I have a Con-Cor PCC trolley running on a DC layout. The package says it is "DCC Ready". I find it takes nearly twice the throttle setting for the same speed as all my other four trolleys (two Spectrums and t
Bowsers). The Spectrum trolleys came with a dummy plug for DC operation and with a DCC plug in board. I installed the dummy plug in the Spectrums. The Bowser trolleys are NOT DCC ready.

Is it possible I have to install a dummy plug in the Con-Cor Trolley to make it more efficient in using the DC power source? If so where can i find a dummy plug for it?

LDBennett

dragger:

Thanks for the input. I'm not familiar with a small digital recording device. And my micro controller would have to be able to trigger it (??). Have you got any brands in mind?

I thought about the real bell some more. I thought maybe putting it into a sound insulated box would allow the sound to be attenuated but I fear the higher frequencies would be attenuated more than the lower ones and you would get the muffled sound with no sharpness to the ring. Maybe a series of holes would allow the higher frequencies to come through while attenuating most of the lower frequency and the overall sound level (??).

LDBennett

My little trolley layout needs some sound for trolleys. All I want is the bell the trolley driver rang a couple of times before moving off from a stop. My plan is to have a microprocessor, that will control the layout, provide a ground during startup of any trolley on the track. That is the only sound I want. Each ground output would ring the bell once.

Dallee is suppose to eventually be making a sound for trolleys but it is much more than I want. The bell circuit would not be in the trolley but attached to the layout as a stationary sound system. Anyone got any insight as to how to get the sound of the bell?

I considered using a real bell but the sound level would be way too high. Any attempt to muffle it would change the sound, so the sound almost has to be electronic. I have no idea what is available in the way of electronic sound generators or sounds or by whom ().

Anyone got any ideas?

LDBennett

Well, I made a few mistakes on this subject. Fortunately I have yet to buy anything.

I thought my track on my existing layout was Code 100. Well, it is Code 83, which changes all the part numbers of the Atlas track system (using flex track).

In addition, I laid out the potential design on paper and found that my original design will not fit in the allotted space. The "yard" area is much tighter and has to be in a different spot using different turnouts and no WYE will fit. Its all a squeeze.

What is the history of Code 100 vs. Code 83 track? Why are their two different height track systems? I understand the reference number refers to the height of the rails (0.100 inches vs 0.083 inches). But why are there these two options?

LDBennett

Atlas says use the right switch machine #53 with the WYE #280.

LDBennett

That was my guess too but then I noticed the machines were mounted on the straight track side in both left and right hand cases.

The machines are long (??) and maybe the straight track side is needed for clearance of the machine (??). So it still leaves me wondering. I sent a question to Atlas.  Maybe they'll respond or maybe someone here has used the HO Code 100 Wye with a switch machine (??).

LDBennett

What LEDs are used inside Locomotives and street cars that have uniform illumination all the way down to the car barely moving (low track voltage on DC layout)? Are they available anywhere? Are there other components used along with the LED, like a voltage regulator? Anyone got the circuit if there are other components used?

LDBennett

I want to use Atlas Code 100 track. They have different switch machines for left and right turnouts. Which one do you use with the WYE #280? Their web page does not say.

LDBennett

ebtnut:

Part of the Bowser modification chassis was the elimination of the plastic light spreader. There is just not room for the big motor/trucks and lighting and the light spreader. They used incandescent bulbs which at slow normal trolley speeds are so dim as to be useless. I stuck the bare bulbs back into the chassis but they barely illuminate if at all.

You are probably right about the LEDs in the Con-Cor PCC trolley. There is, after all, a circuit board in there for DCC (I believe it is DCC "Ready"). Including LEDs for illumination would be simple for Con-Cor. I am not a purest for this hobby and blue white or yellow white illumination makes no difference to me but I am impressed in the effect of the Con-Cor interior. I'd certainly buy another Con-Cor trolley. I have a Bowser trolley on the way and it will be interesting to see how it works and looks.

This is getting addictive (buying trolleys). Im up to five with the Bowser and all I have is eight feet of straight track. The layout is nearing completion at great expense way beyond my initial concept but it has been fun so far. I am contemplating complete Microprocessor controlled operation rather than expanding the layout. My grandson can do the programming for me (he's into programming and I want him to cultivate his natural ability to program).


LDBennett

Well, I was wrong!!!

Extended testing showed that the flywheel weight made the Bachmann/Bowser PCC trolley run much smoother at a snail's pace.

I still did not notice much of a momentum effect other than allowing the trolley to run smoother. There seems to be little effect in the stops and starts.

But the contrast in the detail of the Bachmann PCC shell to the the Con-Cor PCC trolley is stark. The illumination of the Con-Cor PCC is fantastic. The Con-Cor PCC Trolley, even at very low throttle settings, is fully uniformly illuminated (from end to end). The Con-Cor interior detail, as seen through the crystal clear windows, is amazing whereas the Bachmann PCC has little painted on people in semi opaque windows (toy like). The Con-Cor will move nearly as slowly as the Bachmann/Bowser PCC trolley, just not as smoothly since it has no or minimal flywheel. There must be a voltage regulator inside the Con-Cor for the illumination and the motor as it takes a throttle setting nearly twice what all the other of my trolleys take.

So.... The flywheel weight works for the Bachmann/Bowser. The Con-Cor out of the box is more impressive for looks and nearly the match of the Bachmann/Bowser for slow running. I'm happy with both trolleys but especially with the Con-Cor!

LDBennett

I may have screwed up the Bowser chassis for the Bachmann PCC (not permanently). I installed the A-Line flywheel weight which went on OK but the first test shows that the starting voltage to the motor has to be higher which limits it minimum speed on my trolley layout since  the layout has four stops, two of which are reverses. I don't see any significant improvement in the momentum stopping and starting at first run. I'll test it some more. If the resistance to startup continues I'll take out the flywheel (if I can, as it is glued to the motor shaft with LocTite 609...heat may soften it??).

Sometimes you can get carried away with modifications to anything in the pursuit of perfection, which is un-obtainable! I may have been better off without the flywheel weight (??). To be fair I have to test it more.

LDBennett

I would like to document my experience here with the Bowser motor conversion for the Bachmann PCC trolley. We've been talking about it on another thread but it might go missed so I decided to start a specific thread.

I bought the HO Bachmann PCC trolley. The disappointment was how high the body sat on the chassis.... it did not look right at all. It ran alright but looked wrong. Through dumb luck I found the Bowser motor conversion for it. The Bowser web page said that the conversion lowered the body a scale foot. That's a lot and I decided that is exactly what it needed.

Before buying it I inspected the Bachmann trolley internally and could see that because of the tall powered truck there was no way to lower the body with the stock motor/power truck. The motor was a tiny can motor hung horizontally from the truck itself.

The Bowser motor conversion (specifically for the Bachmann PCC trolley) included a chassis and both the powered truck and the un-powered truck, all assembled. The chassis is full length, cast metal with the motor hard mounted horizontally to the chassis, kind of centrally. The powered truck gets its power from a drive shaft with two u-joints. The motor is much bigger and is in a cast metal can. The task was to adapt the Bachmann body to the Bowser chassis. The instruction were not very clear so here is how I did it.

First off, you have to remove the Bachmann body from its chassis and remove the plastic central tower in the body that is used to mount the Bachmann chassis, using a Dremel cut-off wheel. You also have to remove the lighting clear plastic molded part. You have to run sans lights.  I just glued the red & white "bulbs" into the body and cleared the off the rest of the lighting plastics. To mount the Bowser chassis you have to glue in two cast metal threaded end plates. If you just glue them in they will never align with the holes in the chassis (the instruction don't cover this obvious potential problem). So I assembled the two brass tubes that go from the chassis to the metal plates that will be glued into the body. The conversion comes with the two really long screws, the brass tubes they go through, and a nut. I assembled these parts per the instruction along with the loose metal plates, out of the body. One of the plates is shorter that the other and that is to allow clearance for the powered truck so the short plate goes on the end of the chassis where the powered truck is. Once I got the mounts tightened down with the provided nut and the end plates, I put small pieces of masking tape over the threaded screw holes in the mounting plates to keep the glue out of those holes. Failure to do this might only allow one assembly of the trolley with no way to take it apart later.

Now it was time to glue the chassis plates to the body while they were assembled to the chassis. A trial fit might be prudent. I smeared two part epoxy on the top of the mounting plates carefully and pressed the chassis into the body. I laid out the trolly upside down to keep the chassis tight against the top of the body while the glue dried. After the glue totally dried I verified the screws did not get  glued in by slightly loosening them and then re-tightening them. Time for the road...errr.... rail testing.

I found that the trolley would now run smoother and slower (if desired). And the body was definitely at the correct height above the rails. The latter is the "extra feature".

This modification is very good indeed. Too bad the instruction are so meager but I got it right, none the less. The cost is OK when you consider what I got in the end... a Los Angeles lines PCC trolley in the 1950's Yellow paint scheme that no one else makes, and a trolley that runs better than the original. Also included was the correct body height above the rails.

Hope this helps.

LDBennettt

 Doneldon:

OH....I understand the term "pancake motor" now. It follows the use of the term in model airplanes.

The current Bachmann PCC trolley I have uses a very small "can" motor that is about twice as long as it is in diameter. It is plugged directly into the powered truck, horizontally. This powered truck is so tall that it limits how low that Bachmann could place the body on the chassis.

The Bowser chassis for this PCC trolley uses a "can" motor (appears to be a cast case) that is longer than its diameter. It is much bigger physically than the original Bachmann motor. The Bowser motor mounts hard on to the chassis and feeds the power truck via a drive shaft with u-joints on each end. The motor is tight to the chassis and the truck is a lower profile than the Bachmann power truck, such  that the body can ride lower on the new Bowser chassis. The resultant look of the chassis-to-track height seems much more correct than the Bachmann version. It also runs much smoother and slower, if desired. This was a very good modification, indeed. and considering, was not all that expensive to get a Los Angeles lines PCC.

LDBennett

Yardmaster said:

Spectrum is a Bachmann product.....


Yes, I know and I reported that in my posts on this thread. Spectrum is the premium part of Bachmann. A review of the pricing will reveal that but a review of their schematics of the different models will also reveal that Spectrum is THE premium Bachmann product. The Spectrum catalog is part of the overall Bachman catalog, as well.

LDBennett

 jward:

I don't know what a "pancake" motor looks like but my Bachmann PCC had a very small round can motor. The thing is, the body was mounted so high on the chassis that the look was wrong. In browsing of the Internet I found that Bowser made a motor conversion for the Bachmann PCC that included lowering the body to the correct scale height so it would look right.

My disdain for the Bachmann PCC was not the motor at all but the look of the body being too high on the chassis. For that alone I got the Bowser motor change as it included a new chassis as well, to lower the body.

I made the conversion yesterday. I had to do away with the lighting and had to cut out the plastic cast mounting cylinder in the middle of the body (inside, of course). i was left with a plastic shell body. Then two metal pieces had to be glued into the body inside so that the new chassis had mounting points. The instruction were not very good but I got it right, none the less.

The Bowser motor is awesome. It will run slower than any other trolley I have (Spectrum, Con-Cor, or the original Bachmann PCC). It runs smoothly and quietly. It is definitely an improvement. The body is definitely lower on the chassis and now looks right. I am very pleased with this modification and the resultant PCC. My investment is actually no more than the Spectrum Peter Witt trolley but the details on the Peter Witt are phenomenal by comparison. I don't feel cheated by Bachmann as I got what I paid for and thanks to Bowser it now runs better and looks right. I needed to get this PCC right as it is the Los Angeles line version that was the reason for the whole concept of my layout (and good memories).

I am learning about the quality of the various manufacturers, with the process of doing my layout and with the process of helping my grandson with his "N" gage layout. The Bachmann labeled trains seem to be the entry level ones whereas the Spectrum, Kato, and others are more detailed, better powered, and generally better. But the Bachmann stuff is priced lower too. There is a place for all of it.

Thank all of you that have conversed here with me. You have helped me and I appreciate it.

LDBennett