Anyone else dislike these new knuckle couplers as much as I do? ...Until about a year ago all my equipment was older and had horn hook couplers, also known as X2F couplers. When I started getting new locos and rolling stock it all had magnetic knuckle couplers which I discovered were not backward compatible with the old X2F couplers. I discovered that not all of my older locomotives could be easily converted to knuckle couplers without major surgery which I am not willing to do. Some of those old locos still run good but are out of production with no parts available so I don't want to take the chance of damaging them if a coupler conversion doesn't go well. I made up several transition cars out of cabooses so I could run the old locos with new rolling stock. I remember seeing trains on the Norfolk & Western in the 1960s with a caboose behind the locomotive used as a mail car so that would be historically accurate for the era that I model. ...After I started running the new knuckle coupler equipped hardware I discovered that the knuckles don't like grade changes or rough track. Also different brands of rolling stock won't always stay coupled. Long strings of cars come uncoupled almost constantly.  Another big headache is the microscopic coil spring on the knuckle couplers. A derailment or a hard hit on the coupler will dislodge the spring and it will then spring away never to be seen again. Replacing those springs is almost impossible with my middle aged eyes so I have to replace the coupler to fix them. I experimented with the knuckle couplers to find out why they were causing me such a big reliability problem and discovered that a hard pull such as an upward grade or a long string of heavy freight cars will cause the coupler to travel vertically and slip out of the other coupler. The old X2F couplers have a shelf on the bottom of the coupler to limit vertical movement so it cannot slip out of the other coupler. That is why the X2F is a more reliable coupler that will stay together on grade changes, uneven track and will even stay coupled in a derailment. The X2F also has no coil spring to dislodge and render the coupler useless. The X2F will also couple on a curve while the knuckles will only couple on straight track. If I set up a layout with an overpass I will only use the old hardware with the X2F couplers if I want the train to stay together. I started looking at different couplers and discovered that Kadee made knuckle couplers with a lower shelf.  They are the Kadee 118 and 119. They are both medium center set so they won't fit everything. The 118 uses a separate spring and the 119 has whisker springs. I got some of these and tested them. The lower shelf on the coupler limits vertical movement and keeps them together on less than perfectly level track. Recently I purchased an IHC 0-8-0 steam locomotive with a Magic Mate coupler. I noticed that it had a lower shelf built into it and no coil spring. The trip pin can be slid up and down to adjust for clearance instead of having to use special pliers to bend them. The majic mate coupler is a universal coupler so they will also work with the old X2F couplers as well as magnetic knuckle couplers. I got some majic mate couplers and installed them on several locos to test them. The magic mates are a medium center set style coupler only so they may not work on everything. On the test track the magic mates will hook up to both knuckle and X2F couplers and stay coupled as reliably as the X2F couplers. ...They still won't couple on an 18" curve, you have to push the cars to a straight section of track like standard knuckle couplers. The majic mates will couple to anything and don't have that tiny coil spring that can dislodge and cause a coupler failure so I will be replacing the standard couplers on my equipment with magic mates any time they fail. 

Clicking is usually a split axle gear or broken gear in the drivetrain. Sometimes the locomotive will move and sometimes the drivetrain will bind and stall the loco.

Steam locomotives with DCC in the tender have wires with tiny plugs that have to be plugged into the back of the loco. Plugging and unplugging those connectors into the loco and handling the unit while it is wired together will eventually damage the plugs and wires. I would suggest a provision to permanently couple the locomotive and tender to prevent strain on wires and connectors. Also provide a storage box long enough to store the coupled locomotive and tender. This would prevent damage to wires and plugs from repeated connecting and disconnecting of the plugs to put the loco and tender back in the box for safe storage. I have an IHC 0-8-0 that is set up with the loco drawbar permanently connected to the tender. It can go on the tracks or back in the box without risk of damage to connector or wires. I also have a 1970s Chessie steam loco with electrical pickup in the tender. The locomotive drawbar is screwed to the tender to prevent damage to the power wire when handling the unit.

I have a 4-4-0 American in HO scale (product code 51112) I noticed it is tiny, almost looks like N scale. It looks like a toy sitting next to a GP-40 diesel. Nineteenth century locomotives were much smaller than mid twentieth century steam and diesel locos. Here is a picture on railpictures.net of an early 4-4-0 (CP63) sitting next to Nickel Plate 765 which was built in the 1940s. The 4-4-0 looks like a toy train next to the big Berkshire.    http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=292205&nseq=9

Quote from: cyclopedg on September 08, 2009, 12:43:43 PM
Dear Friends,
this is my first post here. I'm 38 already and have a kid of 6. I also bought the mentioned Frontiersman set. I have a (vintage, at this stage) set of N scale and by comparison I find that this Frontiersman it's really small. Is it me or, in 1:1, this train would be in fact smaller?
If you want to see the photos of my set pls go to:
http://picasaweb.google.com/cyclopedg/TrenBachmann#
Any comments will be welcomed.
Brgds/Leo

It is still the simplest and most cost effective way to power a model locomotive. No batteries, no charging and no wireless remote control with its own battery. Rechargable batteries with high power density are expensive and have a finite lifespan. A 50 year old track powered train set can be hauled out of the attic, cleaned up, oiled and run. Don't have to replace a battery pack or failed electronics. Many large scale outdoor layouts are battery powered and radio controlled because of the difficulty of reliably feeding power through the rails in an outdoor environment. I have looked at G scale locomotives that can be powered and controlled through the track or by an onboard battery and radio control depending on where they are to be operated.   

that would have been as soon as I was old enough to stand up and look out the screen door in the kitchen. The Nickel Plate Road went through the middle of a field behind the house. I don't remember seeing any steam locomotives, only diesels. ...One of my earliest childhood memories is standing at the kitchen door watching giant black monsters roar through the field while the floor of the house vibrated beneath my feet...and wondering what they were.

I am seeing problems with 2 out of 6 switches and a 90 degree crossing. Pushing railcars through the turnout is almost impossible. Did severe damage to a switching locomotive when it hit one of those switches at medium speed and ended up on a hardwood floor. I have seen too many other people with EZ track switch problems. I will probably keep some EZ track curves and straights for testing and temporary setups and abandon the rest. My entire layout is now dismantled and put away since I am doing some remodeling on the house. Looks like I will be shopping for better quaility track when I rebuild the layout.

...Wonder if I could get just the EZ track roadbed for switches and crossings and mount Atlas track on them. I have a lot of EZ track and don't want to scrap it all and start over. I wanted to get some number 5 or 6 switches for long passenger cars but I am hesitant since those are pricey and I will be very unhappy if they don't work any better than the standard switches. ...It should not be necessary to rebuild something that should work right in the first place.

I won't even try to run new equipment up and down an incline because I have enough trouble keeping the rail cars coupled on level track. My older equipment had the horn hook couplers and never uncoupled on inclines or rough track. The knuckle couplers that have become standard on all new equipment are a royal pain. Can't keep them coupled unless your track is level and perfect because there is no shelf in the coupler to keep them from slipping up and out of the other coupler. I have some new rolling stock that refuses to stay coupled with another brand of rolling stock because the knuckle couplers don't play well together. The horn hooks would stay coupled even in a derailment. The horn hooks were considered big and ugly and couldn't be uncoupled with a magnet but they were more reliable which equals a lot less frustration.

I have several of those older Bachmann locomotives with one truck driven by a 3 pole pancake motor and electrical pickup on both trucks. They are all sitting on a display shelf now since they are dead or no longer run reliably. In my experience they run good for a short time when new then the gears start to go bad or the drive gears start to slip on the axles. The plastic gears will also split. Another problem with those older locos is that they have rubber drive tires on the drive truck wheels to compensate for the fact that they are too light to get good traction on just one drive truck. I have seen anywhere from one wheel with a drive tire to all four. The life span of these rubber tires can be anywhere from years to about a half hour. They will stretch and spin off or get brittle and crack with age. When the drive tires are gone they have no traction and since there are grooves in the wheels for the tires, they are going to derail, if they can move at all. Some old Tycho locomotives also used the same type of drive with plastic wheels and rubber tires on one side of the drive truck. Lifelike still uses that design since I recently purchased a new Lifelike locomotive online that has the one truck drive with rubber drive tires....I wonder how long before that one gets parked on the dead line. ...I try to avoid locos that use that design as they are nothing but trouble. They have a short lifespan and will wind up being used as scenery... or sitting on a shelf in a static display.

I have 2 out of six standard NS EZ track switches that have problems with derailments caused by points catching the wheels. I also have a 90 degree crossing that is rough and will cause derailments at higher speeds. I have old Atlas track without the roadbed. I have 6 Atlas switches and 2 crossings that have never caused problems. Problem with the Atlas standard snap track is that it doesn't stay together very good if you don't nail it down with track pins. I got the EZ track with an ON30 train set and liked the covenience of being able to change the layout and set it up on carpet since it stays together without track pins. I got some 22 inch and 26 inch curves for long passenger cars and all was well until I added switches and crossings. I am not happy with the design or quality of the EZ track switches and crossings. I don't think the Atlas tru track will connect with EZ track. Don't think the atlas switches will work on the EZ track roadbed either since the switch machines are totally different.

Same problem here with one switch in particular. The point sticks out just enough for a wheel flange to get behind it and try to go straight instead of following the curve. This can happen to any rail car and some locomotives at random. Seems to depend on how they hit the switch. This seems to be a common problem with bachmann switches since I have seen complaints in other model railroad message boards about the same issue. I have some old Atlas switches from the 1990s that never caused derailments. I notice that the straight rail has a recess cut into it that allows the point to fit into the straight rail so the point doesn't stick out to trip a wheel. When I got back into model railroading, I bought an ON30 set with the EZ track. I like to change and move my layout quite a bit so I use the roadbed track and bought more of it to make a bigger multi track layout. All was well until I started adding switches and the derailments began. I don't think the Atlas roadbed track and Bachmann will fit together so that may not be an easy solution.   

The original Bachmann over under fig 8 consisted of twenty 18" curves, five 9" straights, two 6" straights and a 9" straight bridge with a set of 28 piers to elevate the bridge. I determined that the bridge crossed the lower level at a 60 degree angle. I got an atlas code 100 60 degree crossing and four 3" straights. I removed the 9" straight section and the bridge from the center of the layout and replaced them with the crossing and the 3" straights. The 6" straights are at both ends of the fig 8 loop to get the proper spacing for the cross over. This measured 82"x43" and fit on a 4'x8' table. ...To build this, start with the crossing then one 3" straight, one 9" straight, 5 curves left, then a 6" straight, 5 more curves left. one 9" straight, one 3" straight, 60 degree crossing, one 3" straight, one 9" straight, 5 curves to the right, one 6" straight, 5 curves right, one 9" straight, one 3" straight and connect to the crossing to complete the loop.  ...I also could get a 90 degree crossing by building the 18" curves with only 9 sections, remove the 6" sections at the far ends of the fig 8 and putting a 90 degree crossover with four 6" straights in the middle of the fig 8. The 90 degree layout is 38"x86" and fits a 4'x8' table. My old equipment ran good on either layout. When I ran new locos and rolling stock with knuckle couplers there were constant derailments at the crossing. I discovered that the trip pins on the couplers had to be adjusted upward with a pair of coupler pliers to clear the crossing. No more problems after adjusting the trip pins.   

No break in, I shut it down when I noticed something abnormal. I was wondering if the drive train was a little rough and might smooth out with some run time. The drive train could also be out of balance which is not likely to improve with run time. I wanted to see if anyone else has had this problem and what they did to get it corrected. The more I look at the exploded view and examine the loco, the less I want to try and disassemble it.

I have an old (1992) over and under figure 8 set with piers just like that. It came with a diesel locomotive with only one driven truck and rubber traction tires on two of the four drive wheels. It was a pretty steep climb but it always made it to the top until the traction tires stretched out and spun off, that leaves the grooved wheels with little or no traction. I don't know if Bachmann still uses traction tires on any of their newer locos. You might check and see if there two wheels grooved for rubber traction tires that may be missing. I have several new diesel locos and a berkshire. They are all wheel drive and heavy with no traction tires. I have never run my new locos on the over under layout since long ago, I removed the bridge and now use a 60 degree crossing track and run it flat.