Code 40 vs. code 55 - Worth the extra effort?

Recently we have been seeing some pretty good looking commercial code 55 track in N scale. Micro Engineering and Atlas are making a pretty decent stab of things in terms of appearance but don’t have all the votes yet in terms of reliability.

Peco is improving with their line of code 55 though the ties are all wrong in just about every dimension and still look more European than American. Even if the commercial guys get it all right, the flange ways will still be oversize to make sure that every car ever released in N scale can bounce their way through the turnout. So it still seems like a good idea to be able to roll your own.

Code 40 #6 Left hand turnout - Fast Tracks jig

Code 40 corresponds to about 115 lb rail in N scale, code 55 is about 160 lb rail in N and code 80 is over 200 lb. Mainline rail is typically 139 lb so what size rail does the best job of representing prototype size mainline rail? Code 40 or code 55? I’m building this test module to see for myself.

Along the way I will weigh the pros and cons of hand laying and decide if it’s worth having both sizes of rail or if it’s viable to just go with code 55 for main and secondary track.

How can 160 lb rail represent 139lb rail?

Code 55 is a pretty good starting point for representing 139 lb mainline rail because there is very little difference in height between code 55 and code 45 which would be perfect for 139 lb mainline rail - only 10 thou. Code 55 is almost 9 scale inches high but this is not really noticable over the normal viewing distances of hundred’s of scale feet.

Code 55 is also way better than any code 80 track - forget that! Code 80 is almost twice as high as the prototype mainline rail and looks very unconvincing as a result. Our eyes will forgive a little error but not that much!

By comparison to the code 55, code 40 is a little light for mainline rail and would leave a big question regarding how to represent lighter secondary track. What size does that get laid in? Code 35? Code 40 also raises questions about having to modify some wheel flanges, particularly on older locomotives. How badly do you want accurately scaled rail?! Code 35 is really getting pretty delicate too from a building and maintenance standpoint.

Code 55 for the main, code 40 for the secondary

With code 55 as the starting point for main track, what about the secondary? Is code 40 viable (for me!). 

Below is a code 40 hand laid turnout. I made it using a Fast Tracks turnout jig and it took about 2 hours to put together. I am quite happy with the appearance.

The code 40 is a lot flimsier compared to code 55 and it remains to be seen if it will stand up to normal use okay, particularly the point rails.

On the right of the picture is a code 55 #8 turnout. Not a heck of a lot of difference in appearance, at least in this photo. With the darker background, or with ballast applied, the code 55 looks quite acceptable for mainline N scale  track.

I guess the real test is whether the code 40 looks noticably lighter than the code 55 and can the code 55 be painted to adequately simulate lighter track. My guess is no, and I’m really interested to know if the ligher code 40 track looks light, operates well and is worth the extra effort.