This weeks disappointment.

I have finally managed to buy an affordable Princess Coronation
(albeit with superficial damage). It looks good and runs smoothly
but! It has exactly the same low adhesion as the Kings, WC's , Black
5's and other 5 pole can motor models. My 5 pole Ringfield loco
driven Castles are way ahead in pulling power. I compare only Hornby
because all Bachmanns are light footed.
Regards
Peter A
Reply to
Sailor
Loading thread data ...
"Sailor" wrote
Peter,
I sometimes wonder just what you're expecting your locos to haul and note your comments about Bachmann models.
I've had 60+ (modern, metal-wheeled) wagons behind Bachmann 9F 2-10-0 and WD 2-8-0 models and both would have taken more. Virtually all Bachmann & (the can motor-powered) Hornby diesel models will also walk away with similar loads as a minmimum.
I don't have many of the recent Hornby (loco drive) steam locos (A4, 8F & 2P), but was hugely disappointed with a couple of Black 5s which wouldn't pull more than 30 wagons and were quickly eliminated from my loco stud. The 8F is adequate, but somewhat inferior to the Bachmann WD in both quality of detail and haulage capabilities.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
I've found the Hornby rebuilt WC has much greater haulage capacity than the Wrenn unrebuilt BoB. It also has greater haulage capacity than a heavily ballasted Hornby 47.
Chris
Reply to
Chris
On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:51:16 +0100, "John Turner" said in :
And I've hauled 50 wagons uphill round a 36" radius curve with the Hornby 8F, with no artificial additives. The tender-drive A3 needs extra weight over the drivers, mind.
Guy
Reply to
Just zis Guy, you know?
It is not a case of great expectations - merely a direct comparison using identical trains. I do have hills ( prototypical at 1:35/40) and my curves are 1 metre radius so that is what I ask a loco to negotiate pulling 6 Hornby/Lima MK1's (or similar) or 8 Mainline/ Airfix Centenaries. The Hornby slippery souls are those fitted for DCC without the same ballasting as the Ringfield models ( the R2662 Hogwarts example which needed a reversion to tyres is a good example). Running on a horizontal track does not show up the problem. I have yet to see a R/B MN or WC/BB, 9F, 8F , Brittania or WD that I can afford. At the moment my project is making a Star from a Saint body and Castle chassis (a combination of a pretty old and brand new pair of components!).
( My Black 5 is more feeble that me!)
Regards
Peter A
Reply to
Sailor
In message , Sailor writes
Hills at 1:35/40 are not prototypical.
Reply to
Jane Sullivan
They are if you're modelling the Maurienne line, which has ten miles or more at 1:35. Mainline trains normally have two locos pulling, and another two banking, however, rather than a single steam loco. Brian
Reply to
BH Williams
Depends where's being modelled.
Pick your place and 1:14 is prototypical.
Reply to
Andrew Robert Breen
It happens. I got a Duchess of Sutherland off eBay a couple of months back. Seemed cheap, and was in fantastic condition.
It turned out to be a tender drive, and for some reason, it can only just about push itself along the track. It has now been relegated to being a static display.
Reply to
Andy Hewitt
Andrew Robert Breen said the following on 09/10/2008 09:34:
Isn't the Snowdon Mountain Railway something like an average of 1:5?
Reply to
Paul Boyd
Mmm, but then rack (or, indeed, rope-haulage) are a bit different, though IIRC one of the German firms does a rack engine and suitable track in HO which would do perfectly well for a uk-prototype system (given that the Snowdon engines are of Swiss design).
1:14 is, I think, the steepest bank to be worked by adhesion only on public railways in Britain (Hopton incline on the Cromford & High Peak). Industrial lines went a bit steeper - I think there were banks as steep as 1:12 worked by adhesion only.
For main lines, the Lickey is usually reckoned as the steepest bank: 1:38, or just a tad steeper - though there's a bit of 1:27 by Faringdon on the Thameslink line (which surely qualifies as main-line). Either way, I'd say that while 1:30 to 1:40 isn't common on UK main lines, it's not unknown either - so the OP wasn't wrong to claim it as "prototypical". I'd question whether any non-industrial routes in UK combined such steep gradients with such sharp curvature, mind..
Reply to
Andrew Robert Breen
"Sailor" wrote
using identical trains. I do have hills ( prototypical at 1:35/40)
The railway between Grosmont & Goathland on the NYMR is graded at 1:49 and this is regarded as exceptionally steel for an adhesion operated railway. Shap and Beattock and the Long Drag (Settle & Carlisle) have a ruling grades around 1:100 and provided steam locos with real problems most of the time.
The inclines on the Cromford & High Peak were steeper (1:18?) than that on the NYMR but would in some instance need two locos to move a handful of wagons.
I'd suggest that 1:35 - 1:40 is far too steep for normal operations.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
"Andy Hewitt" wrote
Strip and clean the entire tender drive unit including the commutator face on the motor armature, also the associated brushes and tension the brush springs. Clean & remove tender drive wheels, clean any oil from the axles, then clean out the axle slots (I blow WD40 through these) before re-assembling. That will hopefully solve your problems unless the armature is fuffed.
You may also have to clean the (non-powered) loco driving wheels, and maybe their axles too. At one time Hornby used 3-in-1 oil to lubricate locos and it goes 'thick' with age, losing its lubricating properties and becomes a good insulator, stopping reliable current collection.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
Cheers John, it doesn't seem like a motor problem, it turns the wheels OK, it just doesn't have any traction at all, I just get the thing sitting there spinning the driving wheels. I had thought about weighting it down with some lead, but I can't see there being enough room to add enough to help much.
I had already checked the non-driven wheels, and they rotate very freely indeed.
Reply to
Andy Hewitt
[..]
I'll check that, thanks.
Reply to
Andy Hewitt
My Hornby Schools and D49 were like this after a long period of storage (17 years). The traction tyres looked OK, but they were slipping on the wheels. With new tyres they now both pull anything I put behind them.
Reply to
Gerald H
1:49 and lots of curvature - the latter, I gather, being more of a problem.
Shap has four miles of 1:75. Beattock has a worst-bit of 1:69, and the Highland main line seems to have gradients of typically around 1:70. /However/, the Lickey is a bit steeper than 1:38, there's the gradient of 1:37 between Exeter Central and St. David's (just the kind of inter-station bank that a Freezereque model railway might include) and there's a bank of 1:27 near Faringdon on Thameslink (again, just the sort of thing that a C.J. Freezer- type plan might include).
Hopton was 1:14.
Aside from the Lickey and the others mentioned above, it occurs that there were some pretty serious banks on the GW (ex-SD) main line in Devon: aha, yes - Hemerdon bank, mostly at 1:42, with a bit of 1:41 at the bottom. There will be other examples (off the main line, the Portpatrick harbour branch was about 1:30) - so the Birmingham and Gloucester, the London and South Western, the South Devon and the Metropolitan railways seem to have had a different opinion ;)
Granted, bankers were needed for many/all of these steep banks - but then that's going to add interest to model operation, rather than being a damned inconvenience, as it is in 12":1' scale.
Reply to
Andrew Robert Breen
"Andrew Robert Breen" wrote
Bankers are not an insurmountable problem with analogue operation, but the differing speeds (at the same voltage) of more than one loco can cause problems to the loco(s) (overheating of motors for example) and can also cause derailments. Isolated sections are necessary to allow the addition and removal of the pilot or banker.
It's less of an issue with digital operation where motor speeds can be adjusted (with some effort) to be compatible, and where isolated sections are not necessary, but the whole operation is still not quite straight forward and involves switching control to facilitate consisting or multiple operation of more than one loco.
The apparent need for this on Peter's (sailor) layout just shows that even models suffer similar problems to the prototype and that over-steep gradients will and do cause issues.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
"Gerald H" wrote
It could also be the spur gear on the end of the armature shaft which is slipping and not gripping the shaft. If it's made of steel rather than brass I'll guarantee that's the problem.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
The bank to Upton Scudamore from Westbury is 1:47 if remember right for a stretch - banker required for average freight trains (circa 1980). A 31 with 5 on would struggle (mind, a 31 struggles to move itself!). Witham to to the top of the bank on the Merehead branch is something similar.
Cheers Richard
Reply to
beamends

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.