Hattons announce 14xx / 48xx / 58xx

[Paul_sterling]

There is a trap I discovered about "Stay-Alive" when trying to fix a running problem with a 4575 Class over just a couple of points (insulfrog) in forward but not reverse. My local shop convinced me to put in a DCC Concepts Zen nano chip with Stay-alive but that did nothing and some running tests on track covered with masking tape to break contact quickly showed I was getting a fraction of a second of extra "alive" running. A quick look at the small capacitor supplied should have told me that.

 

Further reading of the DCC Concepts guff warned against over sizing capacitors with the tiny Nano sized DCC chips - risk of burn out?

 

Re the Zimo SC68

1)  has the size to work but might be a risk if used with small DCC chips which tend to be put in small locos, worth checking.

2) will it fit? the bunker seems the only possible spot on the 14xx and that's no good if running Sound

 

Also if 14xx stalls so easily, it seems to me most likely it's the rigid chassis structure at fault. My similarly sized 57xx and 64xx Bachmanns with their sprung middle axles sail thru everything at even the slowest speed whereas the larger 4575 is not sprung and has the odd running issue.

 

Strictly speaking as a capacitor is a simple electrical component to store energy (a lot of ignition systems on petrol engines, before Electronic ignition took over have them), I don't think there is any reason why they cannot be fitted to DC equipped locomotives either, as it is a system that just releases the energy after the source is disconnected. 

 

So long as of course, the capacitor is sized for the application (i.e. the typical current and discharge rate) and is the correct voltage.

 

Paul. 

Edited May 18, 2017 by Paul_sterling

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

I now have three of the Hattons/DJM 14xx/58xx. In terms of running qualities, one is truly outstanding and the other two I would classify as very good indeed. I've have not needed to return any of them.

 

Regarding the motor/gear combination I would say this: these locos are both quieter and smoother, especially at very low speeds than any of my Bachmann tank engines (57xx, 64xx, 45xx). I recently posted a short clip of video on this thread showing one of the 14xxs backing onto a coach at very low speed. None of my Bachmann tanks can do that as smoothly and quietly even though they are fitted with very similar decoders from the same manufacturer. 

 

 

In my experience the motor and gearbox is capable of delivering superb results in the right conditions. By the right conditions I mean a well-matched decoder correctly configured, a good dcc signal and clean and level track, which leads me on to what I consider the flaw in this model namely the chassis. Once the decision had been made for both coupled wheels to be powered that left scope only for the rear carrying wheels to be sprung. That would also have been problematic however given that the centre of gravity is behind the rearmost coupled wheels. What I really cannot understand is the decision to dispense with wiper pickups. I do wonder if that is going to become a problem over time as the bearings wear. If it does become problematic once they are out of warranty, my intention is to "hard wire" the locos to a permanently coupled Autocoach. This isn't an original idea, our very own John Dew (Granby) did the same with Hornby14xx. Conveniently the new Bachmann Autocoach comes with pickups in the bogies which should make the process simpler should it ever be necessary.

 

I should add that for now, pickup is good from my three 14xx/58xx. They are slightly more prone to stall than the Bachmann tanks, though that is offset (in my eyes) by the superior performance at shunting speeds.

 

I anyone does decide to have a go at fitting a "stay alive" to one of these locos I hope they will post an account of it on here.

 

Andy.

[JSpencer]

I now have three of the Hattons/DJM 14xx/58xx. In terms of running qualities, one is truly outstanding and the other two I would classify as very good indeed. I've have not needed to return any of them.

 

Regarding the motor/gear combination I would say this: these locos are both quieter and smoother, especially at very low speeds than any of my Bachmann tank engines (57xx, 64xx, 45xx). I recently posted a short clip of video on this thread showing one of the 14xxs backing onto a coach at very low speed. None of my Bachmann tanks can do that as smoothly and quietly even though they are fitted with very similar decoders from the same manufacturer. 

 

 

In my experience the motor and gearbox is capable of delivering superb results in the right conditions. By the right conditions I mean a well-matched decoder correctly configured, a good dcc signal and clean and level track, which leads me on to what I consider the flaw in this model namely the chassis. Once the decision had been made for both coupled wheels to be powered that left scope only for the rear carrying wheels to be sprung. That would also have been problematic however given that the centre of gravity is behind the rearmost coupled wheels. What I really cannot understand is the decision to dispense with wiper pickups. I do wonder if that is going to become a problem over time as the bearings wear. If it does become problematic once they are out of warranty, my intention is to "hard wire" the locos to a permanently coupled Autocoach. This isn't an original idea, our very own John Dew (Granby) did the same with Hornby14xx. Conveniently the new Bachmann Autocoach comes with pickups in the bogies which should make the process simpler should it ever be necessary.

 

I should add that for now, pickup is good from my three 14xx/58xx. They are slightly more prone to stall than the Bachmann tanks, though that is offset (in my eyes) by the superior performance at shunting speeds.

 

I anyone does decide to have a go at fitting a "stay alive" to one of these locos I hope they will post an account of it on here.

 

Andy.

 

Bearing pick ups have been used on all DJM to date (though not sure on the 71 as it has yet to arrive). That said the front pair of non powered wheels on the Well tank and the trailing non powered wheels on the O2 use a more wiper like style pickup.

 

Running issues on the austerity only started when converted to DCC sound and cured with a 'stay alive'. The only loco's to date which gave me grief with their all bearing pickup set up were both my Dapol 73s. I was able to cure that be cleaning them with 90% alcohol. The thing is though, I suspect these bearings no longer have oil which is I suspect could become an issue in the future. The other thing is, oxides will eventually build up on the brass (especially without oil).

[BWsTrains]

 

The only loco's to date which gave me grief with their all bearing pickup set up were both my Dapol 73s. I was able to cure that be cleaning them with 90% alcohol. The thing is though, I suspect these bearings no longer have oil which is I suspect could become an issue in the future. The other thing is, oxides will eventually build up on the brass (especially without oil).

 

The bearings are not necessarily "without oil". You could run a test by mixing a typical lubricating oil with the 90% alcohol you used. I've a strong suspicion these two are immiscible, i.e. the oil won't dissolve in the alcohol.

As I recall from my chemistry experience of many years ago, ethanol and oil don't mix, especially if it was 90% ethanol (+10% water).

 

What ethanol (i.e. Methylated Spirits) would dissolve or shift is more polar crud and that could improve conductivity as you observed.  

Edited May 18, 2017 by BWsTrains

[The Johnster]

The bearings are not necessarily "without oil". You could run a test by mixing a typical lubricating oil with the 90% alcohol you used. I've a strong suspicion these two are immiscible, i.e. the oil won't dissolve in the alcohol.

As I recall from my chemistry experience of many years ago, ethanol and oil don't mix, especially if it was 90% ethanol (+10% water).

 

What ethanol (i.e. Methylated Spirits) would dissolve or shift is more polar crud and that could improve conductivity as you observed.  

 

Immiscible is going to be my word of the day, the challenge being to go up the pub and insert it into the conversation...

[Porcy Mane]

Immiscible is going to be my word of the day, the challenge being to go up the pub and insert it into the conversation...

 

No problem. Insert 10 pints of your favourite, pick an argument with the biggest bloke in the place, call him an "immiscible", wait for him to punch your lights out!

 

Jobs a good un.

 

P

[The Johnster]

All of which leads to the question, probably a daft one to anyone who has the least understanding of electronics but please bear in mind that I don't, can stayalives be fitted into DC locos.  I would guess that, if this was possible, some sort of diodes would also need to be fitted to avoid shorting out the chassis and retaining the ability to run in both directions, which might mitigate against their use in small locos which is where they would do the most good!

[The Johnster]

No problem. Insert 10 pints of your favourite, pick an argument with the biggest bloke in the place, call him an "immiscible", wait for him to punch your lights out!

 

Jobs a good un.

 

P

 

(Pedant mode on) I can't call him an immiscible, immiscible is an adjective, not a noun, so you can't be a, or an, one (pedant mode off).  And after 10 pints of my favourite, I'm quite capable of starting my own fights.

 

I'm not, really.  Alcohol reveals your true, uninhibited nature, and it has many times proved me to have been a dormouse in a previous existence; I just crawl behind a settee and go to sleep...

[Porcy Mane]

(Pedant mode on) I can't call him an immiscible, immiscible is an adjective, not a noun, so you can't be a, or an, one (pedant mode off).  And after 10 pints of my favourite, I'm quite capable of starting my own fights.

 

 

...but after the 10 pints adjective and nouns tend to slur into one with immiscible pronounced or heard as imbecile.

 

Morale: Never talk science of matter, energy and their interactions over a pint. (there's bound to be spillage with an ensuing conversation (Argument?) regarding fluid dynamics.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Porcy Mane

[The Johnster]

...but after the 10 pints adjective and nouns tend to slur into one with immiscible pronounced or heard as imbecile.

 

Morale: Never talk science of matter, energy and their interactions over a pint. (there's bound to be spillage with an ensuing conversation (Argument?) regarding fluid dynamics.

 

(Slurred) voice of experience, Porcy?  Spillage and a gradual descent into entropy...

[Guest 7007GreatWestern]

I have a (probably) hair-brained idea that might improved the pick-up on the Hattons/DJM 14xx/58xx in certain situations.

 

On his excellent "Albion Yard" blog, Paul Martial-Potter of this Parish has helpfully done a comprehensive review and strip down of these models:-

 

https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/hattons-djm-14xx-review-h1410/

 

Towards the bottom of the page we see in a photograph that the under keep, complete with dummy leaf-springs and brakes blocks will separate from the underside of the chassis block. Would it be possible to make some pickups from phosphor-bronze strip that would be held in place against the underside of the chassis by the under keep? That is exactly how current collection works on Hornby/Bachmann, the difference here being that the two halves of the chassis black are both live anyway so no wires are needed to complete the current path from the pickups to the motor brushes. 

 

Of course this doesn't address poor pickup due to insufficient contact between the wheels and the railhead. It would help however if the problem is a poor current path between the (rotating) axles and the bearings/chassis.

[Barry Ten]

 

 

. My similarly sized 57xx and 64xx Bachmanns with their sprung middle axles sail thru everything

 

The Bachmann 64xx doesn't have a sprung axle, the model in fact drives through the centre axle. I've not fitted sound to my 14xx but have fitted a loksound decoder and speaker to a 64xx. This has shown since fitting a marked tendency to 'cut out' as far as sound goes so I mentioned this to one the supplier, whom suggested a stay alive too. I asked why as having already fitted sound to 57xx's ( https://albionyard.wordpress.com/dcc-sound-pannier-conversion/) using the first SWD loksound chip and these not having the same problem, this cutting out was frustrating to say the least. The answer was that the newer chips are far more sensitive, and a stay alive would help smooth out the irregularities. This seems to make sense as the two 'MK1's' that I have done are far less susceptible to cutting out than this recent newer loksound micro. If I were to fit one I'd place a cut down sugar cube in the cab with the stay alive in the bunker space.

 

 

Same observations here with regard to the 64XX; my sound-fitted one is much less happy than an older sound-fitted 87XX. I initially wondered if it was down the 64's slightly shorter wheelbase.

 

Seems a step backwards that the newer chips are more sensitive than the old.

[Caddy]

The length of this thread and the way it has wandered off into various realms of dark knowledge seems to highlight but one thing to me, that even now, during the second decade of the 21st Century, with all our digital and scientific advances, we are not able to build a small model railway loco that will work well enough and with enough consistency to make the intended consumers happy!

 

Reading this and other threads it all seems to be a matter of pot-luck if we get a "goodie" or not. Certainly due to design, construction and/or quality control some models seem to have a much higher percentage of duds, but in the end it is just luck!

 

For me it is the running that is paramount so these days unless I can fairly well have at least a 90% chance of obtaining a good runner I am not parting with my hard earned pennies, and sadly the new Hattons 14xx seems to be barely making a 50% rating. I did purchase an O2 and BWT. The Beattie when warmed up and with clean wheels is passable, but the O2 was sadly a total waste so until DJM come up with a more consistent design for their small locos. I am afraid their 14xx and J94 can remain on the shelves. The Bachmann USA tank seems to be a much more consistently good running model. Mine is very smooth and quiet and with all that valve gear and the very short wheelbase must have been a challenge to design well. 

 

Perhaps DJM are just trying to be too clever with their designs, get back to basics please.

 

Anyway as anyone following the thread knows I have a nearly 20 year old Hornby 14xx which has a simple motor, simple drive, simple pickups and runs like a Rolex so I am happy. Oh, and if anything goes wrong I can whip the body off in 10 seconds!

 

Mind you I do like the "stouter" chimney on the Hattons/DJM model, any spares please?

[kandc_au]

Well Caddy,

I am going to disagree with you.

There have been all sorts of issues pointed out, but at the end of the day this is a very nice "Looking" loco.

I cancelled and then re-ordered my after reading comments here, but decided I thought it worth the risk. The biggest issue to me was that I needed a controller without feedback, so took the opportunity of ordering a controller at the same time.

As for running issues. For mine it has only had about 15-20 mins on the rolling road, but already runs very nicely. (bear in mind I am using DC only)

I know some have sent theirs back and Hattons have replaced as requested, so from that point of view how can anyone complain.

The biggest problems seem to be for the DCC users. different settings for different decoders and even for different users.

THAT, you cannot put on  either Hattons or DJM.
That is an issue for DCC users to sort out, and share their settings with each other so they can get their loco to run to it's best for the decoder/s they are using!

 

So to me and I gradually noticed more and more saying they were happy, with their loco's and it would appear that there are NOT many DC users who are having issues.

Personally I think that if you are really interested in the loco, then buy one. You can always return it if you are NOT happy with it.
If you don't need one then don';t buy one.

 

Khris

[The Johnster]

My core belief is that good running is most easily achieved, maintained, and produced in volume by the use of a split chassis and no pickups along with a motor powerful enough to drive it by means of a 'conventional' steel worm and brass cog drivetrain geared at about 30:1, the advantages of such a set up being particularly noticeable on smaller models; cue 14xx.  Such a thing has never been produced by any of the volume manufacturers, Mainline's split chassis' being the closest but let down by poor quality control at the wheel/axle interface and wear at the axle channels; 'proper' bearings would have helped, not to mention pancake motors driving through far too many gears and not being powerful enough in the first place.

 

DJM are exactly the sort of smaller outfit that could take advantage of this idea, in IMHO it is a shame that they haven't.  Larger manufacturers need something that is easily and cheaply assembled, and AFAIK exclusively use pickups of varying effectiveness on their steam model chassis.  Mainline's failure has more or less binned the type of split chassis I have described for today's market, which I think is a shame.

 

That said, running in small modern steam outline models is generally very good; this particular model seems to have a quality control issue and be sensitive to some DCC arrangements (I do not understand DCC; Ned Ludd's ghost works through me...).

[phil-b259]

The bearings are not necessarily "without oil". You could run a test by mixing a typical lubricating oil with the 90% alcohol you used. I've a strong suspicion these two are immiscible, i.e. the oil won't dissolve in the alcohol.

As I recall from my chemistry experience of many years ago, ethanol and oil don't mix, especially if it was 90% ethanol (+10% water).

 

What ethanol (i.e. Methylated Spirits) would dissolve or shift is more polar crud and that could improve conductivity as you observed.  

 

There are products out there that are designed to be conductive and simultaneously a lubricant. We have been issued one of these http://www.electrolube.com/products/contact-lubricants.html for use on the electrical contact boxes fitted to barrier pedestals and semaphore signals.

[JSpencer]

All of which leads to the question, probably a daft one to anyone who has the least understanding of electronics but please bear in mind that I don't, can stayalives be fitted into DC locos.  I would guess that, if this was possible, some sort of diodes would also need to be fitted to avoid shorting out the chassis and retaining the ability to run in both directions, which might mitigate against their use in small locos which is where they would do the most good!

 

First you need a Bi -polar Capacitor otherwise it will work only in one direction. The capacitor would need to sit directly across the 2 motor contacts. It would charge up in the direction the loco is running, when the loco looses contact, it word discharge directly across the motor in the same sense keeping the motor alive (though at reduced and reducing voltage) for a brief period of time.

No need for diodes, in fact I cannot think how any diode combination that will avoid unwanted shorts and allow you to run a loco both directions! On a capacitor in this senario they will either prevent the capacitor charging up or discharging defeating the objective.

A capacitor takes space, so again needs to be judged against a using a bigger motor on a small loco. Big locos normally have enough wheels in contact with rails not to merit them (except a Bachmann C class where the tender wheels are not used as pickups despite having tender wires, here the loco would certainly benefit).

 

If you find the 14XX itchy under DC and have no use for all the DCC wiring/space, it could be a solution to overcome stalling on dead spots (you rip out the wiring and have direct motor to pickup contacts then wire the capacitor across them - you will invalidate your warranty).

Note: When running, once stopped, give the model a good few seconds to discharge before reversing direction. Also avoid all feedback controllers once fitted - as I'm not sure how that will interpret the signal! And I doubt they will like electronic track cleaners either.

 

Edit: I think modern controllers use pulses so the above may only be perfectly valid for variable voltage type. I'm not sure how effective this will be at low settings on a pulse type where there will be big 10 to 1 or more gaps between pulses. The capacitor will barely charge up during the pulse and almost certainly discharge it before the next pulse. Under DCC, there is normally a constant 15volts with a pulsed signal passing on top.

Edited May 22, 2017 by JSpencer

[The Johnster]

Thanks for that, JS.  As I say, my understanding of electronic components and what they do is, to say the least, limited.  I had never heard of a bipolar capacitor.

 

My DC blt is laid out with insulfrog pointwork to keep the electrics simple; the current goes where I send it by switching the points.  Basic to the point of crudeness, but it works reliably with the proviso that you have to keep the contact where the switch rails meet the stock rails on the points clean, and ensure they are free of debris that might make closure incomplete, if you don't 'bridge wire' them.  I use a Gaugemaster dating back to the Silurian era and built by trilobites to control it all; despite it's age, it is bombproof reliable and very effective at controlling the locos.  Slow running and reliable starting to move off are vitally important on a blt, as all trains and all movements start and stop somewhere and there is no running through.

 

I am happy with my running, which is with a fleet (if you can call 5 locos a fleet) of 6-coupled locos all of which have wiper pickups on the outer driven wheels, effectively long wheelbase 0-4-0s for pickup purposes.  Track is laid with a lot of attention to it's levelness, especially at pointwork, and ensuring smooth joints between pieces and no doglegs.  So. as things stand, I have no need of electronic trickery to improve my running, but in the case of a 14xx, a loco I may acquire in the future, I might need to revisit the idea.  The perennial problem with small locos with limited space and short wheelbases is that you can't get enough weight in as ballast to keep the wheels firmly on the rails, without which pickup is compromised, and the same lack of space limits your options to employ stayalives of the type you describe.  On an 0-4-2, the loco's balance is critical as well unless you have a fully compensated chassis.

 

But I like the principle of the stayalive, a sort of electronic flywheel that will keep a loco running over dead spots.  At the speeds I run at, though, I suspect that neither mechanical or electronic flywheels will store enough energy to make much difference!

[Roy Langridge]

First you need a Bi -polar Capacitor otherwise it will work only in one direction. The capacitor would need to sit directly across the 2 motor contacts. It would charge up in the direction the loco is running, when the loco looses contact, it word discharge directly across the motor in the same sense keeping the motor alive (though at reduced and reducing voltage) for a brief period of time.

No need for diodes, in fact I cannot think how any diode combination that will avoid unwanted shorts and allow you to run a loco both directions! On a capacitor in this senario they will either prevent the capacitor charging up or discharging defeating the objective.

A capacitor takes space, so again needs to be judged against a using a bigger motor on a small loco. Big locos normally have enough wheels in contact with rails not to merit them (except a Bachmann C class where the tender wheels are not used as pickups despite having tender wires, here the loco would certainly benefit).

 

If you find the 14XX itchy under DC and have no use for all the DCC wiring/space, it could be a solution to overcome stalling on dead spots (you rip out the wiring and have direct motor to pickup contacts then wire the capacitor across them - you will invalidate your warranty).

Note: When running, once stopped, give the model a good few seconds to discharge before reversing direction. Also avoid all feedback controllers once fitted - as I'm not sure how that will interpret the signal! And I doubt they will like electronic track cleaners either.

 

Edit: I think modern controllers use pulses so the above may only be perfectly valid for variable voltage type. I'm not sure how effective this will be at low settings on a pulse type where there will be big 10 to 1 or more gaps between pulses. The capacitor will barely charge up during the pulse and almost certainly discharge it before the next pulse. Under DCC, there is normally a constant 15volts with a pulsed signal passing on top.

 

I would be intrigued to see this in operation. I can't help feeling that controllability of the loco for stopping may be compromised as the capacitor tries to make up for a shortage of power being supplied by a DC controller. After all, it will not see a difference between a lack of power from dirty track and a lack of power from the controller.

 

Roy

[kandc_au]

First you need a Bi -polar Capacitor otherwise it will work only in one direction. The capacitor would need to sit directly across the 2 motor contacts. It would charge up in the direction the loco is running, when the loco looses contact, it word discharge directly across the motor in the same sense keeping the motor alive (though at reduced and reducing voltage) for a brief period of time.

No need for diodes, in fact I cannot think how any diode combination that will avoid unwanted shorts and allow you to run a loco both directions! On a capacitor in this senario they will either prevent the capacitor charging up or discharging defeating the objective.

A capacitor takes space, so again needs to be judged against a using a bigger motor on a small loco. Big locos normally have enough wheels in contact with rails not to merit them (except a Bachmann C class where the tender wheels are not used as pickups despite having tender wires, here the loco would certainly benefit).

 

If you find the 14XX itchy under DC and have no use for all the DCC wiring/space, it could be a solution to overcome stalling on dead spots (you rip out the wiring and have direct motor to pickup contacts then wire the capacitor across them - you will invalidate your warranty).

Note: When running, once stopped, give the model a good few seconds to discharge before reversing direction. Also avoid all feedback controllers once fitted - as I'm not sure how that will interpret the signal! And I doubt they will like electronic track cleaners either.

 

Edit: I think modern controllers use pulses so the above may only be perfectly valid for variable voltage type. I'm not sure how effective this will be at low settings on a pulse type where there will be big 10 to 1 or more gaps between pulses. The capacitor will barely charge up during the pulse and almost certainly discharge it before the next pulse. Under DCC, there is normally a constant 15volts with a pulsed signal passing on top.

 

Isn't it recommended that these loco's NOT use pulse controllers due to them having a coreless motor!!

 

Khris

[JSpencer]

I would be intrigued to see this in operation. I can't help feeling that controllability of the loco for stopping may be compromised as the capacitor tries to make up for a shortage of power being supplied by a DC controller. After all, it will not see a difference between a lack of power from dirty track and a lack of power from the controller.

 

Roy

 

If its too powerful then yes you could end up waiting 15 seconds for a loco to come to stop!  It's a bit like choosing a resister to dim diodes on models. Too week and you see no difference, too strong and the difference is too much. One could argue the same on flywheels or DCC braking systems settings.

[JSpencer]

Isn't it recommended that these loco's NOT use pulse controllers due to them having a coreless motor!!

 

Khris

 

Motor's, coreless or not, do not like having electrical feed delivered in pulses period (unless they synchronous motors with specialized pulse feeds). But obviously some are gentlier in not exceeding certain voltages while others go way too high above it.  The higher voltage, the more current it draws, the quicker it gets hot. At the same time the magnetic flux in the motor is changing more often than desired (it will always be changing because that is how a motor works - but here it changing more frequently), reaching higher peaks on those overly high voltages. Overall resistance goes up, which in turn draws more current, which increases heat, which increases resistance.... you can see quickly why it pops!

 

On coreless, the lack of soft iron core mass means that kinetic energy in the motor is less (though this can be countered if a flywheel is fitted or if the gear system allows the mass of the loco to be applied - like a portescape box) but also a magnetic field that builds up and dissipates faster. which messes up the back emf leading to oversized reboots in power on cruder back emf based systems.

 

Enough electricity and back to the small powerful coseless in the 14XX. If treated well, a coreless will out last an iron motor, however a loco chassis life is only as long as its weakest part.

[tender]

Motor's, coreless or not, do not like having electrical feed delivered in pulses period (unless they synchronous motors with specialized pulse feeds). But obviously some are gentlier in not exceeding certain voltages while others go way too high above it.  The higher voltage, the more current it draws, the quicker it gets hot. At the same time the magnetic flux in the motor is changing more often than desired (it will always be changing because that is how a motor works - but here it changing more frequently), reaching higher peaks on those overly high voltages. Overall resistance goes up, which in turn draws more current, which increases heat, which increases resistance.... you can see quickly why it pops!

 

On coreless, the lack of soft iron core mass means that kinetic energy in the motor is less (though this can be countered if a flywheel is fitted or if the gear system allows the mass of the loco to be applied - like a portescape box) but also a magnetic field that builds up and dissipates faster. which messes up the back emf leading to oversized reboots in power on cruder back emf based systems.

 

Enough electricity and back to the small powerful coseless in the 14XX. If treated well, a coreless will out last an iron motor, however a loco chassis life is only as long as its weakest part.

 

 

Really? I feel another 'Rubbish' coming on.

 

Try a refresher course on Ohms Law.

[Pannier Tank]

Really? I feel another 'Rubbish' coming on.

 

Try a refresher course on Ohms Law.

 

Aye,    I = V / R  i.e as the Resistance increases the Current falls

[JSpencer]

Thanks chaps, indeed correct, my bad.

 

Resistance goes up, current drops, power drops and the loco slows down. User/feedback then increase power supply (voltage/pulse depending on set up) to overcome resistance, generates more heat  until finally.... pop.

Edited May 23, 2017 by JSpencer