Bachmann 3MT TANK

[paul 27]

Looking to purchase one I presume they have there standard 3 pole motor fitted.

[Butler Henderson]

Yes

[pH]

I think this topic can now be closed!

[paul 27]

On ‎10‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 18:56, Butler Henderson said:

Yes

 

  Thanks for confirming this,   before member pH  suggests closing this subject are there any problems

   I heard the valve gear is delicate to handle but then that applies to most recent models.

 

 

Edited October 12, 2019 by paul 27

[Paul80]

Why would this topic need to be closed? 

[Butler Henderson]

No problems with the two I have - as with any mass produced models there are bound to be the odd one with assembly errors which might lead to the valve gear failing in some manner. Just make sure its run it for at least whatever period is stated in the instructions. I use an oval of Kato Unitrack  laid on the floor, as it is intended to be and run a loco round the oval for a quarter of the designated period, then another quarter in the reverse direction; then turn the loco round and repeat. Aside from running in that should show up any pick-up problems from wipers being too depressed.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

10 hours ago, paul 27 said:

... are there any problems I heard the valve gear is delicate to handle but then that applies to most recent models.

While I don't own this specific model, I have had one to look at, and own the mechanically very similar V3 2-6-2T. It's Bachmann's standard construction techniques in all respects which I have found robust in extended service, since the first blue riband release purchased in 2000.

 

The usual checks before running on outside valve gear locos to ensure no fouling risk in the gear, and then the running test that Butler Henderson describes followed by minimal appropriate lubrication at regular intervals, and it will probably 'go on forever' from there.

[The Johnster]

You really shouldn't be handling the model by the valve gear if you can avoid it, but the ones I've seen (again, I don't own one) seem robust enough for normal service.  Pick your model up by the tanks, and unless you are seriously hamfisted you will have no bother!

[pH]

8 hours ago, Paul80 said:

Why would this topic need to be closed? 

 

It was meant as a joke. The OP asked a pretty specific question and got a one-word answer - there didn't seem to be any more to be said.

[paul 27]

Do these have coreless motors, someone on here mentioned the latest V1 / V3  has, I thought it 

was  the Whickham  and 009 models  that only  had these due to there small size.

Edited October 14, 2019 by paul 27

[The Johnster]

Not sure it matters much, Paul, so long as the performance is adequate.  There is nothing inherently superior about a coreless motor and they are in fact not suitable for use with some controllers.  The mystique dates from the 70s when the Portescap, a scientific equipment grade motor with very precise control and coupled with the RG4 gearbox, became the choice of some very influential scratch builders of high quality models, and, while costly, was indeed a very good performer.  Modern coreless motors are not as good as this, reflected in their cost.  The 'normal' cheap mass produced can motors are very good and RTR performance out of the box is miraculous to those of my generation brought up on XO4s or HD ringfields with 20:1 gear ratios.

 

Smooth start/stop and low speed performance depends on the ability of the motor to develop sufficient power at low revolutions and with low voltage to overcome the initial frictional resistance of the bearing surfaces and gears and the braking effect of the pickup wipers to be able to move off from rest with a reasonable load smoothly and slowly, and maintain a low speed if required, at the same time being dependent on the physical size of the motor and drive train and the requirement for it not to intrude into cab or under-boiler spaces where detail or daylight needs to be visible.  Any configuration of motor can be made to do this depending on the quality of materials and assembly.  Those of us who remember the 70s and the era of RTR with pancake motors which had to run at very high speeds to develop useful power and then be geared down with inefficient and unreliable trains of plastic cog gears which still provided a final drive that was too fast and difficult to control at low speeds are grateful for the can motors with plenty low speed grunt and 'conventional' transmissions of modern RTR, and their cheap and easy replaceability.

[RedgateModels]

5 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Not sure it matters much, Paul, so long as the performance is adequate.  There is nothing inherently superior about a coreless motor and they are in fact not suitable for use with some controllers.  

 

So yes, it matters to some people

[The Johnster]

Fair point!

[JohnR]

I've got two on these models, and find them to be excellent slow runners, but also with plenty of power to lift a long train. Much better than the earlier Bachmann standard 4MT 2-6-4 tank. 

 

Although I could get away with just two on my layout, I'd still get more if they were available, so go fill yer boots!

[OFFTHE RAILS]

On 13/10/2019 at 14:27, The Johnster said:

You really shouldn't be handling the model by the valve gear if you can avoid it, .........

Luckily the GWR prairies do not have any outside valve gear......

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

20 hours ago, OFFTHE RAILS said:

Luckily the GWR prairies do not have any outside valve gear......

Nevertheless the general handling advice still applies, to the connecting rods in particular. Snagging one of these on the leading driver crankpin - due to introduction of an inward bend by overly robust handling - is the most common and significant damage of this type on outside cylinder locos. The combination of much closer to scale cross section rods, high torque motors and decent reduction ratio gear trains, means that some well mangled pieces of metal can result.

[Robin Verth]

I have a number of 3MT 2-6-2T they are all superb runners the only problem I have had was a faulty DCC socket was a short between the red and orange wires solved by hard wiring the decoder.

On the subject of coreless motors I have 2 ex GWR 1101 0-4-0T one fitted with a Porescap RG4 the other with a Romford motorhome is wired up the opposite way to normal, I had both on the test track and decided to see which was the most powerful the one with the Romford motor pushed the RG4 fitted one all the way down my test track the test was repeated a number of times with the same result every time,  I will rectify to wiring problem when it gets fitted with DCC.

[NCB]

I've used a couple of coreless motors of late, instead of the disappearing Mashima small flat cans. This is in 3mm/ft. I'm impressed.

 

The first was from a batch of 7x16mm remarkably cheap motors bought from ebay; 16 motors for about £25. The second was the 8x16mm coreless motor marketed by Tramfabriek.nl, about £12 I think.  Both are very smooth and have ample power for my needs; they are also smaller than the smallest Mashima which is useful for the small prototypes I used them for (GWR Metro and Cambrian Albion). They are also quiet. Only time will tell how long they will last, but on current form they are actually better than the very good Mashimas. I use them with Gaugemaster's cheapo Combi controller.

[paul 27]

Well only asked as I don't want coreless, any way purchased there latest model and  it runs perfectly,

with there can motor.

[Zunnan]

I really don't see what peoples issue with coreless motors is, I have several which have now clocked 300 hours running logged via exhibition use alone and that does not include running time at the club or at home, so could well be in the region of 400 hours. They're all still as smooth as the day they were run in, in fact the only issues have been with the pickups wearing heavily or where traction tyres have been fitted and needed replacement several times now in some instances, and those issues afflict 'normal' motors too. Conversely, all of my Dapol 'super creep' motor fitted models have failed in less running time and needed replacing, some with as little as 30 hours running on them and a couple as total failures while still running in.

[The Johnster]

Paul may not want coreless as there is, as I understand it, a potential issue with DCC (I do not know much about DCC).  Coreless motors as simply a different form of motor and do not possess any innate superiority over 'normal' motors, nor any particular inferiority either, although the well known Portescap was a very high quality item.  They draw much less current than 'normal' motors and some are prone to burning out if excess amperage is drawn through them even momentarily, but the extent to which this is an issue depends on the usage, not the motor.

[paul 27]

4 hours ago, AlexHolt said:

A lot of the Bachmann releases now will have a coreless motor. The Class 03 has had its chassis retooled/modified to now use a coreless motor but I don't think they have gone back and changed the entire range just yet.  Personally I avoid any model that has a coreless motor as from my experiences they run much worse. Coreless motors do not work well with feedback controllers.

That's my reason as well, hope this is not the future for there larger locos.

[The Johnster]

I doubt the speakers make much difference to the final retail price, Alex, and let's be fair, DCC is the future even if Luddites like me don't want it.  I suppose you can remove them and put ballast in the space cleared.  Bachmann are catering to the non-DCC market by offering models without DCC chips at about £20 less.