Scale Trains First gen turbine

[propmeup1]

Yesterday I received the new Scale Train first generation turbine with tender and sound. This isn't a review other then it looks very nice and crisp. I thought it was a tad light and will not pull 40 empty hoppers up my 1.34% grades. I opened her up and found room for a little bit of tungsten rods for weight but this didn't help too much. Frog Snot will do the trick next.  I believe they have the same sound as the big Blow turbines by Scale Trains. Even with the lack of traction I'm still happy to have this running around my layout when I feel Union Pacificy. Other then that it's back to PRR.  For now I have her on the point with a big boy behind just as UP did.

[propmeup1]

Sorry about the pics. Not sure why they show up off 90 degree.

[peteski]

Sorry about the pics. Not sure why they show up off 90 degree.

Probably taken with a smart phone, and the forum software (and Microsoft PC world in general), do not play well with those photos.

This problem has existed (for several years) since Apple (and later other smart phone brands) OS started using the orientation tag in the JPG EXIF metadate to properly orient displayed photos.

Here is an older explanation (it still applies).
https://www.howtogeek.com/254830/why-your-photos-dont-always-appear-correctly-rotated/

[u18b]

Yesterday I received the new Scale Train first generation turbine with tender and sound. This isn't a review other then it looks very nice and crisp. I thought it was a tad light and will not pull 40 empty hoppers up my 1.34% grades. I opened her up and found room for a little bit of tungsten rods for weight but this didn't help too much. Frog Snot will do the trick next.  I believe they have the same sound as the big Blow turbines by Scale Trains. Even with the lack of traction I'm still happy to have this running around my layout when I feel Union Pacificy. Other then that it's back to PRR.  For now I have her on the point with a big boy behind just as UP did.

That sentence caught my attention.  It immediately gets my mind to wondering why traction did not improve?

[C855B]

Hi, Ron. I haven't cracked mine open yet - waiting for decoders to arrive - but I have two hunches.

Poor traction in the first place may be due to less metal in the chassis. My suspicions are a narrower chassis than the 8500s to accommodate a Veranda version. If that in fact is the case, then they would have inadvertently pre-announced an upcoming model. Or models, the U50 would work on a Veranda chassis, too, as we all know.

Second is the unpowered inner trucks. Since they're part of the electrical pickup system, they're probably not floating like they are on the Con-Cor/Kato model. Also, I'm really curious if the trucks are attached by a span bolster, instead of just a "trailer hitch", again like on the Con-Cor. Consequently, the dummies may be bearing some chassis weight, subtracting what is available to the geared trucks. This may be a factor in poor gains from added weight.

Again, I'll know more in a couple of days.

[u18b]

Consequently, the dummies may be bearing some chassis weight, subtracting what is available to the geared trucks. This may be a factor in poor gains from added weight.

Again, I'll know more in a couple of days.

That was exactly what I would be exploring if I had one.

I encountered issues like this in some Kumata brass.  On many of their locos, unpowered axles float well (non- weight bearing) but still conduct some electricity (good).   

But on the original EP-2, the nonpowered axles don't float that much and can even be weight bearing depending on the slight imperfections of the truck frame.  Traction suffers greatly when that happens.

And the worst example of all is the Kumata Centipede.  Very poor design.

[spookshow]

40 cars up a grade seems like a pretty big ask. What other diesels do you have that are capable of that?

Edit - I just tried running mine with 30 assorted 50' freight cars on level track and it can't make it through a curve without slipping. Very disappointing.

-Mark

[C855B]

My Con-Cor U50s can do ~60 up a 2%. Of course, the Kato-sourced versions had lead alloy frames, I believe. 

[spookshow]

I swapped out the turbine (4.7 oz) in favor of a Kato E8 that I happened to have sitting around (5 oz) and it hauled that train away like it wasn't there. Seems like there's something going on besides just the weight.

-Mark

[C855B]

Which brings us right back to the possibility of too much weight on the ungeared axles.

[spookshow]

Well, it looks and runs great with 20 cars in tow. Solid road switcher, eh?

-Mark

[basementcalling]

Could plating on the wheels be a problem until it is broken in and it wears off? Or is there any place in the mechanism where it binds or doesn't move freely? Just a couple other thoughts besides the very obvious ones already mentioned.

My old Con Cor unit could walk away with 100 MT wood reefers on level track with no issues, so only 40 cars from a more modern design is not encouraging. These units were often run initially as the only road power on a full length main line train, though later GP9 units were added as much to move things if the turbine broke down as for their contribution to the tractive effort.

[Mark W]

Are the wheels slipping, or is the engine just stalling?

Some might remember my GTEL suffered some unusual pulling behavior; couldn't pull to save it's life, however it was stalling, not slipping. 
Turned out to be a voltage issue, it doesn't like anything less than 14 volts.  The motor would sort of stall, but looking closer found the train still moving at a very very slow pace without any wheel slipping. 

If you rule that out and it's still pulling light, does removing the inner trucks improve things?

Mine won't arrive until the weekend, not to mention the layout is packed up from our show in Deshler, so I won't have a way to test right away.

[C855B]

You guys forced me me let out the factory air. 



The dummy trucks connect to the geared trucks by a span bolster. There is a little weight on the non-driven axles, but not much, just enough to keep it on the rails, I think. Unlike the Con-Cor "trailer", which had the pivot point on a "hitch" off the end truck, I think the span bolster is there to provide a center point for the unpowered truck to have more realistic tracking around curves. If you ever had the opportunity to see one of UP's B+B-B+B in action, you'd realize how goofy the Con-Cor arrangement looks. The end trucks do pivot on their centers rather than offset like the inner trucks, so the curve action isn't totally accurate, but at least more representative.

What was a complete surprise to me - get this - is apparently the original ScaleTrains intent was to have all axles powered! The powered trucks have the classic HO-style worm shaft in the truck driving worm gears on the axles. My edumaguess is that the test mules with a U-joint between the articulating trucks didn't perform well enough for production.

Couplers are the usual ScaleTrains sprung-knuckle design in an MTL 1015-compatible box. So, again, TSC fans like myself are on their own to carve-up a perfectly good pilot. Ugh. Since I haven't bought any new ScaleTrains rolling stock since the first run of the carbon black hoppers, apparently they have since fixed their couplers so they couple with reasonably light pressure, at least in my rolling tests with the tender.

I haven't had a chance to run either of mine since I am awaiting decoders for my DC/DCC-ready versions. They look great; expect to run tests in a couple of days.

... does removing the inner trucks improve things? ...

I thought of that, but I'm reticent to try it. I had many issues with the trucks on the 8500s in messing around. The sprung wheel wipers turned axle reinsertion into an infuriating game of whack-a-mole, and I really don't want to relive that experience. 

[Mark W]

I thought of that, but I'm reticent to try it. I had many issues with the trucks on the 8500s in messing around. The sprung wheel wipers turned axle reinsertion into an infuriating game of whack-a-mole, and I really don't want to relive that experience. 

Fair point.  An alternative to removing them; perhaps just 'string them up'.   Probably some low tac masking tape would work best.  Tape them up against the under body so you know they are not bearing any weight.  Then see how they pull.