Central Valley 5' Arch Bar trucks.


Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

I unearthed my cache of these handsome trucks and tested their rollability on the Reboxx Rolltester as follows:

(0-5 Not Acceptable. 6-10 Poor. Good/Acceptable 11-15. Very Good 16-20. Superior 21 and up).

OEM wheels: 6/7/6: Borderline unacceptable/poor.
Reboxx 1.025" wheels: 10/11/10: just barely above the poor, but in the /goodacceptable range.
Reboxx 1.030" wheels: 9/9/10: Almost acceptable, but still poor. Minimal sideplay, however.

Lubrication caused no improvement in rollability.

The appearance of these trucks with their new narrow wheels was improved to an exponential degree.

With their projecting exposed narrow wheels , these are the trucks I will use on Al Westerfield' s fine new Summers Ore cars until something better comes along. Now, if I can only adapt the Kadee brake gear to fit these 5' trucks....

BTW, if one was to stock up on only one length of Reboxx wheels, 1.025" would seem to a worthy bet, with some 1.020" and 1.015" axle sets on the side. These (1.025") are the consistent best for the popular Accurail AAR trucks (maximum rollability combined with minimum axle sideplay. Ditto with Branchline trucks).

Brian Leppart's fine Tahoe trucks are sized to best use the the Reboxx or Intermountain nominal 1.015" axle lengths (but the current new IM production of 1.007" axle sets introduce excessive axle sideplay).

Denny




Denny S. Anspach MD
Sacramento


Tim O'Connor
 

Denny

The problem with the "roll tester" is that it can't measure
how the trucks perform with a car on them.

On my workbench I have an incline and just let the car roll
as far as it can freely -- typically 5 to 7 feet for a good
free roller, 10 feet for an exceptional roller, and lesser
distances mean that it needs work.

What did you lube them with?

Tim O'Connor

I unearthed my cache of these handsome trucks and tested their
rollability on the Reboxx Rolltester as follows:

(0-5 Not Acceptable. 6-10 Poor. Good/Acceptable 11-15. Very Good
16-20. Superior 21 and up).

OEM wheels: 6/7/6: Borderline unacceptable/poor.
Reboxx 1.025" wheels: 10/11/10: just barely above the poor, but in
the /goodacceptable range.
Reboxx 1.030" wheels: 9/9/10: Almost acceptable, but still poor.
Minimal sideplay, however.

Lubrication caused no improvement in rollability.

The appearance of these trucks with their new narrow wheels was
improved to an exponential degree.

With their projecting exposed narrow wheels , these are the trucks I
will use on Al Westerfield' s fine new Summers Ore cars until
something better comes along. Now, if I can only adapt the Kadee brake
gear to fit these 5' trucks....

BTW, if one was to stock up on only one length of Reboxx wheels,
1.025" would seem to a worthy bet, with some 1.020" and 1.015" axle
sets on the side. These (1.025") are the consistent best for the
popular Accurail AAR trucks (maximum rollability combined with minimum
axle sideplay. Ditto with Branchline trucks).

Brian Leppart's fine Tahoe trucks are sized to best use the the Reboxx
or Intermountain nominal 1.015" axle lengths (but the current new IM
production of 1.007" axle sets introduce excessive axle sideplay).

Denny


Denny Anspach <danspach@...>
 

Tim O' C. writes-

The problem with the "roll tester" is that it can't measure
how the trucks perform with a car on them.

On my workbench I have an incline and just let the car roll
as far as it can freely -- typically 5 to 7 feet for a good
free roller, 10 feet for an exceptional roller, and lesser
distances mean that it needs work.

What did you lube them with?
I am certain that Tim's solution works just fine, but it is more
cumbersome IMHO (I used the same method before purchasing the
Rolltester) . In my experience, the rolltester results are pretty
reproducible and track well enough to real operations, and the tester
itself is pretty compact. On occasion I also test trucks with attached
lead weight. I am surprised that only on occasion will the presence
or absence of weight make any significant difference.

I use LaBelle 108 as lubricant.

Denny


Gene Green <bierglaeser@...>
 

Tim,

What sort of grade is your inclined track?

I have about 18 feet of track on an incline of approximately 1 1/2%.
If I let a car go on that grade it is going fast enough to knock the
coupler off for sure and maybe do even more damage. Of course, having
the track end at a solid wall may contribute to the damage.

My point really is that a 1 1/2% grade is way too steep for any meanful
test unless there was a really long - 100 feet? - level track for the
car to coast to a stop.

Another party to this discussion made the point that testing the truck
alone and testing trucks with a car might yield different results.

Gene Green


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Gene Green wrote:
Another party to this discussion made the point that testing the truck alone and testing trucks with a car might yield different results.
Sure, and different cars with a specific truck might yield different results; but what we are evaluating is truck vs. truck (or more usually, wheelset vs. wheelset in a particular sideframe. Why not directly compare them? Seems sensible to me.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@...
Publishers of books on railroad history


Gene Green <bierglaeser@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:
<snip> Why not directly compare them? Seems sensible to me.
Tony,
You are probably right. There are no absolute standards for
rollability, anyway. It is all relative.

I just need to rig up some test method that will work for me and which
will indicate which truck/wheelset combinations are better and which
are worse.

The Reboxx test gizmo is relatively high priced for me and occupies a
lot of real estate that I don't really have.

Gene Green


Don Burn
 

Years ago Ed Ravenscroft (sp?) had an article in Model Railroader (I think 61) on his hump yard. He had a simple tilt track he had made that would test trucks based on the grade. His was specific but I suspect you could make one with spacers to see try various grades.

Don Burn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Green" <bierglaeser@...>
To: <STMFC@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 5:46 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Central Valley 5' Arch Bar trucks.


--- In STMFC@..., Anthony Thompson <thompson@...> wrote:
<snip> Why not directly compare them? Seems sensible to me.
Tony,
You are probably right. There are no absolute standards for
rollability, anyway. It is all relative.

I just need to rig up some test method that will work for me and which
will indicate which truck/wheelset combinations are better and which
are worse.

The Reboxx test gizmo is relatively high priced for me and occupies a
lot of real estate that I don't really have.

Gene Green




__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3762 (20090113) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


Spen Kellogg <spenkellogg@...>
 

Gene Green wrote:

Tim,

What sort of grade is your inclined track?

I have about 18 feet of track on an incline of approximately 1 1/2%.
If I let a car go on that grade it is going fast enough to knock the
coupler off for sure and maybe do even more damage. Of course, having
the track end at a solid wall may contribute to the damage.

My point really is that a 1 1/2% grade is way too steep for any meanful
test unless there was a really long - 100 feet? - level track for the
car to coast to a stop.

Another party to this discussion made the point that testing the truck
alone and testing trucks with a car might yield different results.

Gene,
I can't speak for Tim, but I use both the roll tester and an inclined track for my cars. As Denny Anspach has said, the roll tester is a very good indicator for determining how trucks roll. His criteria is similar to my experience. One additional comment, cleaning the track with isopropyl alcohol can have a positive effect on how a truck rolls. Once I have trucks that I consider "tuned," i apply the trucks to a properly weighted car and put it on my incline. My test track is six feet long (on a plank) with a short incline about one inch high at one end so that about five feet of track is flat. The other end has a piece of foam rubber to act as a stop (no damaged couplers yet). I am satisfied if the car reaches the end, but a good rolling car will rebound about a foot or so. A lightly weighted car does not perform as well. When not in use, my incline sits in a corner taking up very little room.

Spen Kellogg


Robert <riverob@...>
 

Like a Stimp Meter:
http://www.leaderboard.com/GLOSSARY_STIMPMETER

Rob Simpson


--- In STMFC@..., Spen Kellogg <spenkellogg@...> wrote:
I can't speak for Tim, but I use both the roll tester and an
inclined track for my cars. As Denny Anspach has said, the roll
tester is a very good indicator for determining how trucks roll. His
criteria is similar to my experience. One additional comment,
cleaning the track with isopropyl alcohol can have a positive effect
on how a truck rolls. Once I have trucks that I consider "tuned," i
apply the trucks to a properly weighted car and put it on my incline.
My test track is six feet long (on a plank) with a short incline
about one inch high at one end so that about five feet of track is
flat. The other end has a piece of foam rubber to act as a stop (no
damaged couplers yet). I am satisfied if the car reaches the end, but
a good rolling car will rebound about a foot or so. A lightly
weighted car does not perform as well. When not in use, my incline
sits in a corner taking up very little room.

Spen Kellogg


Gene Green <bierglaeser@...>
 

--- In STMFC@..., Spen Kellogg <spenkellogg@...> wrote:
<snip> One additional comment, cleaning the track with
isopropyl alcohol can have a positive effect on how a truck rolls.
<snip>
Spen Kellogg

Spen,
I, too, use alcohol to clean track but I wasn't aware that cleaning the
track improved the rolling qualities of freight car trucks. That's a
nice bonus.

My son uses those little cards (surely they have a name)that are used
to clean credit card reading machines. There's nothing to spill, he
says.

Gene Green


Tim O'Connor
 

Gene

The track is laid on aspen "craft wood" along the back of my
work bench. One end is not nailed down at the end, so I can
shim it upwards 1/2" to 3/4" easily to make a grade about 3 feet
in length and then the car rolls on the level after that. There
is no point in a constant gradient -- I only want to see how
far each car rolls freely relative to other cars. I use this
same track for bench testing locos and DCC programming.

Tim O'Connor

Tim,

What sort of grade is your inclined track?

I have about 18 feet of track on an incline of approximately 1 1/2%.
If I let a car go on that grade it is going fast enough to knock the
coupler off for sure and maybe do even more damage. Of course, having
the track end at a solid wall may contribute to the damage.

My point really is that a 1 1/2% grade is way too steep for any meanful
test unless there was a really long - 100 feet? - level track for the
car to coast to a stop.

Another party to this discussion made the point that testing the truck
alone and testing trucks with a car might yield different results.

Gene Green