PRR Eastern Region - Timonium Show

[Mark5]

[insert suspenseful music here]

[wm3798]

I stopped by Jerry's booth, and he was explaining to those in the audience his disappointment with Atlas #5 turnouts.  He said he had over 150 installed, and he had experienced failures with 50 of them.  I'm not sure what the nature of the failure(s) was, but having 1/3 of a batch go sour would tend to wrankle anyone.

Having seen Jerry's layout, I can surmise that he was counting on better performance from his track components given the amount of hidden and/or buried trackage he included in his design.  The fact is, even if the problem he was having was fixable, such as a couple of passes with a file to fix the gauge problem with #5 frogs that most of us knew about, he couldn't get to the turnouts to fix them.

I think his layout plan was pretty ambitious, but I think his experience with HO might have led him down a design path that didn't take into account the physics of N scale.

One simple approach I took with my layout, for instance, is all the hidden staging is c80 with Peco turnouts.  This was done partly due to the fact that I had a lot of inventory leftover from previous layouts, but also because Peco turnouts are pretty close to bullet proof.  Being subterranean, they don't have to look good, they just have to be reliable.

It will be interesting to see what emerges from this experience for Jerry.
Lee

[Dave V]

Well, crap!  A 33% failure rate?  That doesn't exactly make me want to dig out my Peco Code 80 (with 0% failure rate) turnouts and install Atlas Code 55.

Realistic track is nice, but I'll take tall rail w/ 100% reliability over scale-rail and 66% reliability any day of the week and twice on Tuesday.

Is it just the #5s?  I'd probably go with #7s for most of what's on my layout now.  But jeez, 50 turnouts dying?  That blows!

[Mark5]

33%? Don't believe everything you read.

[Erik W]

I have 39 Atlas code 55 #5 turnouts on my layout I layed back in 2004.  I've never had problems with any of them.

Erik

[John]

I have a lot of C55 #5s also .. while I experienced the occasional failure, none at the rate being reported.

[Chris333]

Could be Jerry bought them all when they first came out. The first run is different.

[Dave V]

Hmm...

Still, I can empathize with Jerry.  Nothing kills model railroading fun like trackwork problems.  You can't bad-order a crossover on the mainline like you can a boxcar with a gauge problem!

I've heard mixed results about Atlas c55 ever since it came along, which tells me one of two things (or a combination of both).  Sounds like there's inconsistency from batch-to-batch (hopefully just an early problem) and/or they're very unforgiving in installation.

If the issue is filing out a frog, then that's not too big a deal (assuming you can reach it!).  Throwbar breakage is another issue I've heard about, and that one's not so easy.

I've always thought that when I do the "big one" after I retire from the Air Force, I'd probably have visibile staging.  I could make it look like the departure yard at Altoona or Enola.  Yeah, not so prototypical (especially if a passenger train is just sitting there), but much less stressful than hidden.  Any hidden track I would have would likely be either Code 80 Peco or maybe even Kato Unitrack.

Stress-free running...  I love making my stuff look as prototypical as I can within reason, but when I crack that throttle, I want the trains will do their business without trouble.  After all, I'm not modeling CSX! ;D

[John]

Dave .. I hear what you are saying ..

The #5s did have some problems with guage .. it was the nickel plating that seemed to screw the guage .. I have also had a couple of throw bars fail .. the little plastic thingie that holds the closure rails in place pops out sometime .. the other problem I had on one or two Ys was the posts on the closure rails that form the hinge lost the little washer that held it in place ..

I also subscribe to the number 1 rule of turnout installation - never put one inside a tunnel, or in a place you can't get to without dismantling the layout .. visible staging, if you can afford the space is the way to go ..

Like I said, I have numerous turnouts on my layout .. and have had very little problem ..

[wm3798]

My code55 installation goes back to 2004, and most of the #5's I have date to the first run.  I followed the advice to file the frogs, and have experienced zero defects.  The count is probably somewhere around 15 turnouts.  The only problem I've had was self inflicted when I was moving a turnout from one place to another, I managed to pop the diverging rail past the frog off of it's little contact.  It was easily fixed with a jumper wire and some CA.

Dave, personally, I don't think you have much to worry about.  I really think that it was the perfect storm of the early run turnouts, and a large number of them, combined with a less than cautious approach to design in his hidden trackage that created Jerry's problem.

This isn't a blind defense of a product.  But as someone who's been building N scale layouts for 25+ years, I know that there are some things you just don't tempt fate with, and hiding a bunch of turnouts, regardless of quality, is one of them.

Lee

[tom mann]

Guys, let's wait until Jerry chimes in before we jump out of windows on the code 55 turnout issue.

[keystonecrossings]

Guys, I am not going to get into specifics given that an amiable arrangement is in process. I'd like to keep it that way. However, I will clarify some facts...

The 33% failure rate quoted is high.

I have 160+ turnouts installed, which include #5's and #7's.

I did purchase in bulk when code 55 first shipped, but I have made subsequent purchases.

Problems developed over time and were grew exponentially last fall. We had many eNjoyable op sessions previously.

[Mark5]

This has dragged on a bit too long for my taste. It's becoming a bit too much of a drama. I just read on the Atlas forum that people are getting scared to use Atlas C55 because of Jerry's post.

My take on this is that if you plan to build a massive layout, you'd better expect a substantial amount of maintenance. And you'd better lay your track perfectly. There's a part of me that wants to build a monster layout, but the maintenance aspect scares me a bit.

Apologies if there is something else going on here, but the conspicuous ANNOUNCEMENT followed by cryptic silence does not really lead me to any other conclusions.




 

[Sokramiketes]

This has dragged on a bit too long for my taste. It's becoming a bit too much of a drama. I just read on the Atlas forum that people are getting scared to use Atlas C55 because of Jerry's post.

My take on this is that if you plan to build a massive layout, you'd better expect a substantial amount of maintenance. And you'd better lay your track perfectly. There's a part of me that wants to build a monster layout, but the maintenance aspect scares me a bit.

Apologies if there is something else going on here, but the conspicuous ANNOUNCEMENT followed by cryptic silence does not really lead me to any other conclusions.

 

Agreed.  Anyone who thinks 160+ turnouts (or anything mechanical for that matter) won't require maintenance is off in La-La Land.  And there's also reasons that warnings are abundant about hidden trackage. 

Now, if the cast frogs are expanding, then I suppose that's another issue entirely.  But, I'd really like to see some proof of this, as I have inclinations to not trust the source of this claim.  The story has been held from the Keystone Modeler as staff wants to give Atlas a fair shake at responding to the allegations before just publishing Jerry's claims. 

It would have been nice if Keystone Modeler did the same thing about the "review" of the upcoming Atlas 50' boxcar, but Jerry didn't even take the time to ask Atlas about the inconsistencies between the photos and the description before going off about how the pre-production sample with incorrect ends and roof didn't match any Pennsy prototype.  If Jerry can't take 5 minutes to email Cory and ask him about the inconsistancy, then why would anyone NOT assume that he is jumping to conclusions about turnout issues as well.

[keystonecrossings]

Skibbe:

Once again you spout off about what you know nothing about... but you do it here, cause you know what will happen on the A-board if you do so...

1) "The story has been held from the Keystone Modeler as staff wants to give Atlas a fair shake at responding to the allegations before just publishing Jerry's claims." -- TKM, specifically Al Buchan, came to me asking for an article. I did not go to TKM. And I've told him I was holding off until Atlas and I settle. Paul Graf has been very receptive and I would prefer to keep things amiable. I have not problems with the code 55 flex, Atlas locomotives, or Atlas rolling stock. Your allegation about the article is dead wrong.

2) "It would have been nice if Keystone Modeler did the same thing about the "review" of the upcoming Atlas 50' boxcar, but Jerry didn't even take the time to ask Atlas about the inconsistencies between the photos and the description before going off about how the pre-production sample with incorrect ends and roof didn't match any Pennsy prototype.  If Jerry can't take 5 minutes to email Cory and ask him about the inconsistancy, then why would anyone NOT assume that he is jumping to conclusions about turnout issues as well." -- Unfortunately, Greg Martin is (was) the lead editor for product news in TKM. You jumped to the conclusion that because it was an N scale item that I wrote it. I did not. I alerted Greg that the model was being released and provided only the manufacturer, the name of the product, and the basic info about the model FROM THE ATLAS WEB SITE. Greg Martin added the editorial comments. Subsequently Al Buchan has been working on a correction, but the error was with Greg Martin, not myself.

And I am not carrying on any drama here or anywhere. I work full time in network security for a rather large law enforcement agency, work half time with my own business, and with what time is left I model railroad and visit forums. I'm sorry I haven't been sitting idle waiting to respond to your every call, but I have to prioritize requests on my time and you did not make the A list. Sorry!