mikesndbs

Jason with respect, you are inadvertently causing confusion. It is not the feedback function that is the problem it is the low frequency < 100Hz pulsed output that is the issue as it causes heat to build up that the coreless motor can not dissipate. Sadly the HM2000 is a feedback type but again that's not the issue. Have a read of this excellent page to understand more about the various controllers out there. https://www.scottpages.net/ReviewOfControllers.html But along the lines of what you have said a Gaugemaster or Morley controller will be fine.

LOL just shows they have deployed something they don't understand! I presume it comes DCC fitted etc? DCC I understand uses feedback control, but at a very high frequency something like 20Khz.

Hi there, it's not a feedback controller no, more importantly it is a PWM pulse width modulated type controller and a very crude one at that. The supplied power supply is 19 volts DC meaning the pulses of power will also have a potential of 19 volts. It's what makes normal motors runs as if there was sand in them. Feedback is not the issue, its the PWM frequency and maximum voltage that causes heat build up in coreless motors which they are unable to dissipate. High frequency PWM and feedback control together with a limited maximum voltage is perfectly fine.

Some clarity on which controllers can and 'should not be used' with coreless designs. Any controller that outputs full wave rectification variable DC voltage will be safe for coreless use. So an example would be the H&M Safety Minor set to full wave not half. You would still hear some buzz on starting and it is possible the motor will jump into life but it will not be damaged. So any electronic controller that also uses full wave rectification (100Hz) will be OK, so this includers Gaugemaster types W,D, Combi and so on. The Morley controllers are very safe for use. Older pulse width modulated control designs (including feedback) that use half wave rectification (50Hz) will cause excessive vibration and heat build up that will kill a coreless motor fairly quickly. Newer designs such as the KPC voltage limited minimal feedback full wave designs (100Hz) will just about be OK for end to end layouts and occasional use. The well known Hornby HM2000 which uses PWM at 100Hz is not suitable for coreless motors. And nor are any of the train set controllers, especially that god awful silver and black thing. Hope this helps.

What controller do you have?

Very tempted by one of these but worried about the performance due to the coreless. I have found them to lack torque and be designed for speed. I've noted the many interesting comments about coreless, feedback and HF track cleaners also the types of DC to use. The one to avoid is anything derived from 50Hz this always causes a build up of heat, most more modern controllers use full wave and so 100Hz ripple. The GM model D/WCombi for example. Ripple is good for older motor types and 100Hz is fine. Those with older controllers but still full wave might like to try a non polarised capacitor rated at around 35volts 220uF, simply place this across your controller's out puts to improve and smooth coreless motors. Or as I have done fit a smaller value say 47uF inside the loco across the motor. DC only of course.

Did a bit of a review

Question! The older Mk1 stock were vacuum braked and after 1977 the Buffets became dual braked or air brake only? Sorry brain has locked up. Can I confirm that R4973A Mk1 RB(R), M1657 - Era 7 is as was after the 1977 upgrade? Thanks

Hi Nick Most analog feedback controllers will be employing 100Hz pulses which for coreless is too low. The other issue is that the PWM signal will use the peak available from the power supply, so 12v maybe, this is a hard hit for coreless designs. I recall KPC used to limit the peak to 9v and very low feedback, this seemed safe enough. Pre 90s controllers may well be using 50Hz which is very damaging!

Hi guys, Bit concerned, does the Heljan Metropolitan loco, 07 and 05 use coreless, they look like a coreless but the instructions say its a 'powerful three pole motor' Many thanks

Does anyone know if they plan to make a Black Fenchurch as she was preserved?

I wonder how a voltage limited (by supply) PWM at 20kHz would work on coreless?

Callum, you don't need to explain yourself mate! Take care

Hi Ian I understand they did with a conventional motor, the newer ones have a coreless motor. Seems to run well enough all the same

Just for clarity, I note the coach number here as 2622 yet on the kodel has 6545 on it?

Looks like no, very good news

Well my day just got better anyway so I am grateful for the confirmation

To be fair I looked everywhere even in a number of SR books. It's great you found that photo, but interesting as it appears to show the wiper was not in contact with the glass?? Oddly photos of 373 have now turned up, even from that time frame and all have the wiped fitted as expected. http://www.marcmodels.co.uk/Images/O Gauge Prototype - PP Gate Stock Set.pdf How very intriguing! Wonder if it would be possible to move it?

OH thanks god, RM web to the rescue again. I do wonder if it was functional in that photo of 373, I'll edit my post accordingly. Much happier now

So come on am I just being stupid here or is it fitted wrongly, is it prototypical for set 373 at date? I can't believe nobody would have not spotted this yet, so maybe it is right?

Hi Martin Yes that is what I am seeing, it does not even look like its the same part, or has it just been bent?

I had not noticed that! I have been looking at books and online to see if there is any chance this is fitted in the right place. All the real ones have the wiper fitted from the bottom left, yet even on the Kernow web page the K1002 is shown with this weird arrangement mine has?

Worried this morning, the gate stock I ordered arrived and is lovely however the windscreen wiper looks as if it has been glued on the front in totally the wrong place! Having looked at other models it appears to me that this is not just on my model, the wiper appears to be fixed randomly at the top or correctly at the bottom on many other peoples models! How it should be, below!

Hi all I am no expert on the Midland, but when I spotted this little stunner I just had to order one. I've since re-oiled my four car set and she manages it well now. Will still look at adding a little weight I think.

Irrelevant now please remove, thanks