# Track recomendations for commerical use



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

I have an opportunity to replace approximately two 130’ mainline loops of track at a McDonald’s restaurant. The track is an overhead suspended system comprised of sectional brass pieces, the two loops are side by side without crossovers. The existing track system is about nine years old it was suggested and operates for 12 hours on a daily basis. The railhead is worn down considerably and many curved pieces have had to be replaced to date. Not sure of the brand track in play (looked like USAT) but will investigate further when I return their Bridgewerks 200 twin control power supply I repaired this afternoon.

I don’t have ANY experience with wearing out track of any material or offering. Looking for recommendations based on long term durability. I assume some OEM track is comprised of better metallurgy than others…

Does stainless track hold up better than brass?

Is stainless harder on locomotive drivers and car wheel sets? I’ve had to replace all of the drivers on their gaggle of USAT and LGB equipment due to excessive wear, the rail head is partly to blame and I assume the continuous running of the equipment is the latter.

I’m also considering using flex track verses sectional pieces, I haven’t made any price comparisons yet but was thinking it was more economical and offered less chances for electrical losses and track fitment issues.

Your thoughts and experience is greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Michael Glavin


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes and yes. 

Stainless holds up better and it is harder and apparently it wears more on loco drivers and wheelsets. 

Once your rail head gets bad, it will really help eat up wheels. 

Yes, use flex track for exactly the reasons you cited. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## NTCGRR (Jan 2, 2008)

I have done two public layouts, small, but SS and ,,,track power is the way to go. ( yes I said that Greg. LOL ) 
If you have to have tight curves use short engiines and short cars.


----------



## denray (Jan 5, 2008)

I was at the East coast show and talked to ,Forget his name, the German guy at Train-Li they recomend i believe it is called nickel plated brass. One of the guys working in his booth told me that he took out all his Stainless track sold it on Ebay for 10 dollars per foot bought this nickel plated brass for 8.00 perft. He said the conductivity is much better than SS but does not get any oxidation or corode. 
He said the first year he cleaned the track at the beginning of the year and ran all year without cleaning it, and only has one connection on a 300 ft loop. 
I bought a box to install a loop for my granddaughter Thomas the Train. 
I do not know if it is true it sure sounds good for track power outside. 
Dennis


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

Posted By denray on 11 Apr 2012 07:41 PM 
I was at the East coast show and talked to ,Forget his name, the German guy at Train-Li they i believe it is called nickel plated brass. One of the guys working in his booth told me that he took out all his Stainless track sold it on Ebay for 10 dollars per foot bought this nickel plated brass for 8.00 perft. He said the conductivity is much better than SS but does not get any oxidation or corrode. 
He said the first year he cleaned the track at the beginning of the year and ran all year without cleaning it, and only has one connection on a 300 ft loop. 
I bought a box to install a loop for my granddaughter Thomas the Train. 
I do not know if it is true it sure sounds good for track power outside. 
Dennis Hi Deniis, 
I was the person you were talking to about our Nickel plated brass track, Axel is the owner and German guy of Train Li USA, lol.

I would highly our NPB track for is great conductivity and almost zero maintanence. I did replace all my aristo Stainless with the Train Li nickel plated brass track and have never looked back.
I have about 700 feet total outside with two loops, and 11 switches I run only one feeder per loop on each end of the layout with zero issues. I also use our NPB rail clamps throughout with
NOALOX applied at every rail joining, which I also highly recommend for increased conductivity and reduced maintenance. 
Last year I added about another 200ft with the extension from the layout into the basement. There are 3 switches inside and 3 35 foot parking sidings.
I did not add any feeders for that entire addition it gets it power from the main layout through our Pro-Line NPB R10/R7 custom curved switch.
It has been outside now for almost 2 years and it has required almost zero upkeep, save the errant leaf or twig removal.
It has been in use on commercial layouts in Germany for many years with no problems. 
It shares SS tracks no/low maintenance qualities, but exceeds SS track in lower cost, higher conductivity, and ease of installation.

I know you will love your new track Dennis, be sure to pass you experience on to your friends









Ron

here is a pic of my layout ;


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I would not recommend any plated material for a commercial layout, because you WILL wear through the plating... the mere fact that you wore the brass down proves that the wear on a commercial layout is much higher than a home layout. 

Conductivity is not an issue, i.e. that the brass inside the plating is a better conductor, because you are not going to have high currents and long feeders on your commercial layout. It's a non-issue here and most layouts. The major components of power loss occurs in the joiners, not the rail. 

I also question that the nickel plated brass is cheaper than Aristo SS rail. 

One thing that would be good to do on a commercial layout would to be to try to equalize wear... but you normally use a simple loop here... If you could run the train in the other direction, you would probably get longer total run time, but having the loco reverse direction would entail switches, an added wear and maintenance point. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

The track has been in use in Germany for many years on huge commercial layouts.

Rail material doesn't matter for conductivity purposes?









If you can buy a box of stainless steel flex track for $380, today, then yes the price is the same. 

Ron


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

I like the idea of the Nickel plated track but as Greg suggested the plating presents a conundrum with regard to the durability of same. If the locomotives in play have a tendency to wear through the plating on the drivers and the railhead has literally wore down to maybe 30% of its original height as I alluded to above plated track won’t be plated for long me thinks… Running trains twelve hours per day, every day obviously has to present some issues with regard to wear and remember this is a small 120’ loop so the rolling stock transverses the rail loop thousands of time per day! Considering twelve hours is 6720 minutes and the train can make the loop in one minute or less, do the math were talking about some serious run time as compared to our hobby empires…

Reversing the direction of travel to alleviate wear in one direction of travel has been recommended, I suggested they do this routinely; of course someone has to physically relocate the locomotive and caboose to the opposite end of the train but in the scheme of things this allows them to mix up the use of the locomotives too.

I wonder if the increased durability of stainless track; which apparently presents increased wear of the drivers and rolling stock wheel sets is a good trade-off? So in other words is minimizing the rail wear with stainless track to whatever degree is realized in a like period of time a good fiscal approach if the cost of rolling stock maintenance is increased substantially? I suspect the answer to this question is going to be a bit elusive...

Michael


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Quick question. Have you checked the for wear on the locomotive wheels? When I worked for a LHS, we serviced a similar set up, and one of the locomotives had literally worn down the wheel, and the flange was paper thin, I recall the groove in the wheel was something like 1/16" thick, and exactly the width of the rail head. They too had problems with the inside of the rails being worn down. I think what we did was move the outside rail to the inside, and the inside to the outside. I think it was flex track so it was easier to do this... But I could be wrong this was quite a while ago. 

Craig


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Craig, 

The predominate wear on the drivers is of the outside diameter and the flange has some wear to as you note. In this case the rail head is so severely worn down reversing the rail is not applicable. By reversing the direction of operation I hope to balance out the wear of the drivers’ flanges; that said the rail is on its own.

Michael


----------



## jake3404 (Dec 3, 2010)

Michael, 

Is it possible to add a siding to the layout? It would be helpful, because you could have a train setup to run in the opposite direction. Then they alternate the trains and reduce wear on the trains. The track will still be an issue. 

My $0.02 on the track is go with the Stainless Steel. It is a much harder material than the Nickle plated brass. It will resist the wear much more.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Michael, believe it or not, it might be worth the effort to apply some lubricant to the wheels/flanges, as in the flange lubricators in real trains. 

I don't know how you could automate it, maybe like those commercial deoderizers that squirt a bit of air freshner every few minutes from a spray can, and put a can of the CRC32 (or 23, can't remember) and put a dab on the rails. 

If this is a flat layout without a lot of cars, the loss in traction should be acceptable. 

I've never seen anyone really analyze, or have real long term data on tradeoff on track vs. wheels, but my first take is that repairing the loco and changing out rolling stock wheels has to be a lot easier and cheaper than replacing rails that are in the middle of a commercial estabilishment, up high. 

Greg


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg you got me thinking about reducing friction on the drivers. My first thought was go brass to minimize wear on the drivers compared to SS, but maybe the fact that SS is more slippery than brass would mean that the wear is a lot less than one would expect. 

Keith


----------



## adelmo (Jan 2, 2008)

I would avoid SS and go brass for indoor commercial use. The brass will require a track cleaning car and some maintenance. 
The SS will chew up parts and maintenance costs will be high for engines and cars. 
Piko has best price for quality brass rail right now. 

Alan


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I have heard all kinds of stories about SS wearing everything more than brass. I would also assume Nickel plated anything would be in the same class too. 

I have not experienced any worse wear than any of my friends, in fact less, but I've heard all the stories. 

I believe that there's all kinds of variables that affect wheel wear, for example grit on the rails... I don't have any, I keep the rails very clean, just like being indoors. 

The stainless is definitely more slippery, and of course does not oxidize. Oxidized brass is not slippery at all. 

I just did not want to get into a war with those people who swear stainless is way worse on wearing down wheels. 

With track prices so high, it seems that bachmann wheelsets and some new driver wheels are cheaper than replacing all the rail. 

But, again, I have not done a detailed comparison. 

Greg


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

Speaking of Mc Donald's There was one that was near Knots Berry Farm. Just off the 91. It had a LGB train suspended from the ceiling. It also had the Cog Rail road in it. It use to be featured in the LGB Catalog. I wonder if that is still in operation 

JJ


----------



## adelmo (Jan 2, 2008)

I have heard all kinds of stories about SS wearing everything more than brass. 

My response was based on installer's experience at the Bagger Dave's restaurant chain in Michigan. The trains run non-stop open to close. 

Alan


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

I haven’t had any personal experience running trains on stainless track, but have noted others suggesting it’s harder on drivers and wheel sets. And I can offer this; I purchased another AML K4 for a bashing project and was told that it had only been run a few hours… Well it looked like it had been run hard and put away wet… I asked the seller to confirm the run time he stated again only a few hours and qualified the statement with the adage that he used stainless track and this was atypical wear because of same. I found it hard to believe the gentleman holding the beast in my hands, I even asked another friend for his opinion and he thought it looked pretty well used too. We all know the seller and his word seems to carry some weight so I took it with the proverbial grain of salt and moved passed my disbelief.
I’ll post some pictures of the drivers to share the experience.

I like the lubricating idea, but suspect it might be implausible in this circumstance.

I was told today that at some juncture they ran an LGB track grinder on occasion until such time it exited the railway and experienced the effects of gravity. I suppose it’s a viable conclusion that the track grinder may have contributed to the railhead wear, unfortunately I can’t validate the intervals and or run time of the grinders operation.

I was pondering the concept that the eight or nine years life of said brass track with trains operating twelve hours a day wasn’t all that bad in the scheme of things. Perhaps this is an acceptable time frame and the track could be looked at as a consumable and budgeted for replacement.

Michael


----------



## NYC Buff (Sep 21, 2008)

Raihead wear is a standard phenomenon in the real world and can be quantified in actual values. What is the loss in head section height and width? Measurement of the worn head section should tell the loss rate when divided by the time interval in years, days, hours, minutes or seconds. The loss is the difference between the measured values for height and width and the nominal values for the railhead height and width. Yes there is a small error resulting from the use of manufacturer's nominal values. This method will tell you the life expectancy of the rail chosen given the materials are the same. 

In order of durability based on my materials engineering experience, I would opine that 300 series stainless steel would exhibit greatest durability in terms longevity of service, nickel plated brass would be next most durable, nickel silver rail would be next, steel nickel plated, steel, then plain brass depending on alloy type and least durable aluminum again alloy dependent. A careful study using failure mode analysis and cause and effects analysis would further illuminate the circumstance as to how rail erosion occurs and the rates at which it occurs. 

To this point in this discussion, I have not seen any attempt to use data to speak to the issue other that by Greg Elmassian. I have offered an opinion regarding wear but it is based on considerable experience in materials testing and failure mode analysis of materials including metals. 

Perhaps it would be wise to determine the facts of the issue and allow good science and engineering to offer the proper conclusion rather than opinion not supprted by substantive data. 

Respectfully, 
NYC Buff


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I will add, just for another data point, that LGB did indicate that their track cleaning loco (not really a grinder ha ha) was not to be used on their nickel plated track. 

No way to compare the quality and thickness of the LGB plated track and the Train-Li track, but since they APPEAR to be from the same vendor (at least the same region of europe), this should be a consideration of what not to use when cleaning plated track. 
i 
Also interesting data point from Michael in that apparently that track cleaning loco was used on this layout. You would think with such constant usage (and I'll also ask Michael to confirm if the locos had sliders) that track oxidation must have been minimal. 

So, either there was some accumulation on the rails (like the carbon dust we find on all track types on powered layouts), or that the conductivity of the wheels and/or pickups worsened. 

My experience with a number of locos is that almost all are using plated wheels, and when the plating wears, their conductivity suffers (meaning their ability to pick up power from the rails). 

What happens has a lot to do with the base metal, of course, so more variables here. 

An interesting situation, and whatever is decided, it will be informative to see how it "wears". 

Regards, Greg 

p.s. Michael, I know how much that loco was run, and early in it's ownership, the owner did comment to me that the plating on the wheels seemed to wear prematurely. Mine has been run much more, and on stainless, and has no such accelerated wear. We were all told (by the advertisement) that these were stainless steel tires. I'm not sure that is true.


----------



## Randy Stone (Jan 2, 2008)

If you consider the labor cost of replacing the rail to the cost of most small locos, I think the harder stainless steel is by far the better choice. 

Switching out a loco has very little labor hours involved.


----------



## jake3404 (Dec 3, 2010)

I cant attest to the cleanliness of the track in Large Scale. But I am involved in an HO layout that is located in a casino that is available to be run when ever the casino is open. This means it is open from about 7:00AM to 2:00AM. Granted it isnt running constantly because a person has to deposit 50 cents to get it to run, but we have monitored how much it runs and it is running a lot. If I remember correctly about 70-80% of the time the casino is open. 

The problem we had was the Nickle Silver rail was wearing out also. What we found was: when we initially got the layout running, we put a track cleaning car in each train. So, when the train was running it would clean the track. This was one of those simple abrasive pads type that rests on the rails underneath a car. This wore down the railheads within 3 years. We had to go back and replace all the mainline track as it was about 30% left. What we discovered is we were overcleaning our track. Since the cleaning car was running everytime the trains ran, it slowly ground down the track. We then went to someone placing the cleaning car in the trains on Wed. and then taking them out on Fri. This would give a couple days of cleaning and then we would be good. What we discovered is, the track really didnt get all that dirty. Since the trains were almost constantly running, the rails stayed clean. It was the constant pounding of the wheels on the rails that kept things clean. 

We stopped using a track cleaning car and found that about every 4-6 months someone would come in and run a track cleaning car on the rails a few times around the layout. Even then the rails werent all that dirty. This is what we came up with. As far as the result transfering to large scale, I'm not sure.


----------



## stevedenver (Jan 6, 2008)

no scientific date here 
but i have used track lubricant a few times, 
when running my LGB mogul, 2018, early version , on ....R1-on a temp indoor layout-becuase this earliest version was a bit stiff in the chassis 


lube helps -i observed the loco slowing less on the curves--i tried lgb smoke fluid as well as a super light Wahl clipper oil 

a downside, fwiw, is that lube makes the track dirty-it the oxidation and oil film collects on the railhead-so imho its one maintenance cost for another 
one swipe with a clean cloth will show what i speak of 

i think, if i were undertaking this project would be to have, as mentioned, short stock, light loads, metal ballbearing wheels 

i would think that the stainz, 2017, and 2090 shoema LGB engines would provide long life and reliability, as well as having affordable back up locos on hand 
i cant really think of anything US , other than the 2063 davenport, or even the WPY diesel (which has offset posts on the trucks that allows superb R1 performance-but the loco is not short)


----------



## Bob in Kalamazoo (Apr 2, 2009)

Just to add another bit of experience. I take care of the maintenance of an over the head G gauge railroad at a local restaurant. They have two LGB diesels that they change out occasionally. Between the sliders on the LGB locos and a green scotch bright pad the track never needs hand cleaning. This has been in operation for at least 15 years and the track has never needed replacing. It’s brass track. The trains do not run continuously, but they do run a lot. I have had to do some minor work on the diesels, but I have never replaced the wheels. Wheels might have needed replacing years ago, but not in recent years.
Bob


----------



## Dick413 (Jan 7, 2008)

disney uses brass LGB and there layout runs all most 12hrs a day 7 days a week only time seen it down was when a hurricane took it out


----------



## Bob in Kalamazoo (Apr 2, 2009)

Let me add something to my post from yesterday. I'm thinking (just a guess) that maybe the cooking oil that gets on everything, coats the sides of the rails and the flanges and lubricates then so there is less wear. The sliders and scotch bright pad keep the top of the rails clean so there are no pickup problems. 
Bob


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 11 Apr 2012 10:49 PM 
I would not recommend any plated material for a commercial layout, because you WILL wear through the plating... the mere fact that you wore the brass down proves that the wear on a commercial layout is much higher than a home layout. 

Conductivity is not an issue, i.e. that the brass inside the plating is a better conductor, because you are not going to have high currents and long feeders on your commercial layout. It's a non-issue here and most layouts. The major components of power loss occurs in the joiners, not the rail. 

I also question that the nickel plated brass is cheaper than Aristo SS rail. 

One thing that would be good to do on a commercial layout would to be to try to equalize wear... but you normally use a simple loop here... If you could run the train in the other direction, you would probably get longer total run time, but having the loco reverse direction would entail switches, an added wear and maintenance point. 

Regards, Greg Greg:

Even the best guys can be wrong. Pure Nickel plated track has been around for years. Long before LGB came out with it Thiel has brought Nickel plated material to the market. Nickel is much harder than Brass, and its wear i have seen only commercial layout with 10 years + impact, but only in narrow curves. We have a garden center nearby and their rail heads are worn down in R1 curves, and in sections where kids had thrown branches on the track and the loco started grinding in a single position on the track. But to repair these are a couple of dollars of new rail.

Does stainless wear less then pure Nickel, maybe ( I haven't done the test, but neither do you own a single piece of Nickel plated Brass track), but here is the flip side, I rather repair a foot of track then exchange often my wheels on my locomotives. It is no secret that the wheels wear in stainless curves (the narrow ones which I talked about above) much quicker than on Brass. A couple of power trucks can easily set you further back than a foot or two of rail.

The huge commercial layouts in Germany based on the Nickel plated quality just show after many year some very little wear in the narrower curves and none in the other section.

You are more than welcome to travel there, and see for yourself.

A commercial builder here in MA has now 3 Seasons behind him and this with narrow curves, and the engines (Aristo and USA Trains) show sign of wear, not the track


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I think the question is replacing (you can't repair worn out track) track or replacing wheels. 

I notice you don't say whether nickle is harder than stainless steel. Good, because both of them are much harder than brass. 

So back to how you make a decision. 

You say you rather repair one foot of track than replace wheels. I don't buy that this is the situation. You are implying that nickle does not wear the wheels. How can you say this? Nickle is hard and that is why it can survive as a thin plating on brass. Otherwise your nickle plated brass would be no good. 

So, since we have established that nickle is harder than brass, now you maintain that it wears the wheels less than brass? 

completely impossible logic... harder rail must wear wheels more. 

So back to the question, do you want to have more wear on the wheels or track. 

I maintain that the rails will wear more in the curves (of course) and for an 130 foot loop, and for a few cars and a small loco, I'd not risk the investment (stainless or plated brass) of the track, which is MUCH more than the cost of a few wheels. 

Now, where is my logic faulty? 

Greg


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

I guess you were in a rush. Nothing waht you are saying in your post has anything to do with what I said.









Why don't you re-read my post one more time - slowly.

I only talk about wheels once and that in conjunction with stainless steel.

What I try debunked was your earlier statement that that Nickel Plated Brass wears to quickly.

Any yes Nickel being a very hard metal and I beleive almost as hard (or even equal) to Stainless steel in our application wheels may were equally quicker on stainless steel and on Nickel plated Brass. But that being the case you are the one who tried to build the case for stainless steel and trashed the Nickel plated track.

Your post seems to alledge that you might actually agree that stainless steel and Nickel plated brass have the same lasting quality (for all pratical purposes).

Then we are in agreement. That was quick enough.


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

Axel,

I’m glad you piped in… 

Is the “pure nickel plated brass track” using a superior plating material than what is typical of drivers and such, is the plating cross section thicker; again than we see of drivers? 

The AML K4 drive with two hour's run time on stainless track below.

Michael


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Axel, I just tried to bring the thread back to the op's question. 

Yes I would say that from a practical perspective, from the basic research I have done and from my experience with nickel plating and stainless track, that they are of the same hardness class as opposed to brass. 

All that said, I would not want nickel plated rail on a commercial layout where it's just round and round, and basically no maintenance until the trains don't run right. 

For me, I would not want the possibility of wearing through the plating. It WILL wear, just as everything will, there is no indestructible material in the world, even Superman has his weaknesses. 

How long will the plating last? Well, that's open to debate. How long will stainless steel rail last? Longer than the plating on the plated rail. 

Is replacing some wheels cheaper than replacing all the rail? Of course. How long will it take to wear wheels out? Dunno. 

In any case SOMETHING will wear out, and from all the experience that has been presented on this forum over the last 5 or 10 years (don't remember how long it's been in existance), brass rail will wear down JUST AS PRESENTED by the op in this kind of application. 

So I don't recommend brass rail because the total cost to replace exceeds the cost of a new train. 

How much faster will the wheels of a loco and cars wear on SS or Nickel-plated track? Dunno. 

How confident am I that the nickel plated track will last XX years? I don't have enough information, but if it was ME making the decision for this case, where the amount of wear has been seen, I would go with solid stainless. 

That's my opinion. 

Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

There's another element in this discusion that's been over looked. 
I suspect that the plating is smoother, closer to a polished look and thus will cause less wheel wear. The Aristo Stainless I have down has a rough when compared to a polished, surface. It's bound to eat wheel treads much faster. 
So for a slightly weaker track, nickel plate might add years to the rolling stock and a biz just might appreciate a balanced wear.... 

Happy Rails 

John


----------



## NYC Buff (Sep 21, 2008)

Gentlemen, 

Electroplated metals tend generally to have smoother surfaces than non-plated base metals. The type of Nickel electrodeposition system will determine the physical properties of the Nickel electrodeposit. Most Nickel Plating Baths have organic chemicals added to improve brightness and leveling (smoothness). These comments are not opinions. They are facts than can be verified by refering to any number of texts on electrodeposition. The thickness of the deposit will determine the time related durability under the varying wear conditions experienced on model railroad irrespective of gauge and scale. Pure Nickel will wear somewhat better than stainless steel. The caveat though is the electrodeposited film thickness. Once compromised the electrodeposit will flake at edges of the wear areas and become the source of unwanted particles of Nickel Metal that will act as abrasive grains. 

As to the wear of wheels that are "plated," the term plating is somewhat the misnomer. The blackening agents normally used are phoshates, chromates or metal oxides deposited by chemical replacement reaction in conjunction with suitable for the circumstance organic dyes that leave black deposits. These depoits are normally quite thin (less than 20 microns [500 microinches]. They are also discontinuous and weakly adherent to the base metal. They are not usually intended for use in wear circumstances but are for cosmetic purposes and some corrosion protection. These comments are also not opinions. They can be verified by reference to suitable texts on "plated" or chemically deposited films. 

Tribology also suggests that the smoother a surface the less abrasive character it has. A measure of surface smoothness is its reflectivity (mirrorlike character). Brightness is also a measure of surface smoothness. 

These comments are science and technology used to understand observed conditions and failure modes. This understanding is only superficial as it does not detail the failure mode type, its frequency of occurence and the underlying cause and effect relationships as well as quantifying data. It is a meager start but a start none-the-less. 

Respectfully, 

NYC Buff


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Good info NYC. John, there were batches of Aristo stainless with a rough surface. All mine is mirror smooth (unfortunately) and requires extra head end power to run trains up the steep grades. 

You were just lucky to get the rough finished stuff in my opinion. Is it smoother now, or has it retained it's roughness? 

I heard people complained and they made the smooth finish. 

Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Since I haven't run anything harder over it, it's the same and I suspect it's the smoother variety as I've bought more track over the years. My statement was it's 'rough compared to plating', due to my knowledge of plating characteristics.... I'm an old gold and silver smith, I've polished my share of metal. I also did some electroplating. 

John


----------



## Axel Tillmann (Jan 10, 2008)

To answer another question regarding the electrolytic plating. Not all plating is equal and not all base metals take various plaiting's equally.

In case of the shown drivers of an Aristocraft engine, I am certain that it doesn't even start to compete with the plating we are used on LGB wheels for example. In a Christmas layout here in Boston (admitted with some insane narrow curves) the USA Trains engines ground down their drivers in about 1 week, while the LGB engines didn't show any signs (and of course neither did the track). 

Nickel doesn't adhere to Brass as well as to Copper, that's why ProLine products are first copper plated and then Nickel plated!

But the entire wear question is exaggerated. I have seen commercial layouts with LGB Brass 10+ years old where the rail heads only become thinner in the curves that were basically R1. I couldn't identify measurable wear on the straight and large curves. But a word of caution, not all Brass is equal to that regard. I have seen Brass track that was used in a Christmas layout and it was everywhere worn within 2 weeks. Why, they removed one metal for Zink and the alloy become so much softer. It makes the rail lighter and weaker.

We all need to appreciate that for rail the manufacturing location plays basically no role in the final price. Therefore there is no advantage in producing in China. Brass rail is extruded brass wire. THis is a 100% machine process. The cost of the raw material is based on the world market price because it is a highly competed commodity. The less copper is in the Brass the cheaper it gets (Zinc and Lead and common filler metals). The high end Brass is actually not found in China and they would have to import it from Germany, which would make the cost of an equal quality product more expensive that high quality Brass rail from Germany.

And yes even the best plated drivers will were a thousand+ times faster than the track because how many revolutions does it take to go around 500' of track during which time the drivers are constantly on the track while they are always at a different piece of track. Many engines with long commercial running times (even LGB) show wear on the drivers, including the above mentioned one. Now you could switch to stainless steel drivers and car axles to reduce the wear, but most people are afraid of the expenses and not all engines have this alternative available.


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

Contact Paul Busse at Applied Imagination. He does gorgeous commercial stuff all the time.

Applied Imagination


----------



## Glockengineer (Jun 4, 2015)

Ron, is there a way to get the details of your layout ? I would love to duplicate that layout in my back yard.
Thank you, Ken


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Ron who?

Realize you resurrected a 3 year old thread.

And it's about track.

No Ron posted on this page.

Greg


----------



## Homo Habilis (Jul 29, 2011)

*Zombie's live!*

Perhaps he is referring to Ron, aka BodsRailRoad.


----------



## Jerry McColgan (Feb 8, 2008)

It may be an old topic but the topic is as valid today as it was when started.

I have never put a lot of use on my layouts but a friend has plus I have purchased a lot of heavily used LGB brass track through Ridge Road years ago that came from a commercial layout in a grocery store.

I still have the boxes Ridge Road shipped that track to me in. The inside of the LGB boxes is BLACK. I presume this is from carbon brushes etc. but I don't know.

My outside layouts have been up since the introduction of Aristo Stainless track & turnouts and LGB Nickel Plated brass turnouts. I can say that weather wise all of the track and ties are still in great shape. The Aristo ties were free replacements for Aristo old ties that had weathered poorly but Aristo honored their lifetime warranty and replaced all of it free (48 boxes).

Between Al and myself I have found:

1. the LGB brass track from the commercial operation was very significantly worn. The inside head of the rails on the R3 curves was completely gone. The inside of the curves had MUCH greater wear than the straight track. The top of all of the rails had significant wear. When I reused the track I found profile of the ends did not fit well with new or newer LGB brass track. There were significant differences between the head top and inside head mismatching. You could hear the click when rolling stock crossed over from worn to unworn track. There were also spots where their LGB Track Cleaning Loco had hung up for some reason and ground deep curves into the top of the rails making that section unusable.

I don't know anything about the locos used but I would bet that they had a LOT LESS wear than if they had been running on stainless track.

To get maximum use out of that track I recurved the curved track in the opposite direction putting the inside worn heads to the outside. There was still some head left on the straight sections so I used them but tried to join them with similarly worn tracks. 

I ended up using most of the heavily worn track on sidings to park trains on or on storage shelves to park rolling stock not currently in use.

2. Stainless track caused more wear on LGB trains where the LGB locos and some rolling stock had LGB plated brass wheels. Al's LGB locos literally had grooves worn into the loco's plated brass drivers.

I suspect the reverse is also true - that Aristo and Bachmann etc. locos and rolling stock with steel wheels will cause a lot more wear on brass track than on stainless track (especially on curves and on R1 turnouts etc.). 

I don't have an opinion on what others have posted. I think it is all good information to have.

In my case I am glad I bought and used LGB brass track where I did (indoors) and I am glad I bought and used Aristo stainless track and Aristo stainless turnouts where I did (outdoors) and I am glad I bought LGB Nickel Plated turnouts where I did (outdoors). I have no opinion on anything else because I have no experience (good or bad) with anything else.

Generally speaking my LGB trains run indoors on LGB brass track and my Aristo & USA trains run outside on Aristo stainless track.

For me the key words of this topic are "Commercial Operation."

Jerry


----------

