Bachmann 94xx

[TheSignalEngineer]

1 hour ago, grriff said:

I am presuming that the above posters have points with insulfrogs? 

I have electrofrog on the main layout but have two insulfrog on the workshop plank.

Some of the contact problems will show up on a plain line 24" radius curve. Even minor ones will usually show up pretty quickly on insulfrog. B2B problems will show up on any type of point. Just have to run it both ways through a left hand, right hand and double slip.

My current problem is the strange pony on the Dapol Moguls. I have two, one derails on hitting the straight after a LH curve, the other after a RH curve.

[Kaput]

Mine stalled sometimes on points at lower speeds but was fine at medium/high speed and that was on insulfrogs.

 

Has a stay alive fitted now so never stalls.

[cctransuk]

14 hours ago, Kaput said:

Mine stalled sometimes on points at lower speeds but was fine at medium/high speed and that was on insulfrogs.

 

Has a stay alive fitted now so never stalls.

 

 

Stay-alives - the 21st Century, DCC equivalent of sprung centre axles with DC!!

 

If you lay track properly, and feed EVERY length of rail with a dropper, neither is necessary, even with dead frogs.

 

Time and care when laying track will avoid endless wasted time and money, trying to achieve flawless running!

 

CJI.

 

Edited January 30, 2022 by cctransuk

[The Johnster]

I have laid out Cwmdimbath with Streamline medium insulfrogs, and while I have nowhere near in excess of one hundred locos, in fact 16 in service at the moment, all, including my Bachmann 94xx, run satisfactorily over the dead frogs.  I took considerable care in laying the track to ensure that all of it, but especially the turnouts, is flat and smoothly joined to the next piece, making life easier for myself by not incorporating any gradients on the layout.  Even the tiny Hornby W4 Peckett runs happily at the lowest speeds over them, though it did object to a former fiddle yard setup with a Hornby setrack curved turnout as the insulated gap was slightly longer than it's wheelbase, and it is not reasonably to expect a loco to run without being able to pick up current through any of it's wheelsets!

 

My track is laid directly to the baseboard, without underlay, pinned lightly to hold position while the pva goes off, and the baseboards themselves are pretty level, consisting of supported Ikea 'Lack' shelving.  It is a 'semi-permanent' erection so there is a lot of bracing at the the baseboard joins to ensure level, and track is laid over the baseboard joints.  It can be, and on one occasion was, taken down, the reason being that I live in a rented flat and my landlord refurbished it, putting me in the flat across the hallway while the work was completed; one has to consider this sort of thing according to one's individual circumstances at the planning stage, and it is best to avoid turnouts over baseboard joints, or, if you can't avoid them, make sure that the piece can be easily lifted out if the layout has to come down.

 

It is a big ask to expect all your locos to run perfectly straight out of the box, though, and while care in tracklaying, not to mention a strict and effective rail-cleaning regime, will give them a better chance, good slow running may well need a bit of tweaking of pickups, checking of b2bs, and so on.  Whether this should be needed with brand new locos out of the box is a different discussion; in the real and imperfect world we actually inhabit none of that matters because it is needed.  I have described my 'new loco routine', which means 'new to me' and includes secondhand, and recommend it, but the idea may remain in some peoples' minds that a new loco should run perfectly out of the box, which it probably should but never will in an imperfect world.  Philosophical point; a perfect world would be a) boring and b) probably not allow me in!

 

There is nothing inherently superior about the running qualities of chassis with sprung axles; it denpends how that mech is designed to work.  Full 3-point compensatin would improve running considerably and release us all from the bondage of deadlevel track and smooth joins, and our colliery locos could lurch and rock all over the place on rough track like the real ones did, but we would not be prepared to accept the high retail price of such models and they are unsuitable for volume RTR production, which is a shame because we are not all Tony Wright and must work within our limitations.  Relying on the manufacturers to provide us with models that work properly out of the box will always, as we've discussed, inevitably lead to disappointment, as has happened with the OP's NRM 94xx. 

 

I know from experience that it is possible to run a Bachmann 94xx successfully brand new from the box, and with the recommended running in performance is as good as any RTR loco I've ever had.  The mech is not designed for centre-axle springing and has a degree of vertical play instead.  I have Baccy panniers that are designed to have sprung centre axles, and they run just as well, but require noticeably more voltage to get them under way, which I believe is to do with the coreless motor (something else that I do not consider inherently superior or inferior).  I also had a Hornby generic Jinty mech with a sprung rear axle, about which the less said the better, suffice it to say that it was eventually given the opportunity of an exciting new career in the landfill industry, but others have reported success with them!

 

Let us look for a minute at what RTR chassis are being asked to do and why I contend that it is a 'big ask'.  The loco is required to run smoothly and give a standard of reliable slow running at low voltage on DC, and maintain contact between the pickup strips and the rear of the wheel tyres throughout the full range of curvature that it is expected to perform on.  In the example of turnouts forming reverse curves (Hornby have a 'ladder' of htis sort on their test layout), the matter is compounded by the dead frogs, and the load on the drawhook may affect the way the loco's 'attitude' as it enters facing turnouts, pulling it one way or another, so a test run of a light engine may not reflect what happens when it is pulling 10 coaches.  Lateral springing to control this might help, but will increase friction and and may well be more trouble than it's worth in an RTR mech.  The pickups achieve this to some extent, but for it to be effective under load the pressure with which they bear on the wheelbacks would act as a brake.

 

The sharper the radius, the more it is important to ensure continual pickup throughout the range of axle side play on all axles, and if slow running with DC is required (and on my layout it is, al the time, everywhere), the tightness of the radius and the added friction and drag from the flangeways, slight deformation of the crankpin and motion bearings, and the sideways movement of the geared axle all combine to provide a perfect storm of drag factors that will stop a loco running slowly under low voltage.  A successful RTR chassis is the result of either good luck or an holistic approach to design, all the various factors being balanced taking all the others into account/

 

If you ease the radius, you will lessen these effects, but if you are still using insulfrogs, the dead gap is longer and you need to pay close attention to the pickups to ensure continual current to the motor.  Again, DCC is your friend, with stayalives.  The recieved wisdom solution is live frogs, but these come with extra wiring and switching to manage, more electrical connections to fail (nobody has ever made a reliable switch, they are mechanical devices that wear out), and are not available for setrack turnouts.  Setrack is a good use of limited space but there's no such thing as a free lunch and it introduces its own issues.  A successful layout must run well, as there is little more frustrating and potentially hobby-abandoning than one that doesn't, especially if, like me, your main focus is operating it.  I was once a member of a club that build a series of show layouts that featured superb tracklaying, scenery, buildings, and so on, but never worked electrically; what was the point (literally)! 

[grriff]

I take the point that, with insulfrogs particularly, track has to be laid flat and kept scrupulously clean, as well as loco wheels, if the running of locos is to be perfect. But have Bachmann the right to expect that, especially if they sell locos with some contacts not working? Remember, there are many modellers, like me and my neighbour, who expect to take a model out of a box and run it. They don't have the expertise, or sometimes eyesight, to adjust contacts, especially by removing the wheels. Presumably Bachmann recognised reality and fitted locos with a sprung axle - which I have proved work better. The question, which I will pose to Bachmann, is why they didn't fit a sprung axle to this loco, when they had done so to previous models. Are we seeing a move to locos where every rivet is perfect but the buyer must carry out extensive work on it to ensure contacts work on all wheels and gears are properly lubricated and then run the loco on track laid to billiard table flatness? I don't think that's their average buyer.

Edited January 30, 2022 by grriff

[Guest]

1 hour ago, grriff said:

The question, which I will pose to Bachmann, is why they didn't fit a sprung axle to this loco, when they had done so to previous models. 

What's this obsession with sprung axles.  Bad tracklaying is the problem, whether it's yours, your neighbour, your friends, your local club, etc. etc.

The Johnster & MikeParkin65 have it spot on.

Edited January 30, 2022 by Guest

[Captain Kernow]

For what it's worth, the first 94XX that I had, had back to backs that were too wide (14.75mm to 15mm, if I recall correctly, instead of the correct 14.5mm). It was also an indifferent runner.

 

I returned it to the retailer and the replacement had the correct back to backs and ran better as well.

 

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, grriff said:

I take the point that, with insulfrogs particularly, track has to be laid flat and kept scrupulously clean, as well as loco wheels, if the running of locos is to be perfect. But have Bachmann the right to expect that, especially if they sell locos with some contacts not working? Remember, there are many modellers, like me and my neighbour, who expect to take a model out of a box and run it. They don't have the expertise, or sometimes eyesight, to adjust contacts, especially by removing the wheels. Presumably Bachmann recognised reality and fitted locos with a sprung axle - which I have proved work better. The question, which I will pose to Bachmann, is why they didn't fit a sprung axle to this loco, when they had done so to previous models. Are we seeing a move to locos where every rivet is perfect but the buyer must carry out extensive work on it to ensure contacts work on all wheels and gears are properly lubricated and then run the loco on track laid to billiard table flatness? I don't think that's their average buyer.

 

You can ask Bachmann all the questions you wish - but it won't make your loco run any better!

 

RTR locos are designed to run on track that is laid to reasonable standards - if you can't be bothered to do that, perhaps you are in the wrong hobby.

 

I have to say that, if this latest loco is the first to have given trouble you have been lucky, it would seem.

 

CJI.

[The Johnster]

I understand grriff's point completely; if the models are fit for purpose they should run straight out of the box on track laid to the recommended specifications by reasonably competent modellers so long as reasonable care has been taken in the construction of baseboards and the laying of the track.  And to be fair they mostly are, but the reality of the situation is that I find it advisable to check that the pickups are properly adjusted and that the back-to-backs are correct, and I don't like the coloured grease lubrication either and habitually replace it.  I feel that grriff, while I absolutely agree that he is completely correct in his assertions, is setting himself up for dissappointment and frustration in the real world.  It is particularly ironic that he has been caught out with a Bachmann 94xx, a model not known to have any particular issues with regard to running and subject to a very good QC regime, but no model is perfect; he's just been very unlucky with his 94xx.

 

It is, IMHO, unfair to assume that his running problems are caused by poor tracklaying or baseboard construction.  They may well be, but we do not know this for certain and should I feel give him the benefit of the doubt.  Even the best of RTR manufacturers (and Bachmann are among the best) will produce an occasional dog, which is why the model should IMHO be returned under warranty for replacement.  If the replacement can't cope with his trackwork then it may be time to be making assumptions about the quality of it!

[grriff]

'The Jonster', many thanks for your comments. My track is laid carefully, though not perfect. My Bachmann GWR class 56XX has never given any problems although I have had to fit stay-alives to my Hornby Thomases. The existence of stay-alives implies I'm not the only modeller with stalling problems. 

I can understand why you say 'setting himself up for dissappointment and frustration in the real world' but if I buy any other electrical consumer goods I don't start with the expectation that I need to check it is built correctly. We recently bought a kitchen blender, I didn't need to strip it down to check the gears were properly greased.

I haven't a clue what the correct back-to-back measurements should be for a loco but I had to correct two faults with this loco, poor contacts and a broken soldered joint, because I didn't want the hassle of sending it back. However, by doing this I am letting the manufacturer get away with selling a poor quality product. We need to be vigilant in that manufacturers are not beginning to compromise mechanical quality in order to keep costs down. 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, confused said:

..  Bad tracklaying is the problem,....

Wrong word I used, more 'suspect tracklaying' is probably politer.

 

15 minutes ago, grriff said:

1/ .....but if I buy any other electrical consumer goods I don't start with the expectation that I need to check it is built correctly. 

2/ .. broken soldered joint, because I didn't want the hassle of sending it back. However, by doing this I am letting the manufacturer get away with selling a poor quality product. We need to be vigilant in that manufacturers are not beginning to compromise mechanical quality in order to keep costs down. 

1/ Agree, 2/ and missed the solder problem.  I had one engine in last 40 years that was problematic on track.  When I meticulously built my first new layout in 40 years during 2020, that loco then ran perfectly, first layout had some iffy track.  Mind you look at H/bys Hush Hush issues.

 

 Send it back.  Good luck

Edited January 31, 2022 by Guest

[grriff]

 'Confused', you raise an interesting point with tracklaying. You had to meticulously build your layout to get smooth running, as have some other posters. How many loco buyers build to that quality? Should the manufacturers assume track of this quality? I'm not trying to make a point here but open a discussion possibly in a new thread?

[Michael Hodgson]

Seems to me that the 94xx should run on ropey track - weren't some of them sold to the NCB?

[cctransuk]

57 minutes ago, grriff said:

 You had to meticulously build your layout to get smooth running ......

 

It seems that your modelling strategy differs from mine - I try and do everything meticulously. Surely, it is unreasonable to expect perfect running if you consciously cut corners? It would seem that you are now experiencing the consequences of NOT laying track meticulously.

 

Each to their own - but writing to Bachmann will not result in better running if your track is 'suspect'.

 

CJI.

[grriff]

I do not 'cut corners' with track laying, as evidenced by perfect running of my 56XX. 

I have started a separate thread on the quality we should expect from new locos

 

[stewartingram]

Comparing the 56xx with a 94xx is comparing apples and pears. Different wheelbase, weight etc.

[MikeParkin65]

Reading between the lines here the one significant difference between the 56xx and 94xx is that the latter has a core less motor whilst former is the more traditional ‘can’ type. There have been reports of poor running of the latest Bachmann models with older DC controllers. @griff - what control system are you operating?

[Steamport Southport]

Without criticising anyone's viewpoint they should work perfectly running on a circle of track on the floor with the Bachmann controller you get supplied in the train sets. Quite often that's how I test mine (on a table rather than floor) as the old layout isn't always accessible.

 

 

Before anyone say's "They're models they shouldn't be compared to train sets", there are three Bachmann train set boxes looking at me with a MR 3F 0-6-0, Coal Tank 0-6-2T and a MR Compound in them. Not quite what I would call toys.

 

That's what they are designed for. If they can't do that then it's obviously faulty.

 

 

Jason

[grriff]

I do not 'cut corners' with track laying, as evidenced by perfect running of my 56XX. 

I have started a separate thread on the quality we should expect from new locos

 

[AY Mod]

25 minutes ago, grriff said:

I have started a separate thread on the quality we should expect from new locos

 

Yes, and I've closed it as you've extended your specific problem to being the whole market. Please contact your retailer if you are not satisfied.

[Michael Hodgson]

30 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Please contact your retailer if you are not satisfied.

If as he says he's taking the soldering iron to it, I'm not sure he can still send it back.

[AY Mod]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

If as he says he's taking the soldering iron to it, I'm not sure he can still send it back.

 

His call. It'll end in tears.

[grriff]

In view of the comments above, I will not be making any further posts. 

[The Johnster]

5 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Seems to me that the 94xx should run on ropey track - weren't some of them sold to the NCB?

 

No, you may be thinking of 15xx which had the same boiler/tanks/cab/bunker configuration.

 

4 hours ago, grriff said:

I do not 'cut corners' with track laying, as evidenced by perfect running of my 56XX. 

I have started a separate thread on the quality we should expect from new locos

 

 

Not as simple as that; the best possible track laying is then subject to expansion/contraction because of ambient temperature range, changes in ambient humidity which can affect baseboard and ballast, and the odd accidental knock to the layout.  It helps if the layout is sited within the heated and ventilated living area of the home, a luxury not available to all of us as the space problem rears it's ugly.

 

We should be able to expect a very high standard of quality from new locos while accepting that nobody's QC is perfect, and mostly our expectations are met, but a 4mm scale or smaller electrically powered model is required to supply continuous current to it's motor through electrical connections that are moving relative to each other, and this is often subject to minor adjustment and general fettling; we're back to my 'big ask' and the balance between reasonable expectation, price, and the acceptance that there will always be a few dogs that get past QC. and that this is what warranties are for.  My view is that grriff should have returned his loco under warranty, but I understand his reluctance to to do this when he can repair it more quickly and conveniently without having to endure the rigours of the postal or delivery cowboys; his choice and decision, and not our place to criticise it.  He may have invalidated his warranty with his broken wire repair, but I'm not sure I wouldn't have taken the same chance in his place.  Sending things through the post or by courier service entails a risk, and these matters have to be balanced when taking such decisions.

 

I have achieved a high standard of running and good slow control on a DC layout with Peco Streamline medium radius insulfrogs, which I think is the result of satisfying following conditions; 1) siting layout in living area of home, 2) level baseboard with strong support across semi-permanent joins, 3) track laid to the best standard I could achieve, 4) strict track and pickup hygiene, including sweeping flangeways and ensuring turnout blades make good physical and electrical contact to stock rails, and jumping on any issues before they develop, 5) (not able to quantify or explain this one in an objective way, but I am completely convinced it is a major factor) frequent running, most days in my case.  I am helped in this by the small size and simplicity of the layout; I can see how the logistics of keeping up with the hygiene and fettling on a big layout with many turnouts and a large stud of locomotives could turn into a problem.

 

It is also an inescapable fact that steam outline models are more of an issue when it comes to running reliability.  The long fixed wheelbases are not particularly amenable to good performance compared to diesel or electric outline locomotives or multiple units with shorter wheelbases that can be mounted to have plenty of sideways and fore/aft movement. The answer to this problem is in full 3-point compensation, but this cannot be provided at a price level the UK market will accept and is difficult to achieve in hig volume production. 

 

Possibly at some future time flexible conductive materials not yet developed may allow it.  By that time, though, I would expect a different method of providing current to model locomotive motors from an on-board power supply to have been devised for RTR production.  I'll be long a'mouldering in my grave by then, though!

Edited January 31, 2022 by The Johnster

[cctransuk]

28 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

 

No, you may be thinking of 15xx which had the same boiler/tanks/cab/bunker configuration.

 

 

Not as simple as that; the best possible track laying is then subject to expansion/contraction because of ambient temperature range, changes in ambient humidity which can affect baseboard and ballast, and the odd accidental knock to the layout.  It helps if the layout is sited within the heated and ventilated living area of the home, a luxury not available to all of us as the space problem rears it's ugly.

 

We should be able to expect a very high standard of quality from new locos while accepting that nobody's QC is perfect, and mostly our expectations are met, but a 4mm scale or smaller electrically powered model is required to supply continuous current to it's motor through electrical connections that are moving relative to each other, and this is often subject to minor adjustment and general fettling; we're back to my 'big ask' and the balance between reasonable expectation, price, and the acceptance that there will always be a few dogs that get past QC. and that this is what warranties are for.  My view is that grriff should have returned his loco under warranty, but I understand his reluctance to to do this when he can repair it more quickly and conveniently without having to endure the rigours of the postal or delivery cowboys; his choice and decision, and not our place to criticise it.  He may have invalidated his warranty with his broken wire repair, but I'm not sure I wouldn't have taken the same chance in his place.  Sending things through the post or by courier service entails a risk, and these matters have to be balanced when taking such decisions.

 

I have achieved a high standard of running and good slow control on a DC layout with Peco Streamline medium radius insulfrogs, which I think is the result of satisfying following conditions; 1) siting layout in living area of home, 2) level baseboard with strong support across semi-permanent joins, 3) track laid to the best standard I could achieve, 4) strict track and pickup hygiene, including sweeping flangeways and ensuring turnout blades make good physical and electrical contact to stock rails, and jumping on any issues before they develop, 5) (not able to quantify or explain this one in an objective way, but I am completely convinced it is a major factor) frequent running, most days in my case.  I am helped in this by the small size and simplicity of the layout; I can see how the logistics of keeping up with the hygiene and fettling on a big layout with many turnouts and a large stud of locomotives could turn into a problem.

 

It is also an inescapable fact that steam outline models are more of an issue when it comes to running reliability.  The long fixed wheelbases are not particularly amenable to good performance compared to diesel or electric outline locomotives or multiple units with shorter wheelbases that can be mounted to have plenty of sideways and fore/aft movement. The answer to this problem is in full 3-point compensation, but this cannot be provided at a price level the UK market will accept and is difficult to achieve in hig volume production. 

 

Possibly at some future time flexible conductive materials not yet developed may allow it.  By that time, though, I would expect a different method of providing current to model locomotive motors from an on-board power supply to have been devised for RTR production.  I'll be long a'mouldering in my grave by then, though!

 

The overwhelming majority of my locos have a rigid wheelbase - no equalisation whatsoever. Many of them have been in storage for up to fifty years, having had nothing but a run up and down my former 2.4m. test track since they were bought / built.

 

As I have posted elsewhere, I recently built a 2.4 x 5.0m. layout, using extra- substantial baseboard construction which is hinged to the wall - ten inter- baseboard gaps, across multiple tracks, with no physical rail joints / means of alignment.

 

The track is Peco Code 75 flat-bottomed on cork sheet underlay, and turnouts are a mixture of medium and large radius live frog. I had not previously laid track for sixty years - Hornby Dublo 3-rail - apart from the afore-mentioned test track.

 

Despite this, my current marathon of testing long-stored locos and rolling stock consists of the application of a touch of oil, followed by a running session.

 

I have been amazed that, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, trains have moved off and run, for extended periods, without a hitch.

 

I ascribe this to the fact that the locos were checked and tweaked on acquisition / build before storage and, most importantly, that EVERY SINGLE LENGTH OF RAIL HAS AN INDIVIDUAL DROPPER CONNECTION TO THE BUS WIRING.

 

I have no exceptional skills, but what I do, I do properly - there are no shortcuts to good running. If I can achieve this, so can anyone who can be bothered to try.

 

CJI.