loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 10, 2016 20:57:36 GMT -5
I've been away from the hobby since a kid, but I'm interesting in modeling a small switching layout similar to Lance Mindheim's designs.
One thing I dislike about all the HO locomotives I've acquired is the speed range extends very high. This results in poorer performance at extremely slow speeds, the same speeds I plan on operating at. Additionally, I have no plans to operate locomotives past 20 scale MPH. Thus, it would be nice to reduce the locomotive speed by a factor of 3 or 4 mechanically. I'm interesting in possible mechanical ways of speed reduction, whether with gearing or belts, etc (not DCC methods, although I use DCC). At the same time, I'd like to make the locomotive as heavy as possible, so keeping the flywheels is desirable.
Is anyone aware of similar speed reduction projects for HO scale locomotives?
Does anyone have any suggestions?
Thank-you!
|
|
|
Post by Randy Earle on Oct 10, 2016 22:17:52 GMT -5
I've been away from the hobby since a kid, but I'm interesting in modeling a small switching layout similar to Lance Mindheim's designs. One thing I dislike about all the HO locomotives I've acquired is the speed range extends very high. This results in poorer performance at extremely slow speeds, the same speeds I plan on operating at. Additionally, I have no plans to operate locomotives past 20 scale MPH. Thus, it would be nice to reduce the locomotive speed by a factor of 3 or 4 mechanically. I'm interesting in possible mechanical ways of speed reduction, whether with gearing or belts, etc (not DCC methods, although I use DCC). At the same time, I'd like to make the locomotive as heavy as possible, so keeping the flywheels is desirable. Is anyone aware of similar speed reduction projects for HO scale locomotives? Does anyone have any suggestions? Thank-you! What brand of diesels do you have? Most of the units made in the last 20 years run pretty good.
|
|
trev
Road Foreman
Posts: 84
|
Post by trev on Oct 11, 2016 3:04:16 GMT -5
See what NWSL have which might be of help
|
|
dale
Superintendent
Posts: 157
|
Post by dale on Oct 11, 2016 7:38:58 GMT -5
Ernst used to make slow speed gearing for Athearn locos back in the 80s,my step father did one and it was very slow.
|
|
loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 11, 2016 20:45:54 GMT -5
I have several brands, Intermountain, Atlas, Broadway, MTH, all newer models. So 20mph is the max, most of the time speed will be say 3-10 MPH. The newer engines do great over a high speed range, but it seems when they start from a stop its not prototypical. Gearing down would improve the extreme slow performance.
Ernst is interesting, had heard of it before. Seems it is a 3:1 reduction. Found a few threads and it seems some like it and others don't because of the motor noise.
Before making mechanical modifications, I may try looking cars up with weights and tuning CV values first. May get close enough.
Thanks for the tips and keep 'em coming!
|
|
dale
Superintendent
Posts: 157
|
Post by dale on Oct 11, 2016 22:03:09 GMT -5
I'm like you,I don't want anything over 20 mph, so I've been having my friend set up speed curves for my locos on his computer and we had a 70 tonner set up to run slow but it was way too slow,so you if you have dcc you should be able to set things up the way you need them.
|
|
EMDX6043
Chairman
Future ex-modeler
Posts: 837
|
Post by EMDX6043 on Oct 12, 2016 8:22:37 GMT -5
Just program the decoders to do what you want.
It'll be a lot easier and quicker than reinventing the wheel...
|
|
|
Post by m a y o r 79 on Oct 12, 2016 11:59:26 GMT -5
If you use DCC that would really be the best way to manage the top end speed. You can also match all the locos together so they all have the same speeds. Its a matter of adjusting the speed tables for each loco. Its been a while since I've done it but I don't believe its that hard. It will be a lot more reliable and accurate than any mechanical adjustments you try to make.
|
|
loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 12, 2016 16:16:46 GMT -5
Thanks for all the suggestions. I'm familiar with the DCC option, tried it, and wasn't satisfied with slow performance, particularly when starting from a stop. Many people are satisfied with the DCC option which is great for them. I'd like to have fun experimenting with mechanical options, even if it is a failure. Thus, I'm hoping to exploring mechanical options. I was hoping this thread would be about ideas, previous attempts, photos, videos, links, and/or article & book references to lower geared HO mechanisms. I have a cnc milling machine and lathe and am proficient with CAD, so implementing mechanical modifications is viable for me. I'm open to suggestions how to best mechanically implement a 3:1 or 2:1 speed reduction while maximizing locomotive weight.
|
|
loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 12, 2016 17:05:40 GMT -5
Another possibility is using slower motors or rewinding for slower operation. I don't know if this is possible or has been done, but I'm interested.
|
|
EMDX6043
Chairman
Future ex-modeler
Posts: 837
|
Post by EMDX6043 on Oct 14, 2016 8:14:38 GMT -5
If you're really looking forward to finding a mechanical way to slow down your locomotives, then more power to you. I was just trying to save the frustration by suggesting the DCC method...
Whether you choose mechanical or digital means to reduce speed, you'll still need flawless (and clean) trackwork to prevent stalling. Is that why you want the extra weight? MicroMark sells low-temp alloys that you can probably pour right into the body shell without damaging anything. You can also maybe use plumber's lead or shotgun shot mixed with some type of adhesive and go that route. I've beaten those thin 1/4 oz lead stick-on weights into thinner strips, then glued multiples together into the body shell.
Good luck and post some pictures!
|
|
loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 14, 2016 20:17:11 GMT -5
The extra weight was for more tractive effort. I'd like to experiment with much heavier car weights than typical, as suggested by Lance Minheim. This will help increase the sense of mass of real trains and eliminate unnecessary movement when coupling or traversing switches. I never thought about mass improving contact, but it probably will.
Thanks for the tips on adding mass! I didn't realize there are low temp alloys. May have to experiment with them. Tungsten would be ideal, but its expensive. I have little lead blocks and lead strips to play with as well.
Will post pics, but it will probably take a while.
|
|
|
Post by m a y o r 79 on Oct 15, 2016 8:28:41 GMT -5
Wasn't there a repowering kit someone made (Helix Humper is coming to mind) that was notorious for extremely slow speeds? It would be quite the undertaking, and expense, to repower all the locos but it may work. I honestly don't know if those motors are even available anymore though.
Otherwise the only other mechanical options I can think of are changing out the gearing (I recall the original Proto SD60 gearing was noticeably slower than everyone else's, which is why I rarely use my two anymore) and adding a ton of weight to slow down the locos.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2016 13:36:09 GMT -5
If you can, put Kato motors in them. They are high torque motors and run excellent at low speeds. Very low speeds. You can also look at putting a resistor in line to the motor feed. Slow the current.
|
|
EMDX6043
Chairman
Future ex-modeler
Posts: 837
|
Post by EMDX6043 on Oct 29, 2016 18:14:42 GMT -5
The extra weight was for more tractive effort. I'd like to experiment with much heavier car weights than typical, as suggested by Lance Minheim. This will help increase the sense of mass of real trains and eliminate unnecessary movement when coupling or traversing switches. I never thought about mass improving contact, but it probably will. Thanks for the tips on adding mass! I didn't realize there are low temp alloys. May have to experiment with them. Tungsten would be ideal, but its expensive. I have little lead blocks and lead strips to play with as well. Will post pics, but it will probably take a while. You mentioned a switching layout, so usually tractive effort isn't the greatest concern. When I was in N scale there seemed to be a connection between weight and electrical continuity. However, now that you've mentioned going above NMRA specs, it makes sense. I've done that to what little rolling stock I have, but I've been concerned about premature bearing wear. Who knows...a switching layout probably won't put enough miles on them to be noticeable.
|
|
loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 29, 2016 20:56:13 GMT -5
Brian - thanks for the Kato motor tip. BTW, I came across you website shortly before it went down. Miss it a lot as it inspired me to try modeling instead of just buying. Unfortunately a lot of the images are missing in Wayback Machine. Dave, glad to know someone else is going above NMRA spec. Lance Mindheim had a blog post about it. OK, so I've been playing with decoders option with a Loksound Full Throttle decoder. Slow speed is very nice! Except starting. Slowing to a stop is OK, but starting is obvious it is a model. This is without pulling heavy cars though as I only have a programming track at the moment. What about using an N Scale motor in a switcher? An N Scale motor is much smaller, so I would allow space for a mechanical speed reduction. The only downside is it seems smaller motors have higher RPMs, thus more speed reduction may be necessary. Is it OK to run an N-Scale motor from an HO scale decoder? Electronics are not my expertise. If it is OK, I was thinking of trying a Mashima 5 pole N scale motor: www.ebay.com/itm/Mashima-5-Pole-Motor-Double-Shaft-12V-N-Scale-/191950440433?hash=item2cb12347f1:g:CzEAAOSw6n5XuHEHYes, the N scale motor will have less power, but switchers also have less power.
|
|
EMDX6043
Chairman
Future ex-modeler
Posts: 837
|
Post by EMDX6043 on Oct 29, 2016 21:45:15 GMT -5
Do you have a LokProgrammer? If not, get one. If you do, great!
It made a tremendous difference during my programming adventures...
An N scale motor should be fine running off an HO decoder. The only thing you need to keep an eye on is what the decoder's rating is (most are about 1.5amps-ish) and making sure the motor draws less than that. Mechanically you're on your own...I'd have no idea where to start. Doing all this fine-tuning digitally would be my preference, but to each his own.
|
|
loddie
Probationary Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by loddie on Oct 29, 2016 22:36:49 GMT -5
Yes, I just purchased a LokProgrammer and started playing with it last night. Was using Sprog3 with JMRI, but once I learned about Full Throttle, I decided it would be worth it. I'll keep playing with the settings and will weight some cars soon to see if that makes the starting "jump" from full stop more acceptable.
Good to know on the N scale motors. I may start shopping around for one to play with. Thanks for the feedback and stay tuned.
|
|
spike
Chairman
They say I can't be Spike anymore, so Mr. Burns it is!
Posts: 561
|
Post by spike on Dec 14, 2016 11:24:40 GMT -5
I never looked at this thread before. The motors and gearing of modern models, plus the capability of speed programming has come a long way. On the other hand, I think the obsession goes too far. This came about in the 1970s, and 1980s, when modern drive lines, and can motors came out, as a marketing gimmick.
Some know that I have been railroading for nearly 20 years. There are really few times when I need to go less than 5mph. Most times I like to stop stretched. This is impossible on models, except on an inclined track. This serves two purposes. First, there is less risk starting a train. I can start faster not having to gently take out the slack. Second, a railroad hater can't pull a pin 50 back.
There are only a few instances where sustained slow running is needed. One is spotting cars to docks, hoses, or chutes. Sometimes spreading out track material, like stone takes a slow, and steady running, for even distribution. Believe it or not, it is harder to keep an even speed when going slow, than fast. Pace setters make this somewhat more tolerable, if the engine has it. If not, it is a pain, since the throttle needs to be toggled between two notches. Sometimes the brakes must be dragged, in order to maintain such a slow speed.
Even yard operations require quick acceleration. There is a fine line between production, and not being so rough to damage equipment, or lading. I have never had a model yard engine which accelerated fast enough to kick cars, nor do the cars roll free enough to coast into a track. Some railroads have quotas of what they expect a switch crew to get done.
|
|