An open letter to ATLAS

i was thinking exactly the same thing what fred said.. i agree atlas flex is not easy to bend,but with sectional curve track up to 108" dia., do we really need to bend it in a sharper curve? we have never had the choices in track that we have today.-jim

As far as I know, Atlas is the only O gauge track in which the ties are UV coated. Wood ties will rot relatively quickly unless you treat them with some type of preservative. That said, the preservative - which is usually oil-based, will probably end up on the track.Other plastics will also deteriorate as they lack the UV protection.

While I haven't tested any other brands, I do have several 40" sections of Atlas that have been outside in this unforgiving Texas heat (and some ice, too!) for going on 3 years now. The ties do look very, very lightly faded, and everything else is just fine.

If I were to put anything on my "Atlas wish list" -  I'd wish for 72" - or longer rigid and flex sections. Ideally, some 10 footers would be great! Use it as a single piece where you can - or cut it up as needed.

Years ago I went from Gargraves track and Ross switches to a total Atlas O track system. I was very pleased with the track once I got passed the price and the bit more labor involved to modify the track. I have never gotten past the poor quality of Atlas switches. I should have kept my Ross switches and just dealt with the non uniformity of track on my layout. Atlas switches are cheaply made and not durable, period. I've had numerous pre-wired jumpers fail in the middle of track sections that are a real bear to take apart. Small track pieces within the switches have come unglued, soldered contacts split and cheap plastic parts in the machine itself break. All of these instances have happened not in handling but just while sitting on my layout through normal operation. Some people will say this part of the hobby and we should be open to fixing thing on our layouts. I don't agree.

The reason I gave up after posting earlier in this thread.  

Sam's basic thesis here seems to be that, despite the success of Atlas' business model/product as-is, Sam wants Atlas to design and develop a Scaletrax doppelgänger, except with more closely spaced ties, all because the Scaletrax in which he already invested for his layout has tie spacing that is no longer aesthetically pleasing to him.  Not even sure why this thread has garnered so much attention. 

Sorry, but I still like the Atlas 3 rail track just as it is. I don't think it needs any changes and I sure hope they don't make any. However, I do agree with the suggestions by prrhorseshoecurve. Especially the one about the addition of an O-63 switch to their existing line. Now, if they want to spend money on tooling, I think that would be a good way to spend it. Right now I think Atlas would be really happy just to get their existing track line back in stock and out to their dealers. I don't think they will have any trouble selling it once it arrives. 

It really sounds to me like your perfect track has already been made by Atlas, it's 2 rail. Maybe you would be a whole lot happier with that than trying to get everyone else to change their track systems. If you have to have 3 rail, do as marker did above. As I said before, his track looks very nice and that may also be just what you are looking for in a perfect track.  

Did you by chance get the older Atlas switches or possibly buy them used? I have not had any problem with any Atlas switches I have purchased new in the last 2-3 years. However, I have some used ones that I wish I would not have purchased. Some of those came with the problems you describe. They had much smaller jumpers underneath as well. Some of the short rail sections came off. One lost a major piece of rail that I have so far been unable to fix. Some of the switch machines were very sluggish, even with 18 volts and I ended up replacing those, which fixed the problem. Also got some parts from Atlas and was able to repair most of the rest of them.

The ones I have purchased new have performed flawlessly so far. I have not had any problem with them at all. I think there were some problems with them early on, when the track was first introduced, but I thought those had all been corrected long ago. I will be buying new ones from now on, as I have had much better luck with those. I wanted everything to match, track and switches, but some people do use Atlas track with Ross switches. Sorry to hear you had so many problems. 

Sam, 

I don't know if Atlas is the answer, but you hit on an important topic... one that I was thinking about this weekend. There is a gap for anyone looking for a 3-rail or 2-rail O track system with reasonably sized rail and scale ties.

Some modelers don't pay much attention to the appearance of track, but those that do won't find much satisfaction in the market today.

rob

The G&O garden railroad has all Atlas switches and track.  Much of it has been outside for 3 plus years.  The Atlas track has held up very well.

We improved the wiring of the Atlas switches before installing them by installing heavier jumpers.   This has worked fairly well.  Some of the jumpers have failed over time and we have had to install new jumpers.  The G&O doesn't use the Atlas switch machines.  They wouldn't last outdoors after the first rain.  Also, unlike the ties, the plastic used in the switch machines is not UV protected.  

There are a couple of ways to fix Atlas track if a rail comes loose from the ties.  The first way is to drill a small hole in the tie, dip an HO tie spike in CA glue, and then insert the spike in the hole so that it holds the rail.  An easier way is to just glue the rail back to the ties using a gel type CA glue.  I use a product called "Quick Grip" that I purchase at craft stores.  

My home layout uses a mixture of Ross and Atlas switches and all Atlas track.  I don't find much difference between the Ross and Atlas switches when it comes to operation.  I use DZ-2500 switch machines.  They have worked well indoors.  

Joe

I'd rather see Ross offer solid track and switches.  Isn't Ross track made in the US?

Maybe they could offer solid rail in straight flex, 072 curves (as a minimum) along with 072 and #5 switches and Wyes.  Offer larger radius track later if this sells well.

This would be a good time for them to design a track that could easily be used with hi-rail wheels or for scale wheels with a simple snap-in mod to the frogs on switches, to prevent wheel dip.

This thread seems to return in a similar form, as the same problems I see, are apparent to a number of others. As for steel track, think "RUST!  I want nickel

silver, but in another form...Scale Trax has the best AVAILABLE appearance, to me,

but with proprietary, incompatible connections, and what I think is flimsy trackbed

and switches, it is a large pain to work with.  (okay, with solid rail, the simple tubular's pins are not going to work) Both Atlas and Gargraves need ties half as thick as they now are, per the comments above about ballast. Some of these that sell out

do so because they are the only systems available, and it becomes making the selection of what is personally perceived as the best of a bad lot.  All the big bucks on $2000 locos spent, and lousy track to run them on.  Marker's sure looks good.  Usually

supply and demand economic laws fill these big gaps...but loss of national manufacturing capability or ?, have inhibited that.

I have seen Gargraves tinplate track down over 30 years in a basement with no signs of rust at all.

Some locations, such as Phoenix, Az., and Bad Water, Calif. see little humidity. Others... not so lucky, and run dehumidifiers night and day, or....get the realistic appearance of little used prototypical track.  Having used tubular track in an old house with no dehumidifier and a dank basement in my teens......and brass HO track in the same location....none of that is looked back upon with nostalgia.  There seems to already be plenty of track available for traditionalists....I want some like Marker's

for highrail modelers, commerciislly available.

For importers like Atlas track and switches are the product that keeps on selling out and generating revenue for the company[think cash cow]

"I should have kept my Ross switches and just dealt with the non uniformity of track on my layout."

if i knew then, what i know now...

when i started my layout in 2001, atlas 20th century track system was the new kid on the block.  i was enticed by the look and by the variety of section types available and by the fact it had operating car sections and uncoupling sections.  i was smart enough to replace the switch motors with DZ-1000's, but not smart enough to use Ross switches.  i had lots of problems with the Atlas switches; all the ones documented for those first generation switches.  i replaced one with a Ross switch and that is how i know i wish i had used them throughout.

i don't have a problem with the appearance of the track on the layout.  i have never had anyone say that my track looks bad.  i also don't get many modelers visiting the layout.  

c. sam, since you like scaletrax so much, why aren't you pushing MTH to retool?  i suspect the change you want Atlas to make isn't as trivial as you make it out to be.

I too use DZ-1000's in most places. The machine is much smaller than the Atlas machine and with a short, crisp deliberate throw. At 16 volts, however, I have found that my Atlas machines work fine. The softer spring also gives better slip performance if you forget to make a throw. On the older Atlas switches, I have learned how to work those as well and am not afraid to buy them and upgrade the wiring if needed. 

I only have one DZ1000 and that is why I have it, the Atlas switch machine would not fit in this particular location. I am becoming fairly fond of it though and there may be more of them used on the layout in the future. I still have a few new Atlas machines left from what I purchased to repair some of the used switches I got.

Joe Barker,

I may try your ideas for rail repair. I have one that is the power rail on the curved part of the switch, rather long and it won't go back in between the little plastic nubs (spikes I guess) that hold it in position. Thought about filing some of those off, just enough in places to get it back in the groove so to speak, but had second thoughts. The others are straights and I can get them back in position to try your suggestions above.  

Thanks for the tips.

"Wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then" - Bob Seger, "Against The Wind"

Pete

Thanks Rob for a sensible response to my original post. I suspect that there are more than a few of us who don't want to go to 2 rail but would indeed appreciate a better 3 rail product to be available.

As others have noted, Atlas is the most recent entry (and that was almost two decades ago according to Atlas themselves) and I would suggest that the hobby has shifted quite a bit since then with a substantial segment (not all) desiring scale-appearing track if available.

Yes, Atlas is a fine system with many good features like serviceability outdoors - (now that's a small market) and sturdy construction. It does look nice. They should not halt construction on it at all. I'm just suggesting that if feasible, it would be great if they could offer a smaller rail as an option.

One suggested that I ask MTH to retool ScaleTrax which as has already been pointed out would be quite involved due to the number of different items that would need retooling. Think about it.  I'm suggesting that Atlas retool only the rails themselves as their tie bed is decent and usable as is. Seems simple enough.

I think this thread has shown that there IS a market for a modern closer to scale sized 3 rail system...

For those with concerns about the quality/reliability of the Atlas 3-rail switches/turn-outs, here's some info for you...

I spent some time speaking to the guys working at the Atlas display at this past weekend's "Big E" train show in Springfield, MA.  One of the questions I asked was if there was any truth to the rumor that they were planning to make some design changes to their 3-rail switches. 

They not only confirmed it, but one of the guys reached down under one of the counters and provided me with a one-page document that highlights the changes.  I have attached a copy below.  I couldn't help but notice that these "fact sheets" weren't on top of the counter like the new catalogs were, so I'm glad I asked the question!

I don't own any AtlasO switches so I don't know if these changes will address & correct all of the issues that have been brought up over the years.  Maybe some of you can share your thoughts.  I hope to begin building my first large (for me!) layout later this year and am absolutely torn as to which track to use!!

joeyA,

Good information, thanks for posting.

It sounds like you are already doing this, but I think the best way to select a track system is by looking carefully at all that is available. If you get where you really like one system, but a test loop and try it out. If you like it you are set, if not you can sell it on the For Sale forum and try something else. I think all the track we have available today is good, it's really a matter of personal choice. Good luck with your selection.

Received a reply from Jerry Kimble at Atlas earlier after writing them with my suggestions. He was very nice and gave me some background on the development of their track by Jim Weaver "almost two decades ago".

I asked when we might see track back in stock and he said most should be in by the end of this first quarter. That is indeed good news!

Ron045, The track that the figure is in is Atlas O Track, not Scaletrak!!............rogerw.

OOOOPS.  You are right RogerW.  I posted the wrong pic.  That is embarrassing.  Let me go take another.

Ron

Ok... Here is Scaletrax with the guy, Atlas with the Guy and my foot on the prototype.  Now I'm not really sure.  But since I purchased a lot of my Scaltrax from CSam... I do admit it serves me well.

Ron

Isn't that Atlas track in the second picture down? What are the actual measurements of Scaletrax tie spacing and prototype tie spacing? That would get us in the ball park. I have Atlas and can measure that here. No idea on the other measurements?

c.sam, I hope Atlas really means it this time. I thought it was already starting to trickle in. I have been seeing things show up at my LHS the last couple of weeks that they have been out of for a very long time.

Well said John. I have tried Gargraves, Ross, Atlas and MTH. All look nice, some operational issues with switches and inability of engines and rolling stock to pass through without derailing.

Personal preference dictates what to use. I am designing my new layout and all these comments are very helpful. Even after using the ones above I am still not sure which one to choose. 

My thought - design with RR-Track and put my track needs out to an RFP. See what happens. What I do know is appearance is important but running my trains is why I am in the hobby. 

I recently visited Elliot - Munoz Lines - before his dismantling and his layout was all Atlas. Engines ran great, no de rails - looked clean and he used the correct turnouts that made the layout spectacular.

All personal preference - Like TMCC and DCS a common standard platform would make it easier for the us but that means manufacturers would actually listening to us.

Maybe in my life time .....

Joey A,

Can you PDF the document on the turnouts and send it to kbmkam@aol.com

Thanks

I'd love to hear more about this rumor, Sam!

TRW

I've had my Atlas track for 10(?) years. I've found it to be bulletproof for the most part and am pleased with it.

Their switches weren't perfect but I liked them enough to buy a pile. I think there was room for improvement and am glad to hear that they're updating them.

I think that of all the people I ever met from the various manufacturers the people I really got the best sense of really being interested in working with customers and making improvements was Atlas.

     I just read where main line ties are spaced 19.5" center to center. Divided by 48 that equals .4 inch. With Atlas O spaced at 7/16 center to center (my measurement), that equals .43 inch, very close to the real thing.

     I do not have a piece of ScaleTrax to do this measurement.

John Knapp

Erie, not Eerie

Hey John - ScaleTrax measures 9/16 center to center, 1/8" farther apart. Both are off although Atlas errs in being a hair too close. This is what contributes to why many feel Atlas appears 'too crowded'. Add in the oversized center rail and the normal compression that occurs in dealing with a miniature of a prototype and you have the issue. ScaleTrax being too far apart gives the opposite impression - that of appearing 'flimsy' and too light. Had Atlas had a slightly larger spacing it would have looked much better!

Sam:

    Actually .43 (Atlas O) is wider than .40, so Atlas spacing is actually very slightly wider than real tie spacing.

    ScaleTrax tie spacing is .562 from center to center, considerably wider than real tie spacing.

John Knapp

Erie, not Eerie

Ahh... You are correct John.  Getting late and the mind is fuzzy...