I found these pictures today (they were taken today).  Check out the last one and read the description below it. AMAZING.

K487

Not being very "digitized", I hope this link works:

http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,300991

I posted this on another forum and thought it would obviously be appropriate here.

As I've posted before, on my HO layout I've got a right-angle figure-8 track where I run a 32-car ore train with one engine and one caboose. The loops are both 11" radius (yes, that's correct, not diameter) - with only one loop visible (basically the rest of the track is out of sight.)

For the last few years I've used an Atlas RS32 as motive power on this train. With no modifications it pulls the train around those 11" radius curves just fine.

Well, a few weeks ago I was doing a minor cleaning/lubing job on two of Bachmann's GP38-2s (running them free-wheeling on the bench and lubing them.)  When I finished I was debating changing out a couple of other engines on another train with these, when the thought came to me, "Why don't you try one of the GP38-2s on the head-end of the ore train? Naaw, that's crazy.  Well, how do you know?  It MIGHT go around the 11" radius curves."

You know me, so I did try it, and with no modifications (see below) to the engines they each took their turn and pulled the train around the figure eight track three times each, and they each went as smooth as silk - not one derailment. I will admit I was very surprised.

So, if you need some diesels for an HO track radius down to 11", you now know that the  Bachmann GP38-2s will work fine "out of the box"...... with this possible caveat - a real nice track easement going into and coming out of the 11" radius track curves may be helpful. (I use Atlas Code 100 Flex Track, and when soldered together first they will basically make their own perfect or near-perfect easement.)

"Caviat +2"  As info, a few years ago I added about 3 ounces of weight (biased to the front so the total engine weight is equalized on both trucks) to each of these GP38-2s, but I highly doubt that that made any difference in their tracking.  And except for also changing the headlight LED, installing metal couplers, and removing the DCC board (I'm a analog DC guy) I didn't modify those  engines at all.

K487

I just wrote a response to the above thread listed below and the computer ate it.

The curves are indeed 11" radius (not diameter).  And believe it or not I myself check this every once in a while.  Why?  Even I have a hard time believing it myself.  And the HO GP38-2s did indeed go through these loops smoothly with zero derailments.

Regarding a pic, I'm 67 and an analog guy; digital things drive me crazy.  My son lives out of state but helps me sometimes when he visits.  I was able to pull up a pic of the visible loop in my computer's Picasa files, but I'll have to find someone locally to help me turn it into a message or whatever and send it.  Or see below:

This may sound crazy, but if one of you could help walk me through this pls send a private email with your phone number and I'll be glad to call you back.  Maybe we could get it done.  Thanks.

K487 (Doug)

Here's a copy of a true story I posted on another model railroad site where a poster had asked why cabooses were eliminated.  I added the story to show one reason why – railroads' costs of injuries to the men in the cabooses.

This was on a 6 day per week train from Bismarck MO to Poplar Bluff MO (and return).

I was an extra board brakeman for the Missouri Pacific RR out of Bismarck MO in the late 1970s, and rode in cabooses about 140 times as rear end brakeman (and about the same amount as head end brakeman in the engine.)  Regarding the following incident I was in the caboose and wasn't seriously injured.

Once after about two days of heavy rain in the area and it was still raining, we were heading south doing about 45mph getting a run at Gads Hill* (in the Missouri Ozarks) with about three engines and 100 cars, we had a washout in the middle of the train - unbeknownst to us. Just before we in the caboose hit the dip (about 60' of rail and ties hanging/drooping down in the air) I heard the train brakes go into emergency, so I got up from my seat in the cupola to go check it out. Just when I stood up the front of the caboose dropped 1' then immediately jumped about 2' to 3' up and came back down. This did two things: 1) the front of the caboose rose off its kingpin (kept on by gravity only) and came back down on it but not through the hole in the car bolster, but on top of the pin. So the caboose was cocked in an "up" slope position (while we were still moving.) And 2) when that caboose dropped, the underside of the cupola roof banged me on the head (I'd just stood up as much as I could to climb down the ladder). It gave me a headache, but when the Trainmaster arrived later he asked me if I was okay, and I told him "Yes" (as I was okay by then - the headache had gone away).

[Regarding caboose crew injuries and costs, could this incident have caused more serious injuries (costing the RR big $$$$)? Yup.]

The conductor was okay through all this. Also, a loaded 50' open top hopper had hit the dip when it was less bad but it broke the back (center) of the hopper anyway - the hopper stayed on the rails but its center dump chute was dragging on the rails.  And as I remember it a couple of other cars derailed.

When the engineer called the dispatcher in North Little Rock and told him we had a wash out with a derailment at the foot of Gad's Hill, the dispatcher wouldn't believe him. I heard the conversation on the caboose radio, and it took three tries to finally convince the dispatcher we were telling the truth. We actually passed by a "high water" detector but it hadn't been activated (if so it would turn on a light on the dispatcher's panel). It turns out the detector was set to go off when the water reached to top of the rails, but the water had only reached about an inch or two above the rail base when the "lake" in an adjacent field pushed through the ballast. (It was later speculated that the rhythmic pounding of the train going over the soaked ballast area could have assisted in setting off the the wash-out, and the water culverts under the roadbed were not up to the current volume of water – also  they were probably plugged up at least a little bit.)

I remember a quick thought that scared me some after the caboose jumped up and came back down in a cocked position - and we were still rolling: I hoped the caboose body wouldn't slide off the lead truck, bust loose from all the brake rigging,  then roll over down into the "lake" (with a high probability of drowning for yours truly.)

*  Regarding Gads Hill:  As info, at 3pm on January 11, 1874, the first train robbery in Missouri occurred.  Jesse James' gang and the Younger gang got on the train when it stopped at the station at the top of Gads Hill and robbed the passengers.  I'm glad to have missed that occasion by about 140 years.

K487

This Subject is currently being discussed by some very knowledgeable people on modelrailroadforums.com here:

http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?34023-Most-significant-diesel-electric-locomotive-of-all-time

I've found it extremely interesting and informative, and I think you will too.

K487 

I've got over 20 of Bachmann's HO diesels and a number of their steam locos. 

The other day one of the diesels had a peculiar problem that stumped me for a while.  One of them was squeaking.  And it took me some time to locate the source. 

Normally any squeaking is due to an engine having been run for 40 to 50 hours and is one or both of the motor bearings is telling me they need lubing.  This is simple to fix so I put a little oil (I use Labelle 107) on each bearing.  Well, that didn't help the squeak.

So I removed the two bottom covers of the trucks.  Believe it or not one of the truck's axles and gears were dry (from the factory).  AHA I thought, easy fix.  After some oil and grease, nope again - squeak still working.

Oh, then how about the gear tower bearings?  Nope, they're fine.  How about the male/female plastic drive-line fittings?  They're okay too.

Ooookaaay, think!  What's left?  Could it be those little (flimsy-looking but work great) copper-colored electrical pickup wipers on the back sides of the loco's wheels?  I din't know, but it couldn't hurt to try, so I turned the engine upside down and put a very tiny drop of Wahl hair clipper oil on the back side of each wheel right above/next to the wiper knobs, then ran the engine on the track.  THAT WAS IT!

This was the first and only time this type of squeak ever happened me.  So if you run up against a squeaky "blank wall", those wipers/wheels combos may be your culprit.

K487

Bach-Man:

Here's a business thought that you folks are probably already discussing, but here goes anyway:

I've not read the thread(s) here about the UP's restoration of their 4014 Big Boy, but it occurred to me that if a UP-approved (sponsored?) manufacturer had superb models of this loco in HO and N gauges for release at the time of 4014's operational debut - well, the international sales could and probably would be "off the charts."

In the four? years' time it will take the UP to refurbish the 4014 the models (and with your successful experience with your EM-1s) could be thoroughly tested and re-tested until they all ran like Swiss watches, and then mass-produced.

I wonder what the world-wide sales volume would be?  And I bet many rail fans around the world would buy one just to have (i.e. not for running but to commemorate the event and display the loco.)

[I also just wondered about a 1:22.3 (large scale) model without a motor but with about 3' of track - both all plastic - for display purposes only.  This thought occurred to me because I have one of your 1:22.3 D&RGW K27s (with motor) on display in our living room - and believe it or not my wife actually LIKES it there!]

Watcha think?

K487

I posted this on another board because someone asked about Bachmann HO SD40-2s.  Because of the subject matter I thought it would be suitable here. 

Regarding Bachmann's HO SD40-2s, here's my 3 years of experience with them. They are my all-time favorite diesel locomotives, and I have many of these. Here's why.

A. To me they look great (any missing or molded-in minor details or potential prototype/model measurement discrepancies don't bother me).

B. Price is attractive (generally can be found for under $50 for a new one).

C. SD40-2s are my favorite real railroad diesel locomotives (I used to ride in them on the Missouri Pacific RR in the Ozarks of Missouri in the 1970's as head end brakeman) - powerful, dependable, and comfortable to ride in.

D. I remove any DCC or light boards (I'm strictly DC only) and use the space (plus elsewhere) to add 4 ounces of weight, and doing it while balancing the total weight equally over both trucks. The locos as-is weigh in at 18 ounces each and with my additions total 22 ounces.

E. After lubing and running them in just one of these will walk off with a 60+ car train - forward or backwards - with no slipping from a dead start.

F. These engines with NO modifications will run around my 22", 19" and 16" radius loops. I use them only on the 22" and 19" loops - my visual barf-meter maxed-out  when I ran one on my 16" radius curves for the first (and last) time.

G. The "negatives" are (1) sometimes they slightly surge while running, (2) sometimes they have some minor (fairly quiet) gear chatter, and (3) once in while I get one that has very noticeable wheel chatter - from cracked gears?

H. Their overall noise level is - well, if an Atlas engine is the standard for "quiet running" and we give it an A grade, then 9 out of 10 of my Bachmann SD40-2 engines  (and most of my other Bachmann HO engines) would rate about a B to an A-. I can easily live with that.

I. I change out the orange headlight and install a 3-to-18 volt with resistor warm white 3mm LED. Since I run the three big trains with at least two locos I don't put any backup lights in (I'm lazy.)

J. Most (85%) of my engines are Bachmann (SD40-2, GP30, GP35, GP38-2; GP40, Berkshires and Heavy Mountains, plus some others), and I've found that about every 40 to 50 hours of run time I need to lube the motor and two gear tower bearings (and I also VERY lightly lube the commutator plates while they are spinning in the motor housing with LaBelle 107). Most of these engines will "tell" you when to lube them by beginning to jump-start sometimes and/or making some small unusual and/or screeching (dry bearing) sounds.

I'll admit that I really enjoy running 2 SD40-2s together (which I do most of the time), and sometimes 3 SD40s MU'd. And I change road names in these power consists when I feel like. Right now on the outside loop I have a CSX on the head end with a BNSF (facing aft) coupled to it.

Lastly, I'll also admit that I enjoy viewing the locos' railings.  Why?  They are painted appropriately and look to be to scale.  This is opposed to the Blue Box Athearn diesels I ran for many years - they served well but (A) I never painted the railings, (B) the railings were over-sized, and (C) the railing stanchions were easily pushed or bent out of the vertical .

Hope this is helpful or at least interesting.

K487

All:

First, I posted this on another forum and thought it obviously appropriate for this forum.

Second, I have over 20 B'mann engines and use some almost daily, so my comments below about fixing a couple of B'mann products are not be taken negatively.
 
You might find the following interesting and possibly useful.  I get in moods to test things so here I go again.

A few days ago I decided to check further into two of my Bachmann engines – GP38-2 and GP40 (identical chassis, motor and drive train, but different shells) – that had issues out of the box (I had test run them, lubed them, then test run them again.)  One loco surged and both had gear growl/chatter = unacceptable.
 
After removing the shells I put one on a test block on my work bench and ran it with no load. In considering the loco I noticed that I had (as usual) a 15" x 15" piece of cloth under the block on the work bench.  So I set the loco on the cloth, held it, and ran it some (the cloth creating drag on the motor and drive train).  I then had THE thought.

I put the heels of my hands on the cloth at each end of the engine so the cloth wouldn't bunch, held the loco with both hands, turned on the power all the way up, then used my thumbs to push down on the engine while it ran in place.  I did this backward and forward, and periodically checked the motor temperature by touching its side with a finger.  I put enough down-pressure to lug the motor down to within 10% of its stall speed, and then turned the motor off after about 1 to 1.5 minutes when it became too hot to touch.  While the wheels were turning on the cloth, and even with my down-pressure, they never burned through the cloth.  I repeated this procedure for the second loco.

The results?  Both engines now run 100% quiet (and I'll admit I was surprised – I used no grit toothpaste or anything – except oil - on the drive trains).  Also, one engine runs smooth as silk, and the one that surged still surges a little, but when mu'd with another engine I can once in a while barely see the train (70 cars) slightly surging.  Both engines are now in the official operating fleet.  I call this procedure a success, and plan to do it again (to a Bachmann engine; not sure about other brands) as needed.

Was I concerned about breaking something in the drive train with this "torque test"?  No.  I figured the parts were tough enough and the small motor not powerful enough.  I was correct on at least these two locos.
 
Lastly, you might be interested in this addendum.  A peculiar problem came up when I first ran one of these locos (with the shell screwed on) after this unusual break-in.  When I ran the engine it hummed loudly, and after listening closely I found that the hum came from the cab!  My first thought was, "That's crazy.  The motor's back in the center."  So I removed the shell and checked for any metal flash around the front of the engine that might be touching the shell.  There wasn't any BUT the lower half of the all-metal, two-part chassis has a 1/4" wide horizontal lip molded on it at the bottom that goes all the way around.  As you know it is used to rest the shell on.  Well, on each corner of this lip there was a small tit molded on.  I don't have a clue what it is for, but a minute's work with the dremel tool with cut-off disk fixed the problem – no more hum at all.

K487

What do you think of the following idea/proposal (i.e. would it sell well and/or would you buy one)?

What if Bachmann approached the production of another articulated loco thus:

Find a prototype articulated, probably with two sets of 3-axle drivers (helps keep its length shorter), with one- or two-axle pilot and trailing trucks, all based on the loco's relatively short length AND the rear corner tip of its cab is the same distance from its nearest set of drivers as the front outside tip of the pilot is to its set of drivers.  Then produce this engine with the pivot/swivel of each set of drivers such that the swing-outs of the pilot edges and cab edges are not only equal to each other, but equal to the mid-ordinate (swing-in) of the engine (or real close).  In other words the loco is built to minimize clearance issues on smaller layouts AND to operate on say 20"? or less (18"?) curves.  It would also have a metal (not plastic) shell (for with that extra weight and 12 drive wheels it should pull REAL well.)

And the loco could be issued with the actual road name(s) of its prototype but also with other road names (I know - HERESY) so that all-in-all it would sell well.  And it could be offered in various options regarding DCC and sound.

If the locos are priced reasonably I personally like the idea.  And, buying an engine who's road name doesn't conform to mine doesn't bother me.  Why?  I can make up all kinds of "reasons" a UP loco is on say the Western Maryland.  For instance, depending upon the era: run through agreement; testing the type of loco on the WM track curves and grades so they (the WM) can determine if they want to buy some; railfan trip; etc.  But with me and some/many? of us, I don't need a "reason" except, "I like watching it run, the price was right, so I don't care if it is "unprototypical."  And most of my guests who visit and watch the trains don't know and don't care about mixed or "wrong" power consists.  Also I wonder what percent of model railroaders are "locked-in" on a road name.

Does anyone agree with this?  Or is this something of a "model railroad regression disease"?  (You know, it reminds us of many, many times in the past 50 years someone made some generic loco, slapped every railroad name they could think of on it for wider sales, and then threw it at the market.) 

On the plus side, Bachmann is getting more well know for making fine steam locos, and a loco like the articlated promoted above could easily turn out to enhance their reputation and sales (thus encouraging them to make more toys for us!).  [Note:  Besides wanting a loco like I described above there IS a method behind my madness here. ]

I look forward to your input (and maybe the Bachmann will too.)

K487

Subject: Backing a 69-car train around a loop with 16" radius curves.

Today I managed to run a long train backwards on a track loop with 16" radius curves (measured center-of-track to center-of-track), and I thought you might be interested in some of the details.

I have had my HO layout (this is my second) for 18 years.

I have 3 major loops, L-shaped, basically like a right angle dogbone.  I run only DC, my cars all have KD couplers, are a maximum of scale 52' long (most are 40' and less), and of the total of 204 cars on these 3 trains there are about 10 different manufacturers represented.  Eighty five percent of the railcars have plastic wheels, and the rest have metal wheels.

The track is all Atlas NS 100 flex (all joints soldered; no exceptions).  There are 9 Atlas crossing diamonds of various angles, 23 20-year old Model Power #4 turnouts, and 1 Model Power curve-on-curve turnout on the layout.

Each train is currently pulled by a pair of diesels: Loop 1 (outer) 2 Atlas Trainman RS32s; Loop 2 (middle) 2 Bachmann GP30s; and Loop 3 (inner) 2 Atlas Trainman RS32s. 

Loop 1 (22" radius) train has 65 cars.  Loop 2 (19" radius) has 70 cars.  Loop 3 (16" radius) has 69 cars (composed of seventeen 52' cars, and the rest are shorter.)

All loops (total of 4 – the fourth is smaller, 80% hidden, and an ore unit train of 33 cars runs on it) are each powered by their own MRC Tech 2 Railmaster 2400 power pack.  The switch engine and remote control turnouts are powered by a fifth MRC Railmaster 2400.

Today I was running trains on Loops 1 and 2, and decided to run the train on Loop 3 (16" radius curves.)  I had the trains on Loops 1 and 2 running backwards, so on a whim I decided to try and run the Loop 3 train backwards.  I had tried this a few months ago and a car derailed fairly quickly, so I've just run it forward since then.  However, I did one thing a number of weeks ago: I took 3 50' light-weight tank cars from the first half of the train and put them in the back half - about 15 car lengths in front of the caboose.

While Trains 1 and 2 were running backwards for the first time ever, I ran Train 3 backwards - 20 times non-stop around its loop.  It takes Train 3 three minutes and twenty seconds to make it around the loop, so I ran these three trains backwards continually for 66 minutes, and did not have one single derailment on any train.  The only noticeable thing that happened was that about 5 box car bodies on Train 3 leaned/tilted outward on parts of the 16" radius curves, but the wheels stayed on the rails.

As a reminder all of my railcars, no matter the length, are weight-targeted at 2.75 oz. per car; I think they currently average 3 to 3.5 oz.  I also do not follow another NMRA practice – that of keeping one truck on a railcar "snug" (to keep the railcar from wobbling) and the other loose.  Both of my railcars' trucks, like the prototypes, must have (within limits) horizontal and vertical freedoms.

The MRC power pack surface for Train 3 (16" radius curves) ran a little warmer than the other two.  That makes sense – 16" radius curves create more resistance/friction/drag than the other two larger radius curves.  And it could be that the tighter the radius gets that the friction/drag rises exponentially and not linearly.

By the way, all my Atlas Trainman RS32s, GP38-2s, and Bachmann GP30s, 35s, 38-2s, 40s and FA units, operate on these 16" radius curves with no modifications.  Haven't tried the Bachmann Alco RS3 on it yet.  Do I even try to run my Bachmann Berks and SD40-2s on it?  Nooooo. 

As info I don't have any other engines except a couple of AHM? 0-4-0s that my son and I used to use as slot cars on a previous layout when he was about 8 years old; he's 36 now.  While we were racing locos (double track main lines) I used to quietly throw a remote control track turnout in front of his engine which then said engine would attempt the curved route, fly off the track, and roll and bounce in fascinating ways.  For the first few times I did this his expressions were priceless – including when I showed him how I was doing it, but then he did it to me and we had finger fights over the push buttons.  I still chuckle every time I think about it.   No, he's not into model railroading, and no I don't think these experiences "scarred him for life." 

Any comments or questions, fire away.

K487

A few days ago I posted this on another model railroad forum, and thought you might find it beneficial here.  Also, it manages to give Bachmann an attaboy or two.
________________

As I've been helped by many of you on this forum I hope the info below will help you and future forum readers.

First, a brief background reminder of The Problem: Last year I sold all of my HO Athearn BB diesels that I'd been using for about 17 years, and purchased some Bachmann and Atlas Trainman diesels.

Over time I noticed two particular problems especially with the Trainman engines, and posted these on 10-2-10, 10-20-10, and 7-22-11.

Problem #1: The Atlas engines (run in pairs) were making the MRC Tech 2 Railmaster 2400 power pack surfaces in certain areas heat up to too-hot-to-touch temperatures after about 40 minutes of normal running of long trains on flat loops (even though the power packs' circuit breakers never tripped.)  My Bachmann  engines (GP30s, 35s, 38-2s, FTs, SD40-2s and 4 Berks) have never done this.  From some of your suggestions (thank you) I addressed this issue in many ways and, surprisingly, nothing changed.

Problem #2: Ninety eight percent of this problem is with the Atlas engines. After a few months following purchase a pair of these would be pulling a train, then suddenly on their own drop their speed about 60%, run that way for 5 to 40 seconds, suddenly go back to their regular speed, and then every 20 seconds up to 5 minutes apart repeat this. It wasn't a power problem; the headlights stayed at the same brightness level. I tried all kinds of things to address this but no success, and concluded (turned out it was incorrect - see below) that I was over-oiling (Wahl oil) the motor bearings and some of the oil was wicking through a bearing and getting on the commutator plates. After much testing and reading the comments/suggestions/experiences here I decided the problem was in the brush/commutator interface. I then even considered trying to disassemble one of the can motors but continually put that off as a possible last resort.

Well, I finally called a person the LHS recommended for doing railcar painting and decaling. This person had done a super job adding some decals to and painting parts on 3 of my cars, and I hoped he might be able to help. He did - he nailed it.

He said the problem was indeed in the commutator/brushes interface, and that over time "gunk" built up on the brush faces. He had this happen to him and fixed the problem real simply - with Labelle 107 oil.  Here's how.

Just put 1/2 drop of Labelle 107 on the commutator (Labelle even says this oil is for bearings AND commutators) in line with the brushes while the motor is slowly running. This is easy to do through the "air vents" in the motors - no need for disassembling. Then run the motor both ways increasing the speeds (all on the bench). I did so.  [I will add here that it is easier to put a half a drop on a toothpick and apply it - it's hard to see inside the motor and hard to keep steady pressure on the Labelle squeeze bottle to keep a half drop on the end of the needle.  Also if you push the Labelle bottle/needle too far the metal needle may scratch the metal commuator pieces, and wood won't do that.]

I then put the engines (two Atlas RS32s, and two Atlas GP38-2s) back on their trains and have run them, over a period of days, for 6 hours without a single speed hiccup. AND the power packs don't heat up near as much. I AM A HAPPY CAMPER. So far this problem is fixed.

[I imagine the oil dissolves? or ? the gunk on the ends of the brushes, and oils the commutator plates enough for less friction but not enough to cause brush/commutator electrical insulation.]

I'll share an interesting observation. The worst engine was one of the RS32s and I did it first. (As info when it dropped speed it caused its mu'd engine to slow down too, but I never heard any wheel slipping.) After oiling the commutator and running the motor slowly, I finally got it to full speed and its sound (pitch) was interesting. In one of the directions the motor's speed was going back and forth between the old high speed (lower pitch) and a newer high speed (higher pitch.) I let it run figuring it was working itself out, and sure enough after about 20 seconds it finally settled on the high speed.

The irony of this whole situation is that I thought I might have gotten too much oil on the commutator. It turns out that I didn't, but the solution DID require oil on the commutator - not Wahl, but Labelle 107 which is formulated for that purpose.

So, where do I go from here?

First, monitor these four engines for another 5 hours or so of running. If there are still no problems I'll figure they are fixed.

Second, I have one of my four of the Atlas Trainman GP38-2s that's always run slower than the others. I thought it was in the drive train, but when turning the flywheel while holding the engine in the air I felt no unusual resistance. I couldn't figure it out so it's been set aside. Now, I'll bet the problem is electrical resistance  and that it's in the brushes/commutator interface. So I'm going to oil the commutator and test it.

Next, I'm going to start using Labelle 107 on the motor and gear tower bearings of all my engines. It's formulated for that too and I bet it does a better job than Wahl. However, I'll still use the Wahl on the tops of the rails  (my layout is about 18 years old and has never had a bright boy, masonite board, sandpaper or track cleaning car used on it) and other uses.

Then, over the next few months go on a program to use this "oil the commutator" method on all the rest my engines – 8 Atlas and about 18 Bachmann. The Bachmann engines have rarely pulled the "let's slow down, speed back up, and drive the operator crazy" stunt. And even in pairs, pulling the same long trains as the Atlas engines, they have never made the power pack surfaces too hot to touch. 

Lastly, in the "ho engine quiet contest", if Atlas engines are the standard with a grade of "A", then my Bachmann engines (after lubing and some running in) average a B+  -  not bad for their price.

Oh, you might find the following interesting:  I currently have my amp and volt meters on the 3rd loop.  A pair of diesel engines usually pulls about 68 cars (85% plastic wheels, 15% metal wheels) around the loop - 16" radius curves.  The current two Atlas Trainman engines (GP38-2s) show they are together pulling 3/10s (three tenths) of an amp and 3 volts.  When I run a pair of Bachmann GPs (30s, 35s, or 38-2s) they show the same amps - 3/10s - but only 4 volts.  Seems to me they are all drawing very, very little juice for the work they are doing.

K487*

*  My signature refers to the following:  In the early 1970s I worked as an employee of the C&TS RR in Chama NM for 2 years and fired/coaled/watered/ greased that narrow gauge Mike #487 many, many times.

I've been running diesels (DC) for 17 years and thought I'd try a modern steam locomotive (still DC).  Instead of running a train pulled by just the steam locomotive I would couple it in front of the diesels in a freight train like the real railroads sometimes do when moving a steam locomotive light from point A to B to get it to a passenger train to pull an excursion for railfans. 

A couple of months ago I purchased a Bachmann 2-10-2.  I liked the locomotive but it had multiple drive axles with the drive wheels not square, so it wobbled.  And it was a little touchy at a point or two on my track work.  So I returned it and eventually ordered and received a Bachmann Pere Marquette 2-8-4.  The first thing I did was to remove the 8-pin plug on the DCC board and install the two enclosed dummy plugs.

This steam locomotive has worked fine after I (a) lubed it (didn't need it very much), (b) slightly loosened (two full turns) and very lightly loctited the screw holding in the lead truck.  The problem was that when tightened all the way (which is the way it arrived) the screw head gave the truck a very narrow vertical range in which to move.  No derailments at all now.  And (c):

The locomotive by itself weighs 12 oz. I believe, but whatever, the point is it is light on its feet.  Whenever I tried coupling it with a pair of Bachmann or Atlas Trainman locos to pull a train the steam locomotive's drivers would always slip (start off spinning and stay spinning.)  Also, not helping things is the fact that the loco's longitudinal center of gravity is just in front of the third driving axle (a little too far back for best traction.)  With the added torque of the motor this makes the front-end relatively light and helps the drivers spin. 

So, all in all I thought that if I could put about 3 oz. of additional weight in the forward part of the boiler (a) the traction would greatly improve, (s) its drivers wouldn't spin, and (c) the diesel/steam lashups would pull together nicely.  Usually this kind of planning is often wishful thinking on my part, but it worked!  First time I tried something like this.

I couldn't figure out how to open/remove the smoke box front (without tearing something up), so I did find the three screws holding the boiler/cab on – it was easy; nice design.  I cut some old railcar weights into two pieces about 2.5" long and ½" wide, the top one narrower than the lower one (because the boiler rounds and narrows up) and glued them in front of the motor on another built-in chassis weight.  I added and glued in a ¼ oz. lead weight right in front of the motor (not plugging any air holes.)  That left the 1" long area in the smoke box, which only had the LED headlight with resistors in it. 

I read that you can bend the LED "wires" so I bent them up at a 90 degree angle (the LED just slides into the headlight; easy to pull out.)  After putting the LED back in the headlight I took some metal bbs (got them at Walmart), put them in a cut-down sandwich bag (very thin plastic), wadded it into a "ball," then test-fitted it into the smoke box.  Had to remove bbs twice.  I then added a little bit of caulk in the bag, closed the bag, mushed the bbs and caulk around, used a small piece of wire to close the bag, then form-fitted the wad into the smoke box front around the LED assembly.  It fit perfect and the headlight still works.  As the caulk dries it will get harder but stay flexible.  And if needed the form-fitted weight can easily be removed.

All in all I got 2.5 oz. of additional weight in the loco. This brought the longitudinal center of gravity toward the front of the loco – from originally right in front of the 3rd driver axle to just behind the 2nd drive axle.

Test time:  I took turns putting the locomotive on the front of 3 different trains – each with over 50 cars and each with two mu'd diesel engines.  Train 1 Bachmann FT A&B.  Train 2 two Bachman GP30s.  Train 3 two Atlas Trainman RS36s.

I like the results and they are interesting.  On all three trains the steam locomotive runs about the same exact speed of the diesels now (no slipping of course.)  On the trains with the Bachmann FTs and Atlas RS36s the diesels actually just slightly PUSH the steam locomotive.  On the train with the Bachmann GP30s the steam loco actually PULLS the diesels just a little.  I can see all this by watching the couplers' spacing between the tender and lead diesel as they move.

Am I worried about burning out the motor with this additional weight?  No, especially with no pulling a load behind it, and all the tracks are flat (no grades.)

You all have probably been-there-done-all-this but I wanted to share a success.

Doug

Bach-man:

In considering making available "extra" parts (doghouse; plow brackets; plow; builders plates; ) could you add a gladhand for the tender's brake hose? - it looks kind of strange with just an open-end.  (I didn't see any gladhand in the bag with all the parts.)

Also, and this may be asking too much but it does make sense, per Dave Goodman's "fix" on another forum, could Bachmann also supply 4 nylon washers 1/8" thick?  These were put on the outside of the lead and trailing drive wheels on their axles to reduce excessive front-end swing out.  And I believe Dave said the locomotive would still go around 4' radius curves with no problem.  As a thought, Dave disassembled the locomotive enough to slide  these on, but if that is too much work to do possibly we owners could cut a notch in the washers tight enough so they would slip on over the axles but not loose enough to fall off.

Thanks.

Doug

Bachman:

Thank you again for producing the K27 - an excellently done product at a reasonable price.

This may sound crazy but with the receipt of your F scale K27 (I actually bought two) you have GREATLY whetted my (and I think most other recipients of this loco) appetite for more.  So, now is NOT the time to "go on to other things."  You have great positive momentum now running with this locomotive (and as you have said, "... the response has been overwhelming.")  Also, the posts on the various forums are almost all very favorable - congratulations.

Would you (Bachmann Co.) start planning and announcing now that your next production loco is some of the K36s (probably the most popular D&RGW locomotive, at least for pleasing asthetics,) then the K28s, and then the K37s?  If you announce this now we will start saving up.

When you have a winner run with it!

K487

Bachman:

Thank you, Lee, and Bachmann Company for producing the upcoming F scale K27.  As a customer I am greatly looking forward to owning at least two of these locomotives.  I and others do indeed appreciate all of your (plural) efforts.

In case I missed it, can you let us know if Bachmann is going to paint the boiler and tender shells and all exterior items on your K27s, vs. leaving these items in semi-gloss plastic shine?  I'm hoping you will paint the exterior items as this will help make (along with the Pittman motor and hopefully stout drive train) this locomotive one class act.  Thanks.

Doug