Date
1 - 6 of 6
HO scale freight car trucks
|
Gene Green <bierglaeser@...>
I just replaced the wheel sets in a pair of Kadee Vulcan trucks with
narrow-tread wheel sets (should I write wheelsets instead?) from Intermountain. The replacement wheel sets appeared to have an axle length very similar to the old Kadee axles. I did not measure them. There was quite a bit of side-to-side movement possible with either wheel sets. This did not seem to affect the rolling qualities at all. Appearance was improved though. Wheel sets from Reboxx with longer axles would take up some of that side-to-side slack but is that important? Given the cone shape of the bearing and axle tip, wouldn't the axles tend to be self- centering? Has anyone experimented with a narrower (shorter) replacement truck bolster for Kadee trucks? Most model trucks apppear to me to be wider than if a prototype truck was literally scaled down to HO or, I suppose, any other scale for that matter. Couldn't slightly narrower bolsters be machined from brass or something? Has anyone ever replaced the wheel sets in old Central Valley trucks? I guess one would drill out the rivet (or rivets in the case of six wheel trucks) and replace the rivet with a small machine screw. Is this worth doing from an operational point of view? Is it worth doing for appearance given that passenger car trucks are usually less visible from the end that are freight car trucks? Gene Green Who is finally back to modeling. I spend a lot of time on my knees, not in prayer, but looking for lost parts. |
|
|
|
joe binish <joebinish@...>
Gene,
I have done the same for cars that need that extra bit of weight, but be careful to get the insulated sides on the wheelsets correct! We had an intermittant short during an op session, and you know who's new car was the culprit.... Haven't tried new bolsters. Try a jewelers apron to save your knees(it is getting to be holy week!) Joe Binish |
|
|
|
Spen Kellogg <spenkell@...>
Gene Green wrote:
Has anyone ever replaced the wheel sets in old Central Valley trucks? I guess one would drill out the rivet (or rivets in the case of six wheel trucks) and replace the rivet with a small machine screw. Is this worth doing from an operational point of view? Is it worth doing for appearance given that passenger car trucks are usually less visible from the end that are freight car trucks?Yes. For CV trucks that have rivets drill out the rivets on one side and tap for 2-56 machine screw. Not every CV truck needs replacement wheelsets, though. Some have very good rolling characteristics already. It seems that CV wheelset quality varied at different times . Denny Anspach is the expert on this, I got the technique from his discussion on the Passenger Car List. He purchased a Reboxx Roll Tester and tests all his trucks on it. I do the same, but once the trucks are mounted under a freight car (mandatory STMFC content) I test the car on the six foot section of track that has a one inch ramp for the first foot. If the car bounces off the foam rubber at the end, it passes. Even Kadee trucks can benefit from replacement wheelsets. The only trucks I have found that pass without upgrading wheelsets are some CV trucks, a few Kadee trucks, and almost all D & G trucks. Regards, Spen Kellogg |
|
|
|
Dennis Storzek <dstorzek@...>
--- In STMFC@..., "Gene Green" <bierglaeser@...> wrote:
Gene, It's important if you intend to use any of the smaller "scale size" couplers, as these couplers have a smaller "gathering range", and are therefore more prone to miss if the car bodies aren't centered on the track, with an attendant decline in coupler reliability. I know logic would suggest that the tapered axle ends would keep the cars centered, but in reality the centering forces are small compared to the other forces acting on cars in a train. Years ago, when I was experimenting with the old Kadee 711 "Old Timer" coupler I noticed this; two cars could be uncoupled on a tangent, one of the cars then used as a "handle" (idler) to push into industrial trackage, and when the original car came back out, it would not re-couple to the car left on the main. The foces acting on the car as it curved through the diverging routes of turnouts were enough to make the carbody crowd to one side, and there was not enough running on the tangent to make it self center again. The solution was to equip all the test cars with brass axles custom make to fit each car, and then coupling reliability increased dramatically. Unfortunately, the couplers had other problems that were not so easily overcome, and my experiment ended. Your best course of action, if you want to use both near scale wheels and couplers, is to invest in a Reboxx sampler set, and closely match the axle length to the trucks. Has anyone experimented with a narrower (shorter) replacement truckUse Accurail trucks, which are very close to scale width (Intentional plug :-) I'm sure Andy Reichert will chime in about his scale width Kadee trucks he is offering for P:87, which I believe he also offers with .088 wide semi scale wheels. Dennis |
|
|
|
Jack Burgess <jack@...>
Dennis shared...
Use Accurail trucks, which are very close to scale width (IntentionalWhat about scale width 5'-6" wheelbase arch bar trucks....? Jack Burgess www.yosemitevalleyrr.com |
|
|
|
Dennis Storzek <dstorzek@...>
--- In STMFC@..., "Jack Burgess" <jack@...> wrote:
Jack, Not going to happen, unless we can turn back the hands of time to an era when the general modeling population was interested in the "archbar era." By the way, this might be a good place to remind folks that I have a paper placed in the Files section that gives some dimensions that are useful in determining the correct width for scale width trucks. View it at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STMFC/files/Finescale_Truck_Width.htm Dennis |
|
|