RMweb Gold Stubby47 Posted July 5, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 5, 2011 I've just bought the 61xx class 2-6-2T loco. On reading the instructions, I noticed the section saying after 100 hours of use the non-replaceable brushes would be worn out and a replacement motor would be needed. 100 hours ? That doesn't seem very long to me -is it usual to have such a limited lifespan ? TIA for any responses. Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 In my experience, Hornby are making a very conservative estimate of likely motor life from a model railway perspective. The motor might fail in that time if operated on full power and nothing else. But operated at more modest speeds, I suspect a rather longer life will be obtained. The only 'hundred hour motor' that I have is in a J94. This was obtained s/h a good ten years ago, and was already well used, brass visible on the tyres for example. It has run regularly since, always at low speed (scale 20mph tops) doing shunts and transfers. If it only accrues five minutes a day when it runs, and is operated every other day I run the layout, it must have done over 100 hours with me; and I would say that is an underestimate of the usage it has had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted July 5, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 5, 2011 I've just bought the 61xx class 2-6-2T loco. On reading the instructions, I noticed the section saying after 100 hours of use the non-replaceable brushes would be worn out and a replacement motor would be needed. 100 hours ? That doesn't seem very long to me -is it usual to have such a limited lifespan ? TIA for any responses. Stu 100 hrs is more than you think. Only if you are a toyshop with a roundy-round running all day in the window, or ditto at home for the 12 days of Xmas round the tree, or someone with only one loco and a great deal of spare time, will you press that loco to its alleged limit in anything like a short time. I also suspect that such a motor is cheap to replace - Faulhaber, it probably isn't! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted July 6, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 6, 2011 I don't think 100 hours is that long, really. If I've got a modelling project on the go, I'll happily set a train orbiting around the layout at low to medium speed for half an hour. Do that for 6 months of modelling evenings and that's your 100 hours! OK, it doesn't work like that but I would imagine some of my models have acquired a good few tens of hours on the clock. However, I'd agree with 34C that Hornby are probably playing it very safe with that estimate. For myself, I have some models bought in the late 70s or very early 80s that are still running on the same brushes they had when they came out of the box. Of course the best way to ease the load on any given model is to buy more models... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium gc4946 Posted July 6, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 6, 2011 The instruction sheet for both my Hornby Networkers (R2603, R2893) which use their Type 7 motors state "the motor fitted to your locomotive has a running life of approximately 150 hours after which the non-replaceable carbon brushes may have become worn out" The now defunct Model Railway Enthusiast magazine put a Networker through its paces in 1997 or 1998, when they were first released, through an endurance test to see how long the motor actually lasted and it stopped working after about 175 hours. AFAIK I've never seen any other manufacturers spell out how long their motors can run before needing replacement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviesparx Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 100 hours at a slow pace is obviously a lot fewer motor rotations then 100 hours flat out, so bit of a 'ball park' figure on Hornby's part... Also, if the brushes wear out requiring motor replacement, then at about a fiver for the motor it's comparable to the prices for replacement brushes and springs, certainly for the Ringfield... No doubt someone will come back with how they solder their own carbon pads onto X04 brass holders, and how the box of 2 gross they bought in 1967 for 2'6d is still half full... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted July 8, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 8, 2011 No doubt someone will come back with how they solder their own carbon pads onto X04 brass holders, and how the box of 2 gross they bought in 1967 for 2'6d is still half full... Or how the solenoids recovered from Lancaster bomb-bay release mechanisms are by superior, although those from a Wellington will do in a pinch... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 How intensively the model is used also has a bearing. When we had an office in Orpington I used to go into the nearby model shop - was it 'Just Trains'? - fairly regularly. One lunchtime I walked in just in front of the proprietor who had an armful of Eurostars. I asked if he'd bought a job lot and he explained that he had the contract to supply them to the Dome (that dates it fairly accurately). These were the dead ones he'd just brought back. The model ran round and round a small loop all day and the attrition rate was one a day. The shortest life he'd had was an hour. In fairness it wasn't always the motor which failed - he showed me a few which had got so hot the chassis had warped so badly they wouldn't stay on the track. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviesparx Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 ...In fairness it wasn't always the motor which failed - he showed me a few which had got so hot the chassis had warped so badly they wouldn't stay on the track. Indeed, I have an early Eurostar - very little use, but quickly stripped it's nylon worm / drive wheel...v.poor ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted July 8, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 8, 2011 I've got one Stu and it's donkeys years old and still going strong with no problems, the Airfix one however is a dog of a runner, but it is a lot older than me! Seeing that Graham Muz has run the Beattie Well Tank for well over 200 hours without failing I would have thought that Hornby's tried and tested motor would last as long as that. Does seem a little conservative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Stubby47 Posted July 8, 2011 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted July 8, 2011 Thanks for all your replies. My initial feeling was that as it's usual to run the loco in for at least 30 mins in each direction, then 99 more hours didn't seem that long. Like Barry Ten, I'll happily set a loco & train running around the loft loop if I'm up there, just to have the pleasure of seeing something moving, so a few evenings doing that would certainly eat into the projected lifespan, however conservative it is. Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted July 8, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 8, 2011 My initial feeling was that as it's usual to run the loco in for at least 30 mins in each direction, then 99 more hours didn't seem that long. Well no! Hour a day, within 4 months it would be dead! I know mine has lasted a lot longer than that! (Thinking of when my locos would run at 145MPH for about 6 hours over a weekend, I'm surprised they didn't go on fire!) Regards, Nick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted July 8, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 8, 2011 Hour a day, within 4 months it would be dead! I know mine has lasted a lot longer than that! Quite agree - Hornby are being more conservative than the most conservative winner of the National Extremely Conservative Person competition. Just run it, mate, enjoy it and don't worry about it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium kevinlms Posted July 9, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 9, 2011 Thanks for all your replies. My initial feeling was that as it's usual to run the loco in for at least 30 mins in each direction, then 99 more hours didn't seem that long. Like Barry Ten, I'll happily set a loco & train running around the loft loop if I'm up there, just to have the pleasure of seeing something moving, so a few evenings doing that would certainly eat into the projected lifespan, however conservative it is. Stu I suppose it could be worthwhile keeping an approximate log & just see how long '100 hours' really is. Kevin Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.