DBT Track

When the track was laid on the temporary lift-out section between the new Staging Yard and Kelvin, I had my first opportunity to properly study the new Micro-Engineering code 70 track. Kelvin has ME code 55 flex, but when this track was discontinued, members of the HOn30 Mailcar arranged for a new batch of HOn30 flex to be made. I ordered a batch of code 55, but ultimately flex with that size rail was not manufactured, and I converted my order to code 70. As I laid the track I was immediately taken by the spacing between the ties (sleepers) which to my eye seemed to be very small. The old "exhibition" fiddle yard had a mixture of track - some Peco N-scale, some European N-scale and Peco OO9 "crazy track". I found my last remaining length of Micro-Engineering code 55 and took this comparison photo. The tie spacing was measured, with the following results. (Note, the N-scale track is measured at 1:87 - HO scale - for this exercise). Peco N-scale 16.5" spacing Fleischmann N-scale 17.5" spacing Peco OO9 Crazy track 29" spacing M-E code 55 22" spacing M-E code 70 17.5" spacing The measurements show that the new Micro-Engineering flex has tie spacing which almost matches the N-scale flex exactly. A quick scan through my research materials shows that US Mainline tie spacing is 22"-23" - that's standard gauge mainline. The 3' gauge White Pass & Yukon specified 2978 ties to the mile - a spacing of 21". Did the Maine two-footers really use a tie spacing which was 5" less than stabdard gauge main lines? Less than the 3' gauge WP&Y? Experience here in Australia would indicate that the heavily-trafficed sugar cane railways in Queensland would tend to have spacing of 24" or greater. It would appear I have a big decision. Use the M-E flex track and accept larger rail than I wish, and tie spacing which looks more like N-scale, or handlay all my track and dispose of my M-E flex. Decisions....

Last updated 04-Feb-01

Back to the DBT page