I use Kadee sprung trucks on my HO scale rolling stock, and they stick to the track MUCH better than rigid-frame trucks. The parts (the sideframes and the connecting piece - I don’t know what it’s called - are all die-cast. Being die-cast or not has nothing to do with whether the trucks are sprung or rigid frame) all move relative to each other with ease, allowing the wheels to follow minor variations in the track.
Rigid trucks give you the “uneven table legs” issue where one leg (wheel) might be slightly shorter (higher/lower) than the others, making the table (truck) rock between two of the legs (wheels).
Hunting, off-center tracking and the car leaning one direction or another have nothing to do with trucks being sprung or rigid. Too much friction at the sprung trucks’ sideframe swivels and the trucks MAY be crooked, but that’s usually easily fixable. On rigid frame trucks, a distorted frame which gives the same effect is only fixable by discarding and replacing the whole frame.
For some folks sprung trucks just seem to increase problems; for others, like myself, they eliminate many.
Like Brunton, I’ve had better luck with sprung trucks, and more problems with rigid ones. Theoretically sprung trucks should perform better, so I think it’s a matter of making sure that the mating surfaces of the bolsters and side frames are free of flash or burrs, particularly with die cast trucks. I bought some Walthers sprung plastic trucks a while back, and went over them carefully when I assembled them to be sure that they moved freely and sat true. IIRC there were some molding irregularities that I cleaned up, and to date I haven’t had any problems with them.
I think SteamFreak is correct, the issue has quite a bit to do with quality and tolerances as opposed to sprung or not sprung and in theory, but not always perhaps in practice, a sprung and equalized truck should have it all over solid side trucks. As we know in actual practice this can vary greatly. Having said that, since most modern layouts feature sectional or prefab/flex track and not hand laid (which can have more variances in tie height) maybe this is no longer as important as it once was.
Maybe you have to be a geezer to remember when Central Valley trucks were top of the line for looks, realism and operation, although not always the easiest to mount on a car. They seemed to get the spring tension just right. Some of the early metal Athearn sprung trucks had too much spring tension and they were not good rolling trucks. In rigid trucks they typically allow for the needed flexibility by making the axle ends loose in the bearings. That was the problem with the AHM trucks (quite apart from the huge flanges). Sometimes the wheels actually would fall out of the truck!
Although I model in HO, somewhere in my collection I have some O gauge Andrews type trucks made by Carl Auel back in the 1930s. The detail is superb even by today’s standards and the spring action quite realistic. By the way I said O gauge, and not O scale, quite deliberately. Auel made his trucks to 17/64’s scale, the corrected scale so that O gauge track is accurate. But many true 1/4 inch scalers used them, too – they just look a bit big under a car. If I recall correctly the ends of the axles are squared off, not pointed.
FOLLOW-UP: [:)][wow] I’m certainly glad I started this thread. I love to read your posts. My original quest was to just clarify the term “sprung trucks” that I saw in an ad. You certainly have given me a lot of information. THANKS, AGAIN.
I have sprung trucks on most of my fleet of freight and passenger cars. I rework the older ones and replace with Kadee wheel sets. Like to watch them equalize as they go over a track joint. Also like them because they will not roll away when a car is set at an industry. But I run less than 25 car freight trains on my layout.
Here is a picture of a TYCO flat car that I’ve just rebuilt with sprung trucks.
Isn’t that just a nice way of saying they don’t roll very well?[:D]]
It’s funny, I just put a pair of Kaydee’s on a Tyco flat car this mourning. After 2 hours tweeking, it still won’t roll down a 2.5% grade and derails on every curve it hits. I think it just joined the ranks of “static displays” I guess that’s better than joining the wall or floor at a high rate of speed.[:P]
Include your chrome Silver Streak caboose and a C-Liner from your Bicentennial locomotive collection, and you got yourself a deal!
Okay then, this thread has become far too silly! [|(]
In all seriousness, the early Tyco/Mantua flat cars were painted instead of being molded in color, and had RP25 flanges on their stock trucks. They were pretty decent cars for their time, but were cheapened later.
That looks great with the better stirrups and grabs, steamage. Nice job. [:)][tup]
I have had a chance to deal with some of these issues on my 0 scale trucks.
That warped condition some speak of doesn’t exist and must be peculiar to H0.
0 scale trucks that are sprung and equalized behave like rigid trucks because the springs are too stiff to flex. This has to be because softer springs tend to fall out when you drop the car. For these and the rigid, the solution is the same: One truck to pivot freely, and the other looser to allow the car to pivot freely.
To prototypically equalize 0 scale two rail Athearn trucks (the only ones I’ve tried this on), the two outer springs are replaced with centering springs from the Kadee 803’s (0n3 couplers) and the third one (rear center) stays as a pivot. This allows the wheels to follow wherever the track leads without adding a lot of weight. On the down side, they appear skinny and copper colored, and if you drop the car they tend to ‘dissappear’. If you have ‘nine miles of bad track’ then this is a good trick. If your track is good, the equalizing will not be necessary.
A few years ago, I spent a lot of time agonizing over free rolling HO trucks. I found that in all the sprung and/or equalized freight trucks on the market, the tolerances were far too sloppy to keep the sideframes parallel to each other. Both would lean out at the bottom, one out at the bottom and the other out at top, etc. This slop is probably necessary to allow them to work under typical car weights but it meant that the tapered holes for the axel bearings didn’t align and the actual bearing surfaces were no longer “needle point”.
These misalligned bearings wouldn’t roll down a 2% grade. The solution was very strong springs which held the truck as rigid as a rigid sideframe. Nothing was gained.
While in theory sprung sideframes should be better, in actuality a rigid truck is better, even on irregular track where one wheel is barely touching, because the bearings are always in allignment.
What’s “…a few years ago?” Which brands of trucks? Maybe you should try some of the better quality ones out now.
I have never seen the issue of non-parallel sideframes in any of the Kadees I’ve bought (well over 50 sets, with many more coming). I did have some Old Pullmans (still do actually, though not in use) that rolled like a brick. I’ve had some of the Kadees for nearly twenty years - they’re not new to the market by a long shot.
