Large Scale Central

Track is not Track unless you double the price overnite

Track and Trestles
#61

There are always different circumstances that factor into what is better or more cost effective. For me, battery/RC is cheaper. I only have a few locos. The cost for me to convert them to battery/RC is just slightly more than the DCC system i wanted. But, with batteries, I am able to use aluminum track, which i couldn’t do w/ DCC in my area. That is a huge savings over brass, and i don’t need rail clamps, which is another huge savings. (see there are track references in this thread :smiley: )
But, the biggest savings for me is time. At my house brass track has to be cleaned normally before each run. I don’t have that kind of time, and to me my time is money. People are going to argue that charging batteries takes time just like cleaning track, but i charge my batteries after i run. I bring the locos in put them on the charger, then put them on the shelf for next time. If you cleaned track after you ran here you’d just have to clean it again when you wanted to run next time. And on a note about run time, my locos out last me. I am normally sunburnt or frozen before my loco’s batteries die.

I agree with Tony in general but there are always those who’s circumstances are different.

#62

Terry,

On control: It’s a matter of what are you looking for in functionality ; what do you accept as a reasonable price to get that functionality.

In my case that is a DCC system that can be used from N to LS with all the bells and whistles, if one needs or wants those.

But back to track: There is as much choice in track today as there is in propulsion systems, “Uncle Lewis” just wanted to remind his “congregation” that he has some “really nice track and at such a deal”. :wink: :slight_smile:

#63

I was going to opine but given that I’m indoors, and without the associated exposure to weathering, my experience is really not relivant to the whole R/C -vs- track power debate, but I will say that R/C and battery has a self-restricting factor in that it can only be used in the larger selections that can internally accomodate the battery packs, circuit boards, now add a sound sysytem and try shoving all that into an 0-4-0 LGB Porter! Using a trailing car that has to be constantly dragged around completely defeats the purpose to create any real world aspects of railroad operations, unless your just going roundy-roundy-round with no operational aspects at all.

BTW track powered, with a BTE R/C throttle, on brass track all bought years before the great “deals” arrived. :wink:

#64
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
Terry,

On control: It’s a matter of what are you looking for in functionality ; what do you accept as a reasonable price to get that functionality.

In my case that is a DCC system that can be used from N to LS with all the bells and whistles, if one needs or wants those.

But back to track: There is as much choice in track today as there is in propulsion systems, “Uncle Lewis” just wanted to remind his “congregation” that he has some “really nice track and at such a deal”. :wink: :slight_smile:


Hey HJ
You formulated that very nice, i like to see it the same way, Uncle Lewis just reminded us, and paper does not refuse any wrong statement. In addition i know that there is no such thing like "One Fits all’ or “One does it all”. We always have to decide if a product fits our needs, and sometimes it is not just a question of money, it also has to work. For example if i would buy any aluminum track, i would be nuts. The reason for that is that i use a DCC system, and me and my kids walk often on the track because it is laid direct on dirt. ( Aluminum has a lesser tensile strength then Brass or Stainless, deforms therefore easier)

think global Pius

#65
PJ said:
In addition i know that there is no such thing like "One Fits all' or "One does it all". We always have to decide if a product fits our needs

think global Pius


Well said PJ.
What is best for you may not be the best for me.
I have code 332 aluminum rail on the ground. Gets stepped on all the time. Not a problem. Code 250 may be a different story.
I use track power with the standard Aristo “screw” rail joiners. So far, not a problem.
No matter what Tony says, you can’t do it any cheaper. Will it require more maintenance ? Probably. Is it the best way? Maybe not.
But it sure was and is the cheapest way(with more than one locomotive).
Ralph

#66
Bob McCown said:
Possibly dragging this back on-topic.

I like the look of weathered brass track. The ‘whiteness’ of aluminum track is jarring to me, and I try and limit its use in the garden. I’m using AMS code 250 track mostly, with some switches aluminum, and some of brass. I intend on painting the alum rail brownish.

I’m battery/rc.

YMMV


I can’t argue with that Bob. Weathered brass does look the best hands down. But the bright yellow Aristo brass looks worse to me than the Aluminum.
Ralph

#67
Ralph Berg said:
PJ said:
In addition i know that there is no such thing like "One Fits all' or "One does it all". We always have to decide if a product fits our needs

think global Pius


Well said PJ.
What is best for you may not be the best for me.
I have code 332 aluminum rail on the ground. Gets stepped on all the time. Not a problem. Code 250 may be a different story.
I use track power with the standard Aristo “screw” rail joiners. So far, not a problem.
No matter what Tony says, you can’t do it any cheaper. Will it require more maintenance ? Probably. Is it the best way? Maybe not.
But it sure was and is the cheapest way.
Ralph

Ralph what AL track are you using…? Cheap, me like

#68

Cale,
I’m using Aristo sectional track. Way too many joints but it works and was cheap.
Unfortunately, the 1 foot straights were sold out last time I checked. They only had the 4 foot diameter curves left and these may be sold out by now.
Ralph

#69
Ralph Berg said:
Cale, I'm using Aristo sectional track. Way too many joints but it works and was cheap. Unfortunately, the 1 foot straights were sold out last time I checked. They only had the 4 foot diameter curves left and these may be sold out by now. Ralph
Looked at those years ago when they first went on "sale"....decided on used cheap brass instead...may go for AL when all my brass runs out!
#70

John,
for some reason in Australia, we elevate our infamous criminals to positions of praise in society. Obviously things are no different in America. From memory, the ‘great’ Rodney King was well known to police for his activities in society. I suppose you put the ‘great’ Rodney King at the same level as the ‘great’ O.J. Simpson. There are some people that one simply does not want to get along with.

#71

If the Glove don’t fit, you Must acquit…My Lord that was a mess!

#72
Ralph Berg said:
Cale, I'm using Aristo sectional track. Way too many joints but it works and was cheap. Unfortunately, the 1 foot straights were sold out last time I checked. They only had the 4 foot diameter curves left and these may be sold out by now. Ralph
Hi Ralph, Just to save money, i would recommend NOT to use any short track sections. In my case it costs me at least $3.60 in addition, to screw together any track section. If you do the math right, it would mean that screwing together four 1 foot sections versa buying a four foot section, costs me $10-$12 more. In addition i see every track joint as a potential problem. In this case the american way is definitive, absolute correct, "bigger is better".

think global Pius

#73

I would usually agree PJ. But I picked up the 1ft sectional for just a little over $1.00 a foot.
I’m using the “free” rail joiners, so it is hard to beat the price.
Ralph

#74

Greg Elmassian said:
I agree, the first problem to solve is conductivity between the sections of rail. Worrying about the resistivity of the metal rail when the joiners are junk is silly. If you get the joiners conducting well, like using Hillman or Split Jaw joiners, then you can worry about trying to feed several hundred feet of track from one point, and worrying about the voltage drop. This is the typical situation with track power and when people do not look at the big picture. Regards, Greg

Hi Greg, how about rail joiners like this ones, one size fits all, solves all problems.

(http://www.citycat.hdud.idv.tw/railfac/rail40.jpg)

#75

I was just trying to inject a little humor into the thread with my Rodney King quote. But, you are right, I think people tend to refer to quotes from questionable people as they are funny just because of who said them. Remember the the quote from Past President Bill Clintion, “What does is mean” or something like that.

#76

PJ said:
how about rail joiners like this ones, one size fits all, solves all problems.

(http://www.citycat.hdud.idv.tw/railfac/rail40.jpg)

Looks like someone is switching to battery power and changing from Code 332 track to Code 215. :smiley:

#77

Be Careful!

Was informed the other night via the tele…“Once you’re in the Battery Mafia there ain’t no getting out!”

#78
Cale Nelson said:
Be Careful!

Was informed the other night via the tele…“Once you’re in the Battery Mafia there ain’t no getting out!”


Not alive, anyway! :lol: :lol:

#79
Cale Nelson said:
Be Careful!

Was informed the other night via the tele…“Once you’re in the Battery Mafia there ain’t no getting out!”


Hey Cale,
during or national garden railway show in Phoenix, i talked to several distributes like Air wire and Locolinc. Just could not find any good argument why to switch to battery power, they even convinced me that DCC is the way to go. There is a good reason why we do not manufacture in big quantity’s cars which run just (sole) on battery’s.

Think global Pius

#80

no argument needed, it just works…for me and many others…but it ain’t for everyone, and that’s ok…

whatever they wanna make, they can make…my side-cutters/soldering iron work like a champ! I personally don’t mind wiring my engines, although I’d bet more folks would be more receptive if it were “easier”…but even then…who defines “easier”?