Kadee trucks and Intermountain wheelsets

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
21

Jerry,

I have a question, and/or comment about this statement. I don’t generally use Kadee roller bearing trucks because they are outside my era for most of my rolling stock. I model 1954 and the 70 ton Barber’s where just starting to appear on things like the new 75’ trailer flats. Everything else was ASF ride control and Bettendorf styles or a few Timken 50 ton roller bearing styles (which Kadee does not make). So I cannot directly comment on the 70 ton RB’s since I don’t have dozens of them laying around like I do the ASF and Bettendorf styles.

Anyway, I just went to the workshop and measured a bunch of Kadee 33" wheel sets. Their axle lengths where all between 1.010" and 1.012". They all came out of Kadee ASF ride control or Bettendorf trucks. Reboxx’s recommendations aside, how could the 1.010" Intermountains (which I measured also) not be a suitable replacement?

Somehow I doubt Kadee is making different length axles for each truck, especially in view of the fact that they sell the wheel sets seperately.

I am not disputing the work done by Reboxx regarding their recommendations, but as I said before the question is how much play is too much.

Not trying to be argumentitive here, you just got me thinking about stuff I checked years ago and am now rech

22

Gentlemen,

First off, let me say that the wheelsets were oriented correctly! No shorts from that. I’ve got Kadee Bettendorf trucks, but I don’t like the black wheels and someday, I would like to be able to install resistors on wheelsets for signals, block detection, etc. I also agree with most here that the IM wheelsets roll more freely than the Kadee wheelsets. I just did some measuring with a micrometer and here’s what I found. The Kadee wheelsets are 1.010" long. The diameter of the shaft right before it begins to taper to the point is 0.089" (measured with calipers, couldn’t get the micrometer in there!). The IM wheelsets are 1.0028" long. The diameter of the shaft right before it begins to taper is 0.060". I’m starting to think that the combination of shorter wheelset + smaller diameter shaft + 18" radius curves will not work out. This stinks because after reading Sheldon’s posts a few weeks ago, I tested this on my straight yard tracks and agree with his results, the Kadee/IM combo rolled almost twice as far as a Kadee truck/Kadee wheelset combo. I may look at the Reboxx wheelsets for my 40-50 cars with Kadee trucks and use the IM wheelsets on the plastic trucks. I also saw no need to use the truck tuner on the Kadee trucks but wanted to see if anybody had experience pro or con with that. Thanks again for the advice and personal experiences.

Keith Baker

23

To all who have been following this thread:

I have always believed that the main reason that the Intermountain wheelsets work so well is the reduced diameter of the axle outside of the wheel, and the resultant smaller cone on the end of the axle.

I believe that with sprung trucks it is impossible to expect the sideframes to remain at a right angle to the bolster or the axle, therefore more flex is needed and more side play in the axle is a help not a hindrance. The fact that the trucks equalize makes them more able to always self center, even with this “extra” play, when compaired to rigid sideframe trucks.

I would in fact agree with the idea that on rigid sideframe trucks, the least amount of side play that results in free rolling is best. But not necessarly so with sprung trucks. The movement factor changes everything.

And to repeat if I may, it is the smaller axle outside the wheel on the Intermountain (and Reboxx) wheel sets that make them roll better. Actually, I think if Kadee would just redesign the end of their delrin axle, they would have the most free rolling truck ever made.

Again, I realize other methods work well, and mine is not the least expensive or easiest, but for me the look, tracking, and superior rolling qualities of metal sprung trucks are worth the time and money.

Sheldon

24

Keith,

Your Intermountain wheelsets only measured 1.0028"? There is the problem you got a bad batch - call them up and send them back. Get some more and check the length again, they should be 1.010".

No wonder the wheels are hitting the sideframes, there is not enough axle outside the wheel to keep them off the sideframe. When the wheel set is bottomed in the journal the wheels should still be a good ways from the side frame, I will take a measurement.

Sheldon

25

The figures that I gave for the Kadee 70 ton R/B came from the Reboxx spec sheet for axle widths. Almost all Kadee and for that matter most all mfrs have slightly different axle widths. The “standard” replacement wheels sets from IM, Branchline, fit 80% of the plastic trucks.

By Truck Manufacturer: Right click on the link. and select “Save As” and save to your desktop.

http://www.reboxx.com/Documents/Wheelsets/33%20Application%20Chart.pdf

By axle length:

http://www.reboxx.com/Documents/Wheelsets/33%20Application%20Chart%20by%20length.pdf

26

I guess 80% depends a lot on whos rolling stock you buy. I buy (or have bought over 40 years) lots of Athearn. Intermountain wheelsets are WAY too sloppy in Athearn side frames (although lots of people use them with no problem), in fact so are Kadee wheelsets. Athearn wheel sets have always been in the 1.020" to 1.025" range.

I measured almost every Kadee wheelset I could find, about a dozen or so (I recycle them by selling them on ebay after removing them from brand new trucks). The production tolerance is pretty wide, I found some as small as 1.008" and some as large as 1.015" with most being between 1.010" and 1.014".

I measured Intermountain wheelsets from three different bulk boxes on my workbench, all where spot on at 1.010". My queestion stands, how could a 1.010" wheelset not a be a suitable replacement in a Kadee truck?

With wheel tread width and gage being constant, overall length and axle projection should all be within working tolerance.

Side note: The reduced axle diameter (.063") of the Intermountain and Reboxx wheelsets actually comes from the NMRA in RP24.3.

In all the measurements I have taken, The axle outside the wheel is at least .025" longer than the depth of the journal, this provides more than enough clearance.

Keith, I am very sure you have some bad product - check it out.

Jerry, a note about trackwork - These days I use Atlas code83 track and turnouts almost exclusively. The high quality and low price can’t be beat. Over the years I have hand layed track and turnouts, used TrueScale products, etc., but these days that is reserved for special trackwork only. Many have complimented me on the pre

27

Sheldon, to answer your previous question about my measurement. They weren’t mine, I took them from the .pdf files.

I know Sam sometimes checks this forum, I hope he will chime in and set us straight. (I have been known to be wrong and will admit when I am.

If you look at the end shot of the my Kadee PS-1, you can’t help but notice how far up in the trucks those IM wheels sit. They did bind against the frame and front of the unloading chutes so they had to be replaced with the originals. They were/are 33" dia, so that wasn’t a factor. This missmatch also effects coupler performance drasticaly too. The couplers on the car, came on the car, nothing was added but weathering. If I would have shimmed the cars trucks to make the couplers the correct height,it wouldn’t have looked correct. (I tried two gray Kadee washers (which are dificult to center on the self centering trucks that I love on these cars.) and it was still a bit low for a semi-scale coupler and I didn’t want to make the car that high off the bolsters.

I know this is getting tedious, but as long as we’re being civil…

Did you read the Reboxx .pdf files? that’s what I used for refrence.

The NMRA standards for track work are antiquated and aimed at increasingly sloppy tolerances such as Tyco and Riverossi type flanges and operating quality. Todays higher quality rolling stock demands better track work than the wide frogs and compromises like the so-called molded on detail of Atlas track. Please post a picture of what you consider good looking painted, ballasted and weathered Atlas track, I’d like to see some.

About NMRA standards; Tim Warris has a great video explaining a few facts.

Scroll down to the bottom of the first video section.

* Demystifying The NMRA Standards
28

Jerry,

Yes I did notice that on your photo. Not sure why we are getting such different results. I just measured the bolster height of two Kadee trucks, both #552 self centering ASF 50 ton. One has the orginal Kadee wheel sets, one has Intermountain wheel sets. Both measured exactly .3125" (5/16") from the rail head - per NMRA RP23. I do not have any of those hopper cars, but all my Kadee box cars have Intermountain wheelsets with no effect on coupler height. The 552 is my truck of choice most of the time.

You are welcome to your opinion about the NMRA standards and RP’s, I don’t agree. It is obvious from you photos and statements that you have an interest in fine scale modeling. I did too at one time. I also understand if Atlas Custom Line code 83 turnouts are not up to your appearance or fine scale operational standards - but for me they are fine. Fact is, with RP25 wheels they work very well, are inexpensive, and are easy to wire (Oh no, another whole topic could start here).

I have no pizza cutter wheels on old locos or cheap RTR talgo trucks from the 60’s, but needing to build completely scale track is not on my radar, and even

29

I wasn’t trying to tell you how to model. I wasn’t telling anyone how to model. I was just pointing out the facts as stated by different mfrs and my opinion. I offered examples and links. I understand your need to do things they way that they suit you, as should everyone!

I have been modeling since I was 10, so that gives me about 52 years of experience, which counts, “por nada”, zip. I know hoggers older than I, (If that’s possible. ) who look down their nose at anything not done their way and usually their advise goes in one ear and out the other, sometimes a good idea comes through, who knows.

About 90% of my work is prototype based fantasy weathering and painting. By fantasy, I mean that the weathering is based on actual weathering patterns, not specific copies of specific cars. Some of my customers want wide wheels (Below) and #5 couplers, some don’t. What ever they want is fine with me as long as I’m not cutting holes in stock cars to poke Giraffe heads through, I’ll most likely try to accommodate. I always check the cars to standard gauges, coupler heights and rolling quality. I’ve had no complaints, so far.

That said, I’m always willing to learn and to help when and where I can.

30

Not to beat a dead horse too long…

I knew that I had a package of Reboxx’s test axles and while looking for something else, I found them.

Now why would a company (Reboxx) got to the expense of making not only these axle widths, but intermediate sizes too? Because maybe there are lots of different sized trucks out there.

The 12 axle set with color code.

One more thing.

From narrow to wide and how to tell, etc, etc…

31

Jerry,

I agree that there is a need/time/place for different length axles. I’m just not convinced that Kadee trucks benifit from axles longer than those provided by Kadee. I have explained in great detail why I believe this to be so. I cannot explain why your expriances are so different.

Here is my question - why doesn’t Reboxx sell both wheel widths???

Maybe they are one of those groups who think their way is the only way?

Or maybe they are right and they know their own market.?

Either way they don’t get my money. I have read their data, tried their product, found it of no beifit and explained why its not needed or wanted in my case. I’m sure for others it works great.

Your work is very nice. As explained, I was once very “driven” for modeling “perfection” but found I was not having fun. Now I don’t worry about perfectly copying the real world, and I am having fun.

Sheldon

32

Jerry,

One other simple fact has gotten lost in this discussion - Performance

Using Reboxx’s own data, they say a stock Kadee ASF truck is a “13” and with the longer axles they recommend it goes up to a “17”.

But my results with the Intermoutain wheel sets consistantly test better than a stock Athean Ready to Roll metal wheel truck which Reboxx says is a “25”, near the top of any of their test results. And my results put the Kadee/Intermountain up with all their “27, 28, 29” performing trucks.

I am willing to concede for discussion sake that my Kadee/Intermountain combo only rolls as well as the new Athearn Ready to Roll truck, but even at that, my results with Kadee trucks with the shorter axles are far better than those of Reboxx with the longer axles.

Could it be that they are more concerned with justifing the use of semi scale wheels then improving performance? So because of side play issues, coupler gathering range issues and the like, are unwilling to admit that alxes of their design but the same length as Kadee’s work and actually exceed their own recommendation in performance? To admit that would be an endorsment of the NMRA standards they are challenging with their .88" tread width wheels.

In my tests, the Kadee/Intermountain combo out performed or equaled EVERY rigid sideframe truck I tested, using stock wheelsets, Reboxx recommended wheelsets or Intermountain wheelsets. That includes truck/wheel combos that Reboxx tested as “28” or “29”?

My testing was done differently than Rebox. I don’t test trucks off the car. For a sprung/equalized truck, off the car tests are not valid in my opinion. I used identical cars and built a 40’ long test ramp/run. I tested all the trucks on both light cars (Athearn 34’ hoppers with only the factory weight - 2.5 oz) and heavy cars (Athearn 50’

33

Sheldon,

I’ve already told you that the way you or any other modeler runs, builds, glues, staples or paints his stuff is okay with me, why do you continue to think that I’m attacking you?

Semi-scale anything, is only for those who appreciate it’s intended purpose, not because it’s “correct”.

I (and I’m repeating myself again) merely pointed out that there are different axle widths available for a reason. It doesn’t matter that they’re attached to a narrow or wide tread wheel, again that’s a personal issue for the user.

I included a shot of the CFSX hopper to show that I indeed do cars with wide wheels. If more of my customers requested them I would have no problem using them. Most of the customers that use me to weather their cars have no problems with narrow treads and only a small percentage request the wider type. That’s my experience and has nothing to do with truck rolling qualities or pulling performance. If a car doesn’t roll well after I work on it, I won’t ship until it does.

Good luck Keith.

34

Jerry,

Aside from your customers, what do you use on your layout?

I do not think you are attacking me, but I find it interesting that you will not consider the idea that Reboxx might not have all the answers for every truck out there, and that maybe they are wrong in their view/recommendations for Kadee trucks.

I know several people who are users/fans of Reboxx and I agree for many/most, maybe even all plastic rigid trucks they are the hot lick if you want semi scale wheels - no arguement from me.

BUT, every time I present facts, numbers, data, you just ignor it and try to shift the focus of the conversation. I have asked a half dozen questions, if Reboxx has all the answers, why have they not responded or told us those answers?

That’s fine, I have a thick skin and know that my modeling views fall outside of “politically correct”.

And I don’t reconize Reboxx as the worlds foremost authority on this topic just be cause they have a business and post some info on the web.

Sheldon

35

Sheldon asks.

Aside from your customers, what do you use on your layout?

I operate on a large club layout but most of my testing is done on a small module using Shinohara, Fast-Tracks and a crossover using two two #6 Atlas Custom line turnouts.

I do not think you are attacking me, but I find it interesting that you will not consider the idea that Reboxx might not have all the answers for every truck out there, and that maybe they are wrong in their view/recommendations for Kadee trucks.

I think that I’ve been willing to consider everything you said and yes, maybe Reboxx is wrong, but until someone comes up with a better reference, it’s beats an old wives tale.

I know several people who are users/fans of Reboxx and I agree for many/most, maybe even all plastic rigid trucks they are the hot lick if you want semi scale wheels - no arguement from me

Again, I wasn’t arguing and again I’ll repeat that I stated semi-scale is not for everyone.

BUT, every time I present facts, numbers, data, you just ignor it and try to shift the focus of the conversation. I have asked a half dozen questions, if Reboxx has all the answers, why have they not responded or told us those answers?

What six questions have I missed? I stated that if what ever wheel/truck combination works for you is fine and good. What you fail to realize is that not everyone will have the same results as you claim given their different circumstances.

Why don’t you call or email Reboxx and ask them why they haven’t responded? Maybe they don’t read this forum? I don’t represent them, but I bet they stand behind their research.

That’s fine, I have a thick skin and know that my modeling views fall outside of “politically correct”.

Model Ra

36

OK, I thought this was the case all along - see ya,

Sheldon

37

I’ve contacted both Reboxx and Kadee. Reboxx’s email was sent after business hours, so I don’t expect a reply tonight. Sam from Kadee gave me a very nicely worded explanation why correct axle widths (and where points of metal axles ride in a conical journal should ride to be correct. He mentioned that he had read the discussion. He didn’t give me permission to post his reply, so I won’t. I did ask Reboxx to drop in and leave his opinion and we shall see how he responds.

Thick skin? Come on Sheldon…

38

This statement is misleading and incorrect since the 1.018 to 1.021 number is a measurement of the journal width, not an axle length.

The Reboxx recommended axle for this truck is 1.015, only .005" longer than the Intermountain.

All my measurements of Kadee wheelsets have been at or shorter than 1.015, most have been shorter with 1.012 appearing to be the target length at Kadee.

Sheldon

39

40

Yes, that’s the chart - It calls for a Reboxx part #33-2-1.015, that is a 33" wheel, double insulated, with a 1.015" axle length - exactly what I said. Reboxx recommends a 1.015" axle length for Kadee ASF 50T & Barber 70T RB trucks.

Looking at the chart above, there are lots of large variations between measured axle length of Kadee side frames and the recommended Reboxx axle length. Maybe Reboxx needs even more sizes? And some .110 wheels.

Kadee’s own wheel sets seem to have wide production tolerence but are generally smaller than that. Ranging from 1.008 to 1.015 with an 1.012 being the most common in the batch I measured.

If a Kadee wheel set that is 1.008" works why would an Intermountain not work?

Sheldon