Richie Kynaston Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Evening guys, Im about to start track laying on a new small N gauge American layout. But a thought occurred to me. We know Peco track for UK use is the wrong spacing for the sleepers, but whats the situation with Amercian railroads? I presume they use a difference spacing than the UK, so is Peco spacing better or worse? I was thinking about Code 55 rail. Any help would be appreciated. Richie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stivesnick Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Richie My understanding is that the Peco sleeper spacing is not correct for American railroads. I can not say if other makes of track would be more realistic. I use Peco code 55 on my N Gauge layout and once ballasted I am happy the results. I would consider finetrax for future layouts, because I feel it would look better. Not sure if it would be correct. Regards Nick 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 2mmMark Posted July 11, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 11, 2019 Sadly, Peco N is as wrong for US railroads as it is for UK railways. Finetrax would also be wrong for US track as it's firmly based on traditional UK chaired bullhead track. If you want a good looking track system for a US layout that replicates the characteristic style of sleepering, Atlas code 55 is well worth considering. I've used it on my US N scale layout. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Kynaston Posted July 11, 2019 Author Share Posted July 11, 2019 Nick/Mark, Many thanks for the replies, you've confirmed what I suspected was the case. I thought there was a difference between UK and US, so I assumed finetrax would be out for that reason. I may look at using sleepers and rail from the 2FS society and handbuilding track ... but does anyone know what the right sleeper spacing should be? Im assuming there will be a website somewhere in this day and age that would tell us? Failing that, i'll look also take a look at the Atlas Code 55 trackwork- thanks Mark. Richie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted July 11, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 11, 2019 If you are up to building your own turnouts, Micro-Engineering have the best track. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 2mmMark Posted July 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, Richie Kynaston said: Nick/Mark, Many thanks for the replies, you've confirmed what I suspected was the case. I thought there was a difference between UK and US, so I assumed finetrax would be out for that reason. I may look at using sleepers and rail from the 2FS society and handbuilding track ... but does anyone know what the right sleeper spacing should be? Im assuming there will be a website somewhere in this day and age that would tell us? Failing that, i'll look also take a look at the Atlas Code 55 trackwork- thanks Mark. Richie Remember the difference in terminology, you need to search for "railroad tie" not sleeper. According to here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_tie it's about 19 inches for wooden ties. That would give you the typical close spacing. US standard rail length used to be 33ft so as to fit on a 40ft flatcar. That may have changed now but it's right for the 1950-55 period I'm modelling. However this lovely little layout https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/25371 does spread the ties out on the sidings and when I contacted the builder Mike Holly, he said it was common practice on lightly used track. The photos do give you an idea of what Atlas track looks like when painted and ballasted. The 2mm Association does indeed supply PCB sleepers/ties and code 40 flat bottom. If I were going this route, I'd use all PCB for turnouts and then PCB every 3 or 4 sleepers. Otherwise you'll get through a lot of PCB sleepers! The track will still be amply strong enough. You'll need to source 9mm gauges as the Association ones are for 9.42mm. Joseph is right, Micro Engineering supply very good looking code 55 and also code 40 flexitrack. They don't have much choice of turnouts though. A point to watch is that some deep older flanges will bump on the rail fixings on Atlas code 55. Counter-intuitively, this won't happen on Code 40 rail that's been soldered to PCB if the inside of the rail is clear of all solder. The neat way to make US style PCB track is using solder paint or small solder balls. Another link to "Downtown Spur" https://www.nscaleworks.com/micro-layout/ Edited July 12, 2019 by 2mmMark 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted July 12, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 12, 2019 I used Atlas code 55 track on Santa Barbara, built in 2009. At the time most of my freight cars used Microtrains trucks with their then standard flanged wheels but they would bump along the track so I replaced them all with the finer Microscale wheel. SInce then Microscale brought out medium flange wheelsets and many manufacturers now use such flanges (Fox Valley and BLMI metal wheelsets are very good) so if your rolling stock is only a few years old you wont have an issue. All my locos (Atlas, Kato, Athearn) run fine on it, some being early 1990's. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdvle Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 3 hours ago, 2mmMark said: According to here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_tie it's about 19 inches for wooden ties. That would give you the typical close spacing. US standard rail length used to be 33ft so as to fit on a 40ft flatcar. That may have changed now but it's right for the 1950-55 period I'm modelling. However this lovely little layout https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/25371 does spread the ties out on the sidings and when I contacted the builder Mike Holly, he said it was common practice on lightly used track. The photos do give you an idea of what Atlas track looks like when painted and ballasted. I suspect each railroad has it's own standards for track, though my understanding is that tie spacing can vary as you say based on lightly used track / max. speed and probably weight. GO Transit (commuter Rail in Toronto area) has their standards online and their standard is 20 3/8" on centre on mainline, or 21 1/4" on centre for yard, spurs, etc. (see section 9.1 - http://www.gosite.ca/engineering_public/GO Track Standards/GO Transit Track Standards Revision 01.pdf ) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave1905 Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 US rail lengths were 39 ft from the late 1890's and early 1900's. 33 ft was used back in the mid 1800's. The US railroads actually had several different tie spacings. Fewer ties on yard tracks, more ties on main tracks, fewer ties on older tracks, more ties on more modern tracks. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Kynaston Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share Posted July 22, 2019 Guys, Thanks for all the advice and information - much appreciated. Richie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now