atom3624 Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Perhaps strange, but I'm just curious. I had had 'Avenger' 3-4 months ago, remember it was heavy but I don't think it was as heavy as my relatively new-addition to the fleet, the TPE 68 019 Brutus. Brutus weighs in at 695 g - this is more than my Hornby 50 and 60. Just wondering what kind of variations there are. Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpendle Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 The N Gauge ones weigh next to nothing by comparison. John P 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 11, 2019 Author Share Posted July 11, 2019 (edited) OK, true, I'm talking about the OO/HO version. Traction when required will be huge. I'm thinking this one might have been run, I'm not sure - no signs of wear and wheels look new, but it's VERY smooth at very, very slow speeds - probably one of the smoothest, slowest locos I've ever had. Al. Edited July 11, 2019 by atom3624 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YesTor Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 (edited) 698g, and yes they are very nice runners. Edited July 11, 2019 by YesTor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 12, 2019 Author Share Posted July 12, 2019 OK, that's fine. I thought Avenger was quite a bit lighter, but I think it was 675g, still very heavy and quite close. 698, 695 - neither here nor there with models. VERY heavy, but consistent. Thanks. Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Mac Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 I’d be surprised if there were any variations at all.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 5 hours ago, atom3624 said: OK, that's fine. I thought Avenger was quite a bit lighter, but I think it was 675g, still very heavy and quite close. 698, 695 - neither here nor there with models. VERY heavy, but consistent. The difference is just as likely to be caused by a variation in scale calibration than a difference between the models themselves. Has anyone scaled this measurement up? 0.695kg * 76*76*76 = 305,088kg or 305 tons, which is about 3½ times the weight of a real one scaled down. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 12, 2019 Author Share Posted July 12, 2019 Precisely!! Weighs a ton .... or 305 MT !! Lovely model 'though - let's hope the 59's as good, or better still ... Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 On 12/07/2019 at 06:54, atom3624 said: ...I thought Avenger was quite a bit lighter, but I think it was 675g, still very heavy and quite close. 698, 695 - neither here nor there with models. If there proved to be a real 20g difference between models, a small change to the chassis casting or a diameter difference on the flywheels would be the kind of thing to look for. But indeed, already at 675g that's ample, probably going to move more stock than many owners possess or have sufficient length of run to accommodate the necessary train length. It's when there is a slight accident that the weight becomes less advantageous. I have seen an HO 'monster' mangle a point blade, which I reckon must have already been detached from the tie bar when the loco ran onto it at 'line speed'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 17, 2019 Author Share Posted July 17, 2019 (edited) Perhaps I'm mistaken in the original 'Avenger''s weight. I think it's more than modern manufacturing tolerances would permit nowadays. Totally agree, that weight is HUGE - it should 'haul'!! Al. Edited July 17, 2019 by atom3624 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Blue Posted July 18, 2019 Share Posted July 18, 2019 This came up in conversations with an old hand today. He stated that poured castings could have weight differences due to formation of gas pockets and sometimes slag or ash content in the pour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 18, 2019 Author Share Posted July 18, 2019 That is true, but you would hope this is fine-honed to limit / avoid aeration - which presumably could cause a weak casting or even failure. A couple of grammes - 695 / 698 is neither here nor there. I'm not certain the Avenger I had actually was 675, but just don't remember it being virtually 700g !! Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 19, 2019 Author Share Posted July 19, 2019 I've just re-weighed mine a little more carefully - initial weighing was very quick, just before the wife saw me using her kitchen scales! Mine's coming in at 697g - this compares well with YesTor's 698g - minor variations in scales / production I think. Bottom line is, this is one HEAVY locomotive. Wonder what the forthcoming 59 will weigh? !!! Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack374 Posted July 19, 2019 Share Posted July 19, 2019 Ahhhhh...it seems mine is a little underweight...maybe the chassis is hollow or I’m missing something? ...or maybe I milled it out to fit proper speakers???? Quite interesting how much has been removed actually...I didn’t weigh it after I milled it. Jack. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted July 20, 2019 Author Share Posted July 20, 2019 I take it the weighing was done after the milling? What a lightweight!! Still about 100g heavier than a Bachmann Class 70!! I think my 70 was ~450g - gone now as I was disappointed the beautifully-detailed locomotive couldn't 'perform' as it should do. There was no room to add more than ~20-30g Pb if I remember as well. This is one locomotive I would definitely want close to 650-700g !! Al. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atom3624 Posted August 14, 2019 Author Share Posted August 14, 2019 I mentioned it in the Accurascale Mk.5 thread, but I've a 'temporary' (carpet!!) layout out, taking advantage of a quiet household! I've a few sidings, and 3 rakes of coaches, totalling 24 carriages - including 2 12-wheeled dining cars, one with lights. Seeing how easily the 68 pulled any of them, I hooked up ALL of them - no slip, and VERY easy, as if it was a normal 7-10-coach rake!! Felt like it could potentially double that, if there was room, it was that easy - doubt it, but, there's the challenge to someone!! What a BEAST!! Can't wait for the 59 to arrive in a couple of months' time - hopefully there's at least the same weight and traction. Al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now