AZL: oops...

[DKS]

OK, here's a really odd situation... The wheels in AZL's roller bearing trucks are 0.15 inches, or 33 scale inches on the nose. Given that they look like 100-ton trucks, they ought to have 36 inch wheels.

However, the wheels in their new "Bettendorf" trucks are .17 inches, or 37.4 scale inches, when they should be 33 inch wheels! I had to measure the new wheels about four times before I could believe it.

So, to be accurate, one needs to buy equal numbers of the two AZL trucks and swap all of the wheels! This does not bode well for AZL, at least with respect to modelers who would like a modicum of accuracy.

Did I step off the bus onto the wrong planet or something?

Oh, and for what it's worth, the "Bettendorf" truck tooling is infinitely better than that of their roller bearing trucks. Nearly on par with M-T.

I'm working on a nice big article about Z scale trucks and couplers, in the same vein as my Geeps review. It should be a very interesting report... and while I'm on that subject, does anyone have some nice, clear, square-on shots of various 1:1 freight trucks they'd be willing to donate to the cause? I can probably find a few roller bearing specimens around these parts, but unlikely I could readily find any flavors of Bettendorf-style (AAR U-section, double-truss, Barber S-2, or ASF A-3 ride control), let alone Archbar or Andrews... much appreciated in advance.

[3rdrail]

David, try several of the many links provided here to both PRR and truck manufacturer files and drawings.

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/PRRFreightCarTrucks.html

[Sokramiketes]

174 inches versus 68 inches???  Typo or are you serious?

[DKS]

174 inches versus 68 inches???  Typo or are you serious?

Drat, sorry, I need to strike that whole section. I had the bloody calipers set to mm instead of inches for the wheelbase measurement. In actuality, it's quite close to 68 inches. Sorry, guys. Long day, short on sleep.

The wheel measurements, however, are all correct.

[DKS]

David, try several of the many links provided here to both PRR and truck manufacturer files and drawings.

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/PRRFreightCarTrucks.html

Thanks very much--already got all of them.

But so... to continue with the wheelbase issue... assuming that 68 inches is right for a typical Bettendorf-type truck wheelbase, then Micro-Trains trucks are then too small--the wheelbase scales out to roughly 58 inches.

Man, this is making my head hurt...

[Sokramiketes]

David, try several of the many links provided here to both PRR and truck manufacturer files and drawings.

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/PRRFreightCarTrucks.html

Thanks very much--already got all of them.

But so... to continue with the wheelbase issue... assuming that 68 inches is right for a typical Bettendorf-type truck wheelbase, then Micro-Trains trucks are then too small--the wheelbase scales out to roughly 58 inches.

Man, this is making my head hurt...

This makes sense, the MTL trucks don't look right under rolling stock.  Something bothers me about the AZL roller bearing trucks, like they are too short height wise or something... I'm hoping the AZL Bettendorfs are ok in this dimension.

[DKS]

David, try several of the many links provided here to both PRR and truck manufacturer files and drawings.

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/PRRFreightCarTrucks.html

Thanks very much--already got all of them.

But so... to continue with the wheelbase issue... assuming that 68 inches is right for a typical Bettendorf-type truck wheelbase, then Micro-Trains trucks are then too small--the wheelbase scales out to roughly 58 inches.

Man, this is making my head hurt...

This makes sense, the MTL trucks don't look right under rolling stock.  Something bothers me about the AZL roller bearing trucks, like they are too short height wise or something... I'm hoping the AZL Bettendorfs are ok in this dimension.

I should be able to provide some definitive answers to these and many other FAQs as I work on the report.

I'm hoping AZL considers re-tooling the roller bearing trucks to bring them up to par with their new Bettendorf-style trucks, which are pretty good--I'll post some good pics shortly. Seeing the two side-by-side, you can readily see that the tooling is bad on the roller bearing trucks (it looks like melted ice cream), and I think the proportions are off. Then, maybe someone can talk them into switching wheelsets!

[bambuko]

. . . I'm hoping AZL considers re-tooling the roller bearing trucks . . .

you must be joking David  ;D
or in the immortal words of JdA "...What universe are you operating in ..." 
after spending money on the tooling, AZL will flog these tools until they are dead, to get their money back, regardless of what you or few other "accuracy nazis"  might think.
It is the same story all over, with all the manufacturers -they could get it right in the first place (it is usually cheaper this way  ), but they don't care, because 90% (or more?) of their customers don't care either. They are buying toys and are having fun with them.
The only answer, for those of us who care, is to invest into our own manufacturing - let's see how long it would be before we would compromise and, or go bust 

[DKS]

. . . I'm hoping AZL considers re-tooling the roller bearing trucks . . .

you must be joking David  ;D
or in the immortal words of JdA "...What universe are you operating in ..." 
after spending money on the tooling, AZL will flog these tools until they are dead, to get their money back, regardless of what you or few other "accuracy nazis"  might think.
It is the same story all over, with all the manufacturers -they could get it right in the first place (it is usually cheaper this way  ), but they don't care, because 90% (or more?) of their customers don't care either. They are buying toys and are having fun with them.
The only answer, for those of us who care, is to invest into our own manufacturing - let's see how long it would be before we would compromise and, or go bust 

Oh, I'm painfully aware of the realities of this market. You're preaching to the choir! I was being facetious about AZL retooling anything (see the new topic on couplers as an example).

[bambuko]

. . .I was being facetious about AZL retooling anything . . .

as long as we are clear about that 
and apologies for the failure of my sense of subtle irony  ;D

I also had great hopes, when AZL promised alternative to MTL . . .   :'(

[DKS]

David, try several of the many links provided here to both PRR and truck manufacturer files and drawings.

http://prr.railfan.net/freight/PRRFreightCarTrucks.html

Thanks very much--already got all of them.

But so... to continue with the wheelbase issue... assuming that 68 inches is right for a typical Bettendorf-type truck wheelbase, then Micro-Trains trucks are then too small--the wheelbase scales out to roughly 58 inches.

Man, this is making my head hurt...

This makes sense, the MTL trucks don't look right under rolling stock.  Something bothers me about the AZL roller bearing trucks, like they are too short height wise or something... I'm hoping the AZL Bettendorfs are ok in this dimension.

I've been wracking what's left my brain trying to figure out why M-T would deliberately make an entire line of "dwarf" trucks. The only thing I can figure is that it was necessary in order to work on the original freight cars they inherited from Nelson Gray. If you pop AZL trucks on a boxcar, they hit the stirrups (complicated by the fact that they're wider as wll as longer). But they sure look good... and they'd look even better with the ride height adjusted.

[Sokramiketes]

I've been wracking what's left my brain trying to figure out why M-T would deliberately make an entire line of "dwarf" trucks. The only thing I can figure is that it was necessary in order to work on the original freight cars they inherited from Nelson Gray. If you pop AZL trucks on a boxcar, they hit the stirrups (complicated by the fact that they're wider as wll as longer). But they sure look good... and they'd look even better with the ride height adjusted.

Don't wrack too hard, MTL thought processes could send me into a coma.  But, I'm sure the original trucks were tooled by Nelson Gray.  They used to look like they were made out of pudding.  MTL has since retooled the sideframe faces, but perhaps left the rest of the legacy dimensions the same.  Maybe even on the same mold base still...

[DKS]

I've been wracking what's left my brain trying to figure out why M-T would deliberately make an entire line of "dwarf" trucks. The only thing I can figure is that it was necessary in order to work on the original freight cars they inherited from Nelson Gray. If you pop AZL trucks on a boxcar, they hit the stirrups (complicated by the fact that they're wider as wll as longer). But they sure look good... and they'd look even better with the ride height adjusted.

Don't wrack too hard, MTL thought processes could send me into a coma.  But, I'm sure the original trucks were tooled by Nelson Gray.  They used to look like they were made out of pudding.  MTL has since retooled the sideframe faces, but perhaps left the rest of the legacy dimensions the same.  Maybe even on the same mold base still...

I wondered about the possibility they were originally done by Nelson Gray, too. They have the same "pudding" quality as the F7A. However, close examination suggests that the newer trucks are all-new molds.

[BAZ-man]

Good find there David.  I noticed how wide the treads were when I first got them and wondered if they were going to wreak havic on the Peter Wright's turnouts with DCC !

The AZL trucks don't fit well on the Bowser stuff either, like the Full Throttle Cylindricals or Pennzee hoppers, hitting in the same way at the ladder / stirups.

At least I know Hans Riddervold personnaly.  He is a prototypical nut, I'd say more than Joe 'talks' it but it is a two part manufacturing process.  While Hans may specify what he wants, Sanda Kan has not always delivered what was asked. So what do you do in the retail world when someone hands you production parts that are not as the prototypes ? Make everone wait another 6 months, which is what the Autoracks are going through but due next month and what Joe is going thru with the SD-40s  (Sanda Kan says, Ok, we can go back an rework, but we have all these other orders to fill so you'll have to get in line [interpretation] ).  Also, Hans says they got so much business in just the past few years with Märklin, MTL's motor chassis, etc, coming on board that they noticeabily started to either combine some parts (volume commodity sourcing) or make mistakes and just try to make them fly.

When he was using Ajin, they got REAL bad in the last years, the reasons why he dismantled them and built a new company, only for brass.  The SD70 had Play-do trucks and 3 reworks but he had to deliver while he pulled the plug and shifted to Sanda Kan which was delivering on time, with set prices and much higher quality.

I can have a personal conversation with Hans this week and mentioned what "We, Us Z-scalers" have noticed.