Welcome to the forum   
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Share
Options
View
Go to last post in this topic Go to first unread post in this topic
Offline DB Fan  
#1 Posted : 28 June 2016 02:30:24(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Hello everybody.
I wanted everybody's opinion if c track is better then m track. I know about the turnout motor to be controlled digitally and that there are more options for curve radius. Why do I have to purchase the motor for the turnout separately?
Thanks for any input. I have a lot of m track but would be willing to sell itBigGrin
Robert
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by DB Fan
Offline xxup  
#2 Posted : 28 June 2016 03:45:23(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,457
Location: Australia
M-track rules.. ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp

50+ years old and still going strong!

None of that namby-pampy plastic rubbish for me..

I have seen grown men cry trying to make contact rails on C-track..
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 5 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline Iamnotthecrazyone  
#3 Posted : 28 June 2016 04:28:24(UTC)
Iamnotthecrazyone

Australia   
Joined: 22/01/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,044
For running quality C track is much better for looks I don't like it at all, if assembling and disassembling regularly when it gets old gets brittle and cracks . M track can have it's own problems but also has some advantages like if you didn't design the layout properly is much more forgiving when joining track badly.

Either C or M turnouts can be controlled digitally without any problem. M can be bought very cheaply, it depends mainly on what you want to achieve. If spending more is not a problem and you want the trains to run the best they can, causing the least damage to the wheels I'll go for C for anything else M is a very good track, the majority of what I have is M. Buying the motors separately means paying less for the points -you may not want a motor- and if the motor goes faulty you only replace the motor and don't have to pay for a full turnout and motor.
Offline DB Fan  
#4 Posted : 28 June 2016 05:08:38(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
That is a good point. Now I have a different problem. I bought a marklin digital starter set 29247 with a mfx BR 24 with sound and MS. First I hooked it up to the m track tt layout I have. The engine didn't want to register or could be seen. Then I set up 2 feet of the c track that came with it and in a matter of a minute I was up and runningConfused . Then I connected the ms back to the m track. Set the engine on the terminal track and it fired right up and ran for about 5 inch to the end of the terminal track and stoppedMad . Why is it not running on the m track?
Offline Bigdaddynz  
#5 Posted : 28 June 2016 05:12:16(UTC)
Bigdaddynz

New Zealand   
Joined: 17/09/2006(UTC)
Posts: 18,661
Location: New Zealand
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Why is it not running on the m track?


Check that the M track feeder track does not have an interference suppression capacitor fitted, as these are known to interfere with the digital signal. You can simply unsolder the capacitor and remove it.
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by Bigdaddynz
Offline sjbartels  
#6 Posted : 28 June 2016 05:23:01(UTC)
sjbartels

United States   
Joined: 11/08/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by: Bigdaddynz Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Why is it not running on the m track?


Check that the M track feeder track does not have an interference suppression capacitor fitted, as these are known to interfere with the digital signal. You can simply unsolder the capacitor and remove it.


Good point, that's exactly what I did in regards to the capacitor.

I admit I had a copious amount of M track, well, I still do, but when I purchased my CS2 switched and started building up a supply of C track, which I regret in some ways, sure you have some greater flexibility in track sizes and radius with C track, but M track I think is a much more solid base, especially the switches and dealing with those horrible c track turn out motors. Converting a M track switch (or point in my "native" tongue") to digital control is easy using a K83 or M83 decoder so there is no limitation there. Personally now I am looking to incorporate my C and M track together, with the C track handling the more intricate parts and using the M track for my "hidden" track in tunnels and in yards for the switches which I think are more reliable in the longer term with the K83 and M83 decoders.
American by Geography, Australian by Birth. I am an original Ameristraylian
Offline sjbartels  
#7 Posted : 28 June 2016 05:27:09(UTC)
sjbartels

United States   
Joined: 11/08/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
\Why is it not running on the m track?


This also happened to me in the early stages as well with C track and M track, in my case the connection with the center rail tongue wasn't good enough, especially with the transition track (if you're using it), that's where it got me
American by Geography, Australian by Birth. I am an original Ameristraylian
Offline DB Fan  
#8 Posted : 28 June 2016 06:07:58(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Originally Posted by: Bigdaddynz Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Why is it not running on the m track?


Check that the M track feeder track does not have an interference suppression capacitor fitted, as these are known to interfere with the digital signal. You can simply unsolder the capacitor and remove it.


Will try that tomorrow. Thanks for the tip. But if this doesn't work I ditch digital, sell the set and stick with my original plan to build a analog layout.BigGrin
Offline applor  
#9 Posted : 28 June 2016 06:08:25(UTC)
applor

Australia   
Joined: 21/05/2004(UTC)
Posts: 1,653
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
The geometry and track pieces available for C track are far better. Of course K track is superior to them both.
modelling era IIIa (1951-1955) Germany
Offline sjbartels  
#10 Posted : 28 June 2016 06:11:37(UTC)
sjbartels

United States   
Joined: 11/08/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Bigdaddynz Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Why is it not running on the m track?


Check that the M track feeder track does not have an interference suppression capacitor fitted, as these are known to interfere with the digital signal. You can simply unsolder the capacitor and remove it.


Will try that tomorrow. Thanks for the tip. But if this doesn't work I ditch digital, sell the set and stick with my original plan to build a analog layout.BigGrin


I wouldn't go that far yet..... once you get over the initial things, it works great. I was analogue for 30 years before I made the switch and I was hesitant, and even ready to throw in the towel, but now I have gotten beyond those initial hiccups, no looking back!
American by Geography, Australian by Birth. I am an original Ameristraylian
Offline DB Fan  
#11 Posted : 28 June 2016 06:19:53(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Originally Posted by: sjbartels Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Bigdaddynz Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Why is it not running on the m track?


Check that the M track feeder track does not have an interference suppression capacitor fitted, as these are known to interfere with the digital signal. You can simply unsolder the capacitor and remove it.


Good point, that's exactly what I did in regards to the capacitor.

I admit I had a copious amount of M track, well, I still do, but when I purchased my CS2 switched and started building up a supply of C track, which I regret in some ways, sure you have some greater flexibility in track sizes and radius with C track, but M track I think is a much more solid base, especially the switches and dealing with those horrible c track turn out motors. Converting a M track switch (or point in my "native" tongue") to digital control is easy using a K83 or M83 decoder so there is no limitation there. Personally now I am looking to incorporate my C and M track together, with the C track handling the more intricate parts and using the M track for my "hidden" track in tunnels and in yards for the switches which I think are more reliable in the longer term with the K83 and M83 decoders.


My initial thought before I posted this, was to mainly use m track for the layout and use the c track for wider curves if that makes sense. With this post I wanted to see what everybody's opinion is between the 2 before I commit to the 1 or the other track . I really appreciate all the comments and I'm thankful for this forum and the great people here.
Robert
Offline DB Fan  
#12 Posted : 28 June 2016 06:32:29(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Originally Posted by: applor Go to Quoted Post
The geometry and track pieces available for C track are far better. Of course K track is superior to them both.


You are probably right. But I'm coming from DC and dcc and 1 of the reasons I switched to 3 rail and to m track was that I didn't like the track laying and everything that is involved with it . I'm looking for playability with my trains . I guess I'm just a big kid BigGrin
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by DB Fan
Offline NS1200  
#13 Posted : 28 June 2016 07:31:56(UTC)
NS1200

Netherlands   
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,443
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: applor Go to Quoted Post
The geometry and track pieces available for C track are far better. Of course K track is superior to them both.


You are probably right. But I'm coming from DC and dcc and 1 of the reasons I switched to 3 rail and to m track was that I didn't like the track laying and everything that is involved with it . I'm looking for playability with my trains . I guess I'm just a big kid BigGrin


It is C track for me for sure.

We are all big kids on this forum,but who cares?

Cheers,
Paul

Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare).
Offline Ian555  
#14 Posted : 28 June 2016 11:50:29(UTC)
Ian555

Scotland   
Joined: 04/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 20,235
Location: Scotland
Hi Robert,

Go looking for some 3900 curves to give you a larger radius for your M track layout, they are the most beautiful tracks Marklin have ever made...

Smile

Ian.

thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Ian555
Offline H0  
#15 Posted : 28 June 2016 12:02:32(UTC)
H0


Joined: 16/02/2004(UTC)
Posts: 15,254
Location: DE-NW
Originally Posted by: Iamnotthecrazyone Go to Quoted Post
For running quality C track is much better for looks I don't like it at all, if assembling and disassembling regularly when it gets old gets brittle and cracks.
They changed the formula and I don't have brittle C track from the last 12 years or so.

Both M track and C track can be ballasted to get a more realistic look.
Regards
Tom
---
"In all of the gauges, we particularly emphasize a high level of quality, the best possible fidelity to the prototype, and absolute precision. You will see that in all of our products." (from Märklin New Items Brochure 2015, page 1) ROFLBTCUTS
UserPostedImage
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by H0
Offline RayF  
#16 Posted : 28 June 2016 13:33:44(UTC)
RayF

Gibraltar   
Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15,838
Location: Gibraltar, Europe
I used M-track for many years. When I got a starter set about 15 years ago with C-track I used it at first as a test track, but when I experienced the superior running qualities of the trains on C-track I ripped up all my M-track and laid down a new C-track layout.

Having run my trains on C-track since then, my experience is that I get less derailments and smmother running, especially through turnouts. On the negative side I find that the track needs cleaning more often, but this might be related to digital operation vs analogue, rather than C-track vs M-track.

The turnout motors are a bit of a pain. Some of my motors have worked perfectly from day one and are still going strong, whereas some others have stopped working in one direction or both. I need to lift my track and bypass the end cut-off switches as I know now that this will cure the problem. Pity I didn't do it before I ballasted around my track! Meanwhile I get the motors to work again for a while by squirting them with WD40.

Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways
Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
Offline Danlake  
#17 Posted : 28 June 2016 14:49:45(UTC)
Danlake

New Zealand   
Joined: 03/08/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,571
I can only comment based on my own experience having a layout with mixed m, c and k tracks. All of them have its unique purpose and charm but if you are building a new layout and pro-typical long sweeping curves is not paramount, I would defintly recommend c tracks.

The electrical connections are inferior to any other tracks on the market. The outer rails are interconnected, so if one outer rail has lost its electrical continuity it will be bridge at the next track piece. With m or k track you will not get the electrical connection before the next feeder wire.

It's also a much quieter track than m tracks with k tracks being even more quiet.

It's very easy to lay the c tracks and it retains the geometry as it is rigid. With m and k track you can easily skew the layout.

It's very easy to do soldering on c tracks, more troublesome on m and almost impossible with k tracks.

I personally found that new c tracks were cheaper to buy than good quality second hand m tracks.

I also had lots of issues with derailment in m track turnout with various locos.

The only minus with c tracks is the turnout issues (but can be fixed with modifications) and some people find the profile of ballast to high.

Also see old post: https://www.marklin-user...2920_C-track-review.aspx

Brgds Lasse
Digital 11m2 layout / C (M&K) tracks / Era IV / CS3 60226 / Train Controller Gold 9 with 4D sound. Mainly Danish and German Locomotives.
Offline PMPeter  
#18 Posted : 28 June 2016 15:27:46(UTC)
PMPeter

Canada   
Joined: 04/04/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: Port Moody, BC
Originally Posted by: Danlake Go to Quoted Post
The electrical connections are inferior to any other tracks on the market. The outer rails are interconnected, so if one outer rail has lost its electrical continuity it will be bridge at the next track piece. With m or k track you will not get the electrical connection before the next feeder wire.

...

It's very easy to do soldering on c tracks, more troublesome on m and almost impossible with k tracks.


I assume you mean superior electrical connections for the C track rather than inferior. Also can you please explain why you say soldering on C track is easy? Isn't it the same stainless steel as for K-track?

Peter

Offline H0  
#19 Posted : 28 June 2016 17:18:20(UTC)
H0


Joined: 16/02/2004(UTC)
Posts: 15,254
Location: DE-NW
Originally Posted by: PMPeter Go to Quoted Post
Also can you please explain why you say soldering on C track is easy? Isn't it the same stainless steel as for K-track?
It is easy to solder cables to the flat connectors where the connector shoes are supposed to go. Easy to solder and completely hidden when installed.

Regards
Tom
---
"In all of the gauges, we particularly emphasize a high level of quality, the best possible fidelity to the prototype, and absolute precision. You will see that in all of our products." (from Märklin New Items Brochure 2015, page 1) ROFLBTCUTS
UserPostedImage
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by H0
Offline PMPeter  
#20 Posted : 28 June 2016 20:35:46(UTC)
PMPeter

Canada   
Joined: 04/04/2013(UTC)
Posts: 1,273
Location: Port Moody, BC
Originally Posted by: H0 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: PMPeter Go to Quoted Post
Also can you please explain why you say soldering on C track is easy? Isn't it the same stainless steel as for K-track?
It is easy to solder cables to the flat connectors where the connector shoes are supposed to go. Easy to solder and completely hidden when installed.



Thanks. If he is referring to the spade connectors, I totally agree.

However, then I disagree with his K track comment. I solder all my K track joints and thus can add a power feed by soldering the brown O to a rail joiner and the red B to a soldered centre rail connection. If he is referring to soldering to the SS rail for an isolation section then yes it is difficult without some special flux.

Peter
Offline applor  
#21 Posted : 29 June 2016 00:07:50(UTC)
applor

Australia   
Joined: 21/05/2004(UTC)
Posts: 1,653
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: applor Go to Quoted Post
The geometry and track pieces available for C track are far better. Of course K track is superior to them both.


You are probably right. But I'm coming from DC and dcc and 1 of the reasons I switched to 3 rail and to m track was that I didn't like the track laying and everything that is involved with it . I'm looking for playability with my trains . I guess I'm just a big kid BigGrin


Well if you are after track for a temporary table layout etc. to play with you can do that with K track too - you don't need to ballast it (though C track is far better for temporary layouts I agree)

If you want to build a proper layout, use pre-formed track bed/ballast from Merkur. Looks excellent, works great and requires little work.

I do like C track though. My dad has all C track and now that they have wide radius geometry points/curves its much more appealing than what it was. Love that they added R4/5 curved points.
The only things missing are flex track and the ballast looks fake/shiny for a professional layout - and if you ballast your C track you might as well use K track and gain the glorious benefit of flex.
Oh and the profile of C track ballast is a bit high for my liking.

modelling era IIIa (1951-1955) Germany
Offline DB Fan  
#22 Posted : 29 June 2016 01:54:08(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Thanks for your input applor. I do agree with you that k track is the better option for prototypical layout and having the options with the flex track. For me I like the sectional track better since I'm not going for prototypical. I'm going to build a permanent layout once I'm trough trying out and exploring the different options. Thanks for all the great info.
Robert
Offline DB Fan  
#23 Posted : 29 June 2016 02:09:01(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Good news. I replaced the feeder track with 1 that didn't have the interference capacitor and it works greatThumpUp . Now I hooked up some c track with transition pieces to the m track. Should not have done that.Tongue . You guys are correct. The c track is much quieter, smoother and the train runs also so much smoother over the switches. What a difference in the noise level when the train transitioned from m track to c track. Wow! Dang!! Now I have to decide if I sell all my m track or keep some for the shadow yard under the layout. Confused . Thanks a bunch. I did notice that when I ran the digital BR 24 the noise reduction was greater then with the analog BR 24 (3003).

Robert
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by DB Fan
Offline dickinsonj  
#24 Posted : 29 June 2016 03:41:29(UTC)
dickinsonj

United States   
Joined: 05/12/2008(UTC)
Posts: 1,676
Location: Crozet, Virginia
Originally Posted by: H0 Go to Quoted Post
They changed the formula and I don't have brittle C track from the last 12 years or so.

Same for me. I have set aside a good number of older sections of C track for breakage but nothing bought since the formula changed has ever broken and my layout gets packed away and put out often. Whenever I make a permanent layout I can still use it though, because it is primarily the female connectors under the track that break and it works fine if it is secured.

I started in M track but once I saw how my trains ran on C track I could never accept they way they ran on M track again. I am in the process of switching my yard out of M track and into C, which will make everything C track for me. K track is the best looking and runs beautifully but I can't really consider it at this point myself and I will no doubt stick with C track to save money for more fun purchases. Cool
Regards,
Jim

I have almost all Märklin and mostly HO, although I do have a small number of Z gauge trains!
So many trains and so little time.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by dickinsonj
Offline Danlake  
#25 Posted : 29 June 2016 04:18:32(UTC)
Danlake

New Zealand   
Joined: 03/08/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,571
Originally Posted by: PMPeter Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: H0 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: PMPeter Go to Quoted Post
Also can you please explain why you say soldering on C track is easy? Isn't it the same stainless steel as for K-track?
It is easy to solder cables to the flat connectors where the connector shoes are supposed to go. Easy to solder and completely hidden when installed.



Thanks. If he is referring to the spade connectors, I totally agree.

However, then I disagree with his K track comment. I solder all my K track joints and thus can add a power feed by soldering the brown O to a rail joiner and the red B to a soldered centre rail connection. If he is referring to soldering to the SS rail for an isolation section then yes it is difficult without some special flux.

Peter


Hi Peter,

Yes I was referring to the fact that, from Marklin design of K tracks, there is no easy way to solder feeder wires or contact wires onto the K tracks. Marklin recommends buying the small ugly clips, which itself is not having a soldering contact but only a spring connection.

The idea of soldering the rail joiners is of course good, however once the tracks are in place and ballasted it would be a major work should you wish to rip of some tracks as you need to change a turnout or if you suddenly realise you need to alter your layout plant slightly.

I also found it difficult to make random piece sections of contact track. The normal way of just installing plastic joiners in each end, means you have no were to solder a wire onto and you have to fit these small ugly clips. It's difficult as you say, without the right tools, to solder onto the k track.

Unless you are a serious model builder, who is making a permanent layout and knows the trick of the trade, I would recommend C tracks for any new hobbyist.

But I agree, ballasted k tracks looks awesome and more realistically, and each individual would have to find their own compromise.

Brgds Lasse
Digital 11m2 layout / C (M&K) tracks / Era IV / CS3 60226 / Train Controller Gold 9 with 4D sound. Mainly Danish and German Locomotives.
Offline sjbartels  
#26 Posted : 29 June 2016 04:51:21(UTC)
sjbartels

United States   
Joined: 11/08/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by: DB Fan Go to Quoted Post
Good news. I replaced the feeder track with 1 that didn't have the interference capacitor and it works greatThumpUp . Now I hooked up some c track with transition pieces to the m track. Should not have done that.Tongue . You guys are correct. The c track is much quieter, smoother and the train runs also so much smoother over the switches. What a difference in the noise level when the train transitioned from m track to c track. Wow! Dang!! Now I have to decide if I sell all my m track or keep some for the shadow yard under the layout. Confused . Thanks a bunch. I did notice that when I ran the digital BR 24 the noise reduction was greater then with the analog BR 24 (3003).

Robert


I am using my M track for my hidden areas, simply from a cost stand point. It is noisier yes, but I actually don't mind the noise
American by Geography, Australian by Birth. I am an original Ameristraylian
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by sjbartels
Offline xxup  
#27 Posted : 29 June 2016 05:50:42(UTC)
xxup

Australia   
Joined: 15/03/2003(UTC)
Posts: 9,457
Location: Australia
Trains ARE noisy in real life.. They go click-clack over the rail joins in real life - just like on m-track.. I don't understand the obsession with quiet trains.. To each their own I suppose.. RollEyes
Adrian
UserPostedImage
Australia flag by abFlags.com
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by xxup
Offline DB Fan  
#28 Posted : 29 June 2016 06:10:02(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
It's not about the train being quiet. I don't mind hearing the train going over the track and making some noise. But if you are running 2 trains and can't hear yourself think, then a little less noise goes a long way. BigGrin
Robert
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by DB Fan
Offline sjbartels  
#29 Posted : 29 June 2016 18:12:24(UTC)
sjbartels

United States   
Joined: 11/08/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,091
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
Trains ARE noisy in real life.. They go click-clack over the rail joins in real life - just like on m-track.. I don't understand the obsession with quiet trains.. To each their own I suppose.. RollEyes


That's how I see it as well, I enjoy the sound of a train in m track, I think it adds a dynamic of realism to it. I think the solonoid m track points are much more hardy as well, I have some that are over 30 years old from when I was starting out and they're still going strong, yet I've had to replace more than one c track turn out motor. In my hidden station it's going to be m track all the way because I don't have to hear tearing into it to replace, yet again, another turnout motor
American by Geography, Australian by Birth. I am an original Ameristraylian
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by sjbartels
Offline DB Fan  
#30 Posted : 29 June 2016 20:11:04(UTC)
DB Fan

United States   
Joined: 01/03/2016(UTC)
Posts: 265
Location: Colorado
Originally Posted by: sjbartels Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
Trains ARE noisy in real life.. They go click-clack over the rail joins in real life - just like on m-track.. I don't understand the obsession with quiet trains.. To each their own I suppose.. RollEyes


That's how I see it as well, I enjoy the sound of a train in m track, I think it adds a dynamic of realism to it. I think the solonoid m track points are much more hardy as well, I have some that are over 30 years old from when I was starting out and they're still going strong, yet I've had to replace more than one c track turn out motor. In my hidden station it's going to be m track all the way because I don't have to hear tearing into it to replace, yet again, another turnout motor


Thanks for bringing up this point. That seals it and I'm going forward with my original plan to use m track for the majority of the future layout and c track only for the wider radius curves. Tried that last night with the transition piece and works great. Thanks sjbartels I needed that info since I didn't have any experience with c track until 2 days ago. I also noticed ( as I mentioned before) that when I ran my analog engine over the test track you could barely here a difference in the noise level. So I guess noise is a mute point BigGrin with older engines.
Robert
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by DB Fan
Offline RayF  
#31 Posted : 29 June 2016 21:42:26(UTC)
RayF

Gibraltar   
Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15,838
Location: Gibraltar, Europe
With locomotives that are equipped with sound decoders it's particularly important for the loco to be as silent as possible, otherwise you struggle to hear the operating sounds over the racket of noisy motors, gears and track.

Those who are into classic Marklin in analogue operation will no doubt have a different set of priorities over those running the latest locos digitally with sound.
Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways
Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by RayF
Offline Minok  
#32 Posted : 30 June 2016 00:20:12(UTC)
Minok

United States   
Joined: 15/10/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,310
Location: Washington, Pacific Northwest
My view is that there is room for all 3 types of track on a layout.

M track is cheap to get and so ideal for hidden areas, so if you already have m track, use it for shadow stations and whatnot. You can replace it with C track later if you really want.

C track is great to get a layout up and decent looking and quiet (less metal) and less shorting issues (derail onto plastic, not metal). The wiring attache points under the bottom make it easy to connect things to and make detection sections by using very short pieces. By putting cutouts in the board on which turnouts sit (for permanent layouts of course) you can access switch motors and controllers from below without having to remove the track if need be. It can be additionally blasted and if the height is an issue, bring up the level of the ground by inserting foam board or other things to raise the ground up - problem solved. (See how Märklin of Sweden does his M tracks with foam holding the track - similar principle)

K track for those custom bits - and by this I mean flex-track exclusively. With the C-K transition pieces its easy enough to, where a longer run and space allows a customized curve, or where just joining up the geometry in the end can be facilitated with a bit of flex track.
Toys of tin and wood rule!
---
My Layout Thread on marklin-users.net: InterCity 1-3-4
My YouTube Channel:
https://youtube.com/@intercity134
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Minok
Offline dominator  
#33 Posted : 30 June 2016 02:12:06(UTC)
dominator

New Zealand   
Joined: 20/01/2015(UTC)
Posts: 1,195
Location: Kerikeri
Hi DB fan, I only have M. My permanent layout is laid on Pinex sheets [ a soft wall or ceiling board ] The trains run quietly on this unless you get them up to unrealistic speeds. As mentioned above, there are situatuions where tecnically the track wont line up, but you can adjust it and line it up with M track. When I first got my delta, then ms2, I had no problems running the digital on the M track. [ even with still only one power feed wire for a track the covers 14 feet by 4 feet including revese/ figure 8 loops with 5128 cross over. I know not ideal but there you go. ] I was going to change to K track but in the end decided to stay with m.
As for the points being a problem. Yes that is true. The cure is to tweek the little guide pcs to prevent the wheels climbing in top of the rails at the gaps in the points. Especially the double curve point [ switch ]

Dereck
Northland. NZ REMEMBER 0228 for ä
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by dominator
Offline Vitor M N Simões  
#34 Posted : 06 July 2016 13:52:55(UTC)
Vitor M N Simões


Joined: 04/07/2016(UTC)
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by: xxup Go to Quoted Post
M-track rules.. ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp ThumpUp

50+ years old and still going strong!

None of that namby-pampy plastic rubbish for me..

I have seen grown men cry trying to make contact rails on C-track..




What is supposed to do in order to avoid corrosion on M tracks?
I'm trying to use M, C and K series in the same diorama. The thirth rail is there to but same parts of the M produced before 1980 need some care.

Regards, Vítor
Offline Danlake  
#35 Posted : 07 July 2016 07:26:57(UTC)
Danlake

New Zealand   
Joined: 03/08/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,571
Hi Victor,

I think the main thing is to keep the air in your train room somewhat controlled, avoiding too much humidity and fluctuation in temperature.

If you have an uninsulated shed I would steer away from m tracks...

But here is what I did to preserve my second hand m tracks (and still no visible rust):

1. Use a rubber to clean any rust spot
2. Wash the the track (be more careful with switches) in warm dish wash water with a stiff nail brush.
3. Use compressed air to immediately dry the track
4. Wipe the whole track in a cloth that has a little bit of preservation oil (I used WD-40).
5. Clean the top of rails and studs with some cleaning solution (I used some alcohol based methylene).

You track will then be shinning as new!

Brgds Lasse
Digital 11m2 layout / C (M&K) tracks / Era IV / CS3 60226 / Train Controller Gold 9 with 4D sound. Mainly Danish and German Locomotives.
Offline GlennM  
#36 Posted : 07 July 2016 12:29:14(UTC)
GlennM

United Kingdom   
Joined: 09/05/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,877
Location: Somewhere, But Nowhere Near Manchester, England
For me personally it is no longer about rigid track systems, and I believe the best solution is a layout made from using the best of both C track and K track.

Incidentally, in the new Marklin 'The Track Plan Book- For HO Layouts over 3m / 10 ft long' - writer Klaus Eckert extols the virtues of combining both C and K systems to produce the "most productive solution for active model railroaders", he goes on to talk about the exact geometry of C track (with the wide turn-outs being singled out for praise), being combined with the seamless flowing beauty of K flex track.

I would also note from my own personal experience, that K track has to be well laid to be effective, and having said this I know of at least two recent occurrences where new Marklin models have encountered serious issues with K track turn outs and switches that have been well laid. In one instance the Marklin train had to be modified before it would run correctly.

I love M track and have several large boxes full of it in my garage, and whilst I will always have a love of this beautiful product, it is an old product, that has serious issues and which has now been technically surpassed. IMHO (and it is only my point of view), I think unless you are building a retro layout or a vintage classic from the old Marklin track plan books, there is little, if any, real benefit from building a new layout in M track.
Don't look back, your not heading that way.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by GlennM
Offline utkan  
#37 Posted : 07 July 2016 12:52:21(UTC)
utkan

Turkey   
Joined: 14/07/2009(UTC)
Posts: 19,116
Location: Istanbul,
UserPostedImage

...this layout has only M-Track...it has been in use since 2007....has not had a single problem due to M-Tracks...the only problem is the noise when you run more than five locos simultaneously.....LOL LOL ....has welcome BR 53, BR 45 , Swiss Ae 8/14 and recently Big Boy....LOL LOL
Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you...
thanks 10 users liked this useful post by utkan
Offline MalinAC  
#38 Posted : 07 July 2016 16:22:52(UTC)
MalinAC

Ireland   
Joined: 29/05/2014(UTC)
Posts: 839
Location: DONEGAL, CARNDONAGH
I love that layout. Its one of my favourites ThumpUp ThumpUp
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by MalinAC
Offline utkan  
#39 Posted : 07 July 2016 22:10:59(UTC)
utkan

Turkey   
Joined: 14/07/2009(UTC)
Posts: 19,116
Location: Istanbul,
Originally Posted by: MalinAC Go to Quoted Post
I love that layout. Its one of my favourites ThumpUp ThumpUp


As the expression goes Eddie, beauty is in the eye of beholder...Cool
Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you...
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by utkan
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

| Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.426 seconds.