CUCKOO LINE Posted April 23, 2021 Share Posted April 23, 2021 Which version do you go for for UK 00 ? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold deepfat Posted April 24, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 24, 2021 Now I am swapping out the points where my derailment problem occurred. The good news is the new long crossing is OK, the bad news is that the apt-e does not like going over a diamond crossing even gently pushing it (it's not wired in yet).. I have a DCC Concepts back to back gauge and all looks OK but is this is the only explanation? The track in either direction, the crossing is new out of the packet the rails in and out are straight .. any advice appreciated Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard i Posted April 24, 2021 Share Posted April 24, 2021 Did the gauge measure the wheels or the track spacing? Either could be an issue. Or plastic burrs caught in between the rail and the check rail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Tilt Posted April 24, 2021 Share Posted April 24, 2021 The dynamics of the bogie won't be the same when under power as they will be when you're pushing it. For a start the wheels won't be rotating when being pushed, and secondly the bogie will tend to pitch nose down when being pushed too, so the rear axle will tend to be unloaded. I'm not saying that it'll be OK under power, just that you won't be seeing the true situation when it's being pushed. 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted April 24, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 24, 2021 Could the tilt mechanism be pushing the rear bogie of the rear driving car outwards just enough to cause the error in route out of the diamond? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold deepfat Posted April 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 25, 2021 Thanks for all the positive advice. I did pull and push test over the diamond with same results and was careful to provide only lateral thrust. I measure the Back to back of the wheel not the track and I am going to use my vernier instead of a gauge to get a reading which I'll share. I am in the process of of replacing the faulty junction with these new point and I am taking slow - butchering the points for DCC etc. check the track bed is level adding longer dropper wires etc etc so it'll be a couple of days before I can test under power. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John ks Posted April 25, 2021 Share Posted April 25, 2021 I am fairly sure the E train wheels are to NMRA RP25 standards Peco point standards have changed over the years Originally to a coarser scale to accommodate Triang Flanges & back to back I was having problems with RP 25 wheels derailing at the frog of Peco & was told of a modification that improves the running of RP25 wheelsets Adding shim (red in the drawing) to the catch rails opposite the frog . They can be made from plastic strips about 5 thou thick & glued to the catch rail (much easier on older points with plastic catch rails) The following drawing, while a bit rough should give an idea how the problem occurs & how the shim fixes it With a little side force (blue arrow) on the wheel set the wheel can try to go up the wrong side of the frog & derail Adding the shim pulls the wheel set away from the frog & ensures the flange follows the flange way through the frog John 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Tilt Posted April 25, 2021 Share Posted April 25, 2021 13 hours ago, Ian J. said: Could the tilt mechanism be pushing the rear bogie of the rear driving car outwards just enough to cause the error in route out of the diamond? Not the way that Bill Schneider designed it. The cams that rotate the Power Car bodies are on the inside of the body shell just above the top of the bogies, and the pegs on the bogies that slot into the cams are quite a loose fit so there's no lateral forces on the body shell, just the rotational forces. I reckon John KS has got it right, I've had similar problems in the past, but in N gauge, and the addition of a sliver of styrene on the inside of the outer check rail solved it. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted April 25, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 25, 2021 (edited) Funnily enough, I'm going to have to implement a shim on the check rails of the RTR turnouts in the fiddleyard of my yet to be built OO layout. I'm using a slightly wider back-to-back than usual to get better running and also to be able to use finer WCG (Wheel Check Gauge) tolerances for the handbuilt track on scenic sections of the layout. Edited April 25, 2021 by Ian J. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmotrutta Posted April 25, 2021 Share Posted April 25, 2021 Interesting that the track is code 75 - I would have thought that it didn't have to accommodate the old Triang flanges as they would be too deep to run on it anyway, and that users would be using more modern wheelsets. But I guess that they err on the side of some commercial back to back measurements being out of specification. Useful tip about the shims. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John ks Posted April 26, 2021 Share Posted April 26, 2021 7 hours ago, Salmotrutta said: Interesting that the track is code 75 - I would have thought that it didn't have to accommodate the old Triang flanges I didn't pick up on that , what i was referring to was early code 100 points , code 75 points should be closer to NMRA standards Back to back's & point clearances are still critical for catch rails to do their job correctly A NMRA standards gauge is very helpful But i just looked & their price ranges from US$16 From MNRA to US$38 on ebay John 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmotrutta Posted April 26, 2021 Share Posted April 26, 2021 13 hours ago, John ks said: I didn't pick up on that , what i was referring to was early code 100 points , code 75 points should be closer to NMRA standards Back to back's & point clearances are still critical for catch rails to do their job correctly A NMRA standards gauge is very helpful But i just looked & their price ranges from US$16 From MNRA to US$38 on ebay John That's more than a digital vernier calliper on eBay! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold deepfat Posted April 27, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 27, 2021 soo 5 thou is 0.127mm which is very thin indeed and I do have code 75 throughout my trusty digital vernier gauge shows the inside top of rail to top of rail at 16.50mm on this diamond crossing which is the NMRA standard? As for a gauge I'll pick some up[ when I am next in the US as I work for a small US company MICROsoft :-) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke_stevens Posted April 28, 2021 Share Posted April 28, 2021 On 27/04/2021 at 15:09, deepfat said: I work for a small US company MICROsoft :-) Never 'erd of 'em... Luke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rapidoandy Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 We have a new thread too ;-) 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philou Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Oh dear .... I like quirky/one offs ...... and I missed the first issue ...... nice to have ..... not my region .............. oh what to do ....... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rapidoandy Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 6 minutes ago, Philou said: Oh dear .... I like quirky/one offs ...... and I missed the first issue ...... nice to have ..... not my region .............. oh what to do ....... Order one immediatly! :-) 4 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UP 4000 Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 It's great to see the re-release of the APT-E, The new price, WOW, The first run was definitely a bargain and really under priced, Is it just a new batch or has it been changed or modified in any way? I've got three at the moment and now showing some interest in O Gauge, So APT-E was Rapido's first UK model in OO, So come on boy's push the boat out and make her Rapido's first venture in to 7mm O Gauge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pre Grouping fan Posted May 1, 2021 Share Posted May 1, 2021 (edited) 17 hours ago, UP 4000 said: It's great to see the re-release of the APT-E, The new price, WOW, The first run was definitely a bargain and really under priced, Is it just a new batch or has it been changed or modified in any way? I've got three at the moment and now showing some interest in O Gauge, Only the packaging is different reading the announcement. It won't have the limited edition packaging or APT book included. Edited May 1, 2021 by Pre Grouping fan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 47137 Posted May 2, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 2, 2021 (edited) Well with one eBay vendor currently asking just shy of £900 for one of these, a second batch has got to be good news for the rest of us. - Richard. Edited May 2, 2021 by 47137 typo in one sentence! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold deepfat Posted May 5, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 5, 2021 so in my continuing saga to get my apt-e (no 0018) running reliably on my layout. I have tried fiddling with back to backs but I can't get the power bogies below 14.6mm. I have also noticed she hates my brand new diamond crossing (SL-E194) however she's perfectly happy crossing the three double slips (SLE-190) on my layout so I am going to swap the diamond crossing for another double slip even if I don't hook up point motors to it because like Andy mcDowell in the L'Oreal adverts she's worth it! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
natterjack Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Help Wanted! I'm looking for the definitive layout of the belly grilles on the two APT-E trailer cars and inspection access at Shildon is presently rather restricted. Can anyone offer photos or sketches of the Rapido take on these for each car- or perhaps of the real thing? Thanks in anticipation Les Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
apt-e Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 18 hours ago, natterjack said: Help Wanted! I'm looking for the definitive layout of the belly grilles on the two APT-E trailer cars and inspection access at Shildon is presently rather restricted. Can anyone offer photos or sketches of the Rapido take on these for each car- or perhaps of the real thing? Thanks in anticipation Les Hi Les, Had this to hand, hope it helps. If you look at the workday reports from www.apt-e.org you might also find what you are looking for... Regards Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
natterjack Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 Thanks Paul The only clear(ish) Rapido belly image I have is of their TC prototypng and I have no idea if their TC1 and TC2 feature any differences. The two relevant shots of TC1 at Shildon attached do not agree with this layout; the split grille being at the outer left end and the single at the outer right hand of the same side. i think I may have to butter up the Shildon staff- or maybe join in the next workday? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Tilt Posted July 28, 2021 Share Posted July 28, 2021 Hello Les, Don't forget that the Trailer Cars are the wrong way round at Shildon, but I'm not 100% sure if that makes a difference................ Link to post 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