Railcraft vs. ME c40 ?

[nkalanaga]

Ouch is right. 

[draskouasshat]

bob,  don't be so critical on those that build a locomotive and don't display  on some fancy diorama right away.  some of us build our stuff in hotel rooms all over the country wherever work takes us. heck, I'd much rather see someone actually modeling something. it seems more and more that there's more whining and complaining than people actually modeling anything at all. especially some of the folks here!

to actually address the thread topic now, if manufacturers would put just a slight raised area for a tie plate and no spike detail, track would look more realistic.  maybe even go the route of peco with the rail sunk into the ties to avoid spike heads all together.  after all do you notice more than tie plates when looking at photos of the prototype at the distances we photograph at in N?

[Dave V]

Actually I do not do "grousing"...I simply state facts.

Hahaha...I find several ironies amusing also.  The one I find most amusing is when an obviously talented modeler takes hundreds of hours to modify or kitbash a particular engine, doing research and settling on an exact time period, paint scheme, lettering font, etc., etc., then, when it's all done with hundreds of photos to document his research, sets it on plain, pure stock Kato Unitrack to take photos of his masterpiece...with a joint in the middle...or runs it on a layout that has Peco C55 or unpainted Atlas C80 for everything!

A couple of times I've been so curious as to the thought process that totally ignores track, while lavishing treasure and time on the model engine or car that I've asked what the thought process is in the thread...only to have the modeler become highly irate and offended...and the moderators delete my comments!!  Guess I should just laugh privately at the irony and not attempt to ask questions or understand it! 

By the way, I agree with your opinion on the reefer.  Doesn't take any more effort to get the sheathing correct, or the attached stirrups smaller or the door hinges finer.  Truth is, since there's less metal to be machined away, it should take LESS effort. I will not be buying any even though I could certainly use 40's and 50's Wilson and Swift reefers in my operating scheme.

As for N-scale track and rail, the "spikeheads" do not "...have to be oversize..." in N-scale as you state Peter.  Peco could, with their rail-imbedded injection molding, make near perfectly proportioned N-scale North American track since their "spikeheads" and "tie-plates" are simply cosmetic and do nothing to hold their imbedded rail onto their molded ties, so they could easily be scale sized.  They could also draw properly proportioned N-scale rail (the visible portion) for both mainlines and sidings/spurs/branchlines since their rail drawings are obviously proprietary anyway.  When I look at their N-scale track vs their HO-scale track, I inevitably scratch my head and ask rhetorically, "Why didn't you do it right in N-scale Peco?"...

Ah well...I don't lose any sleep over it... 

I would walk away from Atlas track forever if Peco would do a US-style code 55 (with proper tie size/spacing as well), especially since their turnouts have the internal spring.

That said, I can answer your erstwhile rhetorical question re: clunky track.  I laid the Juniata Division in code 80 eight years ago because I was not confident enough yet in my tracklaying skills in N at the time (having come from HO).  Certainly now not only have I the skill (i.e., my Enola Yard extension) but I have come to realize that it's no harder to work with than code 80; in fact it's easier.  However, it is less forgiving of mistakes.  That's the point.  People are attracted to Unitrack and other chunky track because it's pretty foolproof.  Especially Unitrack, since you called it out.  It's electrically reliable, solid, super-easy to work with, and pretty forgiving of vertical deviations in the subroadbed.  No, it's not prototypical (for US applications).  But, it works.  And nothing will send a model railroader (newb or otherwise) running from the hobby faster than unreliable track.  Let's be honest...Atlas code 55 (which the most likely choice besides the code 80 and pseudo-55 from Peco) is not without reliability problems like dead frogs, warped rails, closure rails detached from the points, etc.  And let's be even more honest...most of us who are still working and parenting full time are not going to have time to handlay large amounts of track and turnouts.

For photo staging, I guess a slice of Unitrack looks better than no track at all.  Not everyone has built a photo diorama.

We all have various skills.  Some of us are better at, say, scenery than we are at kitbashing locomotives.  Not everyone excels at making track look awesome.  Your pet peeve might be oversized track beneath a well-done model; mine is unweathered models running through realistic scenery.  To each his own.  You're right not to lose sleep over it.

[nkalanaga]

Dave:  I'm with you.  Too each their own, enjoy the parts of the hobby one likes, ignore the rest, look at the pretty pictures.

My pet peeve is peeves.  They make very poor pets...