Quote from: jward on March 13, 2026, 12:27:33 PM

Quote from: trainman203 on March 10, 2026, 09:02:58 PMI don't know how this will reproduce in this form, but this Sanborn map is a view of some long-gone very compact street running switching trackage in my hometown, reminiscent of the 4x8 under discussion. The T&NO comes in from the left. It crosses the vertically running MP several times. The T&NO was in this location at least 20 years before the MP arrived.

https://www.loc.gov/resource/g4014nm.g033751952/?sp=9&st=image&r=0.346,0.184,0.575,0.669,0

Looking at this map raises some questions. There has to be an interesting story here. My understanding is that the later railroad to arrive must pay for any necessary junctions to the existing railroad, and for a tower to control things if necessary. Could the T&NO have purposely added more industrial spurs in order to increase the cost of the MoPac coming to town? How was the issue of T&NO fouling the MP line to serve these industries handled? Did they have to get permission to foul the MP? Or were speed low enough and traffic light enough that visual right of way would suffice?

I would have no idea about the business dimensions of these two railroads crossing each each other so many times within a few hundred feet.

However, there was definitely no tower at that location at that location with that street running track, I never saw anything move on it during the day.  I found out later on with the MP only switched it at night to avoid any auto traffic.  But I have to say, this was a pretty small town and I don't remember ever seeing anything approaching heavy traffic on that street as many times as I rode my bicycle up and down that street.  We were never able to talk to anyone on the T&NO about that location, but I remember seeing a box car at that oil dealer only a couple of times and a only couple of boxcars on the one that curved way to the right after the crossing the MP.  There's a more detailed map of everything to the right that I need to find, should've posted it before.

Also, these tracks here were dead end switching trackage with engines only moving one or two cars at a time, there were no actual train movements with cabooses at this location.

I did a very long, detailed narrative about this spur and the Missouri Pacific in my town in general on another forum a couple of years ago. I could post the link to it here if anyone is interested.

Put the locomotive on an actual program track .  You should be able to get a read out of a manufacturers number which is a standard established by the NMRA.  The next thing it will tell you is a product ID number. Once you know who made this decoder and what it actually is, you can pursue it in more detail.

 To me this sounds like a preowned locomotive with an unknown aftermarket decoder. Correct me if I'm wrong.

But if by some miracle it happens to be a Soundtraxx product, follow their instructions to reset the decoder to factory default by doing a cv8 reset to value eight.  You then break the power to the locomotive by rocking it completely off of one rail, then setting it back down and you should see the headlight blink 16 times if the reset is correctly negotiated.  At that point, the address will be 3 and all functions should work.

Have you tried putting this engine on an actual program track?  If you do that, you can read the address and you can read what each CV value actually is.  One of the first things that will do is provide you a manufacturer ID number which is established by NMRA standards, and you can look it up and see who actually made this decoder.  Then you should be able to get a CV list and know which CV actually does what.

Have you called Bachmann to ask?

I don't know how this will reproduce in this form, but this Sanborn map is a view of some long-gone very compact street running switching trackage in my hometown, reminiscent of the 4x8 under discussion. The T&NO comes in from the left. It crosses the vertically running MP several times. The T&NO was in this location at least 20 years before the MP arrived.

https://www.loc.gov/resource/g4014nm.g033751952/?sp=9&st=image&r=0.346,0.184,0.575,0.669,0

Well, I've seen the plan, and I believe it, seeing is believing.  For those who like a lot of track and a lot of stuff in a small space, this guy has really done it.

Of course everyone does everything differently on their own layout, and if I had that exact track plan, I wouldn't try to crowd that city into it, I would've let the industries be a little more freestanding. But this modeler seems to really like building structures, so more power to him.

A 4 x 8 is a 4 x 8, and that's all that ever will be, but this lemon really got squeezed.

The manual and list of CV's are available on the Soundtraxx website under "factory installed decoders."

The only trouble with downsizing for me is that, in HO scale, I have well over 50 locomotives and probably five or 600 freight cars, I lost count a long time ago.  Everything was very carefully curated and chosen to represent between 1935 and 1948, several locomotives have heavy custom detailing that I went to a lot of trouble to get.  Sweeping that much stuff out of the door in one swell foop is pretty much nigh unto impossible.  Plus, I'm very attached to a lot of it since so much of it represents what I saw in my youth.

 Not only that, I'm in line to inherit a large collection from a local guy who is several years older than me wants to leave it to me.  That's probably another 20 diesel locomotives and at least 300 and more freight cars. Plus a bunch of passenger stuff that I'm not interested in. Fortunately, my friend and his business partner run a traveling LHS at Train shows and I believe we can methodically dispose of some of the stuff there, especially the diesels and the passenger equipment.

Until I see an actual track plan of the Sioux town layout with dimensions, I'll never believe that layout is a 4 x 8.  The perspectives in looking at distance views on that layout are just too long. I am a retired architect with some art training too, and I believe I can speak with some authority about this.  At 8:24 is one of several overall views that cannot possibly be on a 4 x 8 surface.

I hold a very unpopular view of embracing layout concepts with a lot of empty negative space. I want to make it clear that it's just me speaking, but an overcrowded layout like that is not what I would do.  There's no telling how many industries are on that layout but man, I feel claustrophobia setting in just looking at that layout. Not meaning to diminish those who enjoy such a layout, including its builder who certainly is very happy with his layout.

I think the easy quick answer to this question is, the right number of industries on any layout is the kind that allows some room for scenery of any kind around them. That will depend on the kind of industry, of course.

In a few short years, I'm going to be in a situation where all I'll be able to have will be 4 x 8 at best, it will be a big disappointment after having a 50 foot long point to point with four communities on it.  But I've been looking at 4x8 plans for a while and the best ones seem to be the ones that have a passing track on either side, acting as a point A and point B since real railroads deliver people or products from Point A to Point B.  That is, if you want to approach prototypical operation.  After studying umpteen 4x8 plans trying to envision some kind of operation on them, I've come to the conclusion that for my purposes point A needs to be basically an interchange with a main line receiving cars. The other side becomes point B, essentially the end of a branch line.  Then the best you seem to be able to get is two customers at either point.  That is, if scenery means anything to you.  You keep the oval because everyone at some point just feels like mindlessly watching a train run, I am no exception.

It's going to be a big painful downsize.  The best that the layout this size can handle is probably two engines and maybe 10 or 12 cars.

I remember Sid. He was a great modeler.  What happened to his layoutand his stuff?

You mean it got colder and the EZ command ceased to function?

I hope you get that engine fixed.  The light and heavy mountains were beautiful early spectrum offerings that had the best of everything the spectrum line offered, myriad separately applied details in particular.  If there was a flaw with those engines, it was the downward pointing driver pick up wipers that if bent downward wrongly the slightest amount, could snag on track work.

I don't expect those two engines to be ever be re-introduced.  Although they could get around 18 inch radius curves, it was an awkward experience.  The current mikado appears to have replaced these engines for good, slightly shorter and able to get around 18 inch radius better, plus they got rid of 90% of the seperately applied details which brought the price point way down a fair amount.  The mikado is still a nice locomotive, I have several, overall performance is exceptional, including radically slow switching speed

So, be careful with that beautiful engine, you may find it difficult to get a a second chance with an additional one.

Well, if the engine runs fine in DC but shorts out with a decoder (what you call a "chip"),  it's pretty clear that there is a polarity reversal issue of some kind with the decoder and/or its installation.  I'm not going to go any further than that because I've never done a decoder install but from what you're saying, that seems to be where you need to be looking.

Whatever brand of decoder you're using, you probably should call Customer Service at that vendor and talk to them about your problem.

If you have a sound decoder, you could try just placing the tender on the track alone and see if you can activate the sounds without a short, which would further tell you that the problem is not with the decoder or the tender installation, but somehow in the connection between the engine and the tender.

Motor Mount loose?