Are these decoder equipped locos that you are running on DC?

Jack, you didn't "start" anything other than good open discussion. It's what forums should be about.

Jim, you are correct in your assumption.

QuoteIf you are using it successfully on your rails, then I will assume that you use only metal or nylon/Delrin/acetal wheels.  And that you do not spray WD40 directly onto your tracks.

FWIW The "layout" is in a finished garage complete with central air and heat.

What's on the back porch is nothing more than a small oval (6x3) of Atlas c80 flex. Only one power feed.
No scenery, no ballast, just foam, cork, and track.
What some would term "Foam Prairie"?
A small section of that table is utilized as a workbench. This is where I do most of my fleets maintenance and testing.
This way I can be "outside".

I did not take the time, nor do I have the desire, to polish the railhead out there.
Yes, the outside track did require maintenance (more than an alcohol wipe can provide) about every month, weekly in the rainy season.
Inside, it's minimal, maybe twice a year with an alcohol wipe.
This is my reason for giving that track some type of treatment.
As stated in previous posts I am still not in the oiled track camp.
I am also experimenting with 3 other products out there concurrently.
No-ox, Flitz chrome wheel polish, Maas metal polish, and WD-40 (there's that product again).
All are doing what is required, it just a matter of time until the longest lasting treatment is discovered.
Of the four, WD-40 is, by far, the least expensive.

There are many ways to "skin a cat" so to speak.

Bob,
FWIW - 91% Isopropyl alcohol is my preferred way to clean both wheels and track.
Window cleaner migrated into the rail joiners and caused havok.
Just my experience about 5 years ago.

Your mileage may vary.

Hear, hear!
It appears that CNE Runner and I are of the same camp.

QuoteI subscribe to the school that promotes the use of nothing on the rails (who wants to attract more dust anyway?). I never understood the reasons behind oiling track as there isn't any such thing as an oil that effectively conducts electricity. The conduction of electricity, through an oil, is a function of film thickness and applied force...and can be researched in most physics texts.

Unfortunately, many are mislead by the "old school hats" dictating of how to properly model.
What is and isn't the "Right way".

I surmise Jim has never used WD-40 for model railroad application, yet he dismissed it as being something bad to do.

That's OK.

I also surmise, Jim models the way he knows, the tried and proven way through his personal experience, that works best for him in his personal application.

I am not in the camp of oiling tracks, however I have my test track out on my back screened porch. Living just a few miles of the gulf coast, it is subject to what many would term as extream conditions ( salt air, direct morning sunlight, moisture, rain mist,  etc.

So far WD-40 has proven excellent as a corrosion inhibitor on the railhead and on the wheel sets.

To anybody reading this;
Please do not take what either Jim or myself posts on this or any other forum as being gospel.

I am of the camp of trying it for yourself and then making your own personal decision if it works best in your own application.

Times change.

No doubt, Jim knows what he speaks,
but there are many other ways to get the same, or better, results using different means.

Pray tell Jim,

Why in the world would you put oil on the wheel centers or the rail ties?

What is your need to do so?

I would suggest to you, to be careful with your application.

When cleaning loco wheels and drivers, I use a foam cradle similar to Bob's.
I make it a good practice to remove the shell first.
I've used the Q-tip, 91% isopropyl method for decades.

As far as WD40, this is a quote from their website -
http://www.wd40.com/faqs/#q8

"What surfaces or materials are OK to use WD-40 on?
WD-40 can be used on just about everything. It is safe for metal, rubber, wood and plastic. WD-40 can be applied to painted metal surfaces without harming the paint. Polycarbonate and clear polystyrene plastic are among the few surfaces on which to avoid using a petroleum-based product like WD-40."

WD-40 is an excellent loco wheel cleaner used as described by BradKT. It's also great for cleaning metal and plastic rolling stock wheels.

It works equally as well, as does Wahl clipper oil, for those who oil their track to retard corrosion.
When applied properly the track will be soon dry. The lubricant will penetrate into the micro sub-surface structure of the railhead stopping corrosion where it begins, in minute scratches, scuffs, pits, etc.
There is no need to remove the "residue".
The residue is what protects.
Just like the Wahl clipper oil, WD40 is not "conductive" oil.

I personally do not use WD40 to lubricate locomotive drives, as I find it too light, and prefer something a bit heavier for bearings/bushings. I find it's far to light for gears.
When first applied to a clean cloth it's hard to beat as a degreaser/cleaner/ corrosion inhibitor for wheels and track.

I am a Normal scaler and am somewhat familiar with the energized Brass brush cleaners.
Several manufacturers make them.
Some, down at the club, swear by them and use them religiously.
I don't own one.
I don't like the idea of a brass brush against a rubber traction tire.

When I clean the loco wheels in the method BradKT described, I substitute a used dryer "anti static sheet" (Bounce or Cling Free) for the paper towel.

I personally prefer cork roadbed, Midwest has my dollars.
I am not a HO, but rather a Normal scaler.

I never have used nails.

Using EZ track, I used clear silicone caulk to bond the track, cork, and foam board to the plywood.

The hollow EZ track resonates the loco sound, amplifying it. It's best to partially fill this void, under the roadbed, with silicone, which can be easily removed if it's not to your liking.

Aleene's Tacky Glue might be another product you may want to consider.

Ballasting in the old way, (water/glue) forms a hard crusty bond, negating any sound deadening measures you may have employed.

I do not know the smallest diameter it will traverse.

Many moon's ago, I had 45% section of 10"r (flex) that didn't seem to bother it.

I have not personally tried anything less than 10"r.

It's just verbiage used by B'mann on their Spectrum line.

"Master Railroader Series"

I suspect the term is used along with "Spectrum" to differentiate the two product lines, "Standard" being the other.

AFAIK, the verbiage has always been on the Spectrum product line.

It's not something new.

Great thing about those, wherever you buy them from, you'll never buy the same road number, ever.
I have a few myself.

OK SteamGenie, at you instance we will go though this again.

Look at photos of your favorite track side structures dating back to the steam age.
Please point out to us the photos of these structures that are not covered in soot, directly related to the railroad.

The oil residue, on the track, is a good thing, up to a point.

Just as any supposed conductive oil, it permeates the micro surface structure of the rail head, inhibiting corrosion/oxidation at that level. Cleaning the rail head with isopropyl only removes the surface contamination.
Oils penetrate the surface structure of the rails, inhibiting the oxidation where it originates, below the surface.

This is why some perceive some certain oils to be conductive, when truly they are not.

If you can inhibit the oxidation of the rail head, at the micro sub-surface contact point, you are ahead of the game in so far as "clean track".

Certain oils do this.
Beware, that does not make them "conductive" oils.

All that said,

If you want your trackside structures to appear as they would have during the steam era, they will be coated with soot. This is easily achieved by using smoke units on your model railroad

The residue from smoke units will quickly coat "everything" on the layout with soot.

Not a problem, if you're a "proto head" but rather a benefit.

Excess oil on the railhead will need to be removed, as it may inhibit electrical contact.

Cross that bridge when you get there.

Maybe you have some power contact problems in the turnout itself.
If you don't/can't open it up and correct it yourself, I suggest returning to B'mann for a replacement.

If you feel like troubleshooting yourself try here;

http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php/topic,8792.0.html

If not, send it back.

Good Luck

Are you using the AC controlled switch control box, or are you manually activating the switch points?

OK Ntrain,

What I understand you to be saying, is that you are shimming both the pony (lead) and trailing trucks (aft) with spacers (washers).
You are attempting this procedure to help get the loco to traverse "switch tracks" without de-railment.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

If this is in fact the case, then let me offer this advice.

As previously stated, first check the wheel gauge on both the leading and trailing trucks. An NMRA gauge is a good place to start.
Make sure those wheel sets are in proper gauge.
Adjustment can be tricky as the wheels must roll true without wobble.
What I am saying, is that the wheels flanges are perpendicular, to their respective axles, throughout their rotation.
Out of gauge pony truck wheels will severely mess with the picking of the points.

The loco should not "rock". It should sit firmly upon the rail to have the correct weight distributed on the drivers.
The pony and trailing truck are merely along for the ride and do not carry any weight of the loco.
Sometimes it may be helpful to spring the pony trucks with downward pressure to help hold the rail.
Some attest to this procedure, I, personally, have not found it necessary with any loco.

Once you have confirmed the "pony truck" and "trailing truck" wheels are gauged properly, let's leave the drivers gauged as they are from the factory.
We can adjust, as necessary, later.

Look to the switch points now (track)
Are they moving, and holding to the desired path?
They should hold tight and not move as the loco passes over.
Are they firmly against the rails?
Is there a gap, between the rails, whereas the wheel flange can pick the points?

Look to the outside of the points against the inside of the rail.
Some fine work with a file can bring this as close as possible. The inside of the point can also be filed (sharp) to achieve proper closure, and a smooth transition.

Generally, most big steam loco's have their drivers to the bottom of the gauge, even sometimes slightly under-gauged to traverse the tight radius on the curve.

Check these things and report back. Maybe we can offer further advice.

P.S. Please excuse my misinterpretation of your use of the term "Carriages". Proper English differs from American English, and sadly so.
My mistake.
My apologies.

I don't know.

IMO, DT gave good advice.

Both the light and heavy Mountains are a great bang for the buck.
As is the "J" 4-8-4 and the "new split frame" Northern also a 4-8-4, albeit not a spectrum.
The B'mann 2-6-6-2 Spectrum is also a very nice loco, although some consider it a bit light on pulling power.
That can be addressed. It's a great runner.

All of these can be found at the Favorite Spot, if you have patience and don't mind re-painting into your favorite road.

QuoteI am looking for a large steam locomotive, preferably a 2-4-2 to a 4-8-4, for under $90.

At your prerequisite price point, B'mann "owns" the market, in large steam.

Good Luck.

Very interesting reply.

You made me go check mine.

I'm not seeing it.
Considering the tolerance of most massed produced punch pressed parts, would be generally +/- .005.
Take into consideration what your NMRA gauge actually measures.

+/- .005 is nothing.
Considering the tolerance would naturally spread (open) proportional to die use (number of parts produced).
Add to this the number of miss-feeds in the production run.
Miss-feeds damage the die's cutting edge furthering opening the tolerance.
The process for finishing die punched parts is mainly "tumbling". This process removes burrs and can further open dimensions by removing base material. The longer in the "tumbler" the more material removed.
All of this said assuming an "operator" has strict conformance to requirements.
Basically in it's in the operators' discretion.

What does yours actually measure?
Enough said about the NMRA gauge.

I am interested in knowing how you found under gauged track age?
De-railments?
Passing a NMRA gauge through the rail?

QuoteBut I have found the regular EZ Track is a little under gauge...

This is what I find interesting
Using an NMRA gauge or by checking it with calipers?

The only EZ track I have ever found to be under gauged (with a NMRA gauge) was three sections of 10in. straights passed over by a child's tricycle.

As both your, and my, posts, the casual reader should take with a grain of salt.

I could have, and probably should have just dismissed your claim

QuoteBut I have found the regular EZ Track is a little under gauge...

Anybody can post whatever they feel and attempt to get others agree with them.
It's what the "A" forum is all about.
I'm not one of them.
It would be futile, at this point, to ask what your EZ-track measured with calipers.

We have a poster here insinuating Wahl oil is conductive.
Many will not attempt to find the truth about such allegations.

Please do not regard this as a personal attack, I'm just trying to dispel rumor, or if you will, urban myth.


I'm not sure what you are saying about "lowering the rear" by "4 spacers".
The loco does not to be "lowered"

Check the gauge of both the pony and trailing trucks.
The gauge of the drivers is deliberately narrow to traverse 11.25 r EZ track.