard tracks.  All my switch machines are DZ-2500s.  This is an extra expense but I believe it is worth it.  I would have needed some other switch for the Ross switches anyhow.

I live in CA.  I have never seen a piece of Scaletrax on any layout, at a train show or in any train store.  Atlas track is available almost everywhere.  

I am also building an outdoor layout called the G&O.  We are using all Atlas track and switches.  Some of the track has been in the weather for over 3 years.  The ties and track have not deteriorated yet.  The Atlas switch machines fall apart in the sun and rain and have all been changed to manual machines.  The Atlas plastic track insulators also fall apart in the sun.  

We need to walk on the track to reach some parts of G&O.  Walking on it does not damage the track.  I suppose that this an advantage of solid rail.

One disadvantage of Atlas track is that the flex track is very, very hard to bend and hold in place.  This problem can be overcome on an indoor layout by screwing the track to the base board.  Outdoor track needs to float on the roadbed to allow for expansion.  We have found that we need to use the pre-formed sectional curves for all outdoor curves.

Joe

OK, I'm rebuilding with ScaleTrax.

Yes, it can be less available, Ordering by the box will always work. That's what I do.

Yes, the selection of switches is limited a bit, O-31, O-54, O-72, #4, #6 left or right.

However, Ross switches have rails that are VERY similar to Scaletrax in size and shape (slightly taller) with much thicker ties.

Easy fix: 5mm roadbed under the ScaleTrax and 2mm cork sheet under the Ross switch. The tops come out even and the rail shape match is sweet.

I have a pair of Ross Wyes to mate up with my ScaleTrax.

And Yes, ScaleTrax flex is easily the most flexible track made, bar none. I can bend it by hand with no tools needed. I can also straighten it back out by hand and have done so for demonstration.

I think what type of train control and locos make a difference.  If conventional in a dry basement tinplate would probably last a lifetime, little cleaning.  I have a Gargraves flex 20 feet square, 3 levels in an unheated outbuilding that's been cleaned like 3 times in almost thirty years.  I'm sure The conventional top level would run right now even though I haven't run it in two years.  

As for the lower TMCC levels I'm not so sure.

I'm currently running (in the house,warm & dry), an Atlas 6x13 holiday layout, love the track, switches are touchy, prefer Ross.  I also have some Super O which is great but small radius.  

Summed up, figure out what the track's environment will be, the control system, how many operating cars you're going to run (if any sliding shoes).    How detailed you plan to get.  How noisy, clickity clacky?  What you put under the track is very important.  

How big are you planning on making this layout?

And, if you change your mind you can sell or trade it here.  

I've been using Gargrave's tinplate and I really like, it works with Magnatraction 

and newer trains as well and I think it looks good but the plate plastic ties do not 

look as real, I do like the wood better, right now I finally cleaned off the Lionel 

Super O track I have and it looks really nice and conduct's really good (copper 

center rail) in some ways it has the odd shape of the Metro north ties that they 

used.

Tin 

The original poster seemed to be concerned with realism in his track choice which rules out tinplate.

It's good to see more folks chiming in with favorable comments about ScaleTrax. When I was planning our layout about 4 years ago I was asking these same questions. Realism was my primary concern then and if I could build another layout I would go with it again without hesitation.

The limited choices in switches can be a factor with ScaleTrax but as Dave and Ted Hikel have shown, its not that difficult to use Ross templates and scratch-build your own switches using ScaleTrax rail and center from their flextrack.   

Several of you have commentted that Atlas looks 'chunky' or similar - a good observation. The components may be close to 1:48 scale but consider that when working with scale models, more than just 'scale' comes into play. I read a great piece in a magazine talking about the differences between HO and O scales. The writer pointed out that an HO model of an F3 for instance is not 'half' the size of its O scale counterpart but actually 1/8 the size in volume. Yes, HO is technically 'half-O' but when you consider that the height is 1/2, the width is 1/2, and the length is 1/2 that you now have a model that is 1/8 the size in cubic displacement. This is why our O gauge pieces seem so much larger.

Now back to the track - when you create a 1:48th size model of an object the individual components may be true 1:48 but when combined together they can appear much larger. This is likely why the Atlas track seems crowded and heavy (which it certainly does!)

'Pros' like the Hikel brothers and Rich Battista have demonstrated the realistic appearance of ScaleTrax very well. Rich once posted several photos with the center rail removed in PhotoShop that looked as real as any prototype photo I've seen. 

And it considerably less expensive than Atlas.

Gargraves suffers from the oversized appearance too. We have some 'G' Gauge two rail Gargraves that looks great with a large scale locomotive as it is about right for them. For 'realistic' appearance with O gauge trains it is just too big...

I have a mix of both.  More solid than not I would say, probably 60/40.  It's not going anywhere anytime soon though, got to keep the carpet empire going for the kids.

If I were new to the hobby, I would go 2 rail.

If you go 3 rail, stay away from Gargraves.

I've also gone with Atlas track and switches with a couple of Ross thrown in. I did my homework and knew the Atlas switch and connector problems. I bought almost all of my track used and a lot came with the old connectors. I replaced them with new and I also wired the switches to eliminate any dead spots. I also replaced the switch machines with DZ-2500s so I could use command control on them with a minimum amount of wiring. I have about 2/3 of my track installed and because I was careful to minimize the problems I've ended up with a pretty reliable layout. My only problem is with the #7.5, #5 and 072/054 curved switches. The hot rail gap is to long for some of my engines but a short extension rail should solve these problems. This power problem only shows up on some of the steamers that only have one common pickup with a roller on each end. All the Diesels are fine. The switch reliability has been near perfect. This relates to hours of running without a derail operator error not included.

Ron

Well, based on this I am heavily leaning toward Scaletrax over Atlas.  Based on my hands on viewing of Gargraves at hobby shops the downsides in my eyes out weight the advantages.

To me while the switch selection is not perfect, what is offered having both radii and numbered switches should serve most of my needs.  If something more is required I will look to Ross.

Of course there is much more I am looking into for my layout.  We are in the midst of rearranging our house layout and that will determine layout space.  I may also still blend in my existing Realtrax which would probably be the basis for an underground/subway system.  I think with platforms and such, it will be easier to disguise and hide the less realistic appearance using it that way.

I used Atlas tracks and switches.  Alex (Ingenerio No.1) did an extensive comparison between Atlas track and the real world prototype.  I don't remember all of what he told me but I do remember that the tie spacing on the Atlas track exactly matched the Union Pacific prototype that he had measured.  When ballasted properly, the track looks fantastic.  I felt that the tie spacing on Scaletrax was to far apart and reduced the apparent distance factor as one looked down the track.  In other words, the more ties there were, the farther the distance appears enhanced....I liked that.  While I like the narrower center rail of the Scaletrax, I didn't like what appears to be a huge tie plate on each tie...way to large to my eye.  Also, I have over 100 Atlas switches on the layout and have had no problem with them....but I do not use the switch machines.  All of my switches are placed so that I can manually operate them as I follow the train.  We also solved the problem of having switches arranged in ladder formations in yards with a simple $1.00 micro switch.  This eliminated any dead spots or those perfect roller spacing problems if you know what I mean. 

Here are a couple of pictures with the Atlas track ballasted....I am experimenting with roofing granules and so this is just a test section in a curve and is not glued down.

Alan

That ballast looks really good. Plus it looks true to scale.  What I found happened in HO a lot is people used ballast which was too large.  Scaled up the rocks were the size of your head.  Even fist size is really too large by scale but looks about right for the most part.

I am not against Atlas, for as I see it the two real choices are between it and Scaletrax.

I like the look of Scaltrax except for the tie spacing - rail height and center blade is excellent.  Did you notice that the scaltrax photos are all low-angle?  When standing above the layout, as we normally do, the spacing is noticable.  The low-angle shots look fantastic.

So when I build my mountain branch line (about 24ft of track and return loop) I went with Atlas.  It looks great.  Others had posted that the small plastic "spike heads" are fragile, and I found out the hard way.  The rail popped-out of the spike heads, so I am careful with Atlas (much more so than Lionel Fastrack.)

There is no perfect answer in general.  I recommend purchasing some of your first choice and running a small loop prior to investing the big bucks for the entire layout.

Just from reading the posts on here, I think the best thing you could do in terms of realism is to try and see the track in use someplace, since it seems like you are looking for realism, and that, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder and I think you need to see what it actually looks like. I have seen Atlas, scale trax and gargraves, and to my eye it all looked great, but that is me. If cost is no basis, then scale trax and Atlas with Ross switches might do the trick for you, plus gargraves flex is a pain in the neck to bend, though it can be done

Electrically the layouts I saw with scale trax and Atlas didn't have any problems, and they were running DCS and TMCC, and they didn't complain about loss of power on the Atlas. The only thing I have heard about scale trax is what others say, it is a bit more fragile and the electrical connectors can get broken easily, but what the people I met said was that if you are putting down a permanent layout, that isn't a problem, it is only if you need to take them apart and put them together it is an issue. My take, fwiw as a member of the observer class, is to try and see what the track looks like on a layout (or buy a some sample sections and lay them with ballast and roadbed on a small section of board, maybe with a piece of rolling stock on it) and see which looks better, in the end I think any of the track mentioned will work, it all comes down to your esthetic sense. I second what others have said about Ross Switches, all I hear about them is good things, including people who like to complain a lot (the only thing they complain about is the cost...).

   I totally agree with bigkid above. Check out the various brands at some of your local hobby stores or train clubs. Hopefully, they have a store (or club) layout and have ballasted whatever brand of track they are using. That way you can get a feel for which brand YOU like the best when completely installed. After all, whatever brand you choose, it's going to be with you for some time and it is an expense.

John Knapp

Erie, not Eerie