It's not exactly clear what the question is. The Bachmann "Anniversary" model, along with all the Big hauler Series is a 4-6-0.

There are several examples where the 4-6-0s have been converted to other wheel configurations, including 2-8-0. Barry's Big Trains makes a conversion chassis to change the 4-6-0 to a 2-8-0.

I haven't personally seen one done, but would think the addition of Airwire would be as straight forward as any Airwire installation.

The same comment would apply if you are asking about adding Airwire to the Bachmann 2-8-0 Consolidation.

You might get more response if you post this question in Bachmann's Large Scale Board just below.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

The post count 'feature' was dropped shortly after the previous major board update. This was to try to eliminate or at least control the folks who post something totally inane (such as "yeah" or "great") in reply to each and every post or thread, all just to increase their personal post count. This hasn't deterred a very small number of folks who continue to post a reply to every thread, regardless of whether they have anything to contribute to the subject.

The web designer hasn't (or can't) eliminate the remnants of the post count experiment.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Sloan:

The 33" and 36" refer to the diameter of the wheel tread. As glennk28 wrote, the correct diameter wheel is generally dependent on the age and weight capacity of the car. More modern cars use the larger 36" diameter wheels while older cars use the smaller 33" diameter wheels. There are many exceptions as glennk28 noted.

Usually the best solution is to replace the existing plastic wheels with like diameter metal wheels. Use a scale rule or a pair of calipers to determine what size is required. It has nothing to do with which size is most popular.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

You can use any brand D.C. power supply with virtually any brand of locomotive. Usually, the only reason LGB (or any other manufacturer) recommends you to use only their stuff is so they can sell more of it. There are some limitations when it comes to more sophisticated power supplies and control systems, but the basic stuff is all interchangeable.

A 1 amp power supply probably means it is from a set. These supplies are designed to provide power for very short trains (the set) on a loop of level track for a minimum cost. Running larger (in terms of current draw) locomotives, double heading locomotives, adding cars, and running on grades all put a strain on these small power supplies, regardless of brand. To operate anything beyond the set the supply was designed for will require a better power supply. You can still use the set power supply for testing and other bench top work.

You shouldn't experience any problems with any aspect of mixing brands of LS trains.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

You didn't say what material your rail is, but assuming brass or stainless steel, here are some thoughts. If you have stainless steel rail, ignore the parts about soldered jumper wires: You will definitely need rail clamps for a long term solution.

As you have found, slip joiners are not a very good long-term solution to track powered outdoor LS RRing. If you just clean and re-crimp the joiner, you will at least need to take up enough track to get to the offending joiner. There is usually enough flexibility in the track structure to move half the joint the inch or so that is required to disconnect that one joint. Cleaning off any oxidation (with steel wool) tightening the joiner (with needle nose pliers) and putting it back together will get your RR running, but you have found a problem that is just waiting to happen all over your RR. Putting a little conductive grease in the joint will help delay future corrosion, but the joiners can still come loose over time, especially with heavy operation.

Many folks who use track power either use rail clamps from Hillman Rail Clamps http://www.hillmansrailclamps.com/ or from Splitjaw Products http://www.railclamp.com/ or they bond the track joints using a small piece of wire soldered on each side of the joint with the joint held mechanically by the slip joiner.

The rail clamps tend to be expensive, but provide a mechanically strong, electrically conductive solution that will last a long time. Another significant advantage of rail clamps is the ability to unbolt a joint and remove a section of track without moving the adjoining track.

Even though I don't use track power, I do use rail clamps in many places. One example is both rails on each leg of a turnout, where I want to be able to remove the turnout for maintenance. I use the three piece rail clamps there. Another example is on the outside of curves where I want to prevent the slip joiners from working apart during normal operations. I usually use the two piece rail clamps for their strength in that application. On the curves, I use a slip joiner on the inside rail with the clamp on the outside. This saves money. I use the Hillman joiners, but both brands have good reviews and excellent support.

Electrically bonding the track joints by using a small piece of bare wire soldered across the joint is another good solution. This is probably the best solution where you absolutely don't want to take up any of the existing track structure, but it does involve soldering in place on the ground. Not too difficult after a little practice. And you can remove the joint in the future by just cutting the jumper wire. Note that this method leaves the slip joiner in place.

It only requires some small wire (IMO, bare 16Ga. or 18Ga solid copper is best), a medium sized soldering gun, some rosin type flux ("NoCorrode" is one brand) and some small diameter soft solder. Just clean the outside web of the rail with some steel wool, then solder the wire adjacent to the joint, leaving a small loop. Solder one end down, cut off enough wire to provide a slight loop and solder the other end down. Pre-tinning each part helps by reducing the amount of heat required and thus the amount of time the ties are exposed to heating. Be certain to use a wet rag or other heat sinking device to avoid melting the plastic ties.

The folks who recommend soldering the rails together usually have not tried butt soldering two pieces of heavy brass rail in the great outdoors while laying on their stomach. This almost guarantees melting of the adjacent ties plus making future removal of the component very difficult. If you decide to go that route, leave the existing slip joiner in place, as the soldered joint will be too weak to last. Definitely not recommended here.

An alternative to the above is to drill and tap the rail, then use jumper wires under a small screw. Some folks use this method, but it still depends on friction contacts and is subject corrosion and thus failure. Of course a failure is easy to repair, but this method is not totally permanent.

Hope this helps.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Very nice upgrade. All the graphics are really pretty and the board now has a very modern appearance. Several new buttons to explore.

All seems to be working here on both my Mac G4 PowerBook OS X 10.4.11 w/ Safari 3.1 and my MacBook OS X 10.5.2 / Safari systems.

Sincere thanks to both mhess and to Bachmann Trains for providing this forum and the update!

Happy RRing,

Jerry

While I don't model in H0 anymore, I used to get replacement H0 traction tires from an orthodontist. They use many small sizes of bands for retainers. I just took the locomotive along and found ones that fit. I don't remember that he charged me for them, as they are pretty low cost, even from a dentist. The dental bands have a very long life as they are made from tough silicone rubber.

Also, most hobby shops that carry trains have a supply of rubber bands for traction tires. You do not need to find a "Bachmann" band to make it work.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Quote from: Dr EMD on June 09, 2008, 07:28:51 PM<snip>
The term "solid" is much suited for these older type of bearings than the term "friction".<snip>

Sorry, but I have to disagree. I work as a principal technologist (VP Engineering, Chief Technical Officer, etc.) specializing in electromechanical systems design and engineering. I both manage the designs and directly supervise engineering teams involved in making stuff that works.

The term friction bearing is clearly understood by all the folks I work with. We frequently have meetings where someone will say something along the line of ". . . use a friction bearing here . . .", thus differentiating from other types of bearings such roller, ball, air, etc. This is accepted engineering terminology. Trying to change it would certainly cause confusion where there is currently none.

In our world, there is no such thing as a "solid bearing", unless it is a friction bearing that has seized, and thus become "solid!"

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Quote from: sloan on May 18, 2008, 08:07:51 AM<snip> ok who's been here and done this I'd like to know why and is ok to mix the track ? Sloan

Sloan:

As to your original question, yes it is perfectly OK to mix nickel silver and steel track. Personally I would be working to get all your mainline onto nickel silver. Use the remaining steel for sidings where your locomotives don't usually go.

As to your reported malfunction, I would bet you have track joiner conductivity problems. In answer to SteamGene's suggestion to check your joiners, you reported:

QuoteI did everthing is connected

There is a big difference between ". . . connected . . .", and conducting. Use whatever method (disassembly, electrical tracing or very close visual inspection) you find best to absolutely determine that all your rail joiners (especially the reused steel ones) are actually clean and crimped down on the rail. In other words, they need to be what is termed a 'push fit'. Just being slipped together does not insure they are always conducting electricity. Intermittent electrical connections act exactly as you have described in your original post. Use a pair of common pliers (<$5.00) to adjust every joiner to be a push fit.

There shouldn't be any question in your mind as to which rail is the best. The slightly larger investment in nickel silver rail will pay off many times over, especially in terms of reliable operation.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

The size difference between 1:20.3 scale and 1:18 scale is over 11% in linear dimensions and ~30% in terms of 3d 'bulk'. Those differences will be very noticeable, especially on a diorama where every item is subject to close scrutiny. Add to that the fact that most commonly available 1:20.3 scale rolling stock and engines are narrow gauge prototypes from an era that virtually ended in the first half of the 20th century, and it all adds up to not being a satisfactory solution for your 1:18 scale modern day diorama.

As a suggestion, consider doing a very small bit of track (a siding) with a single rail car being loaded / unloaded. You can purchase readily available rail and spikes and use hand cut ties. Hand spike a section of rail to a gauge of 3.14" (the correct gauge for 1:18 scale standard gauge), then build (or have built) a flat car of a design commensurate with the era you're attempting to model. Flat cars are among the easiest to build. The biggest problem will be wheel sets, trucks and couplers, but there are numerous commercial and home based model makers who would be capable of and happy to custom make these items for reasonable costs. The fact that this stuff is destined for a static display would significantly cut the costs as compared to actual operating stuff.

I realize this doesn't provide the engine you are asking about, but it does allow accurate portrayal of a railroad siding where something is being loaded / unloaded and keeps the costs down. In real life the engine would only show up when the rail car is being delivered or collected, so that non-operational part would also be prototypical.

If the presence of an engine is critical to your planned diorama, the internal combustion (mostly diesel) switch engines from the 1940s and later are relatively easier to build from plastic sheet and shapes as compared to a steam engine or large road engine. Trucks and couplers are among the biggest issues, but again, much easier when being powered or capable of actual operation is not required.

On edit: I am currently working on a static diorama requiring some special construction. I own a 1:24 scale model of Westside lumber Co. Shay locomotive #15, bought before 1:20.3 became popular. All my operational LS railroad models are 1:20.3 scale and the 1:24 scale Shay looks out of place on the layout. I'm currently building a display case with a couple of feet of 1.5" gauge (the correct gauge for 3' narrow gauge at 1:24 scale) track, and will populate this diorama with other 1:24 scale vehicles, structures and figures. Because of the availability of 1:24 scale items, this is easier than your chosen 1:18 scale, but the concept is the same.

Just a suggestion: Your mileage, ability and interest may vary! 

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Quote from: Superheater on April 16, 2008, 07:49:01 PM
If it were the U50, here's some photos of what it might look like, and on 8 foot curves to boot.

http://www.westcoastrailforums.com/view_topic.php?id=212&forum_id=49&jump_to=1545

John Fitch

Thanks for the link. A unique, very nicely done model!

Those pictures don't quite show the actual situation: The OP's claimed scale of 1:20 is ~1.4 times bigger than that model's 1:29 scale. That means in every dimension: Length, width & height.

I don't know the actual dimensions of the prototype U50, but if that 1:29 U50 is 36" (86 scale feet) long, the poster's new Bachmann locomotive would be ~51" (or over 4') long. I don't think we'll see them running around the christmas tree on 45mm gauge R1 (~24" radius) track!

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Bachmann's LS track is pressed steel, not stainless steel. The rail rusts easily, preventing the flow of electricity to the engine, and will completely rust through in short order. The plastic ties are not UV resistant and also disintegrate in the sun.

Bachmann only recommends their track for indoor use and experience has shown it to have a short life in the great outdoors.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

Alex, that's much better.

Thank You & Happy RRing,

Jerry

Alex:

Not trying to dampen your enthusiasm or efforts, but having to download your large signature picture over and over on my dial-up internet connection gets old. Even more so when it is mostly an advertisement for a commercial enterprise that is so remote as to not be accessible or used by most of us here.

I would really appreciate if you could remove it, or at least make it significantly smaller both in terms of physical size and file size.

Thanks & Happy RRing,

Jerry

tommy4u2:

Glad you got things turned around!!

Two items you didn't mention checking are the track gauge through the turnouts and the back to back spacing of the wheels on every car and locomotive. It is very important that these dimensions be within tolerances. I check these dimensions as a matter of course before installing new purchase on the RR.

You can find these dimensions and also buy a track & wheel gauge at the NMRA's website. You don't have to be a member to use the site. There is significant beginner's help documentation available there.

Happy RRing,

Jerry