Forums » Motive Power

List of newest posts

    • April 5, 2020 10:20 PM EDT
    • So I don't believe I'll lose tractive effort and I'll gain about 1.75mm in height.  Also a wee bit more weight where it counts most.  Which makes me wonder if anyone has tried replacing the top/bottom covers on the truck with something heavier?

    • April 5, 2020 9:09 PM EDT
    • Thanks Craig,

      Did the GP9 wheels have traction tires?  If so I did not know that NWSL wheels fitted on the GP9 were offered with traction tires.

      -Ted

    • April 5, 2020 8:32 PM EDT
    • Ted,

      The only weight added would be the batteries, but I can't remember if I removed the USAT weight. 

       

      Aluminum rail, mostly all Bachmann cars.

       

      As a point of reference, TOC regularly used the Bachmann Shay to clean up. We added the shay after it started slipping.

    • April 5, 2020 3:50 PM EDT
    • Craig, Was weight added to the GP9?

      I use track power, and track is stainless steel on the outdoor part of the layout.

      On my layout with its approx average 2.2 percent double helix grade, my GP38 (no traction tires) pull about 9 cars up the helix.  Wheel slip can occur, particularly with more cars, and the loco would stop with wheels turning more so on the straighter portions of the helix.  I prefer wheels to slip as a fail safe to protect the motors from drawing excessive current since back emf is present under that condition. A video can be seen of two GP38s pulling 18 cars on my helix before I added weight to the locos at a later date and when the layout was still under construction.

      Another video at a later date with 6 Rock Island locos pulling 44 cars up the helix. (I put the two USAT Rock Island GP38s on the train for appearance sake. I think just using the heavier 4 Aristo GP40s would have pulled the train up the helix)

      -Ted

    • April 5, 2020 3:36 PM EDT
    • GP9 with NWSL wheels, pulls 32 cars up 4% grade, wet rail, 150'. 33 cars, slipping, 34 cars stall. Tested back in the day on TOC's layout during ops clean up one night during the rain.

       Same motor blocks as the GP38.

      I would be more worried about having to modify the brake shoes than tractive effort.

    • April 5, 2020 3:30 PM EDT
    • Dan,

      I did not get NWSL wheels at the time I worked on my GP38s because at that time, to my recollection, the ownership had changed and things were in a disarray.  Maybe today it's different.

      -Ted

       

    • April 5, 2020 3:17 PM EDT
    • Ted Doskaris said:

       

      I agree the more realisitic NWSL wheels would seem to be the best method for raising up the loco like a prototype, but the trade-off is the loco would run a little faster and slightly less torque at the railhead like a car with a tall differential gear ratio.

      I'll admit I hadn't thought of that but would it really make that much difference?  Knowing what I know of you from LSC posts, I take it you have tested pulling power of the USAT GP38-2 stock vs NWSL 36" wheels?


      Admittedly less elegant, I used a spacer between the trucks and chassis in the GP38s I have to raise it up.

      I'm thinking of putting the wheels on first and if I need more I'll print a new truck mounting bolster.

    • April 5, 2020 1:28 PM EDT
    • Dan,


      I agree the more realisitic NWSL wheels would seem to be the best method for raising up the loco like a prototype, but the trade-off is the loco would run a little faster and slightly less torque at the railhead like a car with a tall differential gear ratio.
      Admittedly less elegant, I used a spacer between the trucks and chassis in the GP38s I have to raise it up.


      -Ted

    • April 5, 2020 11:01 AM EDT
    • Craig Townsend said:

      The prototype GP40 and GP38 frames might be different lengths as well. I don't know off the top of my head.

      Craig,

      Both have an overall length of 59'-02" so I assume they are the same frame. However, The frame is higher on the GP40-2LW to accommodate the larger fuel tank so I'll need to do something about that especially since the USAT model is low to begin with.  I do have NWSL replacement wheels which should help.

      -Dan 

    • April 5, 2020 12:47 AM EDT
    • The prototype GP40 and GP38 frames might be different lengths as well. I don't know off the top of my head.

    • April 4, 2020 9:09 PM EDT
    • Ted Doskaris said:

      Hi Dan,

      I thought about this, too, for sometime, but being I have several Aristo GP40s, I did not pay much attention to it.  Since Aristo is out of business, it now will make for a good project that you can pursue with the excellent skills you have.

      Thanks Ted.  After making the Comfort cab for the GP38-2, I started working my way back and made the dynamic brake for the GP40.

      Now I think I'll cut the SD40-2 shell and make a GP40-2LW so I can use the Cab and also make a large fuel tank (better sound)

      One exterior item that may distinguish the GP40-2 from the GP40 is the "Electrical Cabinet Air Filter" (that I call the "Dog House") located behind the left side of the cab, prevalent on the SD40-2 and the GP40-2 pictured above.  I just completed rebuilding my UP SD40-2 from just a shell & chassis purchased sometime ago.  Its Dog House is shown below.

      When I last checked with Mike at USA Trains parts, the Dog House is not available. Coincidentally,  the Dog House was missing on my friend, Colin Camarillo, SD40-2, so he is currently in the process of doing the 3-D print of that part.

      My shell did not include the dog house either but it seems the CN GP40-2LW's don't have them.  Instead there is a low cabinet.  I Also noticed the Dynamic brake on the SD has 2 fans so maybe I'll use the one I created instead!

       

    • April 4, 2020 7:06 PM EDT
    • Hi Dan,

      I thought about this, too, for sometime, but being I have several Aristo GP40s, I did not pay much attention to it.  Since Aristo is out of business, it now will make for a good project that you can pursue with the excellent skills you have.

      Pictured below is a prototype Canadian Pacific GP40-2, albeit without dynamic brakes, that may be of help.
      [img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8f/CP_4657_%288703748501%29.jpg/1280px-CP_4657_%288703748501%29.jpg[/img]

      One exterior item that may distinguish the GP40-2 from the GP40 is the "Electrical Cabinet Air Filter" (that I call the "Dog House") located behind the left side of the cab, prevalent on the SD40-2 and the GP40-2 pictured above.  I just completed rebuilding my UP SD40-2 from just a shell & chassis purchased sometime ago.  Its Dog House is shown below.

      [img]https://elmassian.com/images/stories/motivepower/USAT/sd40/sd40_exp_kadees/USAT_SD40_exampleDogHouseBehindCabComposite.jpg[/img]

      When I last checked with Mike at USA Trains parts, the Dog House is not available. Coincidentally,  the Dog House was missing on my friend, Colin Camarillo, SD40-2, so he is currently in the process of doing the 3-D print of that part.  

      -Ted

    • April 4, 2020 5:20 PM EDT
    • One of my projects is to convert a USAT GP38-2 to a GP40-2.  Last week I bought an SD40-2 shell and frame because ...  Well just because it was $50 and I figured I could do something with it someday.  Today I'm looking at the shell and think "the body sure doesn't look much longer than a geep when the porches are off."  So I place it on a GP38-2 frame and Whoah! 

      Looks like if I cut about 18mm off behind the cab, I've got a pretty close representation of a GP40-2!  Anyone done this before?

    • April 5, 2020 9:11 PM EDT
    • Huzzah! 

    • April 5, 2020 8:11 PM EDT
    • Eric Mueller said:
      Thanks again to all for the guidance along the way and to "Rooster" for the nudge over the cliff!

       

      Aloha, 
      Eric

       

       

      Eric,

        I believe Cliff went over the cliff already and is hopefully searching out/looking for (a minimum) 4 color paint scheme currently !

    • April 5, 2020 8:01 PM EDT
    • Nice work, Eric! Looking good on your railroad!

       

    • April 5, 2020 7:40 PM EDT
    • All,

       

      The lock-down gave me an opportunity to open up this poor thing  one more time and see why the worm gears were not engaging.  The answer was easy...I had screwed the top of the motor block on too loosely.  Stupid, stupid, stupid...

       

      At any rate, Komaka iki went back on the road to field test the fix and frames for "his" field cars that are under construction:

       

      M&K Sugar Co. #7 Operational Test

       

      Smooth as glass.  You'll note the pilot looks great mounted under the firebox, too, per all the earlier suggestions.

       

           And with that, this project is a wrap.  Thanks again to all for the guidance along the way and to "Rooster" for the nudge over the cliff!  I really think this Quixotic project served as a great learning opportunity, and, despite a few setbacks, I am glad we undertook it.  If I had two take-aways (hopefully these have manifested themselves in projects  we've undertaken since!), they are:

      1. Begin with research.
      2. For any future free-lance locomotive project , the motor block drives the project (at least at my current skill level).

       

      With another m2075 (battery) dying on my shelf, I at least have a way forward in this thread!

       

      And, that, as they say, is a wrap!  

       

      Aloha, 
      Eric

       

       

    • April 4, 2020 9:50 PM EDT
    • OK,

       

      I was pondering this with a beverage as I watched my trains chase their cabooses, and it occurred to me I have a test subject ready-to-hand.  We have another battery operated LGB m2075 at the end of service life exhibiting similar issues to the model m2071 in this discussion.  Namely, the worm gear from the motor does engage drive gear (no idler in the m2075 (battery)) and just spins in space. 

       

      My plan is to use the m2075 (battery) as a guinea pig.  I figure if snugging the motor down on the m2075 (battery) fixes this sad sack, it may validate the loose motor theory on the m2071 while also offering an opportunity to practice a repair on a locomotive due to enter the shops for conversion from "Kid-zilla sponge" into "M&K Sugar Co. No. 8," anyway.  

       

      And now, back to the garden for more inspiration.

       

      Aloha,

      Eric

       

       

       

    • April 3, 2020 2:45 PM EDT
    • And for the two axle truck no matter where you put it it will need to pivot. 

    • April 3, 2020 2:43 PM EDT
    • Jim I think you should stick with it, lol. Have the only front wheel drive rail truck. I am sure the same arguments were made for the first front wheel drive cars lol. 

       

      Unless you are shooting for authentic and then it really should be in the back. But inamngood with what ever you do. It's your railroad and it's right if you say it's right.