No Decorum Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 And indeed you are correct. Retraction published !! I have Hornby's instruction sheet for R3310 Bude in front of me .Nothing is printed with regard to a running-in period. In contrast,Heljan's new O2 says a 30 minute running in period in each direction and Kernow's DJ O2 tank also recommends a running in period ....which IMHO is vital. You make an interesting assertion with regard to the process. What we need is some form of accurate trial and measurement process. Much is dependant on variables such as track and controllers and ...some assert...to the effect of wheel 'polishing' as the loco beds in.Bachmann r-t-r I think benefit from a running in period but In general,you may well be right.Thanks for bringing me up short. I'll try putting Bude under load shortly to see what happens. Sorry, I didn’t mean to bring you up short. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 7, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 7, 2016 Sorry, I didn’t mean to bring you up short. No need to aplogise.The assumption was mine.I should have checked before posting.In any case,this is an issue which needs further exploration.I have often wondered myself on whether or not a period of running in did make a difference to haulage capacity.I suppose what it is useful for is to allow the gears to bed in.Hornby gears are occasionally noisy or split. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Decorum Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 No need to aplogise.The assumption was mine.I should have checked before posting.In any case,this is an issue which needs further exploration.I have often wondered myself on whether or not a period of running in did make a difference to haulage capacity.I suppose what it is useful for is to allow the gears to bed in.Hornby gears are occasionally noisy or split. Not so much asserting something, more just stating my experience. Forgive my poor memory but insofar as it serves, I find modern diesels and electrics with central motors, twin flywheels and twin-bogie drive to be good runners. I even concede that those with six-wheel bogies with dummy central wheels run well. With steam it is a different matter. Once Simon Kohler persuaded Hornby to go down the five-pole motor and multiple pickup route, Hornby’s steamers have been superb runners. Then came design clever. Fortunately, that has been left behind. Other manufacturers produce locomotives with tight spots. There is no pattern to this. I have two models which are horrible but a friend has one of the same which runs very sweetly. Sometimes a cause can be traced and the problem solved but not, in my experience, by running in. Sometimes it is mysterious in the extreme. A case in point is the Heljan 05. I have three of these and they are little beauties. One ran roughly, even after running in. In trying to isolate the problem, I swapped the wheels with a good one. The rough one ran well, the smooth one ran roughly. Problem identified, so I thought. I swapped the wheels back. Then they both ran smoothly. I have no idea why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 7, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 7, 2016 And indeed you are correct. Retraction published !! I have Hornby's instruction sheet for R3310 Bude in front of me .Nothing is printed with regard to a running-in period. In contrast,Heljan's new O2 says a 30 minute running in period in each direction and Kernow's DJ O2 tank also recommends a running in period ....which IMHO is vital. You make an interesting assertion with regard to the process. What we need is some form of accurate trial and measurement process. Much is dependant on variables such as track and controllers and ...some assert...to the effect of wheel 'polishing' as the loco beds in.Bachmann r-t-r I think benefit from a running in period but In general,you may well be right.Thanks for bringing me up short. I'll try putting Bude under load shortly to see what happens. And my session with Bude and a few of her elder sisters revealed shortcomings with Hornby's latest release in terms of adhesion and haulage.With a load of 8 Hornby Pullmans ,Bude struggled.,whereas 4 other airsmoothed Pacifics did not.Maybe with gradual constant use things will improve. In contrast,rebuilt sister 34013,also new,coped with little problem Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 7, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 7, 2016 And my session with Bude and a few of her elder sisters revealed shortcomings with Hornby's latest release in terms of adhesion and haulage.With a load of 8 Hornby Pullmans ,Bude struggled.,whereas 4 other airsmoothed Pacifics did not.Maybe with gradual constant use things will improve. In contrast,rebuilt sister 34013,also new,coped with little problem Hornby's Rebuilt Light Pacifics have always been better pullers than the older air-smoothed models or the rebuilt MN. Along with the Britannias, they seem to have more grunt than most other Hornby locos. My 'Bude' hasn't yet been given any serious work to do but all r-t-r models improve with a few hours running - it knocks the shine off the wheels and makes quite a difference in most cases. Our air-smoothed Light Pacifics generally handle 9 or 10 (some will take 11 but not if they are lit Pullmans) without problems, albeit on a layout with minimum curves of 3' radius and no appreciable gradients. When new 7 or 8 is about average for the 'cans' - running in consists of about an hour each way on the rolling road (changing direction every 10 minutes) then stints on the layout of about 20 minutes first with four or five coaches and gradually increasing the load. Ten minutes rest between sessions and lubricate as per the instructions after 2-3 sessions. The most dramatic improvements (proportionally) that I have encountered were my Bachmann Collett 2251 and N Class mogul, both of which went from slipping quite easily with just four coaches to slipping very rarely with seven on. The other thing that helps to a surprising degree is to 'oil round' the motion - since the advent of see-through packaging no lubrication seems to be applied to this area by the factories. One particular Bachmann 3MT tank was a decidedly 'lumpy' runner, and on the verge of being sent back but, with a few drops in the right places was transformed almost instantly into one of my best runners John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted February 7, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 7, 2016 I add lead to the front of the loco body especially with the earlier ones such as WILTON as they have rear driving wheels that are heavily sprung so the locos tend to sit back and loose traction. I must find a way of getting rid of that sprung compensation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combe Martin Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Hornby's Rebuilt Light Pacifics have always been better pullers than the older air-smoothed models or the rebuilt MN. Along with the Britannias, they seem to have more grunt than most other Hornby locos. John My rebuilt WC, 34045 Ottery St Mary, will start a very mixed bag of 15 bogie coaches on a curve without slipping at all, but it is my heaviest loco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted February 8, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 8, 2016 Hornby's Rebuilt Light Pacifics have always been better pullers than the older air-smoothed models or the rebuilt MN. Along with the Britannias, they seem to have more grunt than most other Hornby locos. John Just tried 34013 Okehampton on my Golden Arrow formation with its 7 Pullmans, 2 MK1s and bogie luggage van. As with my 34001 Exeter and rebuilt MN, it also struggled and was slipping when taking curves, even though they're 36" radius. Performance of all 3 loco types is very similar. The two Light Pacifics have the decoder in the tender so there's an opportunity to add weight to the loco if needs be. So for this train my Britannia William Shakespeare keeps its job! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 8, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 8, 2016 Interestingly, apart from the rebuilt MNs (which always were a bit light-footed in my estimation) all the locos being cited as somewhat lacking in the haulage department have the (relatively) new semi-permanent tender coupling arrangement. It seems unlikely that such a simple change should affect performance in this way but something is clearly different. I wonder if the examples of 'Exeter' and the sound-fitted rebuilt 'Crewkerne' produced by Sanda Kan are also like it........ John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold RFS Posted February 8, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 8, 2016 Decided to weigh the respective engines and they are as follows (in order of their respective performance on my heavy Golden Arrow) Britannia - 490g Rebuilt WC - 490g (Okehampton) Rebuilt MN - 440g Exeter - 410g I didn't want the palaver of separating loco and tender so these are the combined weights. I believe the rebuilt WC tender is heavier than the Britannia's which therefore would perhaps explain why the Britannia is better on this train than Okehampton. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 8, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 8, 2016 Interestingly, apart from the rebuilt MNs (which always were a bit light-footed in my estimation) all the locos being cited as somewhat lacking in the haulage department have the (relatively) new semi-permanent tender coupling arrangement. It seems unlikely that such a simple change should affect performance in this way but something is clearly different. I wonder if the examples of 'Exeter' and the sound-fitted rebuilt 'Crewkerne' produced by Sanda Kan are also like it........ John Interesting point. In yesterday's 8 Pullman haulage test on my layout ( min. Radius 36" slight incline ,some reverse curves), all my pre permanent tender coupling airsmoothed light pacifics (4) coped with ease,whereas Bude (brand new,admittedly and not 'run in'),struggled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoverPriory Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Interestingly, apart from the rebuilt MNs (which always were a bit light-footed in my estimation) all the locos being cited as somewhat lacking in the haulage department have the (relatively) new semi-permanent tender coupling arrangement. It seems unlikely that such a simple change should affect performance in this way but something is clearly different. I wonder if the examples of 'Exeter' and the sound-fitted rebuilt 'Crewkerne' produced by Sanda Kan are also like it........ John I am no engineer/mechanic but I wouldn't think the new couplings would be a problem provided the connector has not been bent. I would have thought that the new coupling would be beneficial in that it will tend to keep the loco stable (ie preventing it rocking forwards/backwards and thus possibly losing motive power). The old rebuilt MNs and WCs always had ballast added by Hornby and were quite useless if this was removed from the body shell! I discovered this after allowing Olivias (I will wash my mouth out later) to fit lights to 2 rebuilts and yes they forgot to put the ballast back in!! These two couldn't pull the proverbial skin off a rice pudding until they were sorted. I bought 4 of the SK Exeters. In my opinion they were very shoddily built. And performance issues,I think, result from this. Once sorted out they weren't too bad. But the new batch of Light Pacifics seem to be a much better product. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDJR7F88 Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Following my review of the Hornby Un-Rebuilt West Country Class, 'Bude' in BR Late Green Livery, here's a quick running session featuring her hauling a recreation of the 'Pines Express'. As can be seen she is a superb performer, handling the rake of 8 Mk1's with ease, whilst running smoothly and silently.Highly recommend indeed! Hope you enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcR_pB67C70 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted February 9, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 9, 2016 Following my review of the Hornby Un-Rebuilt West Country Class, 'Bude' in BR Late Green Livery, here's a quick running session featuring her hauling a recreation of the 'Pines Express'. As can be seen she is a superb performer, handling the rake of 8 Mk1's with ease, whilst running smoothly and silently. Highly recommend indeed! Hope you enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcR_pB67C70 Are the Mk 1's Bachmann or Hornby? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ian Hargrave Posted February 9, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 9, 2016 Are the Mk 1's Bachmann or Hornby? Good question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 9, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 9, 2016 Are the Mk 1's Bachmann or Hornby? At least some Bachmann, I'd say. Paint dates etc. on solebars and one is lettered "Restaurant Car" which Hornby haven't produced. A lovely steady runner, though. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDJR7F88 Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Are the Mk 1's Bachmann or Hornby? A mix of both, 3 Bachmann, 1 Hornby Premium, and 4 RailRoad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Well......... Finally decided to pop a DCC decoder into Manstons tender. Taking notice of previous posts, I handled the tender with the proverbial kid gloves, to the extent of prying out Satans Little White Connector and detatching the tender from the drawbar. So far so good. Then I undid the two little, deeply recessed screws at the rear of the tender, which seemed to have been secured at the factory with Loctite. Then I lifted the rear of the tender. A little harder... Ping! Off flew the leading tender steps and the handbrake, even though I'd not gone anywhere NEAR them! Luckily I was able to retrieve them, but they're going into the box. I'm not putting them back on just yet. Eventually the glue holding the front of the tender gave way and it came free. Removing the blanking plug was straightforward, although one of the plug pins also took a tour of the carpet and is now lost to history. C'est la vie! In went the decoder and, trusting to luck, on went the tender body (screws not as tightly secured!) and back with SLWP and the drawbar screw. A quick circuit under ID 3 then programmed to its service number. It had run well under DC and still does so under DCC. Phew! But its a damn PAIN to get that tender body off! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold roundhouse Posted February 18, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 18, 2016 Very strange as no glue on any of mine towards the front. Yes the odd one had had a front step come loose or the handbrake do the same but generally been OK. There was a batch that had the rear ladders glued into the tender but all the recent ones have been fine. Luckily the wiring on Winston Churchill was fine unlike Okehmapton. Winston Churchill is now ex WC and awaiting me to decide which BoB it will become. All the detail is in place including RT Models replacement ash pans and etched drain pipes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted March 13, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 13, 2016 Breaking News... I've acquired an Exeter, for renaming purposes of course Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Breaking News... I've acquired an Exeter, for renaming purposes of course I trust sir that it is a Sanda Kan version.... I have a cupboard full of 'em..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted March 15, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 15, 2016 I trust sir that it is a Sanda Kan version.... I have a cupboard full of 'em..... Thankfully it's the better built CHL version Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernman46 Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Breaking News... I've acquired an Exeter, for renaming purposes of course Yes - me too - not going to rename it though ........................ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold toboldlygo Posted March 15, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 15, 2016 Yes - me too - not going to rename it though ........................ Exeter.jpg Are you going to use it for bombing practice? :D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robmcg Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Thankfully it's the better built CHL version But, but, I paid as much as ninety of the folding for my two SK Exeters.... rarity my son, it's the rarity ... you can't go wrong. p.s. that'll be why I'm so rich. ah, no, wait..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.