Kato Unitrack vs. Atlas True Track

[rogergperkins]

Barry, thank you for sharing your comments and providing an evaluation. 
I was hoping you would reply here because I know we have discussed both kinds of track off-line.

[sumfred]

Thanks to you all for the info posted.
In the end I guess I'll have to decide myself: Looks or functionality.
Fred

[rogergperkins]

Sumfred, Barry is certainly one of the most experienced model railroads I know (after 33+ years in n-scale) and also brings several years of real roading experience to the hobby.

His point about appearance is well stated.  I was willing to sacrifice more realistic appearance and use the Kato unitrack; I know have so much money invested in it that only something like winning the lottery would cause me to change to the Atlas True Track.
 

[sumfred]

Another problem I have is that the True Track turnouts with their 12.5" radius is causing some problems with my older, larger flanged steamers
(2-10-0, 0-8-0 etc.) I never had problems with my Peco Code 80 medium turnouts as they have a larger radius.  So unless Atlas produces some #6 turnouts, I'll have to switch to Unitrack.
Fred

[BOK]

Thanks, Roger for the glowing comments about my experience but as many know this website is made up of a lot of very talented modelers like yourself who are far and away some of of the best in N scale and far exceed any of my efforts.

Fred, I wonder if maybe some/all of the problems with older steam power negoiating  the True Track # 4 turnouts are due to out of gauge pilot/trailing trucks and drivers rather than the turnouts themselves? After checking and adjusting for correct gauge on all wheels then maybe using a tiny jeweler's file to open up the guardrails or frogs of the turnouts a bit will allow your steamers to operate through them without problems.

Barry

[sumfred]

Barry, 
the problem is not the wheel gauge, which is correct, but, as you suggested, the for these larger flanges too narrow a guard rail/frog.
The problem is only with the older, larger wheel-base engines, my older 0-6-0's and 0-4-0's don't have that problem.
I really don't want to alter the turnout itself as this might change the caracteristics of my newer engines driving through them.
I'll wait until I get my Unitrack turnouts and test them with my older equipment.

Fred

[wm3798]

With apologies to John Sing,

... There goes the neighborhood.... 

Wait a minute... was that a couch?

Lee

[Flagler]

I am very happy with my Kato Unitrack.I have around 50 Turnouts and have had a few #4's with problems.The #6 do work better.I almost never have a derailment with them.The expansion track,Double crossover  & 28 1/4" radius are my favorite
pieces of track.I never noticed the tie spacing & have been using the track for 19 years

[sumfred]

Update:

Finished testing my 41 engines.

True-Track:
Out of these 41 units, 12 had some problems negotiating two turnouts back to back, 4 derailed all the time.

Unitrack:
again two #4 turnouts back to back, none of my engines had the slightest problems negotiating these turnouts.

My roster includes old 0-4-0's and 0-8-0's to 2-10-2's and 4-8-4's

My conclusion:
I have sold my True-Track and am switching to Unitrack.
Reliability over looks.

Fred

[rogergperkins]

I have spoken before, but must add that if one cannot run their trains with out problems appearance of the track system takes second place. 

[rogergperkins]

After examining some of the Atlas True Track recently, I have gained a greater appreciation for the appearance and the closer resemblance to US railroad.
I know I am coming into the overall discussion about 4 year after much occurred.
It appears that Atlas has 10" straights and 15+" radius curves in the line per their online listings.

[Dave V]

Atlas doesn't seem to be running with this line of track...  I know they include it in train sets but there doesn't seem to be any push to expand it.  If they offered some actual numbered turnouts and code 65 flex, I would consider it.  Code 65 would be about right for the PRR mainline.

[SkipGear]

Weeks after the second batch of True Track arrived is when the brown stuff hit the fan in China for them. I think it will be the end of the year at least before there is any expansion of the True Track line. I think the line would take off with an assortment of turnouts added. The curves and straights are enough to get a foothold.

[Denver Road Doug]

There is a very important issue not being discussed here, and that is the durability of True Track.   After using Unitrack and loving it, I too was lured by the nice looking True Track and thinking that Atlas wisely "very carefully approximated the features" of Unitrack into a package that looked nice...so I bought some.    But in reality, True Track is simply trainset track Atlas could use with their Trainman line...and nothing more.   It is not designed to be setup and rearranged and taken down like Unitrack, and in my experience the rail tends to come out of the tie webbing very easily when separating the track pieces. 

Stick to Unitrack.

My philosophy is, if you just want to experiment with track plans or get something up and running quickly and semi-permanent or don't really intend to make the cover of Model Railroader, use Unitrack.   When you're ready for the next level it's Atlas or ME C55 and ME C40.  (I would probably add Peco if they ever did their NA track in N-scale)    And if you really want to take it up that final notch, hand lay the track.    I like using Unitrack for hidden trackage, regardless.   That's just my 2 cents.

[DKS]

Atlas True Track may have better tie spacing, but... tan ballast? Not many railroads use ballast of that color, and the thought of trying to paint it or otherwise alter the color seems daunting at best.

So, appearance-wise, IMO there are significant trade-offs for both brands.