Micro Engineering track poll (in case I win the lottery)

[Jbub]

Is Shinohara track still in production?  My first N scale layout was built with their turnouts (and those ladders mentioned above) in the days when Con-Cor was importing the stuff.  Some of those turnouts still work - I used them in my most recent layout for a staging yard with ME code 70 for track.  So I can testify that they hold up well- literally 5 layouts, and kept that staging yard in one piece in case it proves handy for #6.

A quick google shows that Walthers shuttered Shinohara in 2018

[Chris333]

Shinahara was bought by Imon Models.

[Mike C]

Shinahara was bought by Imon Models.

Looks like they are mostly HO scale .....https://www.imon.co.jp/

[Tristan Ashcroft]

HO guy here:
       All my visible flextrack is ME, code 83, 70, and 55.  My #6 switches are ME.  I use the ME #6 switch kits to retrofit old Shinohara turnouts (the #8s or larger just get some extra rail) as part of my DCC-ifying process (insulated frog, constant polarity in all other rail).  I use the ME girder bridge kits.  I'm in kinda deep into ME.  I'm hoping either someone keeps them going or a comparable replacement comes along.
       Admittedly, I wouldn't mind if someone fixed the tooling for the girder bridges and/or sold assembled versions...

[rodsup9000]

Kato
-Rail quality to reduce cleaning

 With the exception of the helix, staging yard and most turnouts, all my track is ME and it stays cleaner than my Kato test loop. The Kato track needs cleaned a lot more than the ME.

[sirenwerks]

If ME was as easily available as Atlas I'd switch for the rest of my layout build.  But I have a LOT of Atlas on hand already, and a fair supply of Atlas switches as well.  Heck, if ME switches were as easily available i'd probably switch.

This is my issue as I am getting ready to start a layout finally.  ME doesn't have the selection of turnouts/crossovers like Atlas.  And the concrete tie offering means nothing to me since I don't model contemporary railroading.  But Atlas has that clunky spike head design that makes even its C55 look hinky on close up.  If ME readily offered a better selection of turnouts/crossovers, I would be all over it, and would employee its code 40 flex for sidings throughout. 


Unfortunately, ME going bye-bye might mean even handlaying is less of an option because there's no rail to be found, and Atlas almost becomes the only option (Peco? Meh.)


I remember someone started to offer a 3D printed tie product (WOT?) not too long ago.  While the tie spacing appeared, to me, to be too close, it really seemed like a winning idea.  Flex track ties like that in prototypical spacing for mainline and sidings, and turnouts that all you needed to do was drop some rail on and cut some spacers seems like a marketable idea, provided rail to slot into those products is available.

[Chris333]

Pretty sure Kato rail is just polished smooth.

[thomasjmdavis]

A quick google shows that Walthers shuttered Shinohara in 2018

\
All my google search showed was that Walthers stopped carrying it.  Walthers, as far as I know, never owned the factory, they just had the distribution right in N. America.  I'm open to correction on that, but please provide some documentation.

[robert3985]

...I remember someone started to offer a 3D printed tie product (WOT?) not too long ago.  While the tie spacing appeared, to me, to be too close, it really seemed like a winning idea.  Flex track ties like that in prototypical spacing for mainline and sidings, and turnouts that all you needed to do was drop some rail on and cut some spacers seems like a marketable idea, provided rail to slot into those products is available.

The "offerer" is Mark @narrowminded and although the tie spacing may "look" too close for you, Mark designed his 3D printed tie strips using official Union Pacific RR drawings and specifications I provided for him...so his 3D printed tie strips were completely accurate as far as tie size and spacing is concerned.  He developed tie strips for heavily trafficked mainline trackage, medium trafficked trackage, and lightly trafficked trackage, including the size and style of tieplates and even the spiking patterns. Tieplate and spikehead dimensions were played with because it became quickly evident that some details, if printed at actual scaled-down size, became invisible after paint was applied, so thickness and size were increased somewhat.

His turnout project has real potential, but requires a lot of work and I don't know where he is at with his Code 40 turnouts.  Maybe he'll join in the conversation and let us know.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[robert3985]

I voted "YES".

I only use old Rail Craft Code 55 flex on foreground areas of my layout which will be closely scrutinized and photographed.

All of my Code 55 and Code 40 bench-made turnouts use 1' lengths of Rail Craft PCB tie material cut to proper length.  I bought their complete inventory of it when they stopped offering hand-built PCB turnouts a long time ago. 

I also use original Rail Craft Code 40 flex in foreground mainline siding/spur trackage. 

I use newer ME Code 55 flex for set-up yards and other areas where no close-up photography is going to be done. 

I also use both Code 70 bridge track (for customer's layouts who have Code 80 track) and Code 55 bridge track for my own bridges and trestles. 

I also use Rail Craft and ME track laying 3-point track gauges for hand-laying my Code 40 branchline trackage.

Additionally, I use ME bridges for kit-bashing deck bridges for my scenes in Weber and Echo Canyons.

Although I have a large stock of Code 40 and Code 55 rail, as well as a hoard of Rail Craft flextrack, I am not really sure if I have enough rail for both future turnouts and flex for future layout scenes.

If Micro Engineering dies, then it will leave a huge hole in my future plans for future layout projects.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[mmagliaro]

While I used ME track and turnouts on my previous PRR layout, and I really liked it, I used Atlas for my current one,
and I voted "no" because:

1. The sheer lack of turnouts and crossings make it too limiting
2. If I build another layout, I won't use ANYBODY's commercial turnouts.   I will go with hand-made turnouts all the way.
3. If I'm going to do that, then I would hand lay everything, even the track.

ME would probably be my choice for the bare rail pieces, but that would be about it.

If they made turnouts with tight tolerances and solid performance, like Fast Tracks turnouts are, and if they offered a variety
of turnouts, I'd go all ME on a new layout in the future.

[sirenwerks]

The "offerer" is Mark @narrowminded and although the tie spacing may "look" too close for you, Mark designed his 3D printed tie strips using official Union Pacific RR drawings and specifications I provided for him...so his 3D printed tie strips were completely accurate as far as tie size and spacing is concerned.  He developed tie strips for heavily trafficked mainline trackage, medium trafficked trackage, and lightly trafficked trackage, including the size and style of tieplates and even the spiking patterns. Tieplate and spikehead dimensions were played with because it became quickly evident that some details, if printed at actual scaled-down size, became invisible after paint was applied, so thickness and size were increased somewhat.

His turnout project has real potential, but requires a lot of work and I don't know where he is at with his Code 40 turnouts.  Maybe he'll join in the conversation and let us know.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

That's great, Bob.  I'm not a UP modeler so I am not sure how it compares to Hill Line standards, but they looked closely spaced to me, whether they were or were not.  Then again, I have spent most of my life walking yards and industrial sidings, not finely maintained mainlines, so I am not programmed for manicured assets.  In fact, I think I originally commented on how a 'siding' version might be a good idea.  More importantly, if you are going to rely on the internet to sell product (which seems to be the case, and I can live with that), rather than place it in LHS for potential consumers to touch and ogle, then you should definitely provide ample photo and data to make sure there is no ill-interpretation of the product.  I only saw a few images of product, nothing finished etc.


As I mentioned, I liked the idea.  I didn't see any other issue except for the tie spacing.  I would be even more all over it if turnout and crossing plates were available.  But as it stands, I don't know it it's available at all at this point, and that's a primary concern for track, as Atlas, Peco, and Kato seem to be the only players with availability in the game these days.


So, is Mark, aka narrowminded, track product available to the public?  Is it growing?  Does anyone have finished pics of the product.