Track Question

Don’t have any experience with Atlas track, so I can’t say if it’s “better” or not…

Selling the fastrack yourself will yield the most money. If a hobby shop would take the fastrack in trade they won’t give you much for it because they have to leave room for profit… the tubular track would be pretty much worthless to a hobby shop…

I have bought used fastrack from Facebook marketplace. There’s issues with that, but if you do cash in person you don’t have to worry about eBay shipping and getting scammed…

Just my thoughts, your mileage may vary…

@IcedCorn posted:

If I were to go about getting the Atlas track, I'd like to dispose of the fasttrack. Can you trade in track for another type at a retail store or is it best just to sell it on eBay and all the "fun" that goes along with it?

IMO, you would be better served going with Gargraves track and Ross switches.. Looks are very similar.. I haven't compared prices, but Atlas track availability has been questionable at times..  You could bundle up your Fasttrack and your tube track sell it here on the Forum's buy/sell option... I've never had a problem selling or buying here.. The prices might be a bit lower here because the Forum members are generally more in tune with the actual cost/worth of things.. Good luck, with whatever you ultimately decide to do!!!!!!

Those who prefer Atlas track cite its solid rails and scale size ties. Atlas switches have had problems reported with internal conductivity due to faulty connections embedded within the ties such that engines stall on them. Atlas is also expensive. If you look at Steve's ad in OGR comparing Ross with Atlas, you'll find a number of comparisons favoring US-made Ross to China-made Atlas.

Admittedly, Atlas looks great in photos and on YouTube with appropriate paint and weathering.

Best to make further investigation before launching yourself down your son's proposed route. How to sell your current track is small potatoes.

@Woodson posted:

IMO, you would be better served going with Gargraves track and Ross switches.. Looks are very similar.

I love Ross.  The only rub here, is that they don't make O36 curve-replacement switches.  Personally, I wouldn't build a new layout with O31, they don't even put it in train sets anymore.   The smallest size I would use today is O36.  So if you need that size, which is great for small rooms, my choice would be Atlas.

I wonder how many O31 switches Ross sells these days.  Or how much effort it would take for them to tool up an O36 curve-replacement switch?

@IcedCorn posted:

My son currently has Lionel Fastrack and really old tubular 3 rail tracks.  He's told me that he'd rather have Atlas 3 rail track because it's better.  That would require a substantial investment over & above the tubular/fasttrack investment he has now.

If I were to go about getting the Atlas track, I'd like to dispose of the fasttrack.  Can you trade in track for another type at a retail store or is it best just to sell it on eBay and all the "fun" that goes along with it?

How old is your son & how serious is he about about advancing in the O Gauge hobby?

@Woodson posted:

IMO, you would be better served going with Gargraves track and Ross switches.. Looks are very similar.. I haven't compared prices, but Atlas track availability has been questionable at times..  You could bundle up your Fasttrack and your tube track sell it here on the Forum's buy/sell option... I've never had a problem selling or buying here.. The prices might be a bit lower here because the Forum members are generally more in tune with the actual cost/worth of things.. Good luck, with whatever you ultimately decide to do!!!!!!

Thank you. Doing my "internet research" I'm having a tough time keeping up. When I did research on Gargraves, it looks like you have to cut it down, I am not a big DIY er on this....is that difficult - like will I have shorts and sparks bu cutting? Maybe I should just stick to fastrack LOL

@Ted S posted:

I love Ross.  The only rub here, is that they don't make O36 curve-replacement switches.  Personally, I wouldn't build a new layout with O31, they don't even put it in train sets anymore.   The smallest size I would use today is O36.  So if you need that size, which is great for small rooms, my choice would be Atlas.

I wonder how many O31 switches Ross sells these days.  Or how much effort it would take for them to tool up an O36 curve-replacement switch?

I am looking for an O72 layout as I do have a nice VisionLine locomotive I'd like to do more than just one loop with. Sorry, I didn't mention that I need the O72 track. Would you still recommend Ross in that case? I used Anyrail to design a 9x9 layout with Atlas track originally. Of course that isn't cheap.

May I suggest you post your track plan? That will make it easier for others to guide you to Gargraves or Ross equivalents.

Sure.

Gargraves track is easy to cut either with a Dremel cutoff wheel or using a fine tooth hobby saw. Ross switches are by far the best and guaranteed for life. Whether you use DZ switch motors or Tortoise under table mount switch machines is your choice. Using cork roadbed makes for a very attractive railroad whether you ballast or not. The flexibility of Gargraves Phantom Rail track and the vast variety of Ross switches makes for an application to almost any situation. And, don't forget open grid L-Girder benchwork construction.

Both Ross and GarGraves make O-72 switches, fixed O-72 curves, and straight sections in several lengths. You can definitely make your layout with either brand, or a mix of both. If you want to step out a bit, flex track would allow you to move away from the racetrack shape with parallel loops, at least on the outer loop and center spurs.

I will add on that I use GarGraves for track and Ross for Switches (with some older GarGraves switches).  Sme of the track I've had since the 70s and it is still in great shape.

GarGraves does have flex track, but they also have individual pieces already cut as does Ross, so you don't have to cut to length if you don't want to.

If I had to do it again, I would still use GarGraves/Ross as they look great and work as intended.

You should be aware that Atlas track uses rail joiners similar to their track in N and HO. Those thin sheet-metal rail joiners are meant for permanent layouts, unlike the FasTrack and tubular rail track. You didn’t specify how permanent your layout will be.

Also, “better” is a nondescript buzzword. Atlas track is more realistic looking, and some people prefer solid rails with a realistic profile. But it isn’t “better” — it’s just another option with tradeoffs. Cost, availability and switch problems are factors, too.

Finally, unless you designed that track plan with Atlas track in mind, you may have to do some cutting to attain the geometry in the plan. Or adjust accordingly.

GG/Ross - it's what I use. No mysteries with it. But, it's "chrome plated" (tin plated, actually), and should be spray painted (camo brown or the like) before laying to not look like toy track, regardless of ballast and the rest, if you're going that far.

Atlas could use paint too. Atlas can look very, very good. As realistic as 3 rails can look. More delicate than GG/Ross.

@IcedCorn posted:

I am looking for an O72 layout as I do have a nice VisionLine locomotive I'd like to do more than just one loop with. Sorry, I didn't mention that I need the O72 track. Would you still recommend Ross in that case? I used Anyrail to design a 9x9 layout with Atlas track originally. Of course that isn't cheap.

I saw your track plan in the other thread.  If you're determined to use O72, then yes I would use Ross.  However... I believe very strongly that the size of your room should govern the size of your curves, and ultimately what trains you buy and run.  I was part of a modular group for years.  I'm *done* with running around in circles.  If I go to the considerable trouble of building a layout, it's going to have alternate routes, provisions for reversing the direction of trains, and other features that create variety and interaction between two or more operators.  Unfortunately I live in the Land of No Basements.  So I've come to accept that means sharp curves and traditionally-sized steam locos.

A lot of folks equate "scale" with realism.  The manufacturers know this, and use that rationale to justify today's high prices.  But are you prepared to weather your trains and structures?  There's nothing inherently realistic about a box-new loco pulling a few cars around a broad circle of 3-rail track.  In the meantime I've seen some amazingly realistic layouts created with traditional trains and even tubular track.

Many folks own high-end scale locos that require wide-radius curves.  Some of these buyers are content to be "closet" collectors.  But I often think that those who really want to see them operate would be better served with an operating roller base display than a 9x9 oval.

Our hobby has always been carried forward by technological innovation and imagination.  What I'm visualizing is a large, scenicked roller base / diorama, with video screens set ahead of, and alongside the loco.  Given the ability to add synchronized digital video content, you could really get to see that Big Boy assaulting the Wasatch!  The experience could even be interactive, with the screen in "front" of the loco displaying upcoming grade crossings, signal indications, etc.  These would give the operator a reason to blow the whistle, slow, or stop the loco, take on coal and water, etc.

What I'm describing would be a functional hybrid of O scale and V-scale (aka Virtual scale, or computer-based train simulators.)  Thus far, computer simulations are a market opportunity which Lionel has unwisely ignored.  Meanwhile Activision has made millions from its "Skylanders" franchise that uses "smart" toy action figures placed on a special base to interact with content in the video game.  What I'm proposing isn't that different.

So we went from Ross switches, to Skylanders for the OGR crowd.  I apologize for the digression.  I guess my bottom line is, before you buy ANY track, "think outside the box circle!"

IMO layout design is ALWAYS about tradeoffs. Saying room size should govern curve radius simply states your preference on one such tradeoff. Someone whose top priority is to watch articulated locos in motion might be satisfied with a 120" diameter circle layout. Someone who wants multiple mainlines and switching opportunities in the same space will need to live with smaller radii and put any articulated locos on the display shelf. Design is ALWAYS a conversation between what you want and what is possible given space, time, and money. I traded away access and simplicity for operational realism. Access issues and problems arising from complex trackage and wiring have both been headaches for me, but would I give up operational realism to resolve either? Never.

I say use what you have, Ballest it  all and see if his interest is held in it. If it is than look at other options.  No sense in spending money now and not knowing if it's still going to be used in a year.  If you add some wood ties to the tube track and it will make it less noticeable