Atlas Code 55 vs. ME Code 55

[Point353]

Truth is, for my eyes and my perceptions about track, zero "spikehead" details at all are better than grossly oversized details.  The reason for my logic is that in most cases, in most prototype photos, the spikeheads are the least noticeable detail of the track...with tie plates being pretty prominent, especially if rusty, but the rail joiners really being the prominent detail on the sides of the rails at each rail joint.  Of course, this detail is almost NEVER modeled in either of the dominant scales (HO and N), but prototypically, they are extremely noticeable.

The rivet-counter in me cringes at the thought of no spikehead or tieplate details on hand-laid track, but truthfully...those details are not very prominent on transition era mainline trackage.  I had to look hard to find a photo where the spikes were fairly prominent.

Suppose that you wanted to model track (as shown in the following photo) where many of the heads of the spikes are standing several inches above the base of the rail.
How might you suggest going about it?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=192573&nseq=34

[wazzou]

Still pretty darned hard to see, IMO.

[OldEastRR]

Is there a source for the old Railcraft Code 55?  It certainly looks the best out of the bunch. 

Only robert3985, because he's bought up every available second-hand piece in the western hemisphere....

[robert3985]

Only robert3985, because he's bought up every available second-hand piece in the western hemisphere....

I hope not! 

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[robert3985]

Suppose that you wanted to model track (as shown in the following photo) where many of the heads of the spikes are standing several inches above the base of the rail.
How might you suggest going about it?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=192573&nseq=34

Here ya go...from Proto87Stores:

Etched HO scale-sized spikes (about twice the size of N scale-sized spikes...but still plenty small):


Etched C40 N-scale tie plates, some with holes instead of spikeheads:


For your turnouts...full tie plates and other detail stuff for N-scale turnouts up to a #10:


Then you'll need some C40 rail and wooden ties, along with some PCB ties.

Then, if you want to make your turnouts even more realistic, you'll spring for the "Ultimate 3-Way CNC Planed Points" for each turnout, so there's no notching of the stock rails required, but you'll need these...

Throwbars and Point Hinges N:


Then, you'll have to learn how to make your throwbars more realistic...

Here's my solution:


Last, but not least...how about some rail joint bars for joining 39' lengths of rail?

Etched "Joint Bars":


Time to get to work!  Have fun! Take pics!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Dave V]

Bob,

Thanks for the heads' up on those.  I'll be laying flextrack soon and could use some details like that in spots.  And yes, my Code 70 is horribly oversized for the RGS in HOn3, but since I'm coming from Code 80 in N, LOL...   

[Doug G.]

You could just paint the tie plates on and add extra dots of paint for the spikes. It probably wouldn't be too far off from being scale thickness.



Doug

[Mark W]

I'm wondering if archer rivets would do the trick too. 

[DKS]

Only robert3985, because he's bought up every available second-hand piece in the western hemisphere....

I've got a fair bunch of the stuff myself, and even more of the C40. Hope I get a chance to use it...

[robert3985]

You could just paint the tie plates on and add extra dots of paint for the spikes. It probably wouldn't be too far off from being scale thickness.



Doug

I'm wondering if archer rivets would do the trick too. 

As to "joint bars"...sure, you can paint 'em on, but that isn't going to look anything like the real deal.  When looking at real "joint bars" it's pretty obvious that they aren't hiding on the rail web, but they stand proud of the edges of the rail head by 1/2" to 1"...at least.  They have an angle on the top edge so the flanges don't hit them, but...they're much thicker than paint, and Archer rivets applied to the rail web every 39' aren't going to represent the plates on either side of the rail.

Even the Proto87Stores "joint bars" with their etched nuts and bolt heads aren't thick enough IMHO, and they hide themselves under the railhead when applied rather than come anywhere near the scale thickness of properly proportioned ones.

Photo (1) - Here's a cross-section of three common types of joint bars so you can see how they're attached and how they stand out prominently from the sides of the rails:


Photos (2) thru (4) - Good shots of prototype Class 3 mainline rail showing joint bar prominence and thickness, standing off noticeably from the railweb:





I've been thinkin' about developing some more realistic looking joint bars to fit both C55 and C40 and having several frets etched up.  Because of the depth of N-scale flanges, I'm certain that N-scale joint bars on the inside of the rails are not going to be able to protrude outward from the railhead like the real deal, but there's no reason joint bars on the outsides of the rails couldn't be just like the real thing.

I've also considered using my NWSL "Riveter" tool, mounted adjacent to my vertical mill's X-Y table, to emboss a sheet of gray Styrene, or NS with alternating big and small "rivets" to get more prominent bolt head and nut details than are on the Proto87Stores fret.

But, one thing is for sure, "paint" ain't gonna do the trick...

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[railnerd]

Dont forget that there are other sources for joint bars, too.

http://pdc.ca/rr/catalog/product/n-code-4055-joint-bars/12

-Dave

[peteski]

That's all well and good, but in out modeling world don't the wheel flanges extend below the rail head?  That would not work really well.

[Sokramiketes]

As to "joint bars"...sure, you can paint 'em on, but that isn't going to look anything like the real deal.  When looking at real "joint bars" it's pretty
Photos (2) thru (4) - Good shots of prototype Class 3 mainline rail showing joint bar prominence and thickness, standing off noticeably from the railweb:
Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

Good sighting of a B&O M-15k! 

Info about the car and modeling in both HO and N available in past RPM Chicagoland program handout:
http://www.rpmconference.com/index.php/2016-rpm-program-complete/

[Jbub]

Bob, the picture of the u50c is amazing. Is it yours?  It's one I would like a print of when I finally get my train room.  I'm curious though, the scenery looks to be around wasatch summit but there's a station in the picture. Where is the actual location?

[Point353]

That's all well and good, but in out modeling world don't the wheel flanges extend below the rail head?  That would not work really well.

Would the NWSL/64 (or NWSL/50) style wheels be sufficient?
http://www.nwsl.com/nwsl-online-catalog.html