Bachmann EM-1's now hitting the shelves....

[Chris333]

Wonder why they still use the contact strips in the drawbar when there are all those DCC wires now doing the same thing.

[mmagliaro]

OD came out at .41" so it's a scale 64" but the face just looks small, I wonder if the flanges were lower and tread depth lower it wouldn't be so noticeable... Something to consider.

The S.

Well, I don't own one but...
.41" over the flange - .365 on the tread = .045
.045 / 2 = .0225 flange depth.

The NMRA N Scale spec maximum allowed flange depth is .022", so this engine is playing by the rules.   
Yes, they could make finer flanges, but people might start complaining that it derails too easily.

[rogergperkins]

Okay, "Couple Converters" please provide guidance
to those who would like to replace the pilot coupler
with a MTL z-scale one such as 905. Thanks.

[jdcolombo]

Okay, "Couple Converters" please provide guidance
to those who would like to replace the pilot coupler
with a MTL z-scale one such as 905. Thanks.

I don't think it is doable without enlarging the "slot" in the pilot that the coupler fits through, and even then, I'm not sure it would mount at the right height.  Probably a better option at this stage is to replace the front coupler with an Accumate, which should be a drop-in fit and is a bit smaller (and BLACK, instead of that horrid poop brown).  However, I'll confess that I haven't done that with my own.  I'll probably just paint the coupler black and let it go, which probably would be best for double-heading purposes.

John C.

[rogergperkins]

John, thanks for the critique on replacing the front coupler.
I am hesitant to start doing surgery on the pilot just to fit a z-scale coupler.
I will leave it alone for now.
No plans to double head mine.  Like to see them running separately heading up two trains.

[sumfred]

Replaced the front coupler with a McHenry, drop in fit and looks a lot better.
Fred

[rogergperkins]

No family with styles of McHenry; which part number?
Look at Kleins, see 4 listed.

[sumfred]

it is the McHenry N 5001 Standard Shank Coupler

Fred

[peteski]

Unfortunately, McHenry coupler is the next largest N scale knuckle coupler. Replacing the Bachmann "boxing glove" with a McHenry is not, IMO worth the hassle.

Here is a comparison I did when N scale McHenrys just came out http://forum.atlasrr.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=52328  That was before Bachmann ones were available (and I didn't have any MT Z scale ones available).

[Bill H]

Group:
Before you leap too far into the EM-1s. I just received four of them, all broken. Pathetic QC. Two had mis drilled holes for the front porch screw which meant the front porch was leaning about 20 degrees to one side, one had broken valve gear, and the last the front coupler was loose in the packaging. I posted a pic of them on Trainboard.

Apparently, like most Bachmann products, you better look carefully and test run before you plunk down your hard earned cash. I am sending them back to the LHS. I will keep this thread advised as to the result.

Sincerely,
Bill

[SkipGear]

We have gone through 10 of them at our shop so far. All were fine except for one I bought which shorted the DCC system when placed on the track. I opened up the tender to find the 6 pin plug installed upside down.

Beyond that, I haven't seen any of the horror story loco's yet. I took all of them out and test ran them before putting them on the shelf and one performed just as good as another. My experience has been very positive so far.

[spookshow]

FWIW, mine handles 9.75"-radius curves without any problems.

-Mark

[SkipGear]

I haven't noticed any issue with excess side play in the valve gear. I have 3 of them (one with sound, one stock, and one that I am breaking in for another) that now have over an hour each runtime on them. They have run on a Kato unitrak kidney shaped double track test loop with 11 and 12 1/2 R curves, #6 turnouts and a double crossover.  I've been watching since you mentioned it earlier and I have tried to slop things into interference by hand and I can't do it. I did find a king pin screw or two that need a quarter turn or so tighter for my peace of mind. These will be run initially on Ntrak so they get put through a torture test at home first and so far they have held up great.

I really haven't seen any mechanical issues at all, including coupler height. My test train is about 30 MT Heavyweight passenger cars and the coupler on all the tenders matches perfectly, a first for Bachmann. I think the people that have coupler height issues have a tender that is sprung unusually high. You can push the trucks up into the floor a little and weaken the wiper pickups to get the tender to settle down lower.

[Bill H]

We have gone through 10 of them at our shop so far. All were fine except for one I bought which shorted the DCC system when placed on the track. I opened up the tender to find the 6 pin plug installed upside down.

Beyond that, I haven't seen any of the horror story loco's yet. I took all of them out and test ran them before putting them on the shelf and one performed just as good as another. My experience has been very positive so far.

Tony:
I find it bizarre, given your good experiences which I fully believe, that I would receive four lemons out of four. Two of the front porches were so badly done it was unbelievable that they could have passed any sort of QC in China. Check out the attached picture I posted on Trainboard on a similar thread. What might be of interest, these four came from a western shop, they arrived a week or two after the east coast shops and you got yours. Possibly a later production run.
Cheers,
Bill

[spookshow]

I doubt that everyone who isn't having problems is going to take the time to post. The unhappy campers always take up way more bandwidth (and on multiple forums to boot).

-Mark