BWsTrains

Hi, Two years on and I struck exactly the same issue with 6424, moderate grinding noise when running but return to UK from Aus is just not on for me. Without the body shell attached, this ran as seamlessly as my 5775, purrfectly you might say, quietest engines I've ever owned. Further exploration showed that there is a very small tolerance between the rearmost gear and the inside of the cab front. We were the unlucky ones where the gear just rubs against the wall on our models. With time you have probably eroded away enough plastic for the problem to resolve. My solution was first to try running in for a further 2 hrs, when this had no effect out came my scalpel and I now have a genuine firebox opening as the wall is already recessed and quite thin there! This with a bit of further trimming fully resolved the issue for me. Colin

Sorry, I was not talking about the Zimo site, I coped OK with that but about the Bachmann site where it's not very friendly or easy to find the relevant manual at page http://www.Bachmann.co.uk/service/dug.php. My comments were intended for others future reference and help. If you don't know up front that Bachmann 36-358 is a Zimo chip, you can go clicking thru various poorly titled links on that page to PDFs for other chips. Colin

To close out this Post, my Bachmann / Zimo 6 Pin DCC finally arrived and all has gone perfectly. Very easy to fit. Even using my limited "Select" Controller, my 64xx faithfully obeys all the various CV settings I've tweaked using the eLink. Bachmann documentation is far from helpful, just a hard to find hyperlink to The Zimo site in German. So for the record, the 36-568 = Zimo MX622n and The Zimo downloadable manual covers this and many other Chips' CV settings

Dave, Let me be clear that my word “ensure” did not and was not meant to imply “no testing was done”. Nor was my commentary intended in any way as “mischievous”. You have misunderstood my (correct) usage of the word admission “an acknowledgment of the truth of something” The serious modellers in this place would be expected more often than not to use quality and NMRA compatible DCC devices, chips and controllers, yet still have encountered a wide range of issues. It seems you have been most unfortunate to have conducted testing that failed to pick up these issues that only appeared after product launch. There are many possible explanations and is an issue that your development team must be reflecting on.

Dave, that is a remarkable admission this deep into the project. Surely ensuring DCC chip / motor compatibility would have been of highest priority during design. For me in Australia where return in case of fault is ruled out by the costs involved, to read here of model after model with running issues has turned me right off buying a 14xx.

Summer here has come and gone and we've moved on into a long hot autumn and so my progress remains slow. I've wanted to use as much natural sourced materials as possible, (see post #1) and I’ve been busy looking for things in the garden to meet my needs to build hedgerows up to mature trees. What I have settled on might be hard to come by in cooler climes but I’ll work thru where I've got to so far. My first goal was to find a convenient plant framework to mimic hedgerows and smaller laterals on more open structured trees. The gently arching structures found in plants work really well and my preferred sources grow well around here. Onion or Guilford weed (Romulea rosea) was the curse in my lawns until I found its dried stems are very useful for hedgerows and laterals. After flowering, by late Spring the leaves dry back to very rigid and gently curved 5-8cm lengths easily pulled out by hand in a clump. As a bonus the nutty corm also comes out so some weeding is done on the side. Trimmed and inserted into Florist’s foam they make a good Hedgerow framework. I covered the foam with Alfoil so the binder I apply will be separable from the base. This photo shows the native weed and then its dried stems inserted in foam (rather too close together in this trial example). I’ve found that using my favorite dark brown acrylic filler makes an excellent ground substrate that when applied ~2mm thick is strong enough to hold all the stems together once everything has set (Day2) and the modelling foam is removed. My final photo shows a better example with filler applied and with the first part of the upper hedgerow in place. More on these steps in my next post

OK, thanks everyone for helping. Bachmann now ordered with fingers only so lightly crossed,

that That is probably due to default CV settings that you can't change using the Select. Should be able to change them with Elite and the Chip instructions will have which CV controls what factor. One of them covers the time delay before starting, another the acceleration rate.

Thanks very much, most appreciative for the feedback

Thanks for feedback so far. Sorry, in a 'senior" moment I typed "Elite" when I really meant "Select" so if anyone has experience with the Hornby "Select" please let me know,

Thanks Nigel, does anyone have any specific experience to add to this? Colin

Hi, Does anyone know if there are compatibility issues with using a Bachmann DCC 6 Pin (36-568) and either the Elite or eLink Controllers from Hornby? I need a 6 Pin chip for several recent purchases but have vague recollection that there might be compatibility issues re using those combinations. Please let me know of any successes or failures, there must be plenty of data out there given the number of Hattons 14xxs being sold right now and with the Bachmann chip being their recommendation. Understandably, Hattons themselves will not commit on the question of compatibility. My preferred option of a DCC Concepts 6 Pin is suffering from a distinct shortage of supply problem right now. Other ideas also welcomed (+ where you might buy them )

PVA is water based and has Acetic Acid in it, just sniff for that vinegar nose. Lead reacts readily with acetic acid to form Lead acetate, aka sugar of lead, soluble and very toxic as a result - better to use a non-aqueous based glue. Same would apply to acid cured silicone resin + lead regarding reaction as the acid used is acetic.

Priceless image

So required weight to tip the balance is somewhat less than 19g; =<1.68cc of Lead by Volume, hardly a large piece. This is not surprising as the tail heavy weight, as reported by melmerby is 18g and the additional trial weights were added fully forward. Isn't there somewhere in / around the front end to park that much?

Keith, re your #1629 "The loco is tail heavy so there is no weight on the front driving wheels. No ifs, no buts, That's what my weight test shows." sorry, your #1600 post was not clear to me and I'd missed the follow up explanation in #1622 of how you'd weighed the rear axle. So, I agree with the above Having the CoG behind middle axle is hardly ideal for effective drive transmission, especially when they've gone to all that trouble plus inconvenience (loose Crank Rods) to get drive to the 4 wheels in the first place. Bizarre.

JSpencer, I agree with most of your points. I was trying to get the principle clear and what we really need to further understand driving problems with 14xx is where is the GoG? Where I disagree is with.. "If it is aft the second drivers, then we could find the front drivers with only 70 grams or less depending how far aft the weight is." If the COG is behind the middle axis, then on perfectly level track there should be no effective weight bearing onto the front axle. This is Physics - the action of the COG is down from behind the centre axle transferring some share of the weight to the rear. Without flexing of the chassis there is no basis for any down action anywhere forward of the "pivot" i.e. centre axle as per my see-saw example. The lighter person on the see saw still has a mass of 50kg but that does not mean there is a weight of 50kg bearing down at that point. Their mass effective acts at the CoG

BTW, just in case my point about Centre of Gravity escapes anyone. A body acts as if all weight is applied at the CoG - think a see-saw with one side slightly heavier / lower because CoG is that side of the pivot. In the rigid chassis 14xx the pivot is the middle axle. So if the CoG is forward of the middle axle all weight will act thru the front two axles whether all axles are on the track or not and no matter how small the difference! If the CoG is behind then all weight will be on the rear 2 axles. One axle can be in contact but with no effective weight applying to the track. Only exception to my point would be if central axle were slightly higher than the other 2 and not acting as the pivot, but that would put a fair bit of weight on the un-driven rear axle and would be a dumb arrangement It might also mean that a small weight placed very well forward, would be sufficient to tip the balance, so to speak. Could be a good market in bespoke Tungsten funnels or even a few grams of Pb carefully placed?

The critical question would appear to be "where is the Centre of Gravity on a DJM 14xx?" If it is behind the central axle that might be a problem and vice versa. Surely DJM will have addressed this issue during design to maximise traction? Likewise, with older models; it seems to me with a heavier motor there is a possibility the CoG might be further forward in the Airfix. Perhaps someone with both can supply some data.

To paraphrase MP "The OO King is no more, it's ceased to be, it's expired and gone to meet its maker. This is a late King. It's a stiff. Bereft of life, it rests in peace". see http://djmodels.co.uk/?p=640 for the potential N Gauge reincarnation.

Phil, not sure if this is the place to raise my issue but as it is related to GWR Mk1 bogies here goes I have a rake of 3 x circa 2000 Era Mk1 Coaches (ex R2077) with the old style Hornby "D" couplings and plastic wheels. While they run OK I'd like to match with all rest of my NEM couplings. I see that my more modern Hornby Mk1 BG full brake (R4642) has the desired Bogie wheels / couplings. Can you or others here tell me where I can get replacement Bogies from please? Not sure where to start looking, Interestingly I've found no issues running Bachmann Mk1s that weigh in at 168g or just 10g shy of the NRMA recommendation. My only problem has been with R4642 (see above) which at 123g was always derailing when combined with other heavier coaches. Addition of 30g fixed that and all my coaches are now in the range 153 - 168g. As with Wagons / vans it seems having no unduly light members in any load is the key factor to prevent derailing (IMO)

This seems odd when you consider that Olivia's Trains supply Hornby King's (and many other Classes) with Olivia's Sound coupled with an ESU V4 (=Loksound I think) as a standard offering. (disclaimer - I have no connection with them at all, it's just a good example to cite) Not sure if related to your issue but I was getting a short in my first purchased King once a Std DCC chip was inserted - my supplier traced this to poor wiring in the loco (see #937).

Where did you source your Autocoach? Any info most appreciated

Hi Jim, I'm bookmarking this Gem for when I get to a similar task, superb stuff, Colin

Coachmann, brilliant responses, thank you. Exactly what I'd expected to hear about, see my emphasis above. Now it's been made absolutely clear in this place that the path to good sound is anything but trivial in time and complexity, Loksound hint at this themselves and my post was in part to hear some real experiences of what's involved get a decent sound result. Nothing stands still for ever and maybe a future generation of chips + some form of external monitoring might reduce the sync process to an automated fine tuning, at a price. Meanwhile I'm happy in my space as I trust you will be in yours.