min track angle for loco`s

[richhotrain]

West Coast S wrote the following post 3 hours ago:

If memory serves a Big Boy measured 133 feet coupler to coupler

So, a little over 18" in HO scale.

That has to look real ugly on tight curves. [xx(]

Rich

[riogrande5761]

RG 5761:

And, and, and that is why a passenger train going around a curve on an HO layout looks so strange, just because an engine CAN go around a tight curve should not be criteria for all curves, the larger the curve the better in many ways.

I agree totally with that. I’m all for bigger curve radii!

[_JaBear]

AArgh!!! I thought i was linking to a Climax

Gidday, amazing what a slip of the finger can do.[swg]

Hope I’m not biting the hand thats feeds us but here’s a link to a pretty comprehensive review

http://rrmodelcraftsman.com/reviews/cm_extra_bachmann_climax.php

It refers to a 15" test track, while not owning one, a fellow club member does and it looks good on 18" radius curves.

Cheers, the Bear.

[BRAKIE]

RG 5761:

And, and, and that is why a passenger train going around a curve on an HO layout looks so strange, just because an engine CAN go around a tight curve should not be criteria for all curves, the larger the curve the better in many ways.

Even Athearns BB passenger cars looks better on larger 24" or better curves and they was designed for 18" curves just like the old AHM passenger cars.

A lot of modelers are asking if they can instead of asking if they should.

A example you can use 18" or 22" radius curves on a 4x8’ layout…Why use the 18" curve when the 22" curve looks and works better?

[riogrande5761]

tatans

RG 5761:

And, and, and that is why a passenger train going around a curve on an HO layout looks so strange, just because an engine CAN go around a tight curve should not be criteria for all curves, the larger the curve the better in many ways.

Even Athearns BB passenger cars looks better on larger 24" or better curves and they was designed for 18" curves just like the old AHM passenger cars.

A lot of modelers are asking if they can instead of asking if they should.

A example you can use 18" or 22" radius curves on a 4x8’ layout…Why use the 18" curve when the 22" curve looks and works better?

I totally agree. My guess is these are people who have already built a layout with tight curves and are now coming and asking what rolling stock they can shoehorn onto the layout. It’s better to ask how can they design a layout, even a small one, which will better accomodate what they want to run. Sometimes a small increase in layout size will be enough to allow them to run things more reliably, even if they don’t look great. Like I said in another topic, an 89’ autorack won’t look good on a 36" curve, but it will operate fine.

[richhotrain]

BRAKIE wrote the following post an hour ago:

A lot of modelers are asking if they can instead of asking if they should.

Amen to that, Larry.

Rich

[Darth_Santa_Fe]

SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE!![:D]

I just worked on one of these newer Rivarossi Big Boys not long ago. It can easily go around an 18" radius. With the rotation of both frames and the side play in the wheels, I wouldn’t be surprised if it could handle a 16" radius, but it would be very tight. I own one of the older AHM era models with the big flanges and cab motor, and it runs around an 18" radius as easy as an 0-4-0.

I seem to recall that the Marklin/Trix Big Boy (which is still considered to be one of the very best non-brass BBs) was listed as going down to a near 13" radius. Many European manufacturers have a tendency to make a lot of their models this way, it seems, and although the Rivarossi model is now made in China, it still uses the smooth running Italian chassis developed 20 years ago.

[West_Coast_S]

That’s why my re-entry into HO scale will set a minium 48 radius and #8 & 10 turnouts, I have vintage articulateds which just don’t play nice on anything under 36R, same for several equally vintage American Beauty passenger car sets, at 80 feet per car they demand broad curves as well. I too have a vintage Riverrossi Y6B with turned down flanges and re-detailed to represent those aquired by the UP as war babies, that layout was set a min of 36R so never had the oppertunity to test its min capabilities.

A buyer beware situation occured with my purchase of a 1/64 scale Overland FEF 3 in Greyhound Paint , this example has a history of mutliple owners, no doubt the reason being it requires 60 min radius, being an impulse buy, I didn’t consider this factor!

Dave

[tatans]

A nice example of a correct curve is seen on TRAINS site, there is a photo of the January, 2014 issue of Trains and a pic of the Canadian rounding a curve, that does look some good eh?