Check it out and see how the prices stack up.
Ouch, I’ll wait to see what it prices out at Wholesaletrains, now watch the old track go way up in price on Ebay LOL
Since the price compares to Aristo, I wonder if the quality compares.
ouch is right. their pricing is way out in left field. I won’t be buying.
Bachmann always said they wouldn’t make brass track because it was less than sensible to duplicate the efforts of LGB and Aristo. Makes me wonder if they know something we don’t… something’s made them change their minds, obviously.
Well. there obviously is a shortage of mfgs offering Code332 track. It’s either that or Aristo is discontinuing the 332 stuff and going for the Code250 market. :lol: :lol: BTW is anyone in the market for a 1:1 bridge or prime development land in the Everglades? 
:lol:
Quote:Well, yeah. Kader bought out Sanda Kan, so they now own the machinery that makes Aristo's and USA's track. Why not add your home brand to the list of players getting track from those machines?
... something's made them change their minds, obviously.
From what I’ve read over on the B’mann forum, it’s virtually identical to Aristo’s track in terms of construction. The tie spacing is much more in line with 1:20 narrow gauge, which is a good thing for narrow gauge fans who haven’t come to know and love flex track yet. What strikes me as curious is that while they’re touting this as being “1:20,” they say their maximum radius is equivalent of LGB’s R3, which is under 4’ radius–the minimum stated for their 1:20.3 rolling stock. Jack Lynch indicates they will be expanding, presumably with wider radii.
As for the prices, any relationship between Bachmann’s stated MSRP and reality is purely hallucinogenic.
Later,
K
I could have been looking at the wrong prices, but it seemed the brass track was less per piece than the old steel track it replaces.
If those prices are like the prices on the bachmann site for rolling stock ect… then the track should be much lower in price when it hits the dealers. It would be nice to see some affordable track and maybe a wake-up call to Aristo ect…
Bachmann website shows the new brass track available. Pricing looks rather steep. $350 for 36 feet of track…my math tells me $9.72 /foot. That’s no bargain! I don’t even know if you can buy the stuff yet?
Kevin Strong said:Quote:Well, yeah. Kader bought out Sanda Kan, so they now own the machinery that makes Aristo's and USA's track. Why not add your home brand to the list of players getting track from those machines?
... something's made them change their minds, obviously.From what I’ve read over on the B’mann forum, it’s virtually identical to Aristo’s track in terms of construction. The tie spacing is much more in line with 1:20 narrow gauge, which is a good thing for narrow gauge fans who haven’t come to know and love flex track yet. What strikes me as curious is that while they’re touting this as being “1:20,” they say their maximum radius is equivalent of LGB’s R3, which is under 4’ radius–the minimum stated for their 1:20.3 rolling stock. Jack Lynch indicates they will be expanding, presumably with wider radii.
As for the prices, any relationship between Bachmann’s stated MSRP and reality is purely hallucinogenic.
Later,
K
One more Code332 line to go with 1:20.3 scale? Smart?
john papadonis said:You cant go by the Bachmann site for pricing. Wait till it hits the retailers then that price will be much lower. Compare the engines on the bachmann site to the retailers. There is a hudge difference.
Bachmann website shows the new brass track available. Pricing looks rather steep. $350 for 36 feet of track...my math tells me $9.72 /foot. That's no bargain! I don't even know if you can buy the stuff yet?
Quote:Well, yeah. The sectional track market is code 332. That's what people already have, and if you want your track to sell, you have to make it compatible with what people have already. Would you buy code 250 sectional track if you're already heavily invested in code 332? Not likely. Also, the majority of folks in 1:20.3 who are that particular about their track aren't buying sectional track regardless of the size of the rail. Compare to HO scale. The "serious" HO guys use code 70, but try to find code 70 sectional track. Heck, it's only in the past 10 years that you're seeing code 100 being replaced by code 83 sectional track. And that's after how many decades of HO railroading where code 100 was the "standard."
... One more Code332 line to go with 1:20.3 scale? Smart?
Don’t misunderstand; I firmly believe code 332 rail should go the way of the dodo. It’s grotesquely oversized, and there’s no reason we need rail that large. The code 250 stuff has proven itself to be every bit as durable and reliable. However, Bachmann has already endured endless criticism for their “old” track which is completely incompatible with anything else on the market. If they were to go with code 250, it may look better, but it would be equally incompatible with the rest of the market. Where’s the logic in that?
Later,
K
Reading all this…Man I’m so glad I dont need track anymore.
Kevin Strong said:I like my "grotesquely oversized" rail :) It matches my "grotesquely oversized" ballast ;)
I firmly believe code 332 rail should go the way of the dodo. It's grotesquely oversized, and there's no reason we need rail that large.
Together, they ensure my train functions well, with minimal effort. More important to me than “is it real, or is it Memorex?”
Ralph
Admittedly a lower code rail might look better and stainless steel (or similar colored) be more prototypical but I like brass because it cleans easily. Don’t tell me stainless does not need cleaning; it does here - birds, snails/slugs, small rodents droppings,sea salt, sand particles and so on. I also find that the oversized rail stands up more easily to careless peoples shoes. 
I join Vic: I’m glad I have all the track that I need.
It is surprising, to say the least, that given the present state of most 1st. world economies, that yet another track (code 332 brass) is being offered. Unless of course one of the following reasons apply. Someone is phasing their product out of production or as sales of models decrease, whatever scales you buy, track will always be required.
We shall see.
I’m one of those who have disliked the parallel and duplicate development of model railroad “staples” (track, power packs etc. etc.) for a long time. Damn waste of resources that “me too” business. And to have a mfg who seems to concentrate on 1:20.3 decide on brass and Code332, wellllll … as I mentioned … really smart move.
I guess one could call it “one more copy made in China”. Now if they could/would pull a Newqida trick and sell it at a bargain then …
OTOH if there will be a supply problem with Aristo and USAT track welllll that’s just the tight market, isn’t it? 
Quote:I'd agree if Bachmann was making the track with identical tie strips, a la Aristo's European ties compared to LGB's, etc. But that's not the case. In another thread, you cited the need for scale specific ties to match the scale of the trains running over it, pointing out the aesthetic difference between Peco's On30 track and HO track. By that, I can assume you'd agree that a 1:20.3 K-27 looks as "bad" running Aristo's track as an On3 2-8-0 looks running on Atlas's HO track. That's precisely what we have here. A manufacturer is introducing a line of track that is scale specific to a segment of the market that has not had sectional track with appropriate-looking ties yet manufactured for it.So they may be "competing" with LGB, Aristo, etc., but only in the sense that Peco "competes" with Atlas and other providers of HO-scale sectional track. Yeah, it's 100% compatible with the other stuff--which I've already argued it needs to be in order to be viable--but from a scale perspective, it's targeted at a specific niche.
... I'm one of those who have disliked the parallel and duplicate development of model railroad "staples" (track, power packs etc. etc.) for a long time.
Besides, if there was no duplicate/parallel development of products from competing manufacturers, we’d never have any motivation for improvement. Otherwise you’re at the mercy of one company to want to improve. Competition is what motivates.
Quote:One other thing to consider, though, and that's the "typical" use of sectional track. I'm going to contradict myself when I wrote earlier there's no reason we need the large size of code 332. Well, there is one--and it's a pretty important one in terms of fostering growth in the hobby. That's the folks who buy trains to run around the Christmas tree, and then buy track to expand on that simple loop. I don't know how many of y'all started out in large scale, but before dad and I laid track up in the woods--and even after--I had sectional track running all over my basement floor, or taking the track to exhibitions where I was often laying the track either on grass or on a bed of mulch; lots of places where there wasn't a firm foundation under the track. That's where code 332 has its distinct advantages. I'd not hesitate one bit to lay code 250 on a solid foundation in the garden, but for exhibitions and living room railroads, no way. And that's precisely how a lot of sectional track is used. It's kept in boxes until it's time to lay out a temporary railroad to play with for a while, then put back in the box 'til next time. That's also why Atlas, Kato, Lionel, etc. have made their various track/ballast combination sectional track--added strength for laying track out on carpets and other not-so-solid foundations. Sectional track needs to be able to withstand the rigors of repeatedly being picked up and put back down again in environments that are less than ideal. I love code 250 track, but it's decidedly [i]not[/i] good for that kind of handling. In the garden, fine. On the carpet with 5-year-old feet walking on it? Not gonna happen.
...And to have a mfg who seems to concentrate on 1:20.3 decide on brass and Code332,
Later,
K
Kevin,
I’ll wait until I either have samples in my hands or read a review in GARTENBAHNprofi. They usually tread where others are afraid to!
OTOH if the reports on the Botchmann Forum are to be believed the samples look like
udo said:
yesterday I had some pieces of the new track in hand..... at Bachmann shop Shanghai. It has dark ties (US spacing) and the connectors are srewed from the side. Aditional srews are glued under one of the ties. There is no brand name in the ties, only "made in China". I have seen this kind of traks earlier already... may be Aristocraft?
ScottyB said::)
Saw some at Trainfest yesterday - looks great. The rail is solid brass and I would imagine it matching up well with other manufacturers code 332 track. The ties I would describe as on the narrow side - like the "American style" used by others. Not sure on the spacing as I didn't have another piece to compare it to, but to my eye it appeared very similar again to the "American style." The Bachmann name was stamped on the bottom of the ties.
With all the 4 legged critters that wander through my Shangri-la, out here where the nearest street sign reads, “End of the World-2 miles” I dasent use anything but Code 332 track. I watched one large buck run through the railroad, being chased by my faithful companion, Gunny. I went out to investigate and found that he had stepped right on one of the rails, putting a vertical kink in it. I was able to smooth it out with a rail bender, sort of. I shudder to think what might have happened if the rail had been anything smaller than Code 332.
Another time, I was trying to teach my almost 3 year old grand daughter to jump over the track, rather than step on it. She tried hard, bending her knees, swinging her arms like she was getting ready for the standing broad jump, then would launch herself into the air, and landed right on the track.
Code 332 stood up to it. Code 250 might not have.
Might I change it out someday? Not a chance. That would be too much like work. Besides, you don’t notice it from a galloping horse.
But, that’s just me. Your mileage might vary.
What I might do is have some Code 215 track on hand for photo ops. That’s not cheating is it?