sparaxis

Yes, I had the same problem with mine. I was running it in on the rolling road. After about 1/2 hour in each direction I increased the voltage a little...POW. Smoke. I opened the locomotive to see what was going on. No signs of burning on the insulation of the armature. So then I removed and cleaned the brushes, and cleaned the commutator with isopropyl alchohol. There was a LOT of oil on the commutator. I suspect the loco was over-oiled at the factory. It now runs sweetly and without smoke. Alan

I used a Lokpilot V4.0 in mine and used the "auto adjust" setting, and it runs very nicely after that. (Of course, it struggles to negotiate my torture track of a layout, and the Kernow Bullied is even worse...but the layout is built with Marklin C-track modified to be switchable between 2-rail and three rail...)

I went to digital for most of my magazines for simple reasons. In the case of BRM it was because I could not find it for sale locally. As I live in the USA the paper versions of "foreign" magazines cost a lot more than the digital versions and usually take at least 6 weeks to arrive. Thus I welcome the digital versions. I like that I can read a magazine, then archive it off my device. And then if I want to refer to it again re-download it. Having bought 4-5 magazines a month for more than 30 years, there is no way you can keep all the older issues. (Without becoming a candidate for a TV reality show about hoarders!) Some German magazines offer an "All time archive" of PDF files on a DVD, as well as annual disks with a full year's magazines. Ie. MIBA, Eisenbahn Journal. I still get these on paper out of habit I suppose, but at the end of the year I buy the annual disks and recycle the paper copies. Both these magazines and Eisenbahn Magazin now offer subscriptions with downloadable PDF files, so I may switch to those in future.

The simplest solution to this issue of "app only" is to purchase a subscription through a service like Pocketmags, or Zinio. I prefer Pocketmags to Zinio, since Pocketmags allows me so store my magazines on the SD card on my phone or tablet, instead of using up all my internal memory. Pocketmags and Zinio allow you to read the magazine "online", through a PC based app, (Pocketmags requires a version of Windows later than 7), or an Apple or Android app. Very versatile and my preference compared to a dedicated app. It is very convenient to have all your magazines in ONE place. The only thing I am not sure about is whether the discount on Model Rail specials is ONLY available if you subscribe through Bauer, as opposed to one of the others. (My Model Rail subscription was originally through Bauer but is now through Zinio, but that is a long story...) Interestingly enough, when I subscribed to the Railway Magazine, on their site, the magazine automatically became available on my Pocketmags account. The best of all worlds really. Alan

I haven't fitted a decoder to my 71 (yet) but I found that the Beattie/O2/Austerity were easily dealt with by "backing off" the various CVs for back EMF. It wasn't necessary to turn it off completely. Basically the CVs that deal with the "hardness" of response to feedback, and the "momentum" need to be reduced to half or less than the standard settings. (I am not referring to acceleration/deceleration CVs here, but specifically those related to motor control.) The "Back EMF reference voltage" can be adjusted to control the maximum speed. Interestingly enough, I found that the Bachmann motor fitted to some of their steam locos has similar issue. Jerky slow speed running and high minimum speed. Reducing these CVs made a world of difference. Alan

I used a mini Soundtraxx MC1 with a short harness and plug added. It fits nicely in the space in the side tanks. Basically an N-Gauge decoder driving the N-Gauge sized motor. CVs needed tweaking. I'm not at home and close to my notebook, but I remember more or less halving the all the back EMF values to get smooth low speed running. Cheap too, (in the USA at least). About 2/3 of the price of a Zimo or ESU. runs very nicely after the tweaks. Now where is the SR green one and Bachmann's missing SR birdcage?

The loco runs well enough. As long as I keep it down to a scale 50 mph or so it is tolerable. As I live in the USA paying for shipping back to the UK and then shipping on the replacement gets expensive quickly. And then there is no certainty that the replacement would be any better. Plus I had to glue on the one buffer that fell off, and re-attach the front handrail that popped out of its mounting. Kernow might not like that. Customer fiddling with the goods and all that. It's hardly the first time I've bough a loco that did not perform up to expectations.

I've been running mine in for several hours on the rolling road, and I have to say it is probably the noisiest loco I can remember coming across in a quarter century. The infernal racket sounds like a swarm of chainsaws taking down a redwood tree, and makes the previous champions, and elderly Airfix 4F and a dysfunctional Rivarossi Mallet sound like paragons of virtue. I guess I got a bad one then.

Mine is running very sweetly with a Soundtraxx 6-pin MC1 decoder. (Also sold in the disguise of a Bachmann decoder) Initially it ran very roughly until I reduced the CV values for back EMF, i.e CV209, 210 and 212 to about half or less of their factory set values. Then it well very well. Same for the O2, Beattie, and J94

Almost as soon as I read about their request for up-front payment on this forum I contacted Kernow, ( 21st September) and told them to go ahead and charge my card. My set was shipped on the 17th of November. I think shipping pre-paid orders in the order payment was received before starting to ship non-prepaid orders for both this and the Bullied is reasonable.

I used a Soundtraxx MC1Z102SQ "mini" with wire harness (Shortened), soldered to an 8 pin plug. The tiny decoder easily fits into the space in the side tanks. The Soundtraxx decoders can give very good running, but sometimes need a bit of tweaking to set the motor parameters. For some reason, they do not have the ability to set maximum speed by means of a CV, so you have to use another trick such as: Custom speed table. Preselected speed table with forward and reverse trim. Tweaking the back EMF reference voltage. Luckily, the H runs just fine with the factory settings. (That is once I worked out why there was a burning smell and smoke coming from the motor...No sign of damage to the coils. removing the brushes, cleaning them and the commutator solved the problem. Oil on the commutator) P.S. The 6 pin direct version works well in the DJM locos too.

Living in the USA, it's always a challenge buying from "offshore". I have always had great service from Kernow and they are my first choice. Since my "details are on file", I have never had a problem sending an email with my order stating "the usual address and credit card". That resolves the whole pre-order credit card round trip. For example with the Gate Stock. When I heard of the funding issue, I shot them an email stating they should go ahead and charge my card. Which they did promptly. And shipped and received in due order. When the engine shed had the first pictures of the SECR H, I knew I had to have one. A quick email to Kernow got me an order. And it was promptly shipped when they were released. I also deal with a certain establishment that used to be on Smithdown Rd, Liverpool, but usually only to take advantage of "bargains" and "Pre-owned" Of course, I am feverishly awaiting the "Bullied"...

I found this the other day. I guess I've been a customer on and off for quite a while:

A quick suggestion: I have a Roco "Glaskasten" 0-4-0 that exhibited the same phenomenon. I eventually traced it to a worm that had excessive longitudinal play. I added some washers and the problem went away. I suspect that when there is a "tight spot" in the gearing the worm would rapidly move from one end of its free play to the other, then potential shift back when the gears start turning freely. This repeated sequence resulted in surging motion. I would check that the gears rotate smoothly without any tight spots, and also check for free play on the worm shaft. I rather fancied buying one of these myself, but since I live "overseas", I am now reluctant to do so in case I get a dud. Alan

"Could someone in the know please explain what this logic level vs full voltage thing is all about and why the 21-pin MTC standard seems to have two levels. Thanks Rob" It's all a very messy story: When Marklin and ESU first teamed up and proposed the 21-pin MTC interface, it was designed to support a number of Marklin specific things, like three motor outputs and 3 motor sensing inputs to support brushless motors, which Marklin was promoting a the time as "Sinus" The initial specification had Auxiliary outputs 3 and 4 at normal amplified levels able to drive lights etc directly, and this information was used in defining the NMRA version of the specification. The NMRA also re-purposed the third motor output and one of the motor inputs as additional functions. When Marklin/ESU released their first loco with 21MTC, they deviated from their own spec and had outputs 3 & 4 as "Logic level", i.e very low current that required external amplification on the loco motherboard to make them drive real loads. The argument for this that I heard was that they could not fit the additional output transistors on the decoder at the time. For a while Marklin followed this practice, even after they broke up with ESU. The ESU interpretation became the basis of the NEM specification, i.e. ONLY forward & reverse lights, and the first two functions can be directly used to drive outputs. The NMRA originally had all the outputs amplified. It is useful to note that the latest NMRA spec, shown as draft on the NMRA website, now conforms to the NEM definition of outputs. As far as I can determine the following is true for outputs 3 and higher: ESU is Logic level only per NEM spec Zimo has decoder versions that do both logic level or amplified outputs Soundtraxx seems to be only amplified Digitrax appears to allow logic level or amplified to be configured in CVs TCS appears to be logic level per spec in the EU621X, and select-able level in their EU821 decoders. I'm not sure about their sound decoders. What is even more frustrating, is that most manufacturers do not EXPLICITLY state on the locomotive packaging or literature which version of the specification they have followed. And the greatest irony of all is that all the current Marklin decoders, (Remember, this is where the mess started) use amplified outputs, so installing a new Marklin decoder in an older Marklin locomotive is gamble. Alan

The irony of it all. The Hornby 71 had a working pantograph, where it wasn't really needed! They also have produced a variety of very fine pantographs for Jouef and Rivarossi locos. I think the compromise of many European manufacturers is what I would expect, a pantograph that is mechanically functional, but not necessarily electrically functional. With the rise of DCC there seems a growing trend in European outline to have non-conductive overhead, and to either reduce the spring force of the pantograph (since reliable conduction is not required) or tie it down with a tiny piece of thread so that it rides a few mm below the wire. The spring remains so that if for some reason it was pushed down by a low spot in the wire, it would then return to its constrained position when the wire rises again. I get why people do this. I had a layout with Sommerfeldt profi-catenary and I was running Roco locos with fragile fine scale pantographs. There is no more distressing event than a derailment resulting in a damaged pantograph entangled in the wires! Now I suppose you could pose the Hornby pantograph a few mm below the wire. Probably be ok if it stays where posed and does not ever get pushed down for some reason. But if I was buying an 87 I would want to have a working pantograph as the layout I am building will have cosmetic catenary. Fortunately, since I model the 1956-1961 period, class 87s are an academic discussion for me.

Unifrog isn't really any radical new idea. Back in the days of cardboard and Seccotine Edward Beal called it an isolated frog. He recommending the concept that we have come to love (?) as Electrofrog as a better answer as 1: you did not need a switch to polarize the frog and 2: You automatically "isolated" the one of the routes as both rails ended up the same polarity. I run a eclectic collection of British, European and American stuff. My layout is on two levels, with the upper level using Marklin C-track modified for two rail. Using the outputs from an ESU Switchpilot extension, each C-track frog is switched, and then one or the other closure rail is powered from the feed to the frog. This is because the closure rail that is in the path of the stud contact pickup shoe needs to be dead or a short may result. Works just fine. The lower level uses Rocoline code 83, and this is conceptually identical to unifrog. The frogs are isolated and for the first couple of years I didn't get around to wiring them up. Eventually I did, using the contacts on the point motor. In my experience all of the "better class" motors have contacts for this purpose. If you want to use the stone age Peco solenoid, you can always add one of the offered switch options. I used the microswitches a lot in my code 100 days. In my experience, relying on blade contact for conduction to the closure rails and frog is not reliable in the long term, and I would rather have bonds as required and a separate feed to the frog. My only dilemma is since my chameleon-like layout mainly "European" in appearance, how can I justify some BH track. (Maybe a micro layout?)

And they are not the only Bachmann locos that have axles geared together, the Compound and D11 do as well, And I suspect the Dukedog. (I'm not in a position to check right now) I think the GNR Atlantic was designed like that but didn't get them in the end. Some Fleischmann and Brawa locos have two axles geared. But, and this is a big but, this is where it gets interesting. When two axles are geared, the gear train can be set up so that the initial drive into the gear train is equi-distant between the two final axle gears. (With respect to the number of sets of meshing teeth that is.) so there is the same amount of backlash between the first gear and both axle gears. When you drive three or more axles from "one end", there is progressively more backlash and slop in the geartrain the further you get from the first axle. Notice that Rapido (Pic Above) has arranged their gearing so that the end axles have the same number of gears between them and the worm-wheel. This means that both end axles will rotate together, allowing smaller clearances in the side rods. The drive to the centre axle is shorter, and thus the centre axle will turn slightly before the others, but this can be dealt with by larger clearances in the rods at the centre crankpin. With good assembly this will work just fine, but I prefer rod drive,with jointed rods as that allows axles to be sprung or compensated. For example, the Fleischmann BR78 4-6-4t, has gear drive on the trailing axle, a sprung centre axle, and a "pendular" first axle, allowing it to rock around the centre-line of the loco, giving a true three-point suspension. Trying to do that with geared axles gets really complex, but it has been done, i.e by Teichmann (Below)

Does it make any sense at all to gear driving wheels together? Good question. Some folks seem to think so, i.e Rapido with their new Canadian locos and of course, DJM. Back in the good old days, when I was a boy, It was common practice amongst the "Good German Makes", I.e Fleischmann, Marklin and Trix. Fleischmann was the first to drop this followed by Marklin and lastly Trix, around the time they went out of business as an independent company and were swallowed up by Marklin. Something has to give. Gears have backlash, also known as "play" or "slop" or whatever you want to call it. So the good old answer was to have a huge amount of slop in the rods so they simply went along for the ride. The only reason to still do this is if you use fragile and flimsy plastic rods like Gutzold or Tillig which would disintegrate in a second if you actually expected them to transmit any force. I have the Beattie, the O2, 14xx and the Austerity from DJM. The first three are fine, but the only way I could make the latter run acceptably was to remove the rods, carefully open out the holes in the rods and re-assemble everything. Is it reasonable to spend hours of fiddling getting a brand new loco to run acceptably, or should it run well out of the box? Based on my generally favorable experience with the DJM products I hope that my 1361 will run well. That being said, the general Heljan experience (as reported on this forum) starting with the Garratt, then the O2 and the L&B loco (which is still on order) with the disintegrating valve-gear has given me pause, and I have purchased none of them.

I am very happy to unsee the splashers. I would rather have a good running loco that looks convincing EVEN WITH ERRORS than something that is nominally totally to scale but is somewhat crude and runs like a dog. I have never seen the locomotive in real life, nor am I ever likely too. But it does make a nice small locomotive, and in the version I ordered - BR black - I am sure the splashers will not be very visible, Just like the lack of daylight under the boiler on the Hatton's Barclay. I can live with both. It is not as if it has gigundous oversized splashers like Tri-ang's Caley single forced onto the Dean Chassis. As an engineer, who works in the rail industry I would have proposed a different compromise: Wheels to minimum size, ie, worn down to the minimum wear limit, RP25 flanges, and a somewhat raised footplate. But I am sure there would have been screams about 3" too small on the wheel diameter and footplate 1 mm too high. You just can't win. Or buy a Polly or Nellie!

Next 18 was designed by the RCN (a group of European manufacturers) to provide a small decoder with multiple function outputs. As such, it replaces the Plux 12 which had a chequered history in that when Tillig first conceived of it they simply chopped 4 pins off one side of the Plux 16. The first Plux-12 decoders would not fit in the space allowed for Plux-16 as the pins were centered on the board. After some debate the standard was revised to allow a Plux-12 with offset pins allowing it to fit in the standard Plux-16 space. The Next-18 has the advantage that it does not have pins that can bend, and has been adopted by all the European manufacturers I can think of except Marklin/Trix. (Even Hornby in Jouef and Arnold Locos). Therefore Bachmann is actually following the newer standard. The MTC21 21-pin socket also went through many changes, with at least 4 different versions over the years. For example with logic level or amplified functions 5&6. It is becoming quite widely used in the USA, no doubt due to the influence of ESU in the OEM market. ESU also uses the Next18 interface on some of their drop-in replacement boards for American diesels. The latest version of the NMRA spec is now compatible with the latest version of the NEM and RCN specs Although I prefer the way Plux was implemented compared to MTC21, for example pins on the decoder and not on the loco board, MTC21 is by no means obsolete. I do wish the 8-pin interface would go away though. Primarily because it doesn't define a space envelope for the decoder, and I am tired of trying to figure out where to put the decoder in those locos that have an interface but no defined space. Of course, you can still live with the limited functionality in British (non-sound) steam locos, where you don't have any functions to energize. Bachmann is not the only company to change vendors while keeping the part number the same: Roco did it frequently in the early days of DCC.

My previous comment notwithstanding, I will be buying one of these, and a P..... Luckily, for goods stock, I use Kadees, so I can usually find one that works. It just frustrates me in general, and in particular when pockets are wrong on passenger stock, so that all sorts of gymnastics are required to get close coupling when with European outline it is simply a case of removing the installed coupling and plugging in the close coupling of choice. (That is, if it wasn't there in the first place.) Irony is that Bachmann Europe makes quite a nice close coupling of there own design, and you would think it would make sense to offer this on their British outline. Except of course the length is wrong for the non standard pockets!

Maybe its just me, but from looking at the picture it does not look as if the coupler pocket is located correctly with respect to the buffers. I suppose Bachmann and others place the pocket too far back to try an compensate for the ghastly over length tension locks, but then no close coupling will work correctly. In this case, without a true close coupling mechanism, the pocket should be placed closer to the buffers than the standard suggests, to give some space. About 1.5 mm further out is fine, as that would give a coupling distance equivalent to the 9" or so between buffers found with loose coupled stock.

I bought a 2P as one of the usual box shifters was selling them off cheap. Sound is quite good but I find the whole effect of the chuffs being wildly out of synch with the wheels disconcerting. I seem to remember that when the loco just starts moving it sounds like its going 20 mph or so. More than 10 beats per revolution or so. It can be done correctly. I have a REE 141 with synchronised chuffs and smoke, but of course the ESU electronic gubbins in that one probably cost more than the whole 2P, chip included!

I think there is another subtlety that people forget. Many traditional pigments fall foul of modern ROHS rules. Lead, Mercury or Cadmium compounds for example. You may be able to get close to the "right shade" using modern pigments in environmentally acceptable paint base, but all bets are off when you start comparing things after a while out in the sun and the rain.