RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted January 13, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 13, 2013 Has anyone noticed a difference in traction/pulling power between their Pannier (32-210 and variants) and Collett Goods (32-310)? The Pannier could pull four Collett coaches up a little gradient on a corner of my layout but the Collett Goods struggling about a quarter of the way through the corner and finally spun its wheels aimlessly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 That'd be because the water in the tanks and coal in the bunker of the Pannier act as extra weight for adhesion whereas in the Collett Goods they're extra load to have to pull up the hill.... ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted January 13, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 13, 2013 All about weight distribution,true,but correct in prototype performance as well. The Collett had 2,000lb less in terms of tractive effort than the pannier,which could and often did punch well above its weight,a little marvel in fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted January 13, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 13, 2013 Branchline, If there is room inside the boiler you could add some extra lead weight which would improve traction. Also I had problems with the tender de-railing on one of my Collett goods, on mine there was very little play in the middle axle of the tender, and if your trying to get it round tight curves (2nd radius) that might also hinder its performance. Regards, Nick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matabiau Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 The Bachmann 3F (tender version) has the same problem. In the case of the Collett Goods there is no weight in the boiler as they have left space for the DCC decoder. This has been resolved, I presume, for the C Class by putting the DCC decoder in the tender so that the boiler can be weighted to improve traction. If you are not running DCC on your layout you can fill the decoder space with weight, if not (like myself) you have to avoid any inclines. Unfortunately that limits my Collett to the engine shed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted January 13, 2013 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted January 13, 2013 The Bachmann 3F (tender version) has the same problem. In the case of the Collett Goods there is no weight in the boiler as they have left space for the DCC decoder. This has been resolved, I presume, for the C Class by putting the DCC decoder in the tender so that the boiler can be weighted to improve traction. If you are not running DCC on your layout you can fill the decoder space with weight, if not (like myself) you have to avoid any inclines. Unfortunately that limits my Collett to the engine shed! The decoder space is in the loco body, but there's a little weight on top (as the coal). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 An interesting topic which has just inspired me to get the kitchen scales out. My early Collett BR 2277 weighs near as matter 200 gm. My latest Collett BR 3205 (with space for decoder weighs just 155 gm. Says it all.RegardsRay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Brinkly Posted January 13, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 13, 2013 That is a huge difference Ray, no wonder the things can't pull the skin off a rice pudding! Regards, Nick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRealistic Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Is there nowhere at all that you can add a slither of 'heavy stuff'? I was contemplating getting one, but I'm proposing a DCC layout that will have slightish gradients (as an excuse for banking). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 As I have commented in my Blog when describing how to add ballast to engines, DCC does have limitations. I do enjoy watching trains go by and as this recent shows (hears) there is plenty of I would say realistic noise without a digital sound chip. Regards Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium southern42 Posted January 13, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 13, 2013 Thank you for the warning. You'll see why as you read on. I have a 57xx to go up and down my branchline and also a Collett Goods for the shed which hasn't had a test run yet. On the prototype there is a steep incline out of the shed to mainline level which I may / may not try to model (?) after seeing this video. If you like lots of smoke and steam, this is for you. It is also a lesson in extremely slow running / creeping so you need to be patient and just watch. And if you're interested, also note the change of head lamp out from the shed to those running on the mainline at the end. http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=UzMMS8XXDsk&vq=medium I'll follow this thread to see what transpires in case I have trouble with the Collett Goods as well. At least I'm forewarned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Sidelines Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Just an after thought regards the Bachmann 22xx - I think when I was looking 'inside' I noticed the latest model has some 'metal' in the dummy sandboxes on the chassis which is absent in the older models. Also for information the newer ROD tender variation is DCC ready so that too has a lightweight body. Regards Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 This is a sort of chronic condition of RTR. Until we can persuade the manufacturers that smaller tender locos really need a chassis block, as much of the bodywork as possible, and ballast block castings in a tungsten rich alloy; then we have to put up with near cuboid tank locos packed with mazak out pulling their tender equivalents. My recourse is to remove the supplied mazak ballast weights within loco bodies, and make lead substitutes to cure the condition as required. The most alarming such pairing I have encountered is the Ivatt 4MT 2-6-0 vs Fairburn 4MTT 2-6-4T. The former has pretty feeble 2F-ish traction as supplied, the latter performs as an 8F/7P out of the box. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNERandBR Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 One solution if you want to fit more weight along with a DCC decoder is to put the Decoder in the Tender. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matabiau Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 One solution if you want to fit more weight along with a DCC decoder is to put the Decoder in the Tender. This seems to be the current approach and has proven successful with the Class C. Unfortunately older models have the chip in the boiler in order to avoid the permanent tender connection or to minimise any modification in the conversion to DCC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrock Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I have one of the original BR collect goods and in order to convert to DCC I decided to go the same route as the latest versions, by cutting away most of the lead block to get the decoder into the boiler. It avoided me having to semi permanently couple the tender but this is one of the things that accounts for the recent weight drop. Must admit it has not caused me any problems on my flat layout. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Budgie Posted February 4, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 4, 2013 When I chipped my old Collett Goods, I put the chip in the cab. It looks hideous! I'm thinking of taking another look at it and putting the chip in the tender. I'm also thinking of using a miniature 4-way plug and socket between them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.