Todays track. Manufacturing.

[Philip-356002]

todays track

In the day I liked the series 4 track

It's construction was sterdier.

The hieght. Of the rail from the track fixings was better.. rolling stock. Had a better flange to keep it on the track..

Coaches.and .goods trucks were heavier to be better graffity. holding .

------------------

The wheels on today's track is practically touching the track fixing . And fish plates . Rolling stock as a tendency to be to light. So they derail lot.

Todays track rail. falls apart .very easy

Rendering the track useless. So it becomes a throw away throw away

Specially the flexie track.

-----------------------

If this is track scale they using today. What people like

I can't say I like it. Certainly not for track and it's wheel flangers that go with it..

Mod note - your four other duplicate posts were rejected. You only need to press post once.

[Rallymatt]

Not sure what you are doing with your track but I have never had any of those issues with any track in OO or now TT:120 in past 40 years!

[Yelrow]

very odd. I have been using flexi and fixed track for as many years as previous poster, as well. Never had any problems. Flexi is always excellent, and i rarely suffer derailments. Tis true that Dublo metal track was and still is, very well made.

[ntpntpntp]

Yes the ancient Series 3 and Super 4 track was thick and sturdy for kid's train sets (I had it in the 60s and 70s) but very much over-scale.

Today's track looks much better, has a wider range of pointwork, and as the others have said it's perfectly sturdy and the vast majority of stock will run on it. The finer scale code 75 stuff is perhaps not so good for very old stock as deep flanges can bump along the bottom, but the track itself is still strong. As long as the flanges aren't bottoming out on the chairs and the back-to-back measurements work with the point frogs and crossings then it's not a problem.

I've had no problems with flimsy track in several decades of railway modelling in a range of scales from Z to G and mostly flexi track, so not sure what you've been doing with yours? grinning

I do agree that some modern rolling stock is a bit light-weight but they still run fine. N gauge is my main theme and British models have always been lighter than the European ones I focus on. The trend toward DCC and sound means more space is required within locos, leading to lower chassis block weight and reduced haulage capability.

[The Doc]

My brother and I managed to break many a Triang super 4 track point in our time, and even with those huge flanges we had plenty of derailments. We were just children playing with toy trains which weren't as robust as some like to think.

I much prefer modern track (especially as it is nickel silver). I still get some derailments but that is mostly due to baseboards that are not 100% flat. Yes, it can be frustrating that certain locos and rolling stock are poorly designed/manufactured and more prone to derailing (e.g. the front bogies and pony trucks on some steam locos, the "kinematic" couplings on some coaches) but, perhaps surprisingly for someone in their 50s, I get more pleasure now as an adult playing trains than when I did as a child.

[Going Spare]

I would agree with P3 only in respect to his reference to flexi-track: to my mind, Hornby's R621 fully flexible track is too 'floppy' and the bunched sleeper mouldings can all too easily come off the ends of the rails. The R8090 semi-flexible track is much better.

[threelink]

All of my track (code 100, some flexi- and some set) and most of my stock is beat up second hand rubbish from car boots and the like but I have never had a problem with any track that could not be put right with superglue, never had a problem with lightweight stock that could not be sorted with a lump of lead and never had a problem with bogies that could not be cured with a bit of biro spring or similar. I must be doing something wrong.

[Brew Man]

I would agree with P3 only in respect to his reference to flexi-track: to my mind, Hornby's R621 fully flexible track is too 'floppy' and the bunched sleeper mouldings can all too easily come off the ends of the rails. The R8090 semi-flexible track is much better.

 

 

I agree, Hornby full flexi is much too springy. The semi flexi is much more manageable, though I tend to use Peco as it's a bit cheaper. It's very comparable with the Hornby semi, however.

[Rallymatt]

I have always accepted that flexible track is flexible and should be handled with that in mind. It’s not ideal for temporary or carpet based set ups although in my teens I laid track onto thin ply boards then on the spare bedroom carpet, there is always a workaround 😁

[81F]

I would go a little further and say flexible track is definately not for carpet layouts as it needs to be nailed down!

[RDS]

My entire layout is nothing but Hornby track and I have not experienced any of the problems described by the OP.

[The son of Triangman]

Super 4 was revolutionary in it's day, it's a shame Tri-ang went with compatibility with Tri-ang Series 3, as Super 4 had scale sleepering and spacing and there was a wide range of accessories and minic motorways as well. Tri-ang System Six which Hornby still use today, has HO scale sleepering. OO is very much a compromise scale.

[Topcat2018]

I agree with P3 in that you have to be very careful when handling flexi-track, whether Hornby or Peco, as the sleepers don't need much encouragement to peel away from the rails, breaking the jaws of the chairs. I wouldn't even get flexi-track out of its box unless I was ready to put it down on a baseboard or lay it down on a suitable flat surface immediately. When cutting it you definitely need a jig to hold the rails down either side of the cut.