HO street car/trolly model comparisons?

[Desertdweller]

LD,

You are going through quite a Rip Van Winkle experience!  I hope you are pleased to discover Bachmann and Life-Like are not the companies they used to be.

Does anyone know if there is actually a prototype for the Con-Cor Diesel PCC car?  It sounds like it could be plausible, if rather unlikely.  I cannot recall ever seeing a photo or example of one.

Well, Back to the Future!  I saw on the Internet yesterday that June 27, 2012 was the future date Doc's Delorean time machine was set to.

Les

[LDBennett]

Desertdweller:

http://www.con-cor.com/PCCRailbus.html

for the history of the rail bus using the PCC body. But I suppose it is not real but only a possibility.

LDBennett

[jward]

i have a book on the new haven's passenger operations. they did alot of experimentation with equipment which is all covered in the book. the mack railbusses are in there but there is no mention of a diesel powered pcc car. the prototype photo shows a new haven car, but i can't find any references to it other than con cor's site. what gives?

[LDBennett]

I think Con Cor made it clear that it was not real but done by them as a experiment that could have been done but that probably was not. Did I read Con Cor wrong?

Some model railroaders do scale copies of reality where others make up a story and more or less follow it. I think the diesel powered PCC is a fantasy. Think about what it would take to build an actual real PCC electric trolley into a diesel electric trolley. How much seating would be lost to house the diesel electric conversion unit. I think it would not really be practical. The PCC car is not designed to have a diesel motor inside without some serious compromises, in my opinion.

I do not run an overhead power system for my little layout (that's the first break from reality). My layout is point to point and three of my four trolleys are the type that would only run in the forward direction (one pole and the driver station at the front). But I have to run them backwards on the return trip (that's the second break from reality). Most are not setup with the body of the trolley low enough and have a several scale feet for a potential person to climb  to enter the car (that's still another break from reality). It goes on forever with my layout and trolleys. It is after all (for me) about the trip not the destination when it comes to building this layout. Having a fantasy Diesel electric PCC car with no pole is just another break from reality. I like it!

On another note I got the Bowser conversion for my Backman PCC HO trolley. I ran the bare chassis on the track and it is very quiet, relatively smooth at slow speeds, and will lower the body on the chassis by what they say is a scale foot. That should make it look more natural. The lesson from the Bachmann (NOT Spectrum) PCC trolley is that Bachmann motive power is more toy like than model railroad like. I think I'll not be buying any more Bachmann motive power stuff. The Spectrum stuff they sell seems to be top notch. The price differential probably reflects that.

LDBennett

[Bucksco]

You get what you pay for. The Bachmann PCC car tooling is at leat 30 years old and has served us admirably for a very economically priced product (it would be a good candidate for a well deserved upgrade....).
The Bachmann Peter Witt trolley and the newer Birney trolley are second to no other manufacturer. They feature state of the art electronics and drive mechanisms and yes you will pay a little more for them since they are higher quality products.

[Doneldon]

I think I'll not be buying any more Bachmann motive power stuff. The Spectrum stuff they sell seems to be top notch. The price differential probably reflects that.

LDB-

Please recognize that Bachmann is like many large companies in various industries in that they try to offer products for a range of potential customers. Just as General Motors offers Chevrolets and Cadillacs, Bachmann offers regular line and Spectrum models to  appeal to both entry-level or economy-minded model railroaders and those of us who expect better detail, more reliability and smoother operation.

Don't throw the baby our with the bathwater; there is a real place in the modeling market for less expensive equipment. If nothing else, the entry-level materials make it easier for new hobbyists to get into model railroading which helps grow the customer base for the more expensive and higher quality items later. Bachmann does a better job of producing models for both ends of this continuum than any of the other manufacturers, IMHO, and I applaud their efforts in doing so.
                                                                                                                                                                                         -- D

[LDBennett]

Doneldon:

I started this layout a couple of months ago. The layout before this one was taken down some 60 years ago. To say I'm new to today's model railroading is an understatement. I learned from this Bachmann purchase what I wanted and what I did not want. I understand there is a need for bottom end products. I just did not realize the differences until I had both a Bachmann trolley and a Spectrum trolley.

I actually picked the Bachmann PCC because it was a Los Angeles trolley (well, kind of, since the real ones were narrow gage) that brought back memories of riding the LA "J" cars as a kid with my mom. The Bowser upgrade will make it look right and run better and I am satisfied both with the results and the cost to me.

I have tried the Bachmann trolley, two Spectrum trolleys, one Con Cor trolley, and the Bowser conversion (which I assume is a measure of a complete Bowser trolley). Actually only the Bachmann was a disappointment and I have fixed that now.

LDBennett

[jward]

do not judge the bachmann locomotives by what you found under the hood of the pcc. it sounds like the pcc uses the old pancake motored power trucks that bachmann used in the 1980s. most if not all of the bachmann diesels now have good motors driving both trucks through worm and reduction gears, the same as most other locomotives. the only flaw, and it's a minor one, is that certain diesels lack flywheels. i say it is a minor flaw because the motor is good enough quality to overcome the lack of a flywheel. yardmaster indicated it was time to upgrade the pcc to the standards of the other locomotives in the line.     dare we hope?

i do agree that the old pancake motor stuff wasn't worth my time or money.

[LDBennett]

 jward:

I don't know what a "pancake" motor looks like but my Bachmann PCC had a very small round can motor. The thing is, the body was mounted so high on the chassis that the look was wrong. In browsing of the Internet I found that Bowser made a motor conversion for the Bachmann PCC that included lowering the body to the correct scale height so it would look right.

My disdain for the Bachmann PCC was not the motor at all but the look of the body being too high on the chassis. For that alone I got the Bowser motor change as it included a new chassis as well, to lower the body.

I made the conversion yesterday. I had to do away with the lighting and had to cut out the plastic cast mounting cylinder in the middle of the body (inside, of course). i was left with a plastic shell body. Then two metal pieces had to be glued into the body inside so that the new chassis had mounting points. The instruction were not very good but I got it right, none the less.

The Bowser motor is awesome. It will run slower than any other trolley I have (Spectrum, Con-Cor, or the original Bachmann PCC). It runs smoothly and quietly. It is definitely an improvement. The body is definitely lower on the chassis and now looks right. I am very pleased with this modification and the resultant PCC. My investment is actually no more than the Spectrum Peter Witt trolley but the details on the Peter Witt are phenomenal by comparison. I don't feel cheated by Bachmann as I got what I paid for and thanks to Bowser it now runs better and looks right. I needed to get this PCC right as it is the Los Angeles line version that was the reason for the whole concept of my layout (and good memories).

I am learning about the quality of the various manufacturers, with the process of doing my layout and with the process of helping my grandson with his "N" gage layout. The Bachmann labeled trains seem to be the entry level ones whereas the Spectrum, Kato, and others are more detailed, better powered, and generally better. But the Bachmann stuff is priced lower too. There is a place for all of it.

Thank all of you that have conversed here with me. You have helped me and I appreciate it.

LDBennett

[Bucksco]

Spectrum is a Bachmann product.....

[Doneldon]

LDB-

A pancake motor is shaped somewhat like a can motor except that it is larger in diameter than it is long; conversely, a can motor is longer than it is wide. Think of can motors and pancake motors as the same thing (yes, I know they aren't the same but I'm speaking of the shapes), with a can motor looking like a can of tomato soup and a pancake motor looking like a can of tuna. Also, pancake motors are commonly mounted horizontally, that is, with their axis of rotation vertical and at a right angle to the plane of the locomotive's frame.

                                                                                                                                                                                           -- D

[LDBennett]

Yardmaster said:

Spectrum is a Bachmann product.....


Yes, I know and I reported that in my posts on this thread. Spectrum is the premium part of Bachmann. A review of the pricing will reveal that but a review of their schematics of the different models will also reveal that Spectrum is THE premium Bachmann product. The Spectrum catalog is part of the overall Bachman catalog, as well.

LDBennett

[LDBennett]

 Doneldon:

OH....I understand the term "pancake motor" now. It follows the use of the term in model airplanes.

The current Bachmann PCC trolley I have uses a very small "can" motor that is about twice as long as it is in diameter. It is plugged directly into the powered truck, horizontally. This powered truck is so tall that it limits how low that Bachmann could place the body on the chassis.

The Bowser chassis for this PCC trolley uses a "can" motor (appears to be a cast case) that is longer than its diameter. It is much bigger physically than the original Bachmann motor. The Bowser motor mounts hard on to the chassis and feeds the power truck via a drive shaft with u-joints on each end. The motor is tight to the chassis and the truck is a lower profile than the Bachmann power truck, such  that the body can ride lower on the new Bowser chassis. The resultant look of the chassis-to-track height seems much more correct than the Bachmann version. It also runs much smoother and slower, if desired. This was a very good modification, indeed. and considering, was not all that expensive to get a Los Angeles lines PCC.

LDBennett

[jward]

i am not a fan of motors mounted on the truck. for one thing, the motor is much smaller than it would be if it were centrally located on the chassis. most likely it will be a 3 pole rahter than a 5 pole, which means it won't run as smooth. another problem is that a truck mounted motor takes up valuable space which would normally be used for reduction gears, thus it won't run as slowly as a chassis mounted motor drive will.

many of the older train set locomotives used truck mounted motors in some form. bachmann, AHM and tyco come to mind. 3 different companies, with 3 different systems using truck mounted motors. all ran like crap.

[Hamish K]

LD,



Does anyone know if there is actually a prototype for the Con-Cor Diesel PCC car?  It sounds like it could be plausible, if rather unlikely.  I cannot recall ever seeing a photo or example of one.



Les

There really is a prototype for everything, one of the Baltimore PCC cars was sold to Costa Rica and converted to a narrow gauge diesel railbus. I don't know of any standard gauge ones, but you never know.

Hamish