Rapido N Scale Budd RDC

[Sokramiketes]

... as well as swapping in MTL True Scale couplers.

Ick!   

[bbussey]

Ick!   

They close-couple also and don't let go.

[delamaize]

Mine came the other day. I ordered an Undec. RDC1 in Phase 1. I will say, I'm impressed. Sound was a little loud for my taste, but nothing that JMRI couldn't fix when I was programming the address. It was really smooth out of the box, and smoothened out even more with the 2 hours break in Rapido recomended (1 hour in each direction). Once everything checked out, It got Lettered. I still need to add details, like the horn, and any other bits I decided to add.

I give you Skookumchuck Belt Line #41.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
(This is a stacked image, so their is some weirdness.)

[kscessandriver]

I pre-ordered them at Factory Direct Hobbies, which may have turned out to be a mistake. I see them in stock many places, but not there yet. Hopefully I didn't get hosed on the deal, but we will see. They look great.

[peteski]

I bought one with DCC/sound and one DC version.  Looks like the built-in keep-alive circuit is also functional (for lights only) running in DC (no decoder - just the dummy Next18 plug).   The keep-alive uses 2 1F 2.7V caps in series (for total of 0.5F 5.4V) and a DC/DC converter for the keep-alive function. Somewhat similar to ESU small Power Packs and ZIMO STACO units.  It is an interesting design.

From what I read on the Interwebs, Rapido has been using similar circuit in their H0 models for some time.  This is the first time it showed up in an N scale model.

[turbowhiz]

They close-couple also and don't let go.

Let us know how that goes for you. So long as you don’t have anything sharper than a #10 turnout on your layout, you’re probably good. But given the RDC length and the non-existent lateral motion of the short shank TSC it will cause you grief if you’ve got anything tighter, even if you’ve successfully used them on shorter models. They won’t get through an atlas C55 #7 for sure. This prototype positively has more range of motion in the coupler then the TSC has!!

The NP couplers not only look better, have lateral motion, automatically couple properly, they out hold the TSC too.

[Sokramiketes]

They close-couple also and don't let go.

And don't pivot or kiss-couple.  There might be a new product that is everything the true-scale is and more! 

[spookshow]

This thing is an amazing runner - out of the box, onto the rails (lord knows when I last cleaned them), set the throttle to speed step 1, and off it went. And six hours later, it's still going! I wish everything I tested ran this well 

-Mark

[brokemoto]

you're not supposed to pull anything with them or the warranty is void. (Why they come with a traction tire wheelset!?)  (emphasis mine)

I wondereed the same thing.  Mine will get up a 2,2% grade running solo without the traction tire wheelset.  It got up the same grade towing a dummy C-C RDC-2.  There was a slight slippage at one point but it quickly regained traction and finished the climb. 

The factory couplers lead to unfortunate coupled distances....

The Factory coupled to Kato is not too bad of a separation.

Unlike some others experience here, I found my DC example to be very well matched to the Kato units running on DC, no issues running those together at all, ................ found my DC example to run extremely well out of the box, no jerkiness

This made me look at something.  I have five Katos lettered for the B&O; 3 -1s and two -2s.  I did note some variation when I first ran them.  I run mine in pairs.  I did the best matches of -1s and -2s.  There was a =1 that was a proverbial "odd man out".  woodin'cha'knowit?. the throttle response om it is pretty close to that of the Rapido.  Now I can run all of mine in pairs but one will be two coaches.  The B&O had only two RDC-2s that it used in commuter/local passenger service.  The other two -2s that it had were modified for the Daylight Speedliner.  Given what my pike is, those cars would have no reason to run on it.  The photographs do not really show it but there is a difference in the color of the two cars.  The Kato and Rapido have about the same height.  The C-C dummy sits a bit lower.

at the speeds I'd want to run them at (i.e. prototypical).

I run mine at speeds of thirty to fifty five SMPH, except, of course when pulling in to or out of a station or yard limit.

I could swap the Kato shell onto the Rapido mech maybe....

I considered this, as well but have yet to take the shell off the Rapido.  From what another [donkey]hat has posted, it ain't easy.   The Kato is not difficult to rempve.  The C-C is the easiest of all of them.  I also considered the possibility of putting the C-C shell onto it'  You can get a C-C shell onto the Kato power chassis.  I cut down a C-C RDC-3 shell and put it onto a Kato RDC-4 power chassis for my non-historic railroad.   The backstory is a rebuild from a wreck.  My pike is set in 1955 and the first RDC wreck was a Boston and Maine RDC-1 at Swampscott, Massachusetts in 1956, -7, -8 pr so, an area that I know well.  Call it a wrecked-at-the factory during testing, or something.  I also cut down a C-C dummy RDC-2 and chassis to run on the non-historic with an RDC-4.  Someone did mention that these things do look silly on nine and three quarter curves.  They also look silly on the thirteen wnd three quarter curves of my non-historic.  The RDC-4 and the sut down -2 do not look so silly, however.

[Mark5]

That is wack about these having traction tires.  "Sounds" like they run great anyway. 

The B&O had only two RDC-2s that it used in commuter/local passenger service. 

Maybe Rapido will do RDC-2s in the future? I occasionally rode in #1951 (it stayed in B&O lettering) on the Brunswick line back in the 80s.
EDIT: looks like they would have been 99xx series on MARC in the 80s. I swear there was one still operating in B&O lettering, but not sure which RDC that was.

https://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3348510

I guess if I wanted a B&O RDC-2 now I'd have to unearth a Kato version.

[jagged ben]

To clear this up before misinfo starts spreading around the web...

These do not come with traction tires.   There's a single traction tire wheelset provided as an extra part, so you can change that out if you're into that.  Mine went up a 3%+ grade no problem, so I do not recommend.

[robertjohndavis]

That is wack about these having traction tires.  "Sounds" like they run great anyway. 

Maybe Rapido will do RDC-2s in the future? I occasionally rode in #1951 (it stayed in B&O lettering) on the Brunswick line back in the 80s.
EDIT: looks like they would have been 99xx series on MARC in the 80s. I swear there was one still operating in B&O lettering, but not sure which RDC that was.

https://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3348510

I guess if I wanted a B&O RDC-2 now I'd have to unearth a Kato version.

More than one of the MARC RDCs wore B&O paint in the 1980’s. Of the RDC2’s 1960/9940 definitely did, still sporting nose heralds into the early ‘80’s.

[brokemoto]

Maybe Rapido will do RDC-2s in the future?

I would expect that as they did do one in HO.  On second thought, I still am waiting for FPA-2s in N.  I did modify an LL and change the number, so I do have a powered A and dummy B.  I transplanted the plastic frame shell onto the metal frame.  On the B, the steam generator stacks go onto the #1 end, at least on B&O's they did.  I do not know if the other roads that had FPB-2s did this.

I occasionally rode in #1951 (it stayed in B&O lettering) on the Brunswick line back in the 80s.
EDIT: looks like they would have been 99xx series on MARC in the 80s. I swear there was one still operating in B&O lettering, but not sure which RDC that was.[

The letterboard still read BALTIMORE AND OHIO but MARC put its own numbers?  I seem to recall that the PRSL RDCs that MARC bought were like that.

Either 6550 or -51 also was on the Brunswick commuter lines when B&O still was running those trains.  It still had one booth and one small table in the "baggage" section.  Other than that, the floor looked pretty torn up.  Either 1960 or -61 also was on that line but the baggage compartment was walled off.

There was a guy who sold B&O RDC decals, so of course, I bought some and lettered five Katos  If you can find a Kato RDC-2 that has the same throttle response as the Rapido, you can do it that way.  Neither of my -2s do but the one -1 does.........or close enough...................  If I absolutely, positively had to have an RDC-2 to run with the Rapido, I could swap one of the shells.  The Kato shell is not difficult to remove.

I am at a loss to understand the manufacturer's stricture against pulling anything with them as they would be ideal power units for the C-C dummies.    Most railroads ran them in pairs, although some did run them three and four.   Why would there be a problem, say, if you ran two Rapido powered and one C-C dummy?  You could do a usual Dayight Speedliner consist, two -1s and one -2.  I would prefer to try to modify the C-C -2 shell, as if you ruined it the first try, you would not be out too much plus it would be simpler and far less expensive to find another one.

i would guess that NYNH&H modellers would prefer to cut up a C-C shell to build a Roger Williams than cut up a more expensive Kato or Rapido shell.  Why would two powered Rapidos and two or three C-C dummies cause problems?

If there is a Rapido representative on this forum, I would like to hear from him on this stricture.

https://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3348510

I guess if I wanted a B&O RDC-2 now I'd have to unearth a Kato version.
[/quote]

[bbussey]

Let us know how that goes for you. So long as you don’t have anything sharper than a #10 turnout on your layout, you’re probably good. But given the RDC length and the non-existent lateral motion of the short shank TSC it will cause you grief if you’ve got anything tighter, even if you’ve successfully used them on shorter models. They won’t get through an atlas C55 #7 for sure. This prototype positively has more range of motion in the coupler then the TSC has!!

The NP couplers not only look better, have lateral motion, automatically couple properly, they out hold the TSC too.

I use them to MU motive power only and they work just fine, including through the maze of #8 crossovers at the east end of the station.  They eliminate unwanted uncouplings and they significantly close the gap between units.  I'm not pulling 50-car freight consists with them.  I still use standard MTL couplers in general because I utilize the magnetic functionality.  I perform motive power changes in New Haven, which eventually will be under catenary and station platform canopies, and eventually the Cedar Hill freight yard will exist and also be partially under catenary.  Only the Turbo Train, FL9s and RDCs will run through without being switched out.  Manual uncoupling simply isn't viable for me.

If the TSCs prove to be problematic in the Rapido RDCs, I'll pick up a pair of your couplers for them.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

This discussion is NOT helping me from wanting a fleet of these f'ers.

I'm in trouble because I don't know what scheme is MOST useful for me:
Amtrak as an option for the "Washington/Buffalo Day Express"?
B&O, considering that MARC/MDOT finally had enough of Conrail's use of a switcher and beat up 1920s coaches on the Parkton Local, and sent these instead?
PRSL or Reading assuming the same as above but that Conrail did something with it?

So many fun options. But scary at $200+ each, lol.