Wright writes.....

[polybear]

34 minutes ago, Chuffer Davies said:

1)  Something is lifting the weight away from the driven wheels, either the bogie (which you say it definitely isn't), the tender through the draw bar, or very uneven weight distribution such that the front of the loco is sitting down on the bogie.

2) Resistance in the non driven wheels, and again either the bogie or tender wheels may not be turning freely.  

 

There is a third possibility if the back to backs are too far apart such that the flanges are rubbing on the inside of the rails and lifting the loco off the track but this would be a very unusual occurrence.

 

17 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

May I suggest you remove the bogie and run the loco under load without it, to absolutely eliminate any possibility of it being the cause?

 

You can exploit the tender's weight by resting its drawbar/draw-hook on the loco's dragbeam. This will help if the loco is nose-heavy.

 

12 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

One possibility  is that the pick ups on the tender are acting like brakes, so the loco is trying to pull a 200g skate. Can the tender wheels turn freely when spun by hand off the track? That would eliminate one possible cause.

 

Many thanks for the replies. 

1.  I've removed the front bogie to eliminate this as a cause.

2.  Bogie and Tender wheels are free to rotate (very slight drag on the front and rear Tender wheels as to be expected, due to the pickups).

3. All loco wheels appear to rotate smoothly (having a Portescap fitted makes this check easy )

4. The Loco is driven off the centre wheels.

5. There is side play between all Loco and Tender wheel flanges and rails, so no drag/binding.

6. The Tender definitely isn't imparting any lift or downward force on the dragbeam.

7. When sat on a flat surface, there is no evidence of any rocking of the loco on the centre wheelset.

HTH

Brian

[Clive Mortimore]

It was nice to see LB looking like many layouts with stuff on it, including glue.

[Headstock]

3 hours ago, rowanj said:

It's Headstock's fault that I'm being dragged into this coach-building malarkey, as he insisted that I need some ex-NER Suburban stock. Here is where am I to date with a pair of D&S builds. They had almost all gone by 1951 so it'd debatable about what condition they were in at the end. The photo also shows the difference between the LNER Brown which went onto most pre-grouping secondary stock and Lner Teak, and also the difference between the 2 recommendations I was given to represent it. I quite like contrast, and don't think either shade is "right" or "wrong".

Thanks, Andrew.

 

Good evening John,

 

or should that be carriage addict.

 

Knowing your predilection for building specific locomotives for your layouts time and location, I suggested (insisted?) that you should have some examples of NER carriages running on your layout. I can tell that you are secretly enjoying this new challenge, as I hear that you have now acquired a clerestory brake. The world waits in isolation and asks what variation on the colour brown will it be?

 

P.S. 'ex NER suburban stock' definitely not me. With a few notable exceptions, suburban is a type of service, rather than a type of stock.

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, rowanj said:

 

As far as I can see, the coaches are numbered NE*****E.

 

I know that I will be corrected if I am wrong - which I hope that I am - but I would have expected the numbers to be just E*****, in LNER style transfers, at the LH end of the coaches.

 

It is my understanding that the the NE prefix was a relatively late arrival; ( late 1950s / early 1960s)? I would have expected these coaches to have been withdrawn before the RH numbering / regional suffix were introduced.

 

I'm no expert though, so I await the rebuttal with anticipation!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said:

It was nice to see LB looking like many layouts with stuff on it, including glue.

Good evening Clive,

 

It was posed there for the photo.

 

When LB was being built it was covered in tools and adhesives. However, since it's almost completed (or as complete as any layout could be), then I try to keep tools and adhesives off it. 

 

I know no layout is ever 'completed', and there will always being some detail to add/finish; in my case the point rodding. However, when I look at the 'check list', most is ticked off.

 

For instance....

 

1. All trackwork is built, down, ballasted and fully-wired.

 

2. The whole layout is fully-operational.

 

3. All full-sized signals are built, installed and fully-operational and, where appropriate, interlocked (thanks Mick, Graham, Tony and Andrew; they know who they are). All ground signals are built and some are operational (thanks Roy, Tony and Ray). I mention the names with regard to the signals because nothing in that regard is my work. I've personally contributed to all the other disciplines. 

 

4. All groundwork/scenery/detail is completed.

 

5. All civil engineering features are completed and installed.

 

6. All buildings; large, small, railway and domestic are built and in place.

 

7. Though not under 'building', a comprehensive operating sequence has been drawn up, practised and established.

 

8. What takes place now in the way of 'work' on the system is routine maintenance of both the layout and the stock.  

 

It's my intention to complete the point rodding in two or three more sessions. The completion of the workings of the ground signals will, obviously, have to wait. 

 

Then what? Apart from the aforementioned rodding (and the wee signals), that's that. By the end of this year, that'll be 12 years for the making of LB. 12 years (with two years' no progress because of my bout of depression) since the first baseboards were built and fixed together (I suppose that should be '0' on the check list). Of course, my making of the locos/stock has taken me well over 40 years (along with the work of others). In fact, though there are far more locos and items of stock than are necessary for running LB at any one time, I'll continue to make locos/stock; that's what I enjoy the most. 

 

It's been a wonderful journey.......

 

 

 

 

Plenty of evidence of clutter on the baseboards here.

 

 

And here.

 

 

 

 

From these views to these........

 

 

Apologies if the following have been seen recently.

 

 

 

 

Of course, nothing of the above would have been achieved without an incredible team of modellers, of which it's my privilege to be a part.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Clive Mortimore]

Hello Tony

 

I am into year three of my solo build and enjoying it. Using your list this is how far I haven't got. 

 

1. All trackwork is built (thanks Mr Peco), down, and fully-wired. Not yet ballasted.

 

2. The whole layout is fully-operational.

 

3. Signals are in place as is the wiring. The signals by the station exit/entrance just need me to get under the base board and solder their wires to the main signal cable form.

 

4. All groundwork/scenery/detail is not completed.

 

5. Mock up civil engineering features are installed.

 

6. Mock up buildings are built and in place. I might add more. No non railway buildings as I am only modelling up to the railway fence.

 

7. An operating sequence is being used. I might revise it as time goes on. I feel how you are going to operate a layout is as important in the planning stage as the track plan. Both need to go hand in hand when designing a make believe train set. Those who build real locations are at an advantage as someone else has done that bit for them.

 

8. Routine maintenance of both the layout and the stock takes place as soon as it is up and running. 

 

Getting Sheffield Exchange  working to my satisfaction was higher on my list of priorities than doing the scenics. When running trains, like I have this evening I can imagine what it will look like in the future as I progress with its building. Having a lovely looking layout with no or limited action would send me crazy. 

 

Edit , number 7, I say i might revise the sequence. Instead of running the next train from the fiddle yard. Things might go to a time table but the basics of a train leaving the fiddle yard (or station) running around the room several times before arriving at the station (or fiddle yard) and at the same time I am shunting locos about to and from the stabling sidings will not change.

Edited March 29, 2020 by Clive Mortimore

[rowanj]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

As far as I can see, the coaches are numbered NE*****E.

 

I know that I will be corrected if I am wrong - which I hope that I am - but I would have expected the numbers to be just E*****, in LNER style transfers, at the LH end of the coaches.

 

It is my understanding that the the NE prefix was a relatively late arrival; ( late 1950s / early 1960s)? I would have expected these coaches to have been withdrawn before the RH numbering / regional suffix were introduced.

 

I'm no expert though, so I await the rebuttal with anticipation!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

John

 

Photos of these coaches in BR  days are  pretty well non existant, though they lasted until the early 50,s. I think you are right about NE and i,'ll sort that.

As for number style and location, my understanding is that those coaches which got some sort of paint job after grouping also got the BR  style. So that's what I will go with, as I want to stretch the date of their disposal as far into BR days as possible.

Of course, if anyone knows different ????

 

 

[juke]

Re:Golden Age

Hi Dave

I had a lot of trouble with my Gresley coaches, so after a lot of trying to sort it myself I started a thread, called 

"OO wheelsets with non-pinpoint ends, do they exist?"  after a first thread didn't get much attention.

 

I was convinced it must be the fine looking flanges that were the problem but I now know they're not fine!

I had previously tried filing the top and bottom of the springs and adjusting the length, didn't help.

There were some very useful replies and I would have worked through more of them but basically as suggested by Grovenor I just removed all the springs. (Washers aren't necessary). That left most of the coaches running well but still two would derail without any reason that I could see. I detached them and just ran with six.

I went up to the loft today and ran the six again (not used in winter) and still great.

I decided to try again with the others and discovered that some of the screws were not able to screw in fully. Grovenor also suggested reaming the hole in the bogie a little but I haven't done that yet but I would say it could help if there was further trouble.

About ten minutes work and all eight are now able to run round my 9*30 foot oval at full speed with no problem at all.

These coaches have been very frustrating as I find the couplings are awkward and have a few faults which I mentioned on the thread, the corridor connections are great looking but the couplings have actually levered some of them off. I want now to devise a Keen-type solution and get alternative corridor connections and fitting Kadee couplers.

 

Syd

 

[Jesse Sim]

In the spirit of making things, I thought I’d share these....

 

I was gifted two Parkside Plate wagons back in November, they needed painting and transfers, they were plonked in a train and that was that. Now in lockdown I cracked on with some kits, one of those was a Cambrian Models LNER quint D bolster wagon, upon further investigation they used plate wagons as runner wagons for oversized loads.....well then I thought! 
 

So here they are, considering my layout is set between 1935 and 1940 the plate wagons are modelled as new wagons, whilst the bolster will be weathered. The bolster still needs some touch up paint, transfers and weathering, the plate wagons only need the buffers painted. I’m quite happy with how this looks, it will make a good addition to my heavy goods train. 

[micklner]

9 hours ago, rowanj said:

John

 

Photos of these coaches in BR  days are  pretty well non existant, though they lasted until the early 50,s. I think you are right about NE and i,'ll sort that.

As for number style and location, my understanding is that those coaches which got some sort of paint job after grouping also got the BR  style. So that's what I will go with, as I want to stretch the date of their disposal as far into BR days as possible.

Of course, if anyone knows different ????

 

 

One for BR experts .would BR have painted them Brown ??

[grahame]

The latest construction/modelling work for me is some cardboard engineering in making part of the station forecourt area that links Fielden House and Southwark Towers across Joiner Street. Here it is, somewhat dwarfed by the buildings. Southwark Towers was 328ft tall (which scales out at over 2ft tall in N/2mm scale) and was demolished in 2008 to make way for the Shard. The inset pic shows the actual area although is taken in the late 1990s with the curved green glass entrance a later addition to the period I'm hoping to replicate. And gawd knows how I'm going to make those balcony walls that extend right to the top and on all sides:

 

 

[rowanj]

42 minutes ago, micklner said:

One for BR experts .would BR have painted them Brown ??

Only in the first year, if at all. York would have still had gallons of the paint. I understand none of these coaches went into maroon or crimson, but the paintwork of surviving examples was touched up if the overall condition of the coach was good enough to keep it in service. I assume (because it suits my purpose to do so), that the BR style of numbering was applied at this point.

Here is one of a series of coaches built by Jonathan Weallans which I used as a template. I'll take it down if he objects, but his thread is a great resource for LNER modellers.

[zr2498]

9 hours ago, juke said:

Re:Golden Age

Hi Dave

I had a lot of trouble with my Gresley coaches, so after a lot of trying to sort it myself I started a thread, called 

"OO wheelsets with non-pinpoint ends, do they exist?"  after a first thread didn't get much attention.

 

I was convinced it must be the fine looking flanges that were the problem but I now know they're not fine!

I had previously tried filing the top and bottom of the springs and adjusting the length, didn't help.

There were some very useful replies and I would have worked through more of them but basically as suggested by Grovenor I just removed all the springs. (Washers aren't necessary). That left most of the coaches running well but still two would derail without any reason that I could see. I detached them and just ran with six.

I went up to the loft today and ran the six again (not used in winter) and still great.

I decided to try again with the others and discovered that some of the screws were not able to screw in fully. Grovenor also suggested reaming the hole in the bogie a little but I haven't done that yet but I would say it could help if there was further trouble.

About ten minutes work and all eight are now able to run round my 9*30 foot oval at full speed with no problem at all.

These coaches have been very frustrating as I find the couplings are awkward and have a few faults which I mentioned on the thread, the corridor connections are great looking but the couplings have actually levered some of them off. I want now to devise a Keen-type solution and get alternative corridor connections and fitting Kadee couplers.

 

Syd

 

 

Golden Age

Syd

Thanks for the information which will give me a few more ideas to further improve the running.

More testing done with the 7 coach Silver Jubilee and the only bit of slip of the A4 is when some of the coaches are sitting on the curves. I have minimum radius of 32" and cannot get more without knocking out an exterior wall to the house! So this might be the stiffness in the bogies. I will take the springs out as you suggest. Perhaps there is a bit of buffer or corridor connection contact as well. The buffers can be slightly retracted by fitting a shim behind the buffer beam. I believe this was done on the prototype? If you could send me a link to the original thread I should be grateful.

Thanks

Dave

 

 

[Tony Wright]

12 hours ago, juke said:

Re:Golden Age

Hi Dave

I had a lot of trouble with my Gresley coaches, so after a lot of trying to sort it myself I started a thread, called 

"OO wheelsets with non-pinpoint ends, do they exist?"  after a first thread didn't get much attention.

 

I was convinced it must be the fine looking flanges that were the problem but I now know they're not fine!

I had previously tried filing the top and bottom of the springs and adjusting the length, didn't help.

There were some very useful replies and I would have worked through more of them but basically as suggested by Grovenor I just removed all the springs. (Washers aren't necessary). That left most of the coaches running well but still two would derail without any reason that I could see. I detached them and just ran with six.

I went up to the loft today and ran the six again (not used in winter) and still great.

I decided to try again with the others and discovered that some of the screws were not able to screw in fully. Grovenor also suggested reaming the hole in the bogie a little but I haven't done that yet but I would say it could help if there was further trouble.

About ten minutes work and all eight are now able to run round my 9*30 foot oval at full speed with no problem at all.

These coaches have been very frustrating as I find the couplings are awkward and have a few faults which I mentioned on the thread, the corridor connections are great looking but the couplings have actually levered some of them off. I want now to devise a Keen-type solution and get alternative corridor connections and fitting Kadee couplers.

 

Syd

 

Good morning Syd,

 

I hope you and yours are keeping safe.

 

Golden Age carriages?

 

I've photographed a large number of the GAM models down the years. The proprietor has been here on a couple of occasions, and we went through lots of prototype material (he borrowed a few of my books, but I've not seen them since!). I also travelled up to John Ryan's place in Cheshire on several occasions to photograph the GAM O Gauge range. As will be seen I've photographed several of the OO models on LB.

 

I must admit, I find the models something of an enigma. The finish is incredibly-impressive (stove-enamelled) and when the detail was right, in my view, they were some of the finest models I've ever had the privilege of photographing. 

 

As you and others have found, however, running issues with regard to some of the carriages have been frustrating. 

 

The cars below make-up the GAM 'Coronation' set; the one which I couldn't get to run around LB with it derailing......

 

 

 

 

 

 

There's no doubt they look magnificent, but surely good-running should be paramount with models of such high-quality? 

 

 

The observation car was also available in Cowlairs' rebuilt condition, in maroon. When I pointed out to the proprietor that the numbers should be at the RH end, both sides, I was told I was being 'picky'! 

 

 

I was even more 'picky' when I told the proprietor that, in maroon, Gresley's Buffet cars were altered on this side, the ends were black and the no-smoking signage was a red triangle, not a yellow circle. I was told 'You'd do well at a bonfire party!'. 

 

 

However, in teak, it looks perfect.

 

 

The firm also made the 1938 FS, PV train, including the magnificent catering triplet. The response to my saying that the trussing should be behind the solebars rather than being attached directly beneath  it didn't go down too well!

 

I'd provisionally ordered one of these in maroon (at around £800.00 if my memory serves) but when I was presented with it at one Warley Show I refused it. 'Why don't you want it?' I was asked. 'The ends are maroon (not black), the internal signage is LNER, not BR, it's got a '3' on the doors of the second class, and I don't like the underframes'. 'Keep your voice down!'. I walked away, my wallet unmolested. 

 

In the end, I got an ex-'38 Scotsman diner (for service in 'The Northumbrian') by using Rupert Brown's and MJT bits. John Houlden and I built it (his part by way of barter) and Geoff Haynes painted it (also by way of barter). 

 

 

Trying to be fair, where GAM got it right, then the models were (are?) beautiful......

 

 

 

 

I'm assuming here (a dangerous thing to do?) that both these models of the ex-NER Dynamometer Car are correct. They're certainly beautifully-finished. 

 

At the price (£300.00 or near?) how do they compare with the Rails' one? I imagine they're more expensive.

 

Of course, there's the D&S kit for one. Anyone built one of those?

 

In conclusion, I've been taken to task for being more 'critical' of the likes of GAM's products, in comparison with more 'mainstream' RTR. 'You were more-critical of our A4 than of Hornby's', for instance. 'But yours costs around ten times more'. If one is asking, effectively, top-dollar for a product, then shouldn't it be 'judged' at a higher level?

 

I have to say, I'm delighted with my GAM A4, even though it's RTR! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

41 minutes ago, rowanj said:

Only in the first year, if at all. York would have still had gallons of the paint. I understand none of these coaches went into maroon or crimson, but the paintwork of surviving examples was touched up if the overall condition of the coach was good enough to keep it in service. I assume (because it suits my purpose to do so), that the BR style of numbering was applied at this point.

Here is one of a series of coaches built by Jonathan Weallans which I used as a template. I'll take it down if he objects, but his thread is a great resource for LNER modellers.

Thanks John,

 

I'd be surprised if Jonathan objects to your using his work as a reference, and showing it on here.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Michael Edge]

I built one form the D&S kit - I think this was the last coach building job I did.

It was a fairly complicated job but at least I could easily go along to York to have a close look at it. The kit went together well as usual but I did have to add quite a bit of interior detail. I can't remember now who painted it - I think either Ian Rathbone or Dave Studley.

[juke]

Re:Golden Age

Dave

I don't know how to make a link but I just tried copying and pasting 00  wheelsets with non-pinpoint ends, do they exist? ,the thread title into search and it came up.

Let us know how you get on with the mod, hopefully it will work for you. I would have loved to have got an A4 but I was a late arrival to their product and they were already out of stock.

 

Hi Tony

We're battened down here and so far OK thanks.

In a way it was good to hear you had such mixed fortunes with GA, I thought it might just be me until Dave's post appeared.

That is certainly quite a list of flaws. Your pictures really show how attractive they were. A great pity how it all went bad.

 

Should have said Gilbert got some Gresleys and thought they didn't look right. He returned them. I had mine coming in the post by then but reckoned they were at least better than the Hornby versions.

Syd

Edited March 30, 2020 by juke
Addition

[Headstock]

16 hours ago, rowanj said:

John

 

Photos of these coaches in BR  days are  pretty well non existant, though they lasted until the early 50,s. I think you are right about NE and i,'ll sort that.

As for number style and location, my understanding is that those coaches which got some sort of paint job after grouping also got the BR  style. So that's what I will go with, as I want to stretch the date of their disposal as far into BR days as possible.

Of course, if anyone knows different ????

 

 

 

Good morning John,

 

I bet you didn't know the carriages are much more complicated than locomotives! Experience of researching such things tells me that almost everything was photographed, it's more of a case of finding the photographs. Unfortunately, they are a carriage type that falls well of my radar in terms of model ability, I know I have photographs, but they remain in the unsorted pile and I suspect that most are LNER. The later styles I am much more familiar with, I think people have forgotten how important these were to the LNER. Being relatively modern, they were wildly spread across the system and virtually became an LNER standard type. These later types served throughout the majority of the BR steam period.

 

With regard to branding, none of them would have received the NE prefix to their numbers, far to late. They would have received an E prefix after nationalization, added to the LNER style numbering, this could have been in the same style or in gill sans chrome yellow. This style would have been carried at the right-hand end. There is evidence that when the E prefix was added the whole number was re-spaced to fit. It is possible that the carriages received white gill sans BR lettering, this would have been placed at the left-hand end, there would be no E suffix in any of these cases.

 

What became the standard arrangement, right-hand end, Prefix E, number, suffix E, is probably less likely. Under no circumstances were these carriages painted crimson, that is true of the majority of pre grouping non gangway carriages and NPC's.

 

Some nice NER carriages for your entertainment,

 

1955, approaching Charwelton on the GC London extension. Virtual a whole train (4th carriage, Gresley CL) of ex NER carriages, including a BZ. Photo courtesy of R W Caroll. My links are embedding, don't know why?

 

 

D 20 at Selby. The carriages are Gresley (steel panelled) BT (4) ex NER T (8) ex GCR T (10)

 

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by Headstock
couple of edits add new info

[cctransuk]

2 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

What became the standard arrangement, left-hand end, Prefix E, number, suffix E, is probably less likely. Under no circumstances were these carriages painted crimson, that is true of the majority of pre grouping non gangway carriages and NPC's.

 

 

Are we mixing up our ends here?

 

Surely, the early BR arrangement was number at LH end, with no suffix; the later (long-term) arrangement was at the RH end, with suffix?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Tony Wright]

46 minutes ago, juke said:

Re:Golden Age

Dave

I don't know how to make a link but I just tried copying and pasting 00  wheelsets with non-pinpoint ends, do they exist? ,the thread title into search and it came up.

Let us know how you get on with the mod, hopefully it will work for you. I would have loved to have got an A4 but I was a late arrival to their product and they were already out of stock.

 

Hi Tony

We're battened down here and so far OK thanks.

In a way it was good to hear you had such mixed fortunes with GA, I thought it might just be me until Dave's post appeared.

That is certainly quite a list of flaws. Your pictures really show how attractive they were. A great pity how it all went bad.

 

Should have said Gilbert got some Gresleys and thought they didn't look right. He returned them. I had mine coming in the post by then but reckoned they were at least better than the Hornby versions.

Syd

Thanks Syd,

 

From my subsequent conversations with Gilbert, I don't think the proprietor was too impressed with the carriages being returned. However, they weren't 'right'. 

 

Is Golden Age still trading?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

[Headstock]

10 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Are we mixing up our ends here?

 

Surely, the early BR arrangement was number at LH end, with no suffix; the later (long-term) arrangement was at the RH end, with suffix?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

No, not mixed up. the reference to early numbering is correct, the reference to what became the standard lettering was mistyped as left, now corrected as right.  I was still editing as you posted.

[zr2498]

57 minutes ago, juke said:

Re:Golden Age

Dave

I don't know how to make a link but I just tried copying and pasting 00  wheelsets with non-pinpoint ends, do they exist? ,the thread title into search and it came up.

Let us know how you get on with the mod, hopefully it will work for you. I would have loved to have got an A4 but I was a late arrival to their product and they were already out of stock.

 

Syd

Syd

Found the thread and the earlier one thanks. Seems as though your thread was more about derailments rather than loco slip.  I reckon that the GAM plain bearings and the bogie pivot arrangement are contributors to the high drag (causing slip).

I want to run them (not display them), and so will pursue this until they run well. So far the pin point bearing conversion has moved the operation well in the right direction.

Thanks for your help

Dave

 

[polybear]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Is Golden Age still trading?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

The latest update on the GAM website is dated February 2019; it appears that, at that time, GAM were in the process of lining up to take their Bank to Court for an issue that has been on-going since 2014 or earlier.  They currently (as of Feb 2019) have no stock to sell.

 

Brian

[juke]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Is Golden Age still trading?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Quite a while back he wrote a lengthy document alleging that his bankers had failed him in some way, over export credits if I remember correctly. His web site is still up but no stock available and the updates column is empty.

 

Then this from Companies House :

Next accounts made up to 31 December 2018 due by 30 September 2019.

Last accounts made up to 31 December 2017.

There is a red warning that they are overdue as well. Certainly doesn't look good.

 

Syd

[juke]

1 hour ago, zr2498 said:

Syd

Found the thread and the earlier one thanks. Seems as though your thread was more about derailments rather than loco slip.  I reckon that the GAM plain bearings and the bogie pivot arrangement are contributors to the high drag (causing slip).

I want to run them (not display them), and so will pursue this until they run well. So far the pin point bearing conversion has moved the operation well in the right direction.

Thanks for your help

Dave

 

Sorry Dave, I only have experience with the coaches which I'm currently hauling with a modified RTR Deltic. It has no problem but I understand 'diesel' models normally outperform RTR steam outline. My problem is my crimson and cream coaches are too early for the Deltic, I think.

I added a lot of weight to a RTR Bachmann but it just sits and spins the wheels.

Maybe I should try the bearing mods next!

 

Syd