Fast question: Does the term “Sprung trucks” mean that there are real springs on the trucks?
(As opposed to the term "Die cast trucks) As always, thanks.
Yes, but the term “die cast” does NOT mean there aren’t springs in the trucks - it means the parts are die cast. “Rigid Frame” generally means no springs in the trucks.
BRUNTON: Thanks for your swift reply. (Guess we both got up before breakfast!)
I’ve had rolling stock with sprung trucks and even a loco that came with them. Close up they look good but at even a short distance they’re usually not noticed unless the person looking is looking for them.
I still have a number of trucks on old rolling stock that have real springs in them. If I have any problems with them, I need to replace the trucks, though. They tend to be a bit squishy, and I’ve had problems with the cars derailing, and, in one case, with the wheels coming out while running the car in a train.
To ALL: Thread end-- I have the information that I was seeking. Many thanks for your time and attention. I knew that I asked the right people. Thanks again.
Not so fast – there is an additional element here that was not discussed. Some really good trucks are “sprung and equalized” – meaning that the side frames can twist a bit on the bolster and thus adjust to uneven track better. Some model railroad sprung trucks have such stiff springs, or the side frame fits so tightly into the bolster parts, that the trucks do not do much better over rough track than unspring, solid sideframe trucks. The springs in that case are largely cosmetic.
It is also possible for a truck to be equalized but not sprung. I have some antiques in my collection where the sideframe attached to the bolster with a screw or bolt so that it can turn on that axis. Some brass steam locomotives had tenders with leaf springs where the trucks were equalized but not sprung.
Dave Nelson
I bought a handmade skeleton logging car with trucks that were both sprung and equalized, and I hated them!
I never use that word, but I got rid of them soooooooo fast…
I don’t blame you! Mine got ‘lost’ real fast. Get this, they were made by Walther’s.
I assume you read tatans thread. [:D]
Good Job !
Jeffrey, these were very nice looking trucks…I wish I could have kept them, but their springs were so stiff, and the equalizing too, that the trucks seemed permanently off true, and they would not track. I could get the car to track if I placed my hand on it and added about 2 kg of pressure.
Something was amiss.
All the metal ones I have were pulled because they wouldn’t track or the cars sat crooked. I have 2 cars I bought on E-Bay that had plastic equalized trucks (with metal springs) and they worked very well. I wish I knew who made them. The metal ones will live on in a gondola scrap load.
From past experience (over 30 years in the hobby) my thoughts on sprung trucks is that they look good, but do not perform as well as the plastic die-cast ones. If you do decide to add them to your rolling stock, make sure to add the appropriate weight to your car. The spring trucks will track much better if the car has some weight added to it. One trick I’ve used to add the illusion of springs on my die-cast trucks is to paint them on.
Here’s a tank car i’ve built showing this “painted” spring technique.
Could the stiff truck problembe solved by replacing the springs with Kadee coupler springs?
I tried that. It didn’t work for me.
The KD knuckle springs are a lot smaller in diameter.
Years ago Model Railroader did an analysis of the performance qualities of both sprung (some of which may have been equalized) and rigid HO scale trucks. IIRC the conclusion was that sprung trucks did not perform any better. However it seems many believe sprung trucks are superior at following irregularities in the track. Was that study flawed? Do sprung trucks really track better?
They should, but the springs are so stiff that they tend to make the metal trucks kink or torsion, as I saw it. So, instead of two nicely parallel axles in all planes, the axles were a few degrees off in at least one plane, thus keeping one or more flanges clear of the rail head. You know the rest.
In retrospect, the metal trucks probably need to be lubed after a mechanical and perhaps fairly lengthy break-in with a motorized jig of some sort. They need to be “exercised” to loosen them up. Perhaps another reader who knows something about this will offer an opinion.
I found that sprung trucks seem to perform better when used on O scale and larger scale rolling stock due to the increased mass. Unsprung and equalized trucks seem to perform best on rolling stock in the smaller scales.
I dont bother.
However, I dreamed of a steam locomotive frame that had springs on each axle to give a little better ride over the small stuff like track joiners and such. Maybe it’s too much to ask for.
Sprung trucks to me is just asking for trouble.
If my solid wheels and trucks bounce the rolling stock over a joint, out comes the dremel with the stone disk to eliminate the offending 1 scale inch bounce.
And furthermore, a dallop of bradgon powder onto the trucks and VOILA! SPRINGS! and Brake shoes Oh JOY!
Without the hunting, off center tracking, flopping springs, missing springs, crookedly high or low trucks with a bad case of the leans.
Whew… thanks for reminding me why I went with regular one peice trucks.