3 poles for all!

[Mark5]

Heh, I wouldn't call that (the real train) a jack-rabbit start! ;D

The vid on the 3 pole is pretty good but a bit stutterish. Certainly a lot better than in the "old days".

Of the Bachmann locos I own I have four Bachmann locos with 3 pole motors: 2 N&W "J"s, 1 2-6-6-2, and one FM H16-44. The "modern" 3 pole motors perform well in slow speeds, but with that "stutter" that only I seem to have the "gift" to see.

I spent a number of summers growing up with a front porch view of a classification yard - all day I watched trains start and stop. So maybe this is more important to me than to others. I can accept that.

It'd be nice if folks accept that I have high standards for low speed ops. I'm probably being paranoid but I'm getting the feeling that I'm two steps away from being burned at the stake for my views on this.



Mark

[SkipGear]

The throttle is an old MRC 7000 with the pulse turned off. No gizmo's or magic throttles.

It's even the old plastic frame version, not the new split frame.

Yes, the video conversion is jumpy. It is smooth in person.

[Mark5]

Yes, the video conversion is jumpy. It is smooth in person.

That's good news, because my Bachmann 3 polers perform better than that.

I don't understand the issue with the video, I'll leave that to someone else.

[victor miranda]

The throttle is an old MRC 7000 with the pulse turned off. No gizmo's or magic throttles.

It's even the old plastic frame version, not the new split frame.

Yes, the video conversion is jumpy. It is smooth in person.

where is the buzzing coming from?

in anycase,  now put the b-mann 5 pole in there and see what 5 poles
can do.

I have done it.  it is an eye-opener.

v

[victor miranda]

Vic wrote:Please accept that Brakie has said to me is that he does not run his locos
at that slowest of speeds...
--------------------------
Exactly where did I say that? ???

I fully believe that anybody that has read my posts over the years on various forums will recall I seek slow speeds for switching since my favorite layout is a ISL and it seems only you have missed that point as well as recalling my roster is 100% Atlas or did you have a senor moment? 


Please read and comprehend the following.

Now I could careless if a motor has 3,5,7,10 or 100 poles as long as it delivers smooth starts and slow speed switching.
------------------------

Now if you enjoy worrying about how many poles a motor has good fer ya and I am happy for you.

In the mean time I'll enjoy the hobby like I've for the last 59 years worry free over such trivial matters.

I decided to bag my first post in reply...

lets say I like this idea more.

allow me to start at the beginning.
No matter what you think, pay attention to, care about,
or consider important...
three pole motors cog and cause jackrabbit starts.
these two points are made clear when set in contrast
to what 5 pole motors do.

The reason the words 'compensate for...' appear when
describing three pole motors is an admission
that there are inherent problems for using those three pole motors
in model train service.
things that compensate are throttles that pulse or form voltage or current spikes
to bump the motor a bit.
flywheels also smooth things out
both of these ideas also improve operations in 5 pole motors.

no matter what you do to a three pole,
with the sole exception of adding two more poles
the 5 pole will outperform it in modelrailroad service.

argue all you want. Thems the facts.


the only thing that is really left to argue about
it the difference in prices
and the differences is performance.

more or less, how much improvement for what cost.

this bears repeating...

the 3 pole vs 5 pole fight fails to have any meaning when
the cost of the magic throttle that hides ALL the flaws
of a 3 pole motor falls below the cost difference between the
two motors.

right now, I have not seen all the flaws get hiden.
what you see or do not see is not directly my problem.

victor

[DKS]

The throttle is an old MRC 7000 with the pulse turned off. No gizmo's or magic throttles.

It's even the old plastic frame version, not the new split frame.

Yes, the video conversion is jumpy. It is smooth in person.

where is the buzzing coming from?

in anycase,  now put the b-mann 5 pole in there and see what 5 poles
can do.

I have done it.  it is an eye-opener.

v

Most likely the buzzing is courtesy of the throttle. Old MRCs (indeed, most ordinary power supplies) do not produce pure filtered DC; it's just AC that's fully rectified, so even with "pulse" turned off, the motor is still receiving pulses.

[victor miranda]

Brakie,
 You need to understand that as far as we know, Victors layout is a single piece of flex track. All he can do is slow speed switching..... back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. Tie crawling speed is all he does so it is important to him, more so than the rest of us, it makes the piece of flex seem longer if he goes slower.

oops, almost forgot about the Christmas fireplace mantle loop used to endurance test the MP15's.

oh the pain!
I am mortally skwered
while I am awaiting my time to shuffle off this mortal coil
allow me a few fine points...

close enough to be painful and far enough to be hilarious!

the loop on the mantle is tight radius curves  only small locos can round it.

I have a two test loops in my basement
and I have a timesaver layout next to my bed.

and now there is naught left for me save die...

drop lights,close curtain.

[Brakie]

victor,Here's the cold facts from my own experiences and my experience is what I go by not yours,not modeler Curly,Moe,Larry,Larual or Hardy..

I have used many N scale locomotives in the past where I have no idea if the motor was 1 or 700 poles all(excluding that old shaker Model Power 420.) had slow speed capability.

The old Bachmann F7s and GP40 I used in the 80s was decent runners as was the Atlas/Roco GP9,the RSD15,the Minitrix FM switcher..These engines served me well for 8 years-save one GP9 that quit running within a year.My "magic throttle" was nothing more then a MRC Tech II-just like I am using today.

In my happy ignorant bless I didn't know what type of motors these locomotives had then or now and and didn't care then and still don't care-the same applies today..

I know my MP15DC is a extremely smooth switcher with "kiss" coupling abilities..

This will be my last reply in this useless discussion.

[Mark5]

recap

I could easily demonstrate (in DC) on a level test track the slow speed non-smoothness of the bachmann (and Kato) 3 polers in controlled experiments. Fortunately the difference compared to a decent 5 pole motor is subtle these days, but significant enough to annoy me.

This is likely one of those things were each of focus on different aspects of the hobby. Realistic acceleration and deceleration are high up on my list of priorities.

Today's 3 pole motors are miles from the 3 pole motors of the 1970s (when I started taking motors out of locos and "playing" with them).

But please don't marginalize criticism of 3 pole motors. They are inherently inferior to 5 pole motors - otherwise I suppose we would start seeing them appear in upscale HO locos right?

I started this thread because some people have repeatedly ridiculed me for pointing out deficiencies in 3 pole motors. This highly annoys me since the "problems" with 3 pole performance in DC can be easily demonstrated.

This is a challenge mainly facing the smaller scales such as N & Z (http://www.zscale.org/articles/fivepole.html). I am not aware of a move in HO and larger scales to 3 pole motors.

I don't understand why folks get so emotional about this. It is obvious to me by watching videos on Youtube that some people have no conception of scale speed or simply don't care. These folks honestly don't have a stake in this discussion as they are satisfied with the status quo.

It has been pointed out that decoders with BEMF can mitigate or eliminate the "stutter" or "cog" of 3 pole motors - I look forward to witnessing this.

Its cool that a nice decoder might fix what I don't like about 3 pole motors but I kinda feel (at least for "premium" locos like Atlas, Kato and other "premium" brands) high end DCC should not be a pre-requisite for enjoying the hobby.

Since Bachmann seems to keep coming up in this discussion I will lay out my opinions on this. I have no problems with Bachmann using 3 pole motors in their "trainset" locos - I'm actually glad that the GP7 looks good out of the box. I am happy with my H16-44 given the price that I paid for i -it looks very nice and runs ok. But I am not the target market for the "trainset" locos.

I am annoyed however that Bachmann has gone from 5 poles to 3 poles on their Spectrum locos. The heavy mountain (USRA) has a list of $250, and Bachmann already has a 5 pole in house that would have worked on this loco. But they went with the 3 pole. Kato also could have made the GS-4 with a 5 pole motor, but chose not to. I don't really care about the motivations for these decisions - I only know that I don't like them and it's a trend that I hope does not catch on at large.

Lastly, I do not understand why folks (on Railwire) seem to rally around the following topics:

• Lower freight cars (ride height matters)
• Better track
• More realistic flanges (can you say Pizza?)

Yet when the problems of 3 pole motors are pointed out, the lynch mob begins to form.

Mark

[victor miranda]

victor,Here's the cold facts from my own experiences and my experience is what I go by not yours,not modeler Curly,Moe,Larry,Larual or Hardy..

I have used many N scale locomotives in the past where I have no idea if the motor was 1 or 700 poles all(excluding that old shaker Model Power 420.) had slow speed capability.

The old Bachmann F7s and GP40 I used in the 80s was decent runners as was the Atlas/Roco GP9,the RSD15,the Minitrix FM switcher..These engines served me well for 8 years-save one GP9 that quit running within a year.My "magic throttle" was nothing more then a MRC Tech II-just like I am using today.

In my happy ignorant bless I didn't know what type of motors these locomotives had then or now and and didn't care then and still don't care-the same applies today..

I know my MP15DC is a extremely smooth switcher with "kiss" coupling abilities..

This will be my last reply in this useless discussion.

ok I get the last word.  thanks.

goes like this.  oddly enough, I believe you.
What you do not seem to appreciate is that while what you say is true for you,
I can tell it is not the truth for what I see in my locos.

At this point you and I are not easily going to be able to reconcile that small difference.
believe me, 3 scale mph is about all we are differing by.

You seem to have settled on the Atlas MP-15 as the loco over which
any specific discussions must be made.

lets go.
can you get an atlas gp-7 or rs1 or gp-9
to run at a sustained 2 smph?
I have an rs-1 that will. (ok it did a year or so ago.)
If I can get the mp-15 to start slowly, it can also run at that speed.
most times it can slow down to those speeds.

compare the two. my rs-1 with slowspeed motor is clearly smoother.

Lets play a hypothetical game called 'what if'
Here is one we both don't know.
What if Atlas had put a 5 pole motor in that MP-15?
We have two informed guesses
one is the loco would be smoother,
the other is that the loco would have cost more.
what we do not know is how much smoother for how many dollars.

In yet another attempt to be perfectly clear,
you can tell me it is good enough for you and you feel it is worth every penny you paid.
I would not disagree with you for even a minute.

what you can't do is tell me it is good enough for me
or that it is smooth at slow speeds.

I believe and trust my lyin' eyes.
I do expect you to do the same with your own eyes.

victor

[victor miranda]

NandW,

stand up for your rights!

besides. they'll lynch me first.

run and hide during the mayhem.

victor

[Puddington]

Ok; I'm getting back into this one...............

Victor; having read all your posts and having tried to understand what you are trying to say, it appears that the following sums up the entire value of a locomotive for you........

IT HAS TO RUN PERFECTLY WITHOUT (without any, I repeat "any") COGGIN AT 3 SMPH.....

That's it eh ? Doesn't matter about the following:

- Overall road performance; specifically pulling power, dealing with grades, number of cars pulled....
- DC vs DCC performance (because five poles are superior in DC and there is no DCC "magic bullet"......right ?)
- "Cosmetics"...like, does it appear to be a reasonable copy of the prototype.......
- Ability to kitbash to obtain a closer copy of a specific loco............
- Cost vs Performance......because, as you have all but said; you see things we model railway mortals don't......so what I deem acceptable at a given price point (because for 99% of us, cost matters) you discount because of the 3 SMPH requirement.....

Ok; I'm there; you have limited your "evaluation" criteria of a locomotive to slow speed performance; If it will creep at your standard; you are happy. And; for your standard, a five pole motor is the only option because it will creep better....ok; "for your standards, for your very narrow qualifications, then you are right; five pole motors are it............"

On the other hand Victor; you may wish to consider that not everyone has your standards; not everyone cares about "creep" to the extent that you do (and if you want to qualify a modeler's "value" or "seriousness" by your standard then that's another discussion altogether) and your may well wish to consider that someone who has a long, double mainline layout might consider a Geep that pulls the teeth out of your head at road prototypical speed and one he can afford ten of, a very valuable model......

I have to be honest; I have been reading your responses and they smack of a "superiority"... It's as if your appreciation of smooth, slow speed performance is a superior position to the many valid arguments that some have made in support of the three pole offerings. No one has said " 3 is better than 5"; many have said that their 3 pole motor units are fine for them....you seem to discount that due to your very specific requirement for ultra smooth, very low scale speed performance.....so; am I right ?; is your position that, in order for a locomotive to be acceptable on all levels, it has to be able to meet the Victor standard for slow speed performance ?

Speak your mind; answer the question.........back to you................. ???

[Ryan87]

Wow....

Why are we arguing over this, it seems rather childish on all sides.
I'll sum the whole thread up;

People have different standards for measuring the quality of toy trains
/thread

Do we really need to fight and call each other names over toys (no matter how realistic we make them that's what they are)

Maybe it's time to discover girls.

[Puddington]

Wow....

Maybe it's time to discover girls.

I did, I married one........now I model even more........"bwhahahahahahahahaha"

"Kidding"......................

[Mr. G]

Ok; I'm getting back into this one...............

Victor; having read all your posts and having tried to understand what you are trying to say, it appears that the following sums up the entire value of a locomotive for you........

IT HAS TO RUN PERFECTLY WITHOUT (without any, I repeat "any") COGGIN AT 3 SMPH.....

That's it eh ? Doesn't matter about the following:

- Overall road performance; specifically pulling power, dealing with grades, number of cars pulled....
- DC vs DCC performance (because five poles are superior in DC and there is no DCC "magic bullet"......right ?)
- "Cosmetics"...like, does it appear to be a reasonable copy of the prototype.......
- Ability to kitbash to obtain a closer copy of a specific loco............
- Cost vs Performance......because, as you have all but said; you see things we model railway mortals don't......so what I deem acceptable at a given price point (because for 99% of us, cost matters) you discount because of the 3 SMPH requirement.....

I never saw Victor say he doesn't value those other attributes.  Valuing smooth motors doesn't negate valuing other qualities, right?