I grabbed up an old Atlas 6-axel diesel at a yard sale last weekend, and plopped it down on my 6 x 16 layout that has 22" curves, and when it runs on the curves, the leading axel’s wheels are always off the track. It doesn’t derail (too often) bt having that leading edge wheelset sort of floating inboard off the rail is disconcerting - is this a truck issue or a curve-radius issue?
It could be the reason it was at a yard sale. All my 6 axle locos (Athearn, Proto 2000) take 18 inch radius just fine. All my Atlas power is 4 axle stuff and it has no problem.
Well, if you can run your 6-axel stuff on 18, there’s no reason why I shouldn’t be able to run it on 22 … just what I needed to know, thank you (again) Jeffrey.
while we’re on the subject, how restrictive are 22-inch curves for steam, machanically, as opposed to escetically?
It depends on what the loco is designed to handle. I’ve seen some 4-8-4’s that can take 18 inch radius all day long and others that won’t touch anything under 24 inch. My 2-10-2 (Mehano) runs fine on 18" while one a friend of mine has (IHC) won’t run on 18" at all. I’ve seen some of the Big Boy locos run on some pretty sharp curves. Looked stupid doing it but it was doing it. As for wear, you’re going to have wear on the flanges whether it’s steam or diesel.
I’ve got a Proto 1000 Alco RSC-3 6-axle diesel that takes my 18-inch curves just fine.
I’ve also got a P2K 0-6-0 and a BLI Hudson 4-6-4 which work fine on these curves. Steamers, though, are all different, so different brands of Hudsons might behave differently. On mine, there are two positions for the drawbar between the locomotive and tender, and the wider spacing must be used on tight curves.
BLI advertises their J1 2-10-4 as needing 24" curves, but our hosts tested it and found it could handle well-laid 22" curves. I sort of agree, but not where my 22" curves on my old layout were less than sterling. [swg]
If you imagine a curve so sharp that the flanges tight against the outer rail are producing plenty of friction, but the engine stays railed, you are causing a lot of wear. As that outer rail straightens, the frame of the engine allows more lateral movement to the axles and the flanges rub less, or not at all.
So, apart from weird visuals on such tight curves, steamers are going to have fewer problems as the radius increases. At the same time, your speed can climb because you are less likely to experience the effects of momentum launching the engine out of the rails. Tightest radii mean more frequent accidents and less speed if you want to minimize the accidents.
Lesson - find every last 1/2" of radius you can shoehorn into your track plan.
-Crandell
Radius gauges that fit between the rails are great for keeping the radius free of even invisible variations (kinks) on curves. Unfortunately, one needs a different gauge for each radius.
Mark
Swayin, one of the first thing I would do is pull the shell and run the engine and see what happens in the turns. Reason I say this is because I had a old Athearn FP 45 that would derail in a tight turn. Side frames of the trucks where hitting the ladder’s and causing it to derail!
I am sure you have done this, but make sure all the rails at gaps are flush. The center wheels act as a pivot point and truck will teeter totter on high points and lift off.
If all fails, remove the center wheel set of the trucks and you should be fine. But, try to fix the track and or engine first.
I remember my first big diesel, gave me fits till I found the mistakes in my track. Tighter the turn, the better the track has to be.
Cuda Ken
good stuff, thanks Ken
I got a new Athearn Dash-9 and it was doing the same thing so I followed it round to see what was catching and I found a couple of my rail joiners were a little messed up a little bit from when I put them so I got a screw drive and pushed down to sit more flush and that fixed my problem
I have no problem running Dash 9s on a 22
The answer to the OP’s question really depends on two variables - truck wheelbase, and locomotive wheelbase.
Short 6 axle locos with short truck wheelbases will handle 18 inch radii just fine. I have a Kato Alco RSC-2 that will handle a 15" radius (the Proto 1000 model of the same prototype will likely do the same), and this is mainly due to a short truck wheelbase. There’s almost no room between wheel flanges and lots of lateral motion in the center wheelset.
I have an Atlas (new run) SD35 that’ll handle an 18 inch radius, but it’s pretty tight and the couplers will barely line up with rolling stock. The only reason it’ll run around a sharp curbve is because the loco wheelbase is short, about on par with a GP40 or similar. My SD40-2 won’t take anything less than a 22" due to the relatively long loco wheelbase.
The OP didn’t mention which 6 axle loco he has, but I’ll be willing to bet that it’s an old Atlas-Roco SD24 or SD35. Although they have short loco wheelbases, the axle spacing is correct for an E unit and not a Flexicoil truck, and there’s not much lateral play in the middle axle.
I haven’t owned any 6 axle diesel that hasn’t been able to make it through an 18" curve
All my Athearn BB & RTR - SD’s, AC’s & lone C44 all make it.
My Proto SD50, no problem.
Mind you, anytime I have a tight curve like that, I usually use snap-track to ensure a proper curve.
All of these have made it around my son’s 4x5 layout & it has tighter curves than I would normally use.
I would look at the track, slowly move the loco through it to see where the truck comes off, find out why the truck derails there & then fix it.
My lone 22" curve I had on a previous layout, I used Atlas 22" radius snap track, never had a problem, even with Walthers & Athearn 85’ passenger cars.
Gordon
DO NOT DO THIS!!! This is simply bad and wrong advice! I couldn’t believe I was reading this as a recommended solution. This is the worst thing you could do. You have a problem somewhere that needs to be resolved. The next thing the OP will be posting is that after removing the center wheel the loco has electrical pickup and traction problems. Duh, I’d wonder why.
I got this advices from the site long before you showed up here. I am sure 50 percent of your postings is saying I am wrong or did it wrong. If you re read, I did say try to fix either the track or engine first!
Worst thing would not be able to run the engine!
Traction will be cut back some, but it would make it around the track. Power pick up from the track will be the same as a 4 wheel truck engine.
Swayin, I am so sorry I went off like this. But, as soon as I saw Tarnished Wings answered the post I knew he or she was not going to be kind.
One thing I am good at is making things work that should not work. Comes from being a Hot Rodder. I guess some people here like Tarnished Wings cannot do it, so they have to criticizes people that can.
Here is a link to a poor video of the engines I had to pull the center wheels out of till I got better at track laying. Video is 5 years old and engines are 30 years old, layout does look better now.
http://s83.photobucket.com/albums/j284/cudaken/Videos/?action=view¤t=good.flv
I think Don Gibson is back.
&nbs
Ken,
You’ve been very helpful on many of my posts and I sure appreciate the advice. This is, by and large, quite a civil board and so I was sorry to see that last post.
Ken - I have NEVER seen the advice of removing the center axle on a 3 axle truck as a cure for derailing problems on this or another forum or in any magazine given by an reputable modeler. SO, according to your method of solving problems, when you had problems with your various steam locomotives, you should have simply removed one of the wheelsets. So your 2-6-6-2 might have become a 2-4-6-2 or your Big Boy would have become a 0-8-8-4 since (based on the recent post and pic you posted in another thread) the pilot wheels were always derailing. Let me try to put it hot rodder terms (and grammar) you can related to - the engine in my car runs rough and all so has a knock. I should remove the spark plug for the cylinder that has the knock and all so block the fuel intake. That will stop the knocking, but it doesn’t fix the root cause of the problem. Sure the car will continue to run, but its performance and reliability will be adversely affected. If I run it really fast, I mean drive it on the highway, the missing spark plug and cylinder won’t be as noticeable since the other 5 out of 6 cylinder will still be working. But now its really bad to drive the car around town and I have a had time towing my trailer and going up hills.
Nice video - NOT! Hard to see the missing axles. But it does point out a few other “Do NOT Do”. First and foremost - do not lay your track on top of indoor/outdoor fake grass carpet. It is not a stable, suitable subroadbed. The other thing that is very evident is the problems with your benchwork. When the train heads away from the camera you can see it rolling up and down over uneven benchwork (oh yeah you call it a bench) and track. No wonder you had to twist tie some of your cars together to keep them from uncoupling and you have derailment problems.
When bad advice or solutions to a problem is gi
[sigh]
Sliver, first let me say I am sorry I got nasty last night, it had been a hard day.
If you dig back 5 years ago on this site, you would see this advices. What got me mad was the fact you left out I said try to fix the engine and or the track first.
You sure are right there! Bench was a slot car track, I did not know any better.
Right again, my wood working skills are not good. Swayin, good wood working is paramount!
Silver. I had some problems last year with 3 passenger cars, but I found the problem and fixed the cars. Now 5 years ago when I first started installing Kadee’s I had problems. Thanks to people here, this is no longer a problem.
I don’t mind criticism, just a little kinder tone would be nice. Some of my solutions may be different, but they work for me.
[quote user=“Silver Pilot”]
In the almost 15 years since I’ve switched to DCC, I’ve never, I repeat, never, burned out a decoder[/