Thanks Crescent! It was "hunting’. I was looking for the right term and couldn’t remember. Reminds me of a YouTube clip I saw of an Amtrak E60CP where one could clearly see the hunting problems those giants had on curves.
Still a problem. Actually a lot of early diesels didn’t run that well either. For the same issues.
I have found that if you put wheel wipers on all the tender wheels the reliability of steam engines jumps dramatically. That solves the stalling on switches problem. Many smaller steamers have wheel bases shorter than the length of an insulated frog so they stall. Adding wipers gives them a larger “footprint”.
Another enhancement is a BEMF decoder. That will help smooth out the running of the engine.
Let’s see. So far we’ve said, to sum it up, diesels are more forgiving than steam when it comes to track. Track work must be much better, if not perfect, to run steam. (not that it shouldn’t be anyway)
Steam requires more electrical pickups to run smoothly.
If you want one to work fairly well, you need to spend a lot, and I do mean a lot, more money than a diesel.
Steam requires a lot of maintenance, and frequently, to run. Diesels are pretty much clean the wheels and go.
Boy, if I were deciding steam or diesel as a person just starting out reading this, I’d say diesel is the way to go because of all the headaches with steam. No matter how you put it you are still saying steam is a fiddling, tweeking, constantly maintaining, track nitpicky, cleaning, mass. Sounds like you’ll be working on the things as much as running them. If I had a lawn mower like that I’d get rid of it.
But which one runs smoother is the question. Sounds to me like they both have equal chances of running smooth. However, track work not considered, with steam you say you need to spend a bunch more money up front, and constantly work on the piece to keep it running smooth. As opposed to diesel were you spend way less and put it on the track and run it for who knows how long. Sounds to me like the answer is simple. However one doesn’t buy something more complicated, as a steam loco is compared to a diesel, and not expect to have to do more to maintain it. But that doesn’t change the facts.
Now before you steamers get your steam built up. (probably too late)There is nothing, IMHO that looks better or more beautiful, than a steam loco. It just looks like a train to me. The cost and the cost alone was the reason I chose diesel. There’s still the chance though… Some of you guys really make it tempting to change eras. And on my layout, that would be very easy to do.
Diesel models do have some advantages. Their boxier bodies allow for room for bigger motors for example. Also, they way they are powered is different. In a diesel the two or three axles in the truck are all powered thru gears so all are turning together. With a steam engine, let’s say a 2-8-2, only one set of drivers is usually directly powered, with the other three drivers getting power from the siderods. That leaves a lot of room for imperfections in the way the siderods are set up to affect the engines “get along” and cause a hitch when the wheels are turning. This seems especially true at slower speeds, once you get up to even 20 MPH a lot of time things seem to smooth out.
Steam may be an area where it pays in the long run to spend the extra money for a top quality model. My BLI 2-10-4 runs great even at very slow speeds, fairly comparable to one of my Atlas diesels…but the 2-10-4 cost maybe 3-4 times what an Atlas diesel does. Although I do have some less-expensive Spectrum steam engines that run very well too.
Real large steam engines hunt nicely to when working hard. I have watched several videos of NKP 765 taken at track level and you can watch the big girl hunt as the works the train down the track. I can make my early to mid 60’s era PFM/United brass models run as smooth as any modern diesel, usualy with the original open frame motor. Just takes those additional electrical pickups and hardwiring the tender trucks to the chassis instead of relying on the bolster screws/springs to transmit the power.
Some do, but only the smoother running ones.
Rich
Tom, this is one area where I have resisted getting involved. I have taken one shell off to fix something, and that was on my BLI Hudson. I also removed the cover and took out the drivers on my little P2K Heirtage 0-6-0 for a reason I can no longer recall…but I do recall the bear of a time I had getting those driver back in and still quartered. I was sweating by the time it all popped and I could place the cover plate and screws back in position.
It’s not that I am afraid of breaking anything so much as not being able to complete the task.
-Crandell
Before I bolted to N-Scale in the early '80s I had assembled a number of HO-Scale steam locomotive kits. In 1968 it took me the better part of three months to get the bugs out of my first Cary/Mantua. After about ten years of practice I had finally learned that old Murphy’s Law Corollary of ‘what can go wrong will go wrong’ and I could assemble these beasts with a minimum of trouble. I will admit to one thing: I can attribute inexperience to a lot of the troubles I had early on but some of my troubles was because of that age-old nemesis of simply not following the directions!
Todd;
I’m not singling you out, but your response had a good summery of basically everything that been said in this thread.
Not necessarily. I haven’t added any extra pickups to any of my steamers, and they do just fine. No stalling or hesitation and I do run DCC. That’s not a good thing or a bad thing, it something that I have found that works for me.
Define a lot more money. I have some kit built locos that cost me less than $30 each and they run just as smooth as my brass costing several hundred more. I have even been able to acquire a couple of the latest plastic steamers for very little cost. And they run very smooth as well.
If you call once a year as “a lot of maintenance”, then yeah I guess they do. But its no more than what I do on a diesel.
IMHO I’d have to say that this is a total misconception. The only tweaking that has to be done to a steamer is the initial set up. This generally takes me less than an hour and I generally don’t need to touch it again maintenance wise for a year. Kits I tweak as they are built. I tweak the diesels as well before they hit the rails. Its about the sa
I’ve got a S scale steam loco (0-6-0) I built from a kit. The “break-in” period required some tinkering and adjustments, but it has run well since (18 years) with only periodic, routine maintenance. I also have a brand-new NW-2 diesel I bought ready-to-run. It runs beautifully, but the steam engine, despite its age, runs almost as smoothly, including at low speeds.
You got it in one. And not to raise my steam, but in reading this, I’m remembering the 4449 guys and gals, the 261 gang, Ross and crew, the newcomers with the Leviathan, ITM and the 587, and so many others in the real world who are lookign at the exact same issues we’ve covered (okay, so we aren’t so worried about tender pickups there…) and decided to go one bigger. You think you have problems with fixing the pilot wheels? count the goose-eggs that 4449 has so lovingly delt out to people over the years. I’m sure 765, 614, 587 aren’t far off, and 63 should be catching up here soon. Hardhats don’t fit under a steamer with heads still in them. And most of them are still at it after 30+ years.
Anyway, just neat seeing our issues scale up and back so frequently. Back to smoothness or not and diesel powered slugs.
Yea i gotta agree with ya on the momentum thing Crandell but i also wonder what part the large flywheels of the diesels play in their smoothness