TheRailwire
General Discussion => N and Z Scales => Topic started by: ek2000 on October 28, 2017, 10:39:56 PM
-
Does anyone have a layout with Bachmann EZ Track? If yes, how did you conceal the height of the roadbed in places where you had to? Rail tracks look prototypical without the roadbed in some places like in an industrial or switching layout and I'm wondering how to get that look with the EZ track. If you did manage to, appreciate if you could post some pics.
When I first got into the hobby, it was more for the love of trains than modelling. The EZ track allowed me to quickly put a track together and run trains and overtime, I collected a lot of them, switches, turnouts and all and I'm now too much invested in it to start over with flex track etc. I'm especially fond of tracks that run just above the ground or at the ground level (like in crossings) and the EZ track is far from it. Plus the height of the roadbed is also much higher than real world specs.
All suggestions are welcome except starting over with a new brand of track :D
-
If it's a permanent layout, could you bury the roadbed in scenery?
-
Ive thought about it, yes. I wonder how it will look like in an industrial setting plus the height will show. I could cut into foam, to bury the roadbed a fairly tedious option.
-
Ive thought about it, yes. I wonder how it will look like in an industrial setting plus the height will show. I could cut into foam, to bury the roadbed a fairly tedious option.
For industrial trackage using built-in roadbed track, the answer is usually to bring the ground up to the rail. One way to do that would be to use foamcore or Gatorboard in the right thickness. Cut it out to fit the areas around the track and bring it right up to the edge of the roadbed. Then go to town with fine cinder (steam era) or dirt (modern day) to blend the gaps.
-
If your layout has a solid, or mostly solid, surface, such as a table or door, you could cover the entire surface with a layer of foamcore. The mainline roadbed would be on that, and it would be easy to cut areas out for industrial track.
If you're using foam board for the surface, cutting pieces out is easy, and with the integral roadbed, the holes don't have to be neat. Low spots under joints can be built up with shims, such as scraps of foam, or other scenery materials, and the roadbed itself will bridge low spots within a section.
As for the roadbed itself being too thick, a visual solution to that would be to use "dirt", whatever scenery material you like, to make a shoulder along each side. On the prototype, the ballast sits on top of the roadbed, which is usually a little wider than the bottom of the ballast layer, especially on well maintained track. Doing that allows the ballast to be as deep as you like, while hiding the excess.
I did that with my mainline, which is on wood roadbed, elevated 1/4 inch to allow the "ground" to built up under the roadbed. The roadbed itself is 1/4 inch thick, too tall for ballast, but with about 1/8 inch of dirt roadbed shoulder, on top of the scenery, then 1/8 inch of ballast on that, it looks like my prototype.
-
Thank you, Dr. And NK, guess I will have to use a mix of techniques to make the roadbed less predominant.
-
A "mix of techniques" describes my layout very well. Some of them are older than me, dug out of ancient magazines, but for a particular location or problem, they still work.
-
Does anyone have a layout with Bachmann EZ Track? If yes, how did you conceal the height of the roadbed in places where you had to? Rail tracks look prototypical without the roadbed in some places like in an industrial or switching layout and I'm wondering how to get that look with the EZ track.
Another option would be to take one of the commercial roadbed products (such as Midwest cork or Woodland Scenics track-bed) and lay it down inverted along each side of the E-Z track, with the beveled edge of the roadbed overlapping the beveled edge of the E-Z track. Beyond that, any remaining area can then be filled in with sheets of cork or track-bed, foamcore or gator board, or whatever other material you might choose to use.
-
Hi
I gave a comprehensive response late last nite on what I did with a Kato Unitrack layout with pics, however it errored saying "the upload folder was full".
The pics did not exceed 650k however and all was lost.
-
Foam core or cork will do the trick. I use Gatorfoam which is similar to foam core, but much stiffer. I can run it through a table saw, just like you would with plywood. I put a 45 degree bevel on it, turn it upside down and butt it up against my Unitrack roadbed. I use 3/16" thick, which is very close to the top of the roadbed. Leaves just a small gap that is easily filled with ballast, dirt or other scenery material.
This is a photo of Unitrack "buried" in Gatorfoam. Notice the roadbed on the left of the photo. At the coal tower, the finish grade is just below the rails. Looks convincing to me, and gives the appearance that I once achieved when I modeled with flex track straight to foam or plywood.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/cASlZtfn2F2cvp03Sd_Ve32bzuHCMcI7z2O1e7tj7TdvcVP6-fWNBjOqnMw32uKdQPQ03SYYRsC55tp6DkT8mK0qobtQ8lnz8YBxEZ42EaEaDsY-e82Pmw9RMLHz7wG2VjriBdc2wXEsBRjoKLwbxLqcTj0HH0GdrrVWKiT6Jsylwq4s3qnrKMozeUMpBa3I86snppuIc0LlWEo4IFlq74VKxTnbKtL7AK8OZg31ldX0BqAZX_HGBoNMZhnM98zeGtCwcr46gvRmr_Sha-g9pq3cT8qHNqpvKsVw7clnLHBxqoQmBXZYqlq6sJjDiotO4OdWWhDpI9YtvXGAG4exI4ip5Lju5A08ME163AtAlmk0ZTVw3BZuvjYGVG9zZzbSbyl5lLRnHYGbzo-QvzxBVO4LKk6ylPydbREJ_MAuW50BiYhdUMcLR1m6_EfAeCCt9F37qaknmqZIvvbZuEV1xxlsrqM-Q_1g9XWSxo9MR5B0Z9xZ6-kdYXKFjzcFWhovyYYlTuwlOdLTm-VHsZfbkNQudG47kuLaw1SXAHOgSZvwLeG1295jmHUPjft8JEvOgvsGOgtRKGl4mwW81WdQ6j_t0CW42VOwg5xe8o3G5Q=w864-h648-no)
Dave
-
I don't see the photo Dave - just a gray "do not enter" sign, or as others call it "circle with dash across it".
-
Strange, earlier today I saw the post and the image appeared. Now it's a black X (IE's equivalent of WTF?).
Here are a couple of images that should stick around.
I built several small layouts using Kato Unitrack, and buried the bulk with Foamcore, the same stuff available in craft stores. It's easily cut with a modeling knife and is just the right thickness to bring the ground level up to a more realistic height for non-mainline scenes.
(https://www.therailwire.net/forum/gallery/2/988-301017152253.jpeg)
(https://www.therailwire.net/forum/gallery/2/988-301017152316.jpeg)
This is my Trenton Transportation Company layout under construction. More information on the layout is here:
http://davidksmith.com/modeling/ttco_1.htm
-
Another option if you don’t want or can’t find foamcore board is using Woodland Scenics Track Bed sheets. I’m not a fan of using it for trackage (it’s actually “too spongy” in my opinion and allows for too much vertical inconsistency) but it will work quite well for raising adjacent scenery.
-
Thank you all.
DKS, I would never guess in a million years that was KATO Unitrack on that layout. Nice job and now I have some hope !
-
deleted
-
Why do I get the feeling Bob missed this one little point...
All suggestions are welcome except starting over with a new brand of track
..or, chose to ignore it altogether. Well done, Bob. :trollface:
-
deleted
-
I chose to ignore it, and I 'splained why in my post (specific paragraphs I have edited by italicizing them)...I surely did NOT miss it... :D
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
I feel like you could have been more polite about it though. I don't know if there's some bad blood there between you guys but wow...that was pretty rough.
-
...what I say is what comes out of the rear end of a bull!
Nuff said.
-
Bob, regardless of how you put it, you did take the time to write your post and express your views on the subject and contribute in a way that you could, so I thank you for that.
I specifically asked a closed ended question of how I could get a certain result using EZ track because thats where my priority lies, in not having to sell and start over. Could I? Yes. Do I want to? No. Simple as that.
Ive seen people in this hobby turn seemingly unreal dimensions and objects into model wonders. Those little towns and industries that look so real actually exists atop someone's coffee table. That train that huffs and puffs by a grain silo by is but a 1:160 replica of the real thing. Thats the beauty of a modelers skill and creativity. To the people that accomplish those things, many of whom are in this forum, is concealing a roadbed of great challenge? I dont think so. I want to hear from them, as I've already heard from some on this thread thus far..
-
deleted
-
Sorry Dave, I was completely polite about it. I even put a smiley face in there to ensure my politeness was reinforced. You're reading "tone" into my post that simply isn't there.
I have absolutely zero "bad blood" with DKS or any other member of TRW. I admire his work and his comments, but...I don't always agree with him, or you, or Peteski, or anybody else 100% of the time...and I don't expect everybody to agree with me all the time either.
DKS has an especially sharp and pointed way of responding and I appreciate it. I am just very happy that he is active here again because his advice is always good, even though his remarks zing me quite often! I simply don't take offense, because I am sure none is intended. When it comes to good work and valid opinions, TRW is where it's at, and differing opinions civily discussed with humor thrown in makes TRW a place where I probably spend way too much time!
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
I was actually referring go your original reply to ek2000...
Either way, ek2000 made his constraints clear and I feel like there would have been a more polite, less condescending way to encourage him to look beyond his constraints. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like new members deserve a little more supportive help at first.
Let them earn their a$$hat first, and then you can tear them a new one about track. :)
-
I was actually referring go your original reply to ek2000...
Either way, ek2000 made his constraints clear and I feel like there would have been a more polite, less condescending way to encourage him to look beyond his constraints. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like new members deserve a little more supportive help at first.
Let them earn their a$$hat first, and then you can tear them a new one about track. :)
Dave, you're right on the money, well said.
-
Dave, you're right on the money, well said.
Since you're (relatively) new here it's worth mentioning that Bob is one of the Railwire track gurus (I count @Chris333 as another). What he can do in N rivals the best work I've seen in HO. I would not discount his advice even if it's wrapped in "tough love."
-
deleted
-
Dave, I share your concern about new members, which is why I was friendly and extremely gentle and thorough with ek2000 in my reply.
Please quote me from my post to him any sentence or hint that I was tearing him a new one about his track choice or where I was "condescending" to him. I'd like to see what I wrote that was so abominably offensive.
The ultimate condescension from me would have been to ignore his request as not worth my precious time and effort to advise him since track is a major interest of mine, as you've pointed out.
I'd apologize for any offense, but I gave none, just what I considered was my best advice, making his desire to accomplish low-ballast trackage in the easiest, quickest way...which means using track that doesn't have a built-in ballast contour instead of expending a lot of effort to hide it...which means disregarding his dictum to not suggest using flextrack...which I also explained in my reply.
I also emphasized using Peco products ONLY in areas that he wanted the low-ballast look...expressly NOT recommending that he "start over" as he erroneously thinks I recommended.
Through laying a lot of Peco code 80 trackage on my good friend Nate's layout, I've come to a reluctant but positive new view about toy trackage, which I expressed to our new member to give him encouragement rather than to "tear him a new one", specifically recommending trackage that closely resembles B-mann EZ track in every way except it doesn't have a built-in ballast contour, with ease of installation being an equal consideration, which I repeatedly emphasized.
I also gave kudos to both you and to DKS for your work with "high rail" N-gauge track, and included a photo of my work with it on Nate's layout in his low-ballast example at Branchline Yard to show that I have worked with it also and have done code 80 trackage with a low-ballast look before.
I don't assume that a new member to TRW knows anything except what he reveals to us in his posts. So, I also included other advantages of using Peco track to represent his industrial/branchline trackage that perhaps he was not aware of, such as smaller rail and a lower railhead height on the layout...and how to possibly recoup part of his investment by selling his excess B-mann trackage.
None of this tore him a new one about his track choice, and was thoughtfully designed to get him his desired low-ballast look with a minimum of time and effort on his part.
I have no interest whatsoever in tearing anybody here a "new one" about anything at any time. If the OP feels like he's got a new one torn, it didn't happen through any of my remarks since I did not make a single denigrating remark about his track choice...and everybody who knows me, knows that I am more than capable of shooting down toy track choices in flames and ripping new "ones" with great aplomb. No flames at all in my reply to the OP.
Not-so-Cheerio
Bob Gilmore
Okay.
Yeah yeah..I know you don't want the logical, easy answer but want to raise or lower whole portions of your scenery base to conceal the built-in "ballasting" in the B-mann EZ track, but you also have an investment of TIME to think about too. It'd go a lot quicker just to change to Peco 55 flextrack in places where the track would be prototypically lower and with less ballast than on the mainline. Period.
...which you didn't give a damn about when you first started out in the hobby...but now you do.
Just sayin'.... :D
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
Maybe I misunderstood your tone but it really read to me as condescending. Particularly the verbiage "I know you don't want the logical, easy answer..."
I really don't feel like getting into it with you, Bob. I've said my piece. The OP didn't communicate anything to me about it...that was my own perception.
-
@ek2000 if you need more EZ Track there is a sale at Model Train Stuff
(https://www.therailwire.net/forum/gallery/2/3062-041117083522.jpeg)
-
I think it applies to all tracks.
-
MK, I think you're right.
-
Do you want to use only E-Z TRACK or are you flexible?
On my pike, I have used (and still have): E-Z TRACK®, Kato UNITRACK®, Kato UNITRAM®, Atlas flex, Atlas SNAP-TRAK®, PECo.
If you are not averse to buying a few pieces of the other manufacturers' track, you could address your problem of lower track for the sidings. You could purchase a few pieces of Atlas Flex, cut the pieces as needed and simply transition from the B-mann roadbed height to the surface of the board, foam, or whatever you are using. How gradual a transition is up to you. I am not that picky about a last minute steep grade from board to B-mann (or Kato or even cork and Atlas track) as on most of my business trackage, it a switcher's pushing or pulling one or two cars (or even an RS configured unit or a small steam locomotive). Any of those can handle the sudden climb if there is only one or two cars.
The Bachpersonn track does not transition easily to either the UNITRACK® or UNITRAM®. What I have done for that is use either a small piece of flex or a short section of SNAP-TRAK® to transition between the two.
The Kato UNITRAM® is street trackage. It is available in curved, straight sections and both LH and RH turnouts. Some of the curves are extremely sharp, which limits what you can run on them. It is double tracked, but I have managed to saw both straight and curved sections in half (lengthwise) and use them (most street trackage in the US of A is single track). I considered sawing the turnout in half, as well, but took a look at it and lost the courage to try it. The turnouts cause the most operating headaches. The curves on them are extremely sharp, which causes climbing or outright derailment. The plastic frogs and diamonds (remember, this is double tracked) seem to be spaced strategically to cause loss of contact with many locomotives and the consequent stalling (add to this the climbing, and the result is predictable). I even tried laying it single track, leaving the double tracked turnout piece to simulate abandoned street trackage, but the result was still unsatisfactory. There were simply too few locomotives that I could operate on it, so I took out most of the curves and all of the turnouts. I suppose that I could have hardwired pairs of B-mann 44 or 70 tonners (or even Kato NW-2s) together, but, again, the number of locomotives that would operate were too few for my purposes. I did, however, retain some curved and straight sections, so, if you want street trackage, limited use of UNITRAM® might help you.
You could keep mostly B-mann and, for less than fifty dollars, buy a few extra pieces of track to accomplish what you want. If you do buy some flex and decide to cut it, buy a Xuron® Rail Nipper or its equivalent, if you do not already have one. The Atlas SNAP-SAW® just does not get it, in most cases, that is. It does have its uses from time to time, but the rail nipper is a more useful tool.
-
^^^^^^^This thing will not let me edit, so I must do it this way. Please do keep in mind that in my reply, I am expecting that you will retain the B-mann track for your main lines, turnouts and even the start of some of the business trackage. I am suggesting the other brands strictly for use on business trackage.
-
@brokemoto thanks for your detailed suggestions. Will the flex track have the same rail height as the ez track?
-
Will the flex track have the same rail height as the ez track?
The B-mann E-ZTRACK®; the Kato UNITRACK® and UNITRAM®, the Atlas SNAP-TRACK® and flex are all code eighty rail, so the rail dimensions are the same. Do keep in mind that the SNAP-TRAK® and flex do not come with roadbed. If you put the Atlas track on roadbed, the roadbed height will not match that of the B-mann
E-ZTRACK®. The Kato does not match the Bachpersonn, either. The rail heights are the same, the roadbed heights are not. The flex and the sectional (SNAP) will match at the rails. You will need some rail joiners. Do not attempt to remove the rail joiners from the Bachmann track, as you are as likely to mangle the track as you are to get off the rail joiners.