Reply to "Commencing Build: 5' x 12' Fastrack 3-4 train layout"

1. HaulingSTK posted:

Greetings Friends.   I'm new to the group and O gauge since I have been a G scale Railroader for some time.  Ken, excellent job and hope all is well.  My son is now in love with trains so we decided to build  a table based on your design.  I'm sitting around 11 feet by 5 feet but i'm having trouble choosing track.  I was looking at either the FastTrack or Atlas -O.  I was wondering if you had the design in the Atlas-O or how the conversion would work.  Also if you had some recommendations for a new user, that would be fantastic too.

Thank you 

HaulingSTK:  both are great track systems, a few points IMO off the top of my head:

FasTrack Pros: 

1. no ballasting needed with integrated roadbed
2. turnout machines integrated within the roadbed, so no ugly switch machines on top of the layout next to the track
3. switch machines can be command controlled with TMCC/Legacy, and powered through the rails - no need to run wires for turnouts or build a control panel
4. Works with magne-traction
5. Faster/easier to put a layout together, and get up and running

Fastrack Cons:

1. both a pro and con:  track sections connect tightly, do not come apart (in my experience).  But the integrated plastic roadbed means that track sections must be planned to fit closely without compression.   It is possible to stretch joints a bit, 1/16" looks OK.   But cannot be compressed. 
2. It is difficult, but not impossible to make custom-length track sections.

Atlas Pros:

1. railjoiners have been improved, and allow some flexibility in making layouts connect together
2. Flex track, and the ability to trim sections allow layout shapes to connect with custom size and curved sections
3. Numbered turnouts for high-speed and more realistic looking trackwork

Atlas Cons:

1. Need to ballast track.   Can look really great, but a lot of work IMO.   Others don't mind this task, so could be a pro or con depending on your personal preference.
2. Switch machines on the surface of the layout, or invest in the expense and time of under-table switch machines
3. Must run control and power to the switch machines, and build a control panel
4. No magnetraction effect

Which one looks best:  perhaps Atlas-O if you can ballast your layout.

Both are reliable