OO Gauge class 71 Electric Locomotive

[Ian Hargrave]

So a coreless motor really is core-less then?

 

Stewart

No .This is not a conclusion you can necessarily come to.In this particular case,the lack of punch is down to the design of the

model's gearing.

 

Kernow's in development D600 Warship also is to be released with a coreless motor.I am reliably informed that it pulls with plenty of clout through speed ranges.

[Budgie]

No .This is not a conclusion you can necessarily come to.In this particular case,the lack of punch is down to the design of the

model's gearing.

Is it possible to change the gearing?

[Ian Hargrave]

Is it possible to change the gearing?

Beyond my comprehension . I'm not going to tinker with it anyway.I believe one forum member did tweak the circuitry which produced a degree of improvement.

[stewartingram]

Luddite me keeps away from these things. I have a homebuilt PWM controller which gives me superb low speed control and a large collection, so no need for DCC or coreless here. I detest them.

 

Stewart

[woodenhead]

Beyond my comprehension . I'm not going to tinker with it anyway.I believe one forum member did tweak the circuitry which produced a degree of improvement.

Electrical work will just let the motor spin faster won't it, probably not good for it's longer term health if it is allowed to spin beyond it's design.

 

Altering the gear in the tower should allow improved revolutions at the rail head without adding more revolutionary stress to the motor but I am thinking it would have to be a new tower as the new gears would be a different size to the originals.

[Hroth]

Just got E5002 from Kernow and with the knob full over on my HM2000 controller, it laps the roundy layout at a scale 55-60mph (approx).  Admittedly it hasn't yet been run-in for the prescribed length of time and its a bit grumbly at one end. I'll just have to see if things improve!

[Oldddudders]

Just got E5002 from Kernow and with the knob full over on my HM2000 controller, it laps the roundy layout at a scale 55-60mph (approx).  Admittedly it hasn't yet been run-in for the prescribed length of time and its a bit grumbly at one end. I'll just have to see if things improve!

All the evidence suggests speed will not increase materially, sadly.

[Gwiwer]

Whilst agreeing with Ian in that the top speed is a mite pedestrian the HM2000 is also not the most powerful of controllers and might be playing a minor role in the performance problem.  

[mikesndbs]

Just got E5002 from Kernow and with the knob full over on my HM2000 controller, it laps the roundy layout at a scale 55-60mph (approx).  Admittedly it hasn't yet been run-in for the prescribed length of time and its a bit grumbly at one end. I'll just have to see if things improve!

 

 

Hi, it won't overly like the HM2000 due to its feedback control, you might consider fitting one of these inside the loco across the motor feeds, it will both smooth and very slightly speed it up. https://cpc.farnell.com/unbranded/np63v227m16x25/capacitor-n-p-220uf-63v/dp/CA05969

[The Stationmaster]

All the evidence suggests speed will not increase materially, sadly.

 

Agree - the model was apparently specified to give good very slow speed running and was presumably geared accordingly.  So it will never be a racehorse without changes to the gearing.

[PrestburyJack]

Agree - the model was apparently specified to give good very slow speed running and was presumably geared accordingly. So it will never be a racehorse without changes to the gearing.

Do you know if it is possible to change the gearing? Thank you.

Agree - the model was apparently specified to give good very slow speed running and was presumably geared accordingly. So it will never be a racehorse without changes to the gearing.

Do you know if it is possible to change the gearing? Thank you.

[mikesndbs]

I'd not change the gears even if it is possible, they protect an otherwise tiny coreless motor that would struggle otherwise.

There in is the problem in my personal opinion, with hindsight these coreless motors lack torque and mass and are not really suited to anything more than a high geared shunter.

Sad really as they seemed like the way ahead at one time.

[Vixen]

Been extremely tempted to get one of these, and fit it with sound, however I'm unsure as to which decoder would be better. Coastal's whistle sounds better than biffo's, however the whistle sounds are randomized instead of quillable. Any suggestions?

[7013]

I believe if you want a little more grunt from your Cl 71 then the Hornby version is a better choice.

[Kaput]

However the Hornby one is a pain if you want DCC and/or sound

[Oldddudders]

It all depends what you want your 71 to do. If it’s batting round with a trainload of Pullmans or sleeping cars, speed matters. If it’s working freight and vans, speed is less of a concern. The latter duties were far more typical of daily use than the former.

[leopardml2341]

It also depends on whether you're a roundy roundy or an end to end sort of person.

 

I have both DJM and Hornby and tbh, I'm hard pushed to choose which one is 'better' than the other. As long as one has 'the right horse for the right course' I guess either will do.

 

Edit to correct predictive text errors.

Edited December 25, 2018 by leopardml2341

[JSpencer]

For me the DJM version has enough grunt for my layout and a typical 6 coach pullman train there on that I typically I run (bigger trains can run but only by sacrificing space in the fiddle yard which would normally be held for another train on the same line).

Design wise, the DCC set up is simlar to Dapols 73, except the latter has a roof fan to help sound escape. You can fit a big speaker in both and a 21 pin chip.

 

The Hornby one is a more solid and reliable performer though. DCC sound wise, there are some small 8-pin sound chips out there now. Speaker space exists for a sugar cube in the battery boxes (pre made holes there in).

[Vixen]

Well, my club layout is Canadian based.. lots of corners and frequent stops where speed doesn't really matter. Ontop of that the extra room on the DJM sounds good to me. However, still tempted on the Hornby offering.. I just need to make up my mind on a sound file! 

[Judge Dread]

For me the DJM version has enough grunt for my layout and a typical 6 coach pullman train there on that I typically I run (bigger trains can run but only by sacrificing space in the fiddle yard which would normally be held for another train on the same line).

Design wise, the DCC set up is simlar to Dapols 73, except the latter has a roof fan to help sound escape. You can fit a big speaker in both and a 21 pin chip.

 

The Hornby one is a more solid and reliable performer though. DCC sound wise, there are some small 8-pin sound chips out there now. Speaker space exists for a sugar cube in the battery boxes (pre made holes there in).

I must agree with JSpencer regarding pulling power and speed of the DJM Class 71 loco. Here is a video of one of Charlie Petty's test loco loaded to him for  the fitting of one of his sound chips. I ran it around my Meopham East Junction layout in 2017 with 9 coaches behind it. 

The eagle eyed will spot at 15 seconds, another of Charles' Class 71's under the frail ling arms of ChrisH of this parish.

I had a loco ordered myself but it arrived after the layout was sold. I am now working on a Hornby Class 71, converting it to a Class 74.

Edited December 25, 2018 by Judge Dread

[leopardml2341]

I must agree with JSpencer regarding pulling power and speed of the DJM Class 71 loco. Here is a video of one of Charlie Petty's test loco loaded to him for  the fitting of one of his sound chips. I ran it around my Meopham East Junction layout in 2017 with 9 coaches behind it. 

https://youtu.be/aFSPo2vdtpo

The eagle eyed will spot at 15 seconds, another of Charles' Class 71's under the frail ling arms of ChrisH of this parish.

I had a loco ordered myself but it arrived after the layout was sold. I am now working on a Hornby Class 71, converting it to a Class 74.

Maybe a separate thread, but I'd be interested to see more of your 74 conversion progress please.

[Oldddudders]

That video clip of the 71 on His Honour’s layout looked to be quite fast enough. Scalextric our hobby ain’t.

[Judge Dread]

That video clip of the 71 on His Honour’s layout looked to be quite fast enough. Scalextric our hobby ain’t.

Thank you young man for kindly works. By the way, I was only entitled to the address of "Your Worship" but those days are long gone now.

A happy new year to you and yours. Bon chance mon aime. 

[Judge Dread]

Maybe a separate thread, but I'd be interested to see more of your 74 conversion progress please.

Thank you for your interest. I think you should follow the same path as I, that would be the handiwork of "rembrow" in the Silver Fox Models postings. Now there's a fellow with more skill than I.

I've cut up the supplied bogie sides and glued the third rail retractable collector shoes onto the modified Hornby frames. My loco will not have a smoke device but I seem to remember the 74's downfall was it's ability to catch fire.

I will supply some photos however when it arrives back from the paint-shop of one "Rippers". (Anyone remember him?) 

[JSpencer]

That video clip of the 71 on His Honour’s layout looked to be quite fast enough. Scalextric our hobby ain’t.

It cannot reach a scale 90mph. It just about makes it above 60mph. On the other hand she can creep really slowly. The fall whack is adequate for most layouts but not for big layouts which allow full rakes and 90mph scale running, there the Hornby one takes over.

Likewise the DJM with fine wheels and limited play bogies demands excellent track work. The Hornby one copes with any rubbish thrown at it and feels more robust. The DJM easier for DCC and DCC sound conversions (also changing the head odes).