coachmann Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) I realize people can get touchy on forums about the word "serious", so what I have in mind is fully ballasted track Code 100 track amid scenery. I just wondered how much it is still used by modellers. Edited June 29, 2018 by coachmann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal.n Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 A very interesting piece here about how Code 100 can actually be closer to true rail height for modern lines. Worth a read. http://s374444733.websitehome.co.uk/code75/index.htm Given OO is narrow anyway, taller rails (even if more accurate) will look out of proportion and visually highlight the smaller gauge. Code 75 and smaller really helps in this aspect. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Popular Post Clive Mortimore Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Premium Popular Post Share Posted June 29, 2018 Hi Larry I use it. It works, it is reliable, comes ready made and easy to lay. Doesn't look as good some other track but life is too short to get up tight about track if you want a working layout not a half built diorama. I also use tension locks, they work, look 'orrid but again I want a working layout. I do like making my own locos, coaches, DMUs, EMUs, wagons, scenic bits, buildings, little people, wiring the layout (non DCC) and most of all driving a layout that works. Just about to make some 4mm WR petrol pumps for my new diesel depot layout, Pig Lane (Western Region). Please come and say "Hi" if you can make it to tomorrows Wrecrail St Nicholas Church Hall Rectory Lane Little Bowden Market Harborough LE16 8AS From 10.00 am to 4.00ish pm 21 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 A very interesting piece here about how Code 100 can actually be closer to true rail height for modern lines. Worth a read. http://s374444733.websitehome.co.uk/code75/index.htm Given OO is narrow anyway, taller rails (even if more accurate) will look out of proportion and visually highlight the smaller gauge. Code 75 and smaller really helps in this aspect. That seems to be good, subjective, unbiased review. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiptonian Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 So would a "Modern Image" layout in EM gauge with Code 100 rail on 34mm concrete sleepers be more accurate and look better? Certainly, if you look down from an over-bridge onto a modern main line, the rail looks very deep and "code 100-like". At this point, I had better casually don a tin hat and saunter in the direction of a protective wall. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 29, 2018 I realize people can get touchy on forums about the word "serious", so what I have in mind is fully ballasted track Code 100 track amid scenery. I just wondered how much it is still used by modellers. I have used Peco Code 100 and pointwork for 16 years without any problem. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 29, 2018 Nothing wrong with using Code 100 in my view. One idea I hadn't thought of looks good is to increase the sleeper spacing to be more realistic. This is what Richard who is currently rebuilding his layout Everard Junction and posts updates on YouTube is doing, using Peco Streamline concrete sleeper track. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 29, 2018 Certainly still very popular on mainland Europe where many modellers are running locos and stock with wheels that would not be compatible with Code 75. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 I saw an amazing American layout using Kato unitrack, once the scenery was added and the track painted it looked as good as any hand built track model 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Neil Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 29, 2018 Yes it is. My previous layout Morfa had handbuilt EM track, individual chairs and timber sleepers, my current layout Vischkaai uses Peco code 100 (with a couple of set track curves) and my projected next big layout will also use Peco Streamline in its code 100 form. Though I can do finescale and make it work well I believe that it's not the finescale bits of Morfa (or its predecessor Shell Island) which had the wow factor but the arty farty bits, the composition, colour and concept which really made an impact. Vischkaai goes part way to prove that, to my eyes anyway, though with most of the track buried in cobbles it doesn't do so unequivocally. The next big thing being more mainstream will, I hope, do just that. 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Metr0Land Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted June 29, 2018 Another vote for Code 100 here. It works with pretty much any stock I run on it. 28 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium New Haven Neil Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 29, 2018 We sell about 90%/10% code 100/75. Says it all really. Not sure how much of that is used on 'serious' layouts, but they must be more serious than set track - of which we also sell heaps of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tractor_37260 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Regardless if using Peco Code 75 or 100 it's well worthwhile cutting the webs and re-spacing the sleepers, which will improve the visual look. Good example of the benefits here: 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 There is only really 1 judge...you. For anyone deciding on code 100 v 75... buy a length of each & lay it on a small test board. This will also give you something to practice ballasting & weathering. Even if you try different techniques then go back to the way you did it before, you will be happier that you are doing things they way which works best for you. I was intrigued by an earlier link on here to see that the reviewer felt that 100 looked better before weathering but 75 looked better afterwards. Your perception will adjust to what you see most often, which will be on your own layout...or for those who use the railways frequently, they may judge appearances from what they see on the real railway, which is my benchmark. Someone who has used code 75 for years will probably spot 100 straight away, but careful weathering will help. In the same way, an EM modeller will spot OO straight away & a P4 modeller's eyes will be drawn instantly to the comparatively huge gap between check & running rails on an EM layout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Alcanman Posted June 29, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted June 29, 2018 I like code 100. It's robust and reliable and with careful painting and ballasting can look good IMHO. 22 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davknigh Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Code 100 is fine if you are modelling modern heavy duty CWR mainline trackage. Steam era is more accurate with code 75, especially if you are modelling branchlines rather than mainlines and, IMHO, looks much better. When it comes right down to it many people use code 100 because that is what they have or can get in bulk at shows whereas until recently code 75 was in the domain of those who did their own track. Cheers, David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fozzy280472 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 I use code 100 trackwork .....but then again I don't take anything seriously anyway ! I reckon code 100 looks excellent when combined with 3rd / 4th rail as in Metrolands layout above which I think looks superb. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted June 29, 2018 Author Share Posted June 29, 2018 (edited) Peco Code 100's wide rail base ensures that rail-joiners really do hold the rail ends in line and recently, this made it easy to lay a 36" radius curve with no flats at joins on the outdoor garden loops. So I must come clean here and say I decided to cut and fishplate Code 100 track & points for my layouts scenic section as well to see how it looked. It is currently lying on top on of the existing bullhead track waiting for me to bite the bullet. Edited June 29, 2018 by coachmann 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 29, 2018 Code 100: I don't know if you'd call this serious or not but I built this layout to use up a stash of Code 100 I'd salvaged from an earlier one, but after some careful ballasting and painting, I was very happy with the general look of the track. I still have a fair bit of Code 100 and I'd happily use it on another project. I did have some bloke at an exhibition tell me to my face that it couldn't possibly be Code 100, but, hey, I only built the layout so what did I know. 16 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold nickwood Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 29, 2018 Much Murkle was built using code 100, primarily because I had lots of it in stock at the time. Photograph by Andy York Apart from couplings the trackwork is what I get most questions about at exhibitions. Very few believe that it isn't code 75. From this angle it is clearly code 100 but from a slightly lower angle at exhibitions it is difficult to tell. The secret is in the ballasting and weathering. 18 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
autocoach Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Code 100 will remain in use on my current UK layout until Peco have the rest of the BH product line available...... Now about that Peco Code 70 US Style line of track....... However Micro Engineering yard ladder turnouts look interesting for space reasons...... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Grantham is fairly serious - at least, we take it seriously - and it's all on Code 100, most of it recycled from previous layouts. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john dew Posted June 29, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 29, 2018 Not up to Nick and Larry's standard. but I think I qualify According to my wife I devote a serious amount of my time (dont mention money) to Granby and its definitely fully ballasted....... .see post #955 http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/2773-granby-junction-00-gwrlms-1947-1948/page-39?hl=granby . Regards from Vancouver John 16 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 It is not what you use but the way that you use it! There are many layouts running with many items that are now regarded as substandard but still look good and remain hidden in plain sight! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
E3109 Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 As I'm starting 'from the ground up', so to speak, I'm using code 75 on mine. Not that there is anything wrong with code 100 and as others have mentioned, it's more in proportion with post-BS113A renewals. Definitely agreed on spacing the sleepers out though, for 4mm scale whether it's 75 or 100. This is not particularly scientific, but I've found that with concrete sleeper Peco code 75, a really easy way to space the sleepers out is to use a Lego base as a jig. The sleepers, once the sprues are cut through, space out very easily between the Lego studs and are a comfortable interference fit between them. This doesn't seem to work with wooden 75/100 as the sleepers are a different width, same with concrete 100 although with a bit of fettling it's possible. It would be interesting to see if anyone has managed to respace the sleepers on HO pointwork to resemble OO though. Can't be an easy task! 1 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