black beetle traction issue

[micklner]

I managed to wreck two Spuds with my NuCast Sentinel Railcar, both times one of the tiny plastic gears stripped after a minimum of movement. It now has a Beetle much better , but even that just about manages to move it . The Sentinel is very heavy being all whitemetal including the roof !!

[davefrk]

Yeah, that's the one, Nu-Cast Sentinel Railcar, vvvery heavy. The one I did is still performing as far as I know although I did advise not hauling any other vehicles with it, on test though it did take 4 coaches so the guy was happy.

 

Dave Frk.

[hollywoodfoundry]

I thought they were available with better than that.

I like very slow running - my planks are short, and if it takes 1 second to travel from one end to the other I might as well pick it up and throw it. It is the 0-60 lurch that I also have issues with.

 

I only just picked up on something here, after it was pointed out to me by someone, the statement "It is the 0-60 lurch that I also have issues with" This is not a function of the Black Beetle, it is the controller you are using more likely. I can get a BB moving on just 2 volts, and it creeps along slowly. Even better, with a BB under DCC control with BEMF speed stabilisation, I can get one to travel one metre in around 55 seconds.

 

However this question crops up regularly for both the Black Beetle and my BullAnt range. And when we dig deeper, it is discovered that the modeller is using an old rheostat controller that was designed for use with motors used in models back in the 50s and 60s. Many rheostat controllers, notably the Hammant & Morgan types, started with a voltage of 6 or more volts, so modern low current consumption motors jump into life at high speed. And because the owners were still using older models with these relatively high current motors, they assume the problem is with the newer Black Beetle or Bullant.

 

There is almost no point in using an old rheostat controller, other than the desire to save money, but do not expect newer motors to perform properly with them. Do yourself a favour and buy a new electronic controller, it will work exceedingly well with both old high current motors and the newer low current ones.

[Kenton]

And when we dig deeper, it is discovered that the modeller is using an old rheostat controller that was designed for use with motors used in models back in the 50s and 60s.

My DC controllers are Gaugemaster Combi and Modelex Hand Held - both of which I believe are a bit more modern than a H&M.

[hollywoodfoundry]

I don't know how well either of those controllers work, as they are not available in Australia, but the simple test is to measure the starting voltage at the track. A modern controller should begin at 1 volt or less.

 

Either way, I have not seen the "0-60 lurch" you speak off in a Black Beetle. SPUD yes.

[Kenton]

I don't know how well either of those controllers work, as they are not available in Australia, but the simple test is to measure the starting voltage at the track. A modern controller should begin at 1 volt or less.

Possibly a bit confused here. Surely the voltage at initial setting on the controller is not the issue?

It must be reasonably low otherwise all other locos RTR and kits (with Mashima cans) would also exhibit the same lurch on start-up. OK, I'll admit to some Lima stuff that is also exhibits a certain reluctance to move, but in the main they all crawl into life at a steady slow pace.

 

Is it not the voltage required to bring a motor to life that matters not the initial voltage at the controller across unoccupied track? The motor and mechanism providing a certain electrical and mechanical resistance to running that has to be overcome before the loco actually moves and then keeps moving.

[hollywoodfoundry]

Yes, you are correct, the voltage that starts a motor moving is important, which is why I said earlier: "I can get a BB moving on just 2 volts, and it creeps along slowly. Even better, with a BB under DCC control with BEMF speed stabilisation, I can get one to travel one metre in around 55 seconds."

 

And that voltage is what I meant by measuring it at the track, I did not mention measuring it across unoccupied track. My point, perhaps poorly explained, was to determine what voltage appears across the track when you move the controller from 'Off' to the first speed step. In the case of older rheostat controllers, the first step is often around 5 or 6 volts, which would account for the lurch you mention.

 

However if you do not have an old style controller, and the first step voltage is around 1.25 volts, which is common for most solid state regulator type circuits, then I cannot account for why you get the suddent lurch.

 

However I can assure you it is not typical of Black Beetles. The Black Beetle is at least offered with two options of gearing, which is one more than just about any other type of bogie.

 

It is also important to remember that these products are designed for an international market, whereas the UK is unique in modelling short layouts where speed is not required. And that was a primary reason why the 27:1 gearing was offered as an option on the Black Beetle. Unfortunately, offering greater gear reduction means trying to shoehorn a double reduction into an already confined space, as there is little room to spare in a power bogie that is designed to fit entirely under the floor.

[Kenton]

I think I understand what you are saying.

But still cannot quite get round to this idea that appears to be coming across that all motor+gearbox+motion combinations are the same in terms of their initial and continued motion.

 

Perhaps the BB has radically changed in design? Mine went to the crusher years ago when I formed my opinion of them. Perhaps it was a rogue one, I can accept that, but see no reason to spend money on another given my experience and when there are alternative and proven ways of making a loco move forward. As far as DCC is concerned I would not use it simply to try to remedy a poor motor - I have little time for it anyway as I have found it offers nothing other than the ability to run 2 locos in close proximity. (I am not anti-DCC just think it is a waste of money in the small layouts that I build). DCC should really not be part of this discussion as what it brings to the BB has nothing to do with the BB.

 

I still have it in my head that a loco requires an initial spike in voltage to get over the initial resistance to motion. That resistance is a combination of the design of the motor and mechanism, the gearing, and friction. Once moving the resistance is less. Overcoming that initial resistance produces the 'lurch'

 

The 1:27 gearing is very much different from a 1:108 set-up. I appreciate that the BB has been designed for a specific application as a bogie motor drive and that probably annoys me even more when it is 'recommended' or promoted as a drive unit for a more substantial loco that could and really SHOULD have a conventional chassis+drive installed. It is this gearing, I believe the root of the 'lurch' and the main fault with the BB as far as slow running is concerned.

[cctransuk]

For what it's worth, I have two 27:1 Black Beetles installed in a *very* heavy cast white metal model of 10800.

 

Performance is superb - I use H&M Walkabout controllers - with the loco able to make an almost imperceptible crawl, accelerating and decelerating in an entirely prototypical way.

 

There is a nice growl - again wholly prototypical.

 

 

 

I am *very* pleased with my BBs, and have just taken delivery of another to fit in an Anbrico cast kit of a Great Western railcar.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Kenton]

Nice 10800 build.

 

Perhaps weight has a bit to do with the motor+gearbox+motion equation - I am talking here about etched brass kits where there is ample space for both a chassis a motor and a modern gearbox.

 

I can see that the weight of such a cast large loco or railcar is going to go some way to smooth out the initial 'lurch' in the same way as it goes some way to smooth out the SPUD. I can also see the strong argument in favour of a BB or similar mechanism in a railcar where the intrusion of the motor into the visible inside of the vehicle is unwanted. Like many things it is a compromise of different factors.

[hollywoodfoundry]

Nice loco John.

 

I would agree that a model may need a 'spike' to nudge it into motion, my contention is that it should not do so at 60mph. Interestingly, DCC motor drive waveform is exactly that, a series of spikes, so I would suggest it is very useful in getting a drive system going at very low speeds. My view on DCC is that it enhances the operation of a model in every way, and is particularly good at moving models at very slow speeds for shunting operations.

 

I am wondering if the unit you had was actually a Black Beetle or maybe am NWSL PDT. They look identical actually, and the reason is that the BB is a copy of the PDT. This was brought about because Steam Era Models had invested around $50K in the tooling for this model:

 

 

 

The model was based around the NWSL PDT drive unit, but just as the tooling was close to being finished, the 2003 Kobe earthquake wiped out the Sagami motor factory. As the PDT was designed around the Sagami motor, NWSL could not supply the PDT any longer. With so much invested in the tooling, Steam Era Models had no choice but to design their own motor bogie, and it was designed around the Mashima range of motors that were then quite easily available.

 

The Sagami motors in the PDT were not that good, and if you had one of those, then that could explain the operation you describe.

 

The Black Beetle is primarily designed to be used in DMU/EMU applications, using it in a locomotive as John and I have done was not what they were really intended for. The design is a compromise, all so the motor does not intrude into the interior of the model, so using a conventional motor/gearbox and wheel set-up is not as effective, as virtually all conventional drives will intrude into the cabin space. The BB does exactly what the SPUD does, but with improved low speed performance and reliability.

 

This is the locomotive I powered using BBs:

 

 

And this is the chassis before fitting of the superstructure:

 

 

The upper area is clear, allowing me to fit around 350 grams of lead weight. The model was then able to pull a maximum of 42 four wheel wagons up a slight grade.

[Kenton]

Thanks for the historical background info on the BB

 

I am wondering if the unit you had was actually a Black Beetle or maybe am NWSL PDT. They look identical actually, and the reason is that the BB is a copy of the PDT.

You might be correct. It was certainly sold as a BB (I had not heard of the PDT) but the period is about right 2003/4

 

The Black Beetle is primarily designed to be used in DMU/EMU applications, using it in a locomotive as John and I have done was not what they were really intended for.

I do accept that, however I am coming from the other direction where a very spacious loco has been designed and recommended use of the BB where a perfectly normal chassis combination would fit. On the surface it could be viewed as a cop out of producing/designing a chassis but I am prepared to believe it is more of a case of marketing a kit with a "off-the-shelf" drive unit substitution for those unable/unwilling to make the effort to buid a normal chassis.

 

I appreciate everyone has their own opinion of speed of a loco particular to their layout and some really don't care that they operate at full throttle. But to me, where virtually every layout is less than 6ft, slow really means slow and smooth.

[hollywoodfoundry]

What you say is quite true, and these days I would design a mechanism that is specifically intended for the application, but many people do not have the skills you and I may posess, so a ready-built answer is what they are looking for. In fact, my whole business is built around the fact that few people have the skills to design good locomotive drive systems.

 

When you look at some of the questions I receive by email every day, it becomes obvious that a lot of modellers have no idea at all how a drive system needs to be designed. Just today I received a query that sort of went along the lines of: "I want a power bogie with side rods, can you supply one to the dimension I need?" Now, the first question you would ask is what dimension, as it was not mentioned. I was also tempted to ask if he thought side rods were made of rubber and could stretch to any wheelbase, and then I remembered to be polite and point out the practicalities of the situation.

 

I find that the sales I make in the UK are often requiring higher ratio drives than elsewhere in the world. The US is the opposite, most times they have no idea what gearing to choose anyway, but discerning buyers usually have enough sense to ask for help or advice, so most drives sold to the UK are of 30:1 or greater ratio.

[kevinlms]

I only just picked up on something here, after it was pointed out to me by someone, the statement "It is the 0-60 lurch that I also have issues with" This is not a function of the Black Beetle, it is the controller you are using more likely. I can get a BB moving on just 2 volts, and it creeps along slowly. Even better, with a BB under DCC control with BEMF speed stabilisation, I can get one to travel one metre in around 55 seconds.

 

However this question crops up regularly for both the Black Beetle and my BullAnt range. And when we dig deeper, it is discovered that the modeller is using an old rheostat controller that was designed for use with motors used in models back in the 50s and 60s. Many rheostat controllers, notably the Hammant & Morgan types, started with a voltage of 6 or more volts, so modern low current consumption motors jump into life at high speed. And because the owners were still using older models with these relatively high current motors, they assume the problem is with the newer Black Beetle or Bullant.

 

There is almost no point in using an old rheostat controller, other than the desire to save money, but do not expect newer motors to perform properly with them. Do yourself a favour and buy a new electronic controller, it will work exceedingly well with both old high current motors and the newer low current ones.

 

Well, in a way they're right in thinking the problem is with the new generation motors. Why, because their old Hornby Dublo, Wrenn & Tri-ang still work perfectly with them, so since the new motors don't work very well, where else are they going to point the finger at?

 

 

How many of us chose to drive cars from the 60s & 70s daily (I mean by choice day to day - not occasionally for classic or historic novelty)? We should remind modellers that things like the motors in modern R-T-R locos & controllers have moved on somewhat during the last 40-50 years, just as cars have.

 

Kevin Martin

[hollywoodfoundry]

My apologies Kenton, I went to reply to your post and it disappeared. I may have accidentaly deleted it. Oh poop.

 

As I was going to say before I screwed it up, many kit designers are focused on the aesthetics of the model design and elect to leave the mechanism to someone else. There is a growing tendency for anyone with CAD skills to design a 3D body for a model, have it printed by a rapid prototyping service then, thinking it looks pretty good, offering it to the public. But no thought is given to the mechanism.

 

One cottage manufacturer here in Australia blithely states "A mechanism for this kit can be obtained from Hollywood Foundry", which is interesting in that I have never seen an example of the kit nor discussed what requirements there are for the mechanism. One would imagine that if they wished to hand-ball the responsibility to me for that important part of the kit, they would have at least entered into some sort of dialogue with me, but not in this case.

[Kenton]

But no thought is given to the mechanism.

To me, that is one more step along the further decline of the kit provider.

 

For me the perfect kit is one that comes with all the parts required to produce the finished model with the exception of only the skill and tools to build it.

 

The "kit" sold as a simple etch with "motor and gearbox, wheels, transfers to be supplied elsewhere by kit purchaser" just simply is not a real kit. The trend seems to be getting worse with the designer now abdicating responsibility for buffers and even other essential castings, and now even the rather important mechanism to make it actually run!

 

I know there are many modelers out there who are not avid kit builders, who seem to relish the challenge of researching and sourcing these missing parts but to someone who essentially is a kit builder I wish to purchase a kit complete.

 

Sure we all have our own preferences of gauge and motor gear combination, and I would not necessarily expect a small supplier to keep stock of all variations. But I would expect them to keep a stock of the basic recommended formation and probably have a good relationship with their suppliers o have a better lead time than I could have. There is, however, nothing worse than not having that basic information of where to obtain a specific casting or missing part.

 

To be fair I purchased the kit in the knowledge that a BB was "recommended", however I did expect a rudimentary chassis to be included for those who do not like the drop in bogie approach. Even now, I will resort to scratch building frames and spacers, and mount my favourite motor and gearbox combo. But what a faff! Which all goes to delay the build considerably as it goes to the back of the queue and a more user friendly kit takes precedence and the spare motor+gearbox intended.

[Xerces Fobe2]

Having used many Black Beetle Motor bogies ( with quite a few more to fit into some of my forthcoming projects) I think they are ideal for 2/3 car DMU/EMU's. I run them mainly on DCC and have found that I can get them to crawl at very slow a speeds as well and they are very responsive.

 

On the few occasions I have run them on DC using them on old Hammet & Morgan Clipper controllers I have found that they still perform reasonably well however on gradients there is not the same torque and and they do slow down somewhat.

 

Xerces Fobe.

[hollywoodfoundry]

Having used many Black Beetle Motor bogies ( with quite a few more to fit into some of my forthcoming projects) I think they are ideal for 2/3 car DMU/EMU's. I run them mainly on DCC and have found that I can get them to crawl at very slow a speeds as well and they are very responsive.

 

On the few occasions I have run them on DC using them on old Hammet & Morgan Clipper controllers I have found that they still perform reasonably well however on gradients there is not the same torque and and they do slow down somewhat.

 

Xerces Fobe.

 

 

Yes, that is pretty much what they were designed for. I do however apply one fairly rigid rule to DMU/EMU applications, and that is one BB to two unpowered bogies.

[hollywoodfoundry]

To me, that is one more step along the further decline of the kit provider.

 

For me the perfect kit is one that comes with all the parts required to produce the finished model with the exception of only the skill and tools to build it.

 

The "kit" sold as a simple etch with "motor and gearbox, wheels, transfers to be supplied elsewhere by kit purchaser" just simply is not a real kit. The trend seems to be getting worse with the designer now abdicating responsibility for buffers and even other essential castings, and now even the rather important mechanism to make it actually run!

 

I agree 100% with your views there, I am also one who expects everything to be included in the kit. But it seems UK modellers expect to be able to choose what gauge they use and what motor, wheels and gearbox they employ. Or so you are lead to believe by the kit makers.

 

In Australia I design kits, not one of my pulicised activities mind you, but one I nevertheless enjoy as a break from assembling drive systems. But the difference is that I expect to put everything in the kit except couplers and paint. Frankly I would include the paint, but recent laws stop us from posting kits anywhere that contain paint. I consider that the kit designer has a better idea of what motor and gearbox combination fits best and performs best. Because of our smaller market, there is no-one over here to supply alternative wheels, and the motor and gearbox is not that important a choice, as often it is difficult to substitute another anyway.

 

And as for gauge, 16.5mm is the norm, because we are dealing in HO scale where the gauge is correct anyway. All except for Victoria, on 5' 3" gauge, or 18.37mm if you are a pedant. If you were to cater for 18.37mm though, you would sell maybe 5 kits, so we don't bother.

[JeffB]

 

The Sagami motors in the PDT were not that good, and if you had one of those, then that could explain the operation you describe.

 

 

 

 

That's not necessarily true... I apologize in advance for slight diversion away from the subject, but I thought that this comment needed some additional information.

 

The problems with the PDT had more to do with the section of the gear case that the motor pressed into splitting over time. Being cast Delrin, it was prone to shinking, coupled with expansion from the pressing action, the cases would split. This would cause a serious degradation in the running quality.

 

There were a few problems reported with the shortest wheelbase PDT option. On those units, NWSL machined the end off the motor case to shorten the wheelbase to the absolute minimum.

 

I had one PDT that had a poorly pressed on 8 tooth pinion gear, which caused the unit not to run at all. This was quickly fixed by NWSL, at no cost to me.

 

The 1220 Sagami motors, especially the later versions had some cogging at lower RPMs. But they generally ran well, with no overheating when used with low to no pulse controllers. The larger 1225 motor, in my limited experience with them, seemed to cog a little less and run slightly better. Both had a fairly high starting RPM, but with ample gear reduction, a slow running and very smooth chassis was very much possible.

 

The 10mm diameter Sagami motors were more prone to moderate heating, more so the 1015 and 1013, and not so much the 1020. Though the heating didn't seem to effect the operation in the short term, I can't imagine that it was good for the motors long term.

 

I and a good modeling friend of mine, have had similar experiences with the Mashima 10mm flat cans. Both silver and brown can versions. The silver cans have stronger magnets, with more cogging. The brown cans have less cogging. Both are pretty powerful for a motor of the iron core variety in this size range. Both varieties overheat terribly on older pulsed controllers. I stopped using the silver cans early on because of excessive overheating. I've used about a half dozen of the brown case version, with similar over heating, on both DC pulse and DCC. My modeling buddy has had similar experiences with them on DCC. Neither of us will use the Mashima 10mm brown case motors if we can avoid it. If there's something we're doing wrong, I've yet to figure it out. No matter what I use to power them (DC, DCC), I get overheating, sometimes excessive.

 

Probably the best motor for the money is the Mashima 1220... I use these whenever I can fit them. If I can't fit them in, I'll use the Mashima 916, which is a near bullet proof motor, and they can be "tuned" for smoother operation if they seem rough on first start up. Other than those, I'll use a Sagami 1220, or 1020 from my private stockpile if the chassis is for me, or if a customer supplies one.

 

Again, I apologize for the diversion away from the thread's original subject.

 

Jeff

[hollywoodfoundry]

Jeff,

 

No need to apologise, the thread is still moving in essentially a similar direction.

 

It is interesting that you say: "The Sagami motors in the PDT were not that good..." is not necessarily true, then go on to explain the problems with the Sagami motors. There have been many cases where I have supplied replacement Mashima motors to fix problems customers had with Sagami motors, and in a private conversation with the original owner of NWSL he confessed they had considerable trouble with Sagami over the years, mostly due to quality control issues.

 

As far as Mashima is concerned, they have been progressively converting all their motors to skewed armature design using Neodymium magnets, whereas that never happened with Sagami. I rather suspect there was also some involvement between the two as well, but that is simply speculation on my part.

 

The silver can Mashima motors had straight armature stacks and conventional magnets, only the black can versions changed, and not all at once, each motor in the range gained skewed armatures and Neodymium magnets over a period of time, and this significantly improved their performance, particularly a reduction in cogging. The Open can motors, as far as I know, got Neodymium but not skewed windings, but I don't stock or use them so I cannot be certain.

 

Of the various Mashima motors, I rate the MH-1626 motor as being the best bang-for-buck, it has optimum power, torque and speed range. Oddly though, you probably know it as a 1426 as British modellers seem to have a different numbering scheme to Mr. Mashima. The 1220 is actually better in most respects to the 1224, except torque, so we would agree on that.

 

With regard to heating, it must be considered that this is a feature of all can motors, not just Mashima. An enclosed can does not allow air to circulate around the armature windings, so the can itself gets hot. While many people regard can motors as an advance in motor design, I do not. It is a way to save on motor construction costs, but offers little in the way of advantages, keeping contaminants out of the motor being about the only one.

 

The 10mm motors from Mashima should not be lumped together, as the 1024 outperforms the 1220 or the 1224, with the 1020 not far behind. The black sheep in this family is the 1015 can motor, which I regard as inadequate for any job. I advise modellers not to choose this motor for anything but the simplest of tasks, as its performance is quite poor.

[JeffB]

Jeff,

 

No need to apologise, the thread is still moving in essentially a similar direction.

 

It is interesting that you say: "The Sagami motors in the PDT were not that good..." is not necessarily true, then go on to explain the problems with the Sagami motors. There have been many cases where I have supplied replacement Mashima motors to fix problems customers had with Sagami motors, and in a private conversation with the original owner of NWSL he confessed they had considerable trouble with Sagami over the years, mostly due to quality control issues.

 

As far as Mashima is concerned, they have been progressively converting all their motors to skewed armature design using Neodymium magnets, whereas that never happened with Sagami. I rather suspect there was also some involvement between the two as well, but that is simply speculation on my part.

 

The silver can Mashima motors had straight armature stacks and conventional magnets, only the black can versions changed, and not all at once, each motor in the range gained skewed armatures and Neodymium magnets over a period of time, and this significantly improved their performance, particularly a reduction in cogging. The Open can motors, as far as I know, got Neodymium but not skewed windings, but I don't stock or use them so I cannot be certain.

 

Of the various Mashima motors, I rate the MH-1626 motor as being the best bang-for-buck, it has optimum power, torque and speed range. Oddly though, you probably know it as a 1426 as British modellers seem to have a different numbering scheme to Mr. Mashima. The 1220 is actually better in most respects to the 1224, except torque, so we would agree on that.

 

With regard to heating, it must be considered that this is a feature of all can motors, not just Mashima. An enclosed can does not allow air to circulate around the armature windings, so the can itself gets hot. While many people regard can motors as an advance in motor design, I do not. It is a way to save on motor construction costs, but offers little in the way of advantages, keeping contaminants out of the motor being about the only one.

 

The 10mm motors from Mashima should not be lumped together, as the 1024 outperforms the 1220 or the 1224, with the 1020 not far behind. The black sheep in this family is the 1015 can motor, which I regard as inadequate for any job. I advise modellers not to choose this motor for anything but the simplest of tasks, as its performance is quite poor.

 

Let me clarify my comments on the Sagami/PDT...

 

A few points...

 

I've reread my original comments several times and I'm a little stymied by your rebuttal. I said that the 1220 Sagami, especially the later version had minor cogging and that they where generally a good motor. The problems I listed with the Sagami's were mostly in regard to the 10 series motors, which did have significant overheating issues (more so the 1015 and 1013). But these were not used in the PDT's, only the 1220, 1225 and shortened can 1220. The PDT's have/had other issues other than the Sagami motor... When new, unless the motor was completely bad, a gear was installed incorrectly, or the Delrin case was cracked, the PDT's ran very well. The higher ratio units (36:1 and 45:1) had excellent slow speed response, and if used within their limits, had few operation issues. I'm not saying that the 1220 Sagami's were perfect, maybe the motors from the last run or two did have problems. I've just not heard that, even in the several conversations I've had with Fred Martin (NWSL founder) or Fred Hamilton (one of the later shop floor managers), motor quality issues never popped up.

 

My comments on the Mashima 10 series motors apply to both the silver and black/brown cased motors. I've burned up several of the silver case, and disassembled most of them, and they are most definitely not skew wound (as you say). I've also burned up a few of the black/brown case 10 series Mashima motors, disassembled those, and the ones I have are most definitely skew wound. Both motor types have serious issues with overheating, regardless of the winding type. I've found this on all 10mm x 15mm and 10mm x 20mm motors I've used from Mashima, regardless of motor case color, or armature type. I sent back over 30 of the 10mm series motors to my distributor because of this, and traded them for Mashima's 1220, which I absolutely love.

 

I've never experienced motor overheating or even minor heating on a Mashima 1220 motor, in 20 or so of them that I've used on various HOn2 and HOn30 mechanisms. Doesn't matter what I run them on, DC, DCC, or heavily pulsed DC, they run cool (barring a bind in the mechanism or overloading them). They are a great motor! I've not used the 1224, or larger motors, but I've heard that they are even better (for iron core motors that is).

 

The thing to keep in mind about some of these underfloor powered trucks... They were not built for heavy duty, or heavy superstructure applications. The 0.3Mod gear profile is a little on the too fine/small side for heavy applications (NWSL admits as much in their handbook/catalog). Also, at 15:1 gear ratio (SPUD), you are not going to get super slow speed operation from them. The higher ratio PDT, or Black Beetle is better.

 

Jeff

[hollywoodfoundry]

Jeff,

 

I don't think we are much in disagreement here.

 

My conversation was indeed with Fred Martin, and it was he who mentioned the quality control issues they had with the Sagami motors.

 

Where we do disagree is in relation to the Mashima motors. I am not sure what version of the 10 series motors you had and rejected, but if they were 1015s, then I would agree. As I said, I have a very low opinion of that motor. However, the 1020 and 1024 motors are the main motors used in my BullAnt range and I do not have a problem with them and there are many thousands of them out there working quite well.

[JeffB]

Jeff,

 

I don't think we are much in disagreement here.

 

My conversation was indeed with Fred Martin, and it was he who mentioned the quality control issues they had with the Sagami motors.

 

Where we do disagree is in relation to the Mashima motors. I am not sure what version of the 10 series motors you had and rejected, but if they were 1015s, then I would agree. As I said, I have a very low opinion of that motor. However, the 1020 and 1024 motors are the main motors used in my BullAnt range and I do not have a problem with them and there are many thousands of them out there working quite well.

 

I'll take your word on it regarding the 1020's you use... It is entirely possible that the batch of black case 1020's I purchased a few years back, were faulty or not up to the current design specs. It is or was not my intention to make trouble for you, just relaying my experiences with the motors I have used in the last few years. Your Bullant products look to be extremely well designed and a quality product. I was especially glad when you switched to belt drive (I contacted Nigel Lawton in the UK a few years ago and suggested he contact you and send you some samples). The minor reduction first style of gearing is noisy, no matter how well it's made!

 

Thanks for the exchange... It has been fun.

 

Jeff

[charliepetty]

Did you know the BB comes with an optional 27:1 gearing instead of the standard 15:1 gears? Unfortunately the UK importers do not seem to know of this option.

 

DC Kits stock some of the 27:1 options but they are dearer. Charlie