RBE

40 minutes ago, tlm said:

Greetings NBL - with reference to your post on Wednesday, it looks like I'm vying for the title of the upgraded idiot !

The attached shows the main problem with my 56023. As you can see from the image the bogies had spread on both inner ends. On first opening the box, I noticed that both bogies had their outer ends facing outwards, due I suspect to the fact that the cradle securing screws were loose, with one close to coming adrift. I didn't notice the bogie spread issues at first, but on putting the loco on to the track, it moved a short distance, the motor over revving with a gear miss-meshing sound, and then derailed. It was then that I discovered the bogie spread issues and that both bogie securing clips were loose. Attempting to recentre the axles back into the bearings and press the rear of the bogies back together with the loco sitting in the cradle as per the photo didn't work, not helped by the pick ups also having bent.

I appreciate that I could have returned it, and have nothing but praise for Alex for his comms and feedback, but I decided not to wait however long while it went back by post to the supplier, then from them to Cavalex for repair, and so on, and so ended up removing the bogies, cleaned and degreased the gearing, lubricated very sparingly with some high quality light machine oil, and rebuilt the bogies, resoldering the wiring in the process - call it a Nigel Burkin F Exam if you will. It also gave me the chance to see just how superbly these have been designed.

023 now is now the best runner of the lot.

Excellent. Sounds like you did a great job there!!! Far from an idiot.

15 minutes ago, Wayne 56089 said:

Anyone been to Model rail Scotland today manage to find anything out?
 

 

 

Good to hear that a second run is planned but I did have to run after my wallet after reading that!! 

 

Just now, AY Mod said:

 

Apologies; that was the inference I'd been left with - as well as making it roundy-roundy.

Yes we are making it roundy roundy. 

15 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

It was taken on by the Alex half of Cavalex and is in the process of being re-gauged so don't hold your breath! 😁

It's actually been taken on by Cavalex as a whole and we are rebuilding it as a WCML 90s layout. We are not regauging it though it will still remain EM. 👍

10 minutes ago, APT Fan said:

 

Your right, I shouldn't have had to do anything all with a new model.

You didn't have to. You can always return it to us to look at if necessary. 

8 minutes ago, APT Fan said:

 Dropping the bogies out.

Again you don't need to go anywhere near them. Anyway we are where we are. The shoes fit onto a peg on the brake gear so a spot of superglue (gel is probably better with a little flex to it) should sort it. Might need your glasses on though.

7 minutes ago, APT Fan said:

Whilst checking the bogie tower issue a brake shoe has fallen off. How on earth do I re-attach that? Nightmare.

How on earth do you pull the brake shoe off when checking the bogie tower? You don't need to go anywhere near those.

It's a small piece but should glue back on if it's just the glue that's given up, however I have never knocked one off so can't comment on how easy it is to glue back on.

17 minutes ago, APT Fan said:

 

Are you referring to the Rail Guard? If so it was discussed earlier in the thread,

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its not a rail guard its a step. The rail guards are mounted to the bogies as per the prototype.

1 hour ago, Norski said:

 

I had Lenz 21 pin decoders waiting for my 4 x 56 but I can't get them to make the locos move. Im still confused (easily so im told) why this loco is sold as 21pin but the Lenz didn't work. Lights and fans worked (cab lights didn't) but I can't get them to budge an inch.

I notice you guys recommend the ESU decoder but don't insist on it. Would appreciate some feedback as I don't want to repeat what was a very costly mistake.

 

Thanks.

Which Lens decoder is it. It is sold as 21 pin because it is 21 pin. There are indifferent 21 pin standards though so maybe that's an issue for you?

2 minutes ago, vanbasher said:

Thank you for your rapid response, no I've hadn't previously ran it with the sound off. I tuned the sound off yesterday as I noticed it was having a little struggle then heard the noise. I don't think for a minute it's anything serious but just wondered if there was anything I could check to rectify. Many thanks again for responding. 

I would check the worm cover caps for peace of mind.

4 minutes ago, vanbasher said:

A question for the Cavalex crew on here, I've had my 2 56's for a little over 2 weeks now (055 in Load Haul & 091 in DCR Grey). Both ran absolutely superbly when first tested, however I got 091 out yesterday for a spin & noticed when the sound was switched off there was a kind of scraping noise & it appeared at slow speed that the loco was juddering a little bit. 

 

As said when testing the loco straight out of the box it ran superbly but only noticed the problem on my second running. Could anyone please advise if there's something I can check to see if there's a motor problem or perhaps something within the gearing? Many thanks in advance. 

Have you ran it previously with the sound off? It seems odd that there would be more noise after running in than before. It's not something that we have seen before and we have had 008 and 120 running on Making tracks for a couple of months none stop with no detriment to running. 

2 hours ago, Pendle Forest said:

I've two accurascale 31s on order but I'm seriously considering cancelling them and going with Bachmann over the decoder issues. I've two Bachmann 37s and it was a doddle... plux22, straight out the box, in and everything worked just as Bachmann stated it should. 

There is no decoder issue though with the 56. The complexity of the lighting requirements on the 56 necessitates a certain level of custom set up. The choice is that you either have basic lighting or submit to custom chip set ups, you can't have both. We are going for fully accurate with lighting etc to match the model and that means we need custom chip set ups. We have specified which decoder to use and you have the ability to download and blow your own chip or get one supplied via a retailer. 

The locomotive works perfectly with the specified decoder so if you are planning on using something else then that is a problem created by the end user and not the manufacturer to be honest. We can only do our best to accommodate other decoders etc as best we can given the complexity, but that level of compatibility is not a requirement or an obligation on our part. 

36 minutes ago, Zunnan said:

 

Hopefully it is proven to be the latter, as that is just a case of tightening up on assembly (no pun intended). That and it also means that we as customers aren't likely to initiate these failures should we need to store the models away in their own packaging; I've lost count of the minor damage from simply rushing to clear away at the end of an exhibition over the years. It really is the only thing which has taken the gloss of what is a quite significant step forward in the British RTR market. As much as I can't wait for the SLW Rats to arrive as my most anticipated model for many years, I just don't see them surpassing the quality of the Grids you've produced, if they're even close I'll be more than chuffed. Roll on the next batch, and the logical choice of a class 58 after the 60!

Having fitted the clips to a few returns I can now understand 1: How hard it is to apply the clip from the top and ensure that it engaged both sides fully without specifically checking afterwards and 2: How much force is required to pop them off when you want to remove a bogie. 

Based on this I would air towards them not being fully home during assembly. 

Needless to say we have made the factory aware of the issue and also already tweaked the tooling for the clips in the next run to make it easier to fit positively.

On the cradle, we do not intend to move away from this as it protect ms the models and their detail like nothing else. However we do intent to change the design a little where the wheels sit, and also add thumbscrews rather than normal screws to make removal and reattachment easier.

I personally have an easier time putting locos back in this than clam packaging, I guess it's down to practice.

8 minutes ago, Woowooo437 said:

Very useful to have pages numbers ^ in an 89 page thread. Took me 30 minutes to locate this info. on page 59. My experience is similar. Loco stalled in a couple places that no other loco has ever stalled. As soon as I read the stuff about the worm cover popping off I knew that was the issue I had. As the boss sez the solution is easy, but fiddly. Removing all the little plugs and screws to get the circuit board, fans and decoder off needs a bit of careful work. All fixed now and loco running fab. Other issue is my irritation with Rails. As someone else noted I to ordered (inc deposit) in 2022. I am not in the UK and when I got the note about being short supplied and wanting to supply a non sound item professionally upgraded I accepted, but concluded others that ordered after me, but easier to ship to, were getting priority. I don't believe orders were shipped in the order they were received, and I dont like this. After getting this fabulous model I will order at least one 60. But it may not be from Rails.  

You don't have to take the circuit board out. You can easily clip it back on through the access holes.

17 minutes ago, Zunnan said:

When one of mine arrived with telltale skewed bogies on the cradle I pretty much expected traction issues straight away. It could barely move itself on level track and stalled out entirely on slips. I’ve not yet got into the gear towers to check the clips, but I can tell it’s gear related as it sounds like a cheese grater. The affected bogie was also sitting a good 5mm forward of where it belongs too. Overall a really impressive model, but I’m not so impressed with the cradle which is capable of allowing such drivetrain damage. I would not be surprised that if I store a model back in its box and the act of screwing it back into its cradle pops the gear tower if the bogies aren’t aligned properly while it’s inverted to get the screws back in…

Tbh we are questioning whether it's a cradle issue or simply that the clips were not pushed fully home at the factory. Once on they are very hard to get off. It seems unlikely that screwing to the cradle would pop them.

44 minutes ago, 33212 said:

Ok thank you, I’ll research what that is and assume its an easy fix at home?

 

Yes it's a very easy fix. Just remove the body and look in the four access windows on the chassis where the gear towers are. There is likely a cover clip not seated correctly. 

This can be clipped into place with a flathead screwdriver.

Clip on

Clip off

Just now, 33212 said:

Hello, I have 56023 and what a stunning model it is, looks and sounds great. One issue I have is hauling capability. I have a rake of 29 Hornby HAA’s, the high detailed versions, and prior to the arrival of the 56, a single Heljan class 33 was utilised to haul the combo out of the storage sidings, up a curving ramp to the helix and up the helix and away. The 33 is a non sound loco. I also use Bachmann 47’s on it now and again but being a Kent modeller, 33’s were the staple traction, until replaced by 56’s…. Anyway, the Heljan 33 will haul all 29 up the Helix and if allowed will just get faster and faster, the Cavalex 56 does not even get the train up the approach ramp. I have reduced the formation by single wagons over multiple tests, it sits there screaming and wheels spinning with 19 wagons at which point I gave up. Has anyone else tried the Cavalex 56 with a challenging trains on a hilly layout?  I’d have expected it to handle it no problem. I have not tried it without sound yet, would that affect power delivery?

 

thanks

 

Matt

I would check to make sure that you don't have the worm clip issue. It causes the worm to not mesh with the gears so effectively powering only one bogie under load. The loco can easily pull that load without problems when working correctly. In fact a test was done recently where a Hornby 56 pulled against ours one going one way and one the other and our 56 pulled the Hornby one away in the opposite direction.

16 minutes ago, Bryn_Bach_Railway said:

If all else fails I’ll have to, however I don’t really want to be forced to use esu. Zimo gives me better control as I know exactly how the decoders perform, and know what cv’s I need to change to get the functions mapped how I want even on a gaugemaster prodigy. looking at the esu manual there’s not as much information available unless you have a lok-programmer etc. 

 

the decoder is giving an output on the correct pin, the loco for some reason is not accepting it. I’ll keep having a play to try and work out what’s up but it’s definitely a weird predicament. 

Have you got the dip switches set for none ESU?

2 minutes ago, Bryn_Bach_Railway said:

Finally got mine today as a birthday gift, however having quite a weird issue with DCC. 
 

Using a Dapol chip, I can get the fans working fine, and the decoder supply’s 5 volts. (Tail lights don’t work due to the way I’ve re-programmed the decoder used for testing), however, using a Zimo mn340C, the decoder only seems to be supplying 3ish volts and the fans do not work. But when the Zimo chip is in another loco, it can supply the full 5 volts just fine? Not an issue I’ve encountered before.

Why don't you use the specified Lokpilot with the correct programming either via download from ESU or pre programmed from Rails of Sheffield?

11 minutes ago, Tony Walker said:

 

Have to agree Mike, the Symoba couplings work really well. I've used them on most of my non kinematic fitted coaches and never had a problem. You may need to do a little carving on the chassis to fit them, but once in place they work great. Just a matter of fitting them in the right place to get super close coupling.

The symoba couplings very much benefit from a very shallow pull out, it's more like a slightly improved draft box and is the way to go I think. 

1 hour ago, Bryn_Bach_Railway said:

With double heading or pushing stock, it entirely depends on how the kinematic coupling is designed. If it’s completely free from the bogie and is very free moving, then when pushing or double heading (if the following loco is faster) the coupling gets push to the outside of the curve rather than pulled inward. However if the coupling is guided by the bogies like the accurascale 37 or a lot of coaching stock (still kinematic and not attached to the bogie, but if the bogie turns a lot, the coupler is nudged over too) then the couplers stay on the inside of the curve when being pushed and double headed as well as being pulled. That’s in my experience anyways.

The couplings aren't 'guided by the bogie' the bogie has a gap in it to simply make room for the mechanism. Ideally you don't want the kinematic anywhere near the bogie as the sideways pressure caused by the kinematic (which is a different force to that of a bogie mounted couplers) is usually what causes problems with the couplers causing derailments as it pushes the bogie to the side. This bogie gap requirement and potential for bogie contact is unavoidable if you insist on a combination of kinematics and bogies very close to the end of the vehicle.

1 hour ago, owentherail said:

Is there a date / time scale to when what liveries are in run 2...... as run 1 has almost sold out. 😊

There's time yet. 👍

1 minute ago, andyman7 said:

An interesting discussion that once again highlights that no matter how dedicated one is to fidelity, once you get down to 4mm scale there have to be compromises. One of the massive benefits of kinematic couplings in my opinion is their ability to allow buffer-to-buffer or corridor-to-corridor coupling when correctly configured. For me, this vastly outweighs the trade-off of the NEM box. For others, the appearance is more important. At the end of the day you have to make a choice!

Yes on coaching stock with magnetic couplers kinematics do come into their own I agree.

30 minutes ago, The Fatadder said:

Its a lot easier to chop the awful looking thing off without visible damage when its mounted on a kinematic setup than when its part of the bogie.  Of course in the case of the 56 the combination of the sandboxes from the sides and the bash plate from the front mean that is not necessary.

Well yes there is that however the majority of modellers will want to use the NEM pocket for one coupling or another so a necessary evil really. The 56 is great as the bang grid can hide it brilliantly when you are detailling the end up. That's why we also included the NEM socket bang plate in our BBAs as well.

1 hour ago, Southernman46 said:

Speaking of which we could really do with a 00 re-issue especially the older Redland version please 🙏

We are looking at another run of those.