Chuck Posted June 7, 2014 Author Share Posted June 7, 2014 Grant, I explained all that including the profile/ broad fillet being wrong but they opted to reduce the backspacing...oh well at least they're aware of a problem. Joe, I used a bunch of the AML metal wheels when they first came out back in 2009? Then they were all steel with a very rough tread finish which made them very noisy. I ended up chucking every axle in the lathe and "finishing" the tread surface with a file while the wheels were spinning. I "finished" AML wheels for 50 cars that way. That quieted them down but also removed the anodizing which lead to surface rust on the tread. Can't beat USA wheels though as brass & stainless is a winning combination...at least for rusting. I did buy a bunch of used USA wheels off of Al Krammer a few years back and those things were about wore out...every wheel was gouged from use...I had to turn every one down and re-profile them on a lathe. Aristo wheels are about the same. That is they look nice when new but the shiny plating either wears off or flakes off right away then your down to brass. The wheels that I'm the most impressed with are the ones USA Trains uses on the Hudson & Big Boy. All stainless tires. My Hudson has 10's of thousands of scale miles run on it and those wheels look brand new! The original AML K4 steamer has crappy drivers. The tires are brass with a shiny plating on them. But they're so rough on the backside where the power pickup brushes rub that they wear the brushes out in no time. I ended up pulling the drivers out of 2 of those engines and chucking them in a lathe and smoothing/ finishing the backside. Then install MTH brush assemblies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginear joe Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Thanks Chuck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant-Kerr Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 These are what I use in the manufacture of Outback Turnouts. Note that there is no - on the back to back setting only +20 thou. I set my Back to Back to 1.575, Works for me. Joe , Don't give up on making your own turnouts. Took me a year to get Outback Turnouts to the point that they could be sold without any problems and then I just kept on improving them. Biggest turnout I have ever made was a #15. Still got it and no it is not for sale. Almost need a small layout area to use it hehehe. Make yourself a tie jig to start with. It will help you greatly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginear joe Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Grant, I did lay a tiny bit of rail on my 2 rail O gauge layout. I made a diesel fueling shop where the rails go into a service area. It was very easy once I got over the fear of handlaying track. I know switches are complicated. I look forward to making some someday. Having this aluminum switch already made from Switchcrafters, it should be easier to just replace the rails right??? Thank you for the chart!! I'll have to study it to figure out what I'm doing. Do you still make switches for sale? Your quote from Sagan makes me laugh. I remember dealing with very smart individuals who were wrong about somethings. I never corrected them as they could find out down the road. I have no need to to bash them for I make more mistakes then they ever did. There was a line in the TV series Men who built America, " ...the brightest minds are capable of making ...." huge mistakes,... or something like that, talking about how Edison favored DC voltage and stuck with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xl_special Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Wonderful amount of information here. The research done by Chuck and Grant-Kerr is valuable to every G-scale person. I'd like to show you what I use and I've been doing it this way for 25 years. I stick to one brand of wheelsets that work for me. In my case I use only Gary Raymond metal wheels RS133 or RS136. I've found they run forever and really stay on the track. The picture is from a set of wheels that must have a zillion miles on them. Next I check every wheelset using the "Old Pullman" gauge. This gauge is almost Identical to the H.O. NMRA gauge. Alway add a small drop of glue on the axle behind the wheel. You can see it in the picture. The other side of the gauge is for checking track gauge and flangeway clearance. I use "Old Pullman" turnouts and Micro Engineering track. I have never found one switch or piece of track that was "out of gauge". The reason I go to all this trouble is because I LIKE TO RUN TRAINS. I've found this forum to be wealth of valuable information and I'm so glad we have it. Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginear joe Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 I got that gauge from Old Pullman for my O scale. I didn't know that they even made G scale stuff but they're out of business now, right? I have seen some Micro Eng stuff around and never knew where to get my hands on big amounts. It does look great! I started with Aristo and got in heavy now. The only GR wheels I have, came on four used coal hoppers. They have BB axles and the wheels slide very easily in and out of gauge. I have not rum them yet to see if they'll stay put on their own after adjusting. The flanges are very pointed and picked a switch the minute I tried them. I found they were out of gauge and that's when I found how easy they slide. I will try some CA on them to fix that. My G scale MTH Challengers don't back thru Aristo wide switches very well. The tenders jump a bit, so I go slow. I need to research what's the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant-Kerr Posted June 8, 2014 Share Posted June 8, 2014 Joe.My Challenger when I got it had issues with gauge with the lead and trailing truck and all of the axles on the tender. All were under gauge. Reset and no problem since but use care when resetting them. If I recall right, they were fairly tight on the axles so take them right out of the loco before doing it and the tender as well. The drivers however were ,from memory pretty good, so I left them alone. Then check the clearence's on the switches using the chart above. There is a ton of info around on how to fix them if needed. One of the reasons I started making switches for myself which grew into Outback Turnouts was the issues with the major's turnouts and the fact I DON'T like set track turnouts. A review of that Challenger can be found here at this link http://www.largescalecentral.com/forums/topic/5312/mth-challenger-reviewhttp://www.largescalecentral.com/forums/topic/5311/mth-challenger-review-part-2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginear joe Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 I apologize to any others for wondering off topic...., but this thread is once again helping me out big time. Grant, I had never seen your reviews. I wasn't a forum member there back then and I believe it was even before I got my first Challenger? I didn't know I could even adjust those wheels on the tender so I'll have to check all of them. Some great info again. Thank you!! I had figured it was the switches causing trouble and looked right past the Challengers. I had a few engines act up on those switches and I think I remember even putting a router to them to make the flange ways deeper for clearance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginear joe Posted June 9, 2014 Share Posted June 9, 2014 Has anyone here tried the #1 gauge track from Gargraves? It seems to be tight across the rails on most of my stuff. I now wonder if it's actually correct? I'll have to go measure it now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markoles Posted June 10, 2014 Share Posted June 10, 2014 I am having an intermitten derailment issue with one of my new heavyweight cars. I always assume it is my less than stellar trackwork combined with a particularly bad double crossover. But perhaps it is also the wheels. For what it's worth, I got a box of USAT blackened wheels in 2005 or 2006, and installed them on my aristo 40 foot cars. These are the standard sprung aristo trucks. What I discovered is that the USAT wheels have a shoulder on them that pushes in to the side of the truck, creating a lot of friction. Further, the wheel itself is a smaller diameter, which allowed the brake shoes to ride the top of the track, as well. These wheels were made for the LGB and LGB copied arch bar trucks. They fit perfectly on my LGB tank cars and box cars, no issues there! And once the black plating is worn off, the brass underneath looks good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted June 19, 2014 Author Share Posted June 19, 2014 Well I tried "fixing" one axle of the Kadee wheelsets with no success. I dis-assembled one and chucked the wheels in my lathe and machined .040 off both the backside of the flange and the hub. Re-assembled and gauged the back to back spacing which came out fine. But they still wouldn't ride the rails correctly. As Grant-Kerr stated previously the wheel profile is all wrong. Suppose I could hand grind a tool bit to re-cut the tread profile but to me it isn't worth the time or the $$$ as I'd also have to make/ buy a expanding mandrel to mount them on to turn them. Bottom line...I'm not buying anymore Kadee wheels...I'll stick with USA Trains wheelsets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Strong Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 A few thoughts on the NMRA standards... A few years ago (starting around 2007, and ending with published standards in February, 2010), Gary Raymond and I got together with the NMRA wheel-and-track standards folks and re-tooled the large scale wheel and track standards. As of February 2010, there are two "sets" of standards, as per NMRA practice--the "standard" and "Hi-Rail" standards. The "standard" standards for large scale are very much in keeping with G1MRA's standards, with subtle variations here and there to fit better into the NMRA's format for such things. The "Hi-Rail" standards are likewise very similar to the G1MRA standards, but with slightly larger tolerances for flanges. The manufacturers were almost universally opposed to flanges as small as those dictated by G1MRA, citing customer feedback demanding deep flanges so the trains stay on the rails. (Let's be realistic--the trackwork on many large scale railroads leaves something to be desired, and deep flanges are a much easier fix than relaying the track.) The "Hi-Rail" standards are still smaller than what some manufacturers are doing with their wheels, but others have re-profiled their wheels to be meet these standards. On those "hi-rail" standards is a note for manufacturers who use flanges on the thick end of the spectrum to make sure to narrow the back-to-back such that the check gauge is maintained at the target value. (Check gauge is Back-to-back plus the thickness of one flange.) From the photos in this thread, it appears that Kadee did not take the thicker flange into consideration when designing the axle to set the back-to-back. I don't have a set of wheels here to measure, so I can only speculate based on what I'm seeing in photos. The G1MRA and NMRA track standards are essentially identical in practice. The NMRA wheel standards (both Hi-Rail and Standard) are written such that wheels built to those standards should operate smoothly over G1MRA track. There is--to my knowledge--no movement afoot to re-write these standards. Later, K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enginear joe Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Kevin, thank you for sharing those charts. I have copied them to study later. I think my fleet is out of specs and I'm embarrassed. I will go over everything this winter. I need to study how Grant K set his MTH Challenger to specs. Mine doesn't like backing up thru switches and I just live with it. It does hop slightly in any direction. I have other equipment that is suspect as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant-Kerr Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Kevin, I found the standards implemented by NMRA as quite acceptable and had / have no problem with them at all. Would have been nice though if they had not made their chart so damn complicated to read for the un-initiated. As for the subtle variations , I believe TOC called that " the NMRA fudge factor" . It is with some interest that I think MTH moved to the Hi- rail standard not long after it was implemented. Why I say that is because their early offerings would not run on code 125 rail without the flanges hitting the spikes, aka my Challenger, but their later stuff does not appear to do so, as reported elsewhere in this fora. USA trains I cannot comment on except to say my 2 GP 38's will not run well on 125 code rail. Hit the spikes. These are old units though. Aristo? No good flogging a dead horse so leave that alone now. Why I mentioned new moves were afoot was reported by Greg E. (who had Polk's ear for a while) and he stated that NEM MOROP standards were being looked at for adoption by the NMRA for anything running on 1.772" gauge track. Those standards to me meant that some of the problems would disappear with a certain manufacturer but would create a slew of other problems for older made gear already out there. So a question then arises. Do we need that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted July 13, 2014 Author Share Posted July 13, 2014 Do we need that? No we don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Strong Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Code 125??? As in 1/8" tall rail? Not much out there (even finescale) is gonna run on that without hitting the spikes. In terms of NEM/MOROP, we looked at those standards just as a frame of reference, but always thought them to be too loose for what we were trying to do. G1MRA provided a much better (and proven) template to work from. Aristo used NEM/MOROP moreso than G1MRA (as does LGB and Piko, but they're European so that's to be expected). Of course, Aristo isn't exactly the poster child for "adherance to standards," so... Later, K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant-Kerr Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 Sorry Kevin, my fault. Should read code 215. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted July 13, 2014 Author Share Posted July 13, 2014 I have always checked wheel gauge via backspacing. I've always considered anything between 1.565 - 1.575 as good...some wheels have so much wobble in them that they fall out of those specs one way or another esp. Bachmann wheels. With USA Trains I've had the 5-car Gunderson sets sway so bad that the top container starts rocking on the lower...wobbly USA wheels. Absolute worse engine that I've ever had to deal with is Aristo Dash-9's. Those drives were assembled/ gauged so tight that they wouldn't travel thru a USA Trains #6 switch without derailing. I ended up removing the wheels, chuck them in my mini-lathe and shave about .030 off the backside but not the hub. Ended up being pizza cutter wheels with sharp flanges. With MTH engines I've always had to re-gauge the tender wheels on the Big Boys & Challengers. The drives were always spot on albeit on the tight side. The Triplex's were always right on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.a4fb2273837361b3bbaa7a1d8a4c8996.png){kind=logo}
(149xauto-130).thumb.gif.e34a14c0b3a921d31a6330a26b1e278b.gif)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.