Please help with weights for my passenger cars

[craigolio1]

Hello all.  I have no way to run them so I guess it doesn't REALLY matter right now, but....

I have nine passenger cars I have been building over the past ten years and they are, but for a few small details, finally finished.  It's final assembly time and I want to get the weights just right.  Below I've listed the length of the cars, the actual weight, the recommended weight, and the difference.




Car # 1 ( Kato):   6 inches, Actual 1.2oz, NMRA 1.4oz, diff -.20oz

Car#2:  (Kato)  6 inches, Actual 1.3oz, NMRA 1.4oz, diff -.10oz

Car #3 and #4:   6 inches, Actual 1.5oz, NMRA 1.4oz, diff +.10oz

Car #5    6 inches, Actual 0.9oz, NMRA 1.4oz, diff -.50oz

Car #6   6 inches, Actual 1.1oz, NMRA 1.4oz, diff -.30oz

Car#7 and #8  5.75 inches, Actual 1.6, NMRA 1.36, diff +.24oz

Car # 9   6 inches, Actual 1.0oz, NMRA 1.4, diff -.40oz



   My layout will include two circular helixes, 18" rad and 5 or six turns with about 2" rise per turn.  This is not finite but it's going to be very important obviously as it will be the most challenging terrain for all of my trains.  This train will be pulled by a single Kato RS11 (actually a True Line Trains RS18) with the short hood chopped and a speaker milled into the fuel tank (ie, less weight than it had before).

   All of the cars have Kato trucks with the needle point axles and are picking up power for lighting.  There are wires soldered to the pickups in the trucks which put the tiniest bit of resistance on them when swiveling.  Not very much at all but it's still a little bit.

   I'm not opposed to converting one of the passenger cars to a power car if I have to but I would like to avoid it as this train wasn't turned in prototype operation.  The engine ran around the train for the return trip and I have a feeling having power at each end of the train could cause issues going up and down a helix.  Plus, I worked really hard on these and think it would look stupid having an RDC chassis under one of my dining cars.  Silly? Maybe.  That and it would be a ton of work!  I'm an ADHD kid.  A chronic non-finisher.   It took me almost ten years to build this train.  If I have to build a powered car I'll be dead before it climbs the first turn, haha.

   The loco and cars have low profile wheels and will be running on Micro Engineering C40 mainline and Atlas C80 in the helix.  Handlaid C40 turnouts using Fastrax.

   OK  obviously I have some cars that are over weight.  I already weighted them and it's no problem to shave the weight with my grinder.  Same thing with the cars that are under weight.  No problem to add weight.  Most of the cars don't have interiors and the ones that do can still have weight tucked in.  I can put bits of solder between the seats or something.

   Now that you have all of the info I think you need here are the questions.

   Will I get the best operation if all of the cars are the EXACT same weight, even the ones that are 1/4" shorter, even though the NMRA recommends they are slightly lighter?  Or am I ok with .2oz or .1oz difference here and there?

   Should I match them all to the slightly under weight Kato cars?  Less load for the single loco on the helix.  Obviously the slight weight deficiency isn't an issue as thousands of people are running Kato cars with out issue.  More weight would ensure the trucks with wires soldered to them track better, although I really don't see that being an issue.  If it turns out to be I'll fix it at the actual problem source instead of adding weight.

   Should I match them all to the heavier cars?  More load on the loco.  Trucks would track better and have more reliable electrical pick up.

   From lightest (weight I would accept) to heaviest I have a difference of .4oz.  Is that a big deal?  Honestly I've never had a working N scale layout so I just don't know but I'm willing to make sure I get it right the first time.

   Perhaps our passenger car aficionados can weigh in?  Pudd? Skytop?  Others?

Thanks everyone.

Craig

Oh, and PS, those of you who know me, know that this is the BC Rail Pacific Starlight Dinner Train.  For those who don't, now you do.  In my opinion it looks absolutely awesome and I promise to post photos as soon as I find my camera battery charger, or buy a new charger.

[peteski]

I think that you are way over-thinking this!
Have you actually tried running that train to see how it behaves?  I would run it and then if you notice any problems, address them at that time.  Relax, have fun, be happy! 

I do however think that you might have a problem with RS-11 pulling 9 cars up the helix (no matter if the cars all weight the same or not). But again, try it and see what happens.

[craigolio1]

Peteski,

Normally I would but I don't have even a loop of track let alone a helix.  I keep thinking I should build one to use as a test bed but that doesn't help me now.

Thanks for the input.  I think I'm going to weight them all the same as the lighter kato cars.  I can add more if I have to.

How many locos do you think would be needed to climb a helix?  I guess I can double head if I have to.  As much as I like the train as is, I do want it to run.

Craig

[Cajonpassfan]

Craig,
I wouldn't sweat the weight differential; in my experience with passenger trains, how freely they roll is much more important then weight for operations. I have some fat 2.5 oz. brass six axle heavyweights which couldn't be lightened and after I equipped them with FoxValley wheels and MT trucks, they roll beautifully and can be mixed with lighter cars. Your Kato trucks should roll just fine. Even so, I suspect one RS is going to have its hands full with nine cars on your 1.75% plus grade (if you can keep it to that; 2" separation is hard to do). Perhaps this is a case for a set of traction tires on each truck, with electrical pickup supplemented from a trailing car?
Good luck,
Otto K.

[mmagliaro]

Another vote for "the weights are close enough that it won't matter".
The free-rolling qualities of the trucks, coupler swing, and good trackwork are going to matter a heck of a lot more.
Does it have to be a single RS11?  I'd have reservations about that pulling a 9 car passenger train up a
1.7% helix (what you have there).   If it were me, I'd leave the cars alone, test it, and if the only problem
is wheel slip, add another engine.

[craigolio1]

The prototype ran a CRS-20 (RS18 rebuilt with a CAT diesel), an ex-CN steam gen converted to a HEP car, and 9 dining/dome cars.  Ideally I would like to keep it to this consist.  I could always add another unit but I would prefer not to.  The issue with getting power from a trailing unit is that the consist remained as is and the loco ran around at the end of it's run.  Part of the beauty of this loco is the crazy lighting package it has at both ends which I have replicated and it works.  I don't want to ruin that by permanently coupling another car too it.  What if I put a Kato RDC chassis under the trailing car and leading car?  The train would always be powered from both ends. Plus the locomotive.  Would the pushing and pulling create issues?

The cars are all extremely free rolling.  For now I will leave it.  One day when I have track operational, and it becomes an issue, I will address it, but I'm thinking ahead.

Craig

[peteski]

For now I will leave it.  One day when I have track operational, and it becomes an issue, I will address it, but I'm thinking ahead.

Craig

There you go!  That, IMO, is the right (and easiest) way to approach this (not yet existing) problem.  The single RS-11 would most likely be be good enough, but its chassis would have to be made from depleted uranium (for weight).  Or at least it would probably need couple of traction tires. The original Atlas/Kato (Japanese made) RS-11s had traction tires.

[craigolio1]

This is a new model.  No traction tires.  But I can sort that out later.  Perhaps the Uranium will be easier to get then.  I had plutonium that I got from Libian terrorists but I used all in my time machine.

Thanks again.

Craig

[robert3985]

This is a new model.  No traction tires.  But I can sort that out later.  Perhaps the Uranium will be easier to get then.  I had plutonium that I got from Libian terrorists but I used all in my time machine.

Thanks again.

Craig

Okay...my question is, does an N-scale time machine only need to go a scale 88 mph before transitioning to the past or future?  Also, are the time calculations constrained to the use of a fast clock?

Just askin'.... 

[craigolio1]

Bob, Bob, Bob.  Sighhh.  Clearly you haven't been paying attention.  It's a real, 1:1 time machine baby!  I just sent this email from Nov 3, 2023 where I just finished my helix (but none of my other projects are any closer than they are now and I still can't find my multi-meter) and the Dinner Train climbed it just fine.  Please disregard all previous posts on this matter.

Craig

[Cajonpassfan]

 
I can't find my multi-meter either...

[Ike the BN Freak]

Kato passenger cars are very forgiving when it comes to bad track work also, one of the few trains I can run on the local NTrak layout...until we start replacing the 30+ year old modules with new ones.

[nkalanaga]

I've run longer trains than that on 18 inch curves, and my passenger cars are a mixture of almost every brand of streamlined cars made in the last 45 years.  No attempt was made to match the weights, and the only ones I've had trouble with were unweighted plastic core kits with brass sides.  They got a brass slab glued to the floor, which also kept the floor straighter, and fixed the derailment problems.  Some of the cars have body mounted 1025s, some have truck mounted couplers, and even those seem to work well together most of the time.  I few pairs don't like each other, but if all of yours are one or the other, you should be fine.

Your grade is about 1.8%, steep by most railroads' preferences, but well within the prototype standards for a mountain railroad.  I'm with the others, though, on the single unit.  Most roads would have used at least two on that steep a grade. 

What is your "ex steam generator" car?  Could it possibly be powered?  I've often wondered about building one of the GN's EMD steam cars, made from F unit bodies and trucks.  They'd be easy to power!

If you're going to run the train as a fixed consist. and leave it on the layout rather than removing and storing it between runs, I'd suggest two things.  First, if the weights bother you, match the lighter Kato cars.  Relative weight is more important than absolute, and they'll run a little bit better if they're all the same.  Second, if lighting is important to you, consider running jumper wires between the cars.  They can be disguised as steam lines, and will greatly improve the reliability of the lights.  In fact, with a split frame loco, it would be easy to run the jumpers all the way to the loco, and you'd have the best possible operations.

[mmagliaro]

All kidding aside, you'll find that Tungsten is almost as dense as uranium (19.35 vs 20.2 g/cm^3),
so if you really want to keep that consist, and you do find one day that you get wheel slip on that grade,
you can get tungsten cubes or disks and weight that thing down.

I happen to own a 1st generation RS-11 that I took the traction tire drivers OUT of (replaced them).
I also happen to have a 9 car passenger train sitting here on my layout consisting of Kato, a few Con-Cor,
and a few Walthers cars.  And I also coincedentally happen to have an 18" curved grade at 1.7%.

The short answer is "no".  That engine cannot pull that train on that hill.  No way.  6 cars yes, no more.

[trainforfun]

I just did a test for you , I used the new RS11 ( no traction tires ) like the one you intend to use starting with 9 stock KATO Santa Fe cars ( Chief set ? ) . The loco is able to pull ( but on the limit ) the train on a flat surface .
My helix is 18" radius but 2 3/4" from top of railhead to top of railhead .
My loco had no problem getting 5 cars up , with 6 the train was barely moving and needed a push to start again so on my layout it would be like 5 1/2 cars max. , I have no intention of cutting one of these fine car in two for testing purpose ...
The top speed of my loco is programmed at 70 smph.
Like some says I never checked the weight of these cars and I often run KATO passengers train in excess of 12 cars without any problem . My radius is minimum 18" and in some entrance to yards it's around 15" .
Hope it help .