I have a set that are close to the delton trucks that are 3d printed will post a picture after scouts tonight
Are these leaf spring trucks though? Every real sprung truck I have seen is coil springs. I know I am splittin hairs here but the prototype is a leaf spring truck. I mean if I am going to the trouble of hand making a truck shouldn’t it be authentic.
My though at this point is that I can go with a rigid non sprung truck and if it doesn’t work then switch later.
Devon, I thought about making my own trucks. I even bought a set of plans from Side Street Bannerworks. Then I figured out that a pair of USA trucks can be had for $5 to $10 if you shop around. I also bought up quite a few Delton classic (Aristocraft’s re-release) trucks, and some Bachmann trucks. For me, its just easier to use those trucks then to take the time to build my own. Under the car, rolling down the track, most folks don’t pay much attention to the trucks. But, that is just my opinion. If you do build truck, please post a thread about the build.
As for sprung trucks, in HO my KaDee trucks are sprung, and one car with those trucks under it will not track on the poor club track worth a darn. The others work fine. The main reason I believe the one car will not track properly is because its an unweighted hopper car, and being so light the truck is just too flexible.
Another opinion I have, and we all know what opinions are worth, is that the springs in sprung trucks just look too thin and fragile. They aren’t beefy enough to be scale springs. I guess if they were that beefy looking then the truck would be ridged. But I, personally, think the springs actually detract from the look of the truck, due to them not being beefy looking enough.
Devon, tender trucks and caboose trucks tend to have leaf springs for a smoother ride. So I would say, yea you want to model the leaf springs. Even if they aren’t operational (springy), they would be the proper choice for a tender truck.
If and when I decide to pull the trigger on building these I will definitely post a thread on it.
I have a nasty habit of building something when I can buy a better looking version cheaper. Scratch building is in my blood. My first HO scratch built diesel took about 4 months cost as much or more than a good used one and looked like terrible when it was done. But I enjoyed building it and in my opinion that’s what matters. I am not much of a runner. I don’t even have a layout in either scale anymore. I always preferred to spend my time building instead of running. The guy who got me into trains so many years ago was the exact opposite. He loved to run trains and he ran it like a real operation. Nothing moved without a waybill and a purpose.
That’s why I love this hobby. It has so much room for variety.
Ok I am just straining my brain way to much trying to understand the above diagram of the arch bar truck. Some things just don’t make sense to me. First off let me say that my prototype is an Eames vacuum brake system as opposed to positive pressure system. so it pulls the brake on. Which I guess is really neither hear nor there.
I see that there is a bracket that holds the brake shoe hanger that in turn holds the brake shoes. then there is some sort of deal that must hold the bottom of the shoe that looks slotted for the shoe to slide back and forth on. I am just not seeing how this all works and then is in turn hooked to the lever which in turn is hooked to the brake actuator. Now each truck has inside shoes on each wheel and there are two trucks. I am lost at how all of this would hook together without seeing the real deal.
Also is there some sort of metal cap sort of deal that would go on the end of the wood beam so it can slide up and down in the truck side frame, kinda looks like it in the picture. I am a show and tell kinda guy. Can anyone enlighten me on how exactly a truck of any sort works. for the most part all early trucks have the same principle don’t they?
So I might have helped my cause considerably.
I found this site showing a guy assembling an arch bar truck. Its starting to come together.
This will simplify the system. While it pulls the brake beam, it also works the fulcrum and applies twice (or so) the pull on the far side to compensate for the moving beam/fulcrum.
John
John
Thank for that diagram. That will help place the ejector. I am starting to get the picture think.
From a visual standpoint, one problem with most “large scale” coil-spring trucks I’ve seen is that the springs have to use really thin wire compared with the real thing.
Ray yea. the springs are undersized on sprung trucks in any scale. I would prefer scale looking springs, even though that would make the truck ridged.
That drawing does not show the ejector…which must have been the drawing below but does show the vacuum pot and mechanical brake rigging.
Looking at thedrawing of the truck at the beginning of the post, it looks like the bolster beam is not straight. That suggests to me that it was probably iron or steel. If it is a tender truck from Baldwin, I would guess that is even more likely. That said, wood will be fine in the model, though I would use a stronger wood than redwood. I would go with oak myself but I do have scraps of all kinds of wood and the tools to work them.
Eric Schade said:
That drawing does not show the ejector…which must have been the drawing below but does show the vacuum pot and mechanical brake rigging.
Looking at thedrawing of the truck at the beginning of the post, it looks like the bolster beam is not straight. That suggests to me that it was probably iron or steel. If it is a tender truck from Baldwin, I would guess that is even more likely. That said, wood will be fine in the model, though I would use a stronger wood than redwood. I would go with oak myself but I do have scraps of all kinds of wood and the tools to work them.
I see what your saying about the bolster not being straight. Now I was looking close at the drawing and it doesn’t mention the material. The reason I said wood bolster is that on the loco build sheet it specs a arch bar wood bolster truck and supposedly that is the drawing of the truck that was used but now I am skeptical if that is the right drawing. I will make it wood bolster since that is what is specked. I can use what ever wood is best. I have tons of wood and tools to work it. I was just thinking of the weather proof nature of redwood. Bt I can do oak just as easy and seal it.
Eric Schade said:
That drawing does not show the ejector…which must have been the drawing below but does show the vacuum pot and mechanical brake rigging.
Looking at thedrawing of the truck at the beginning of the post, it looks like the bolster beam is not straight. That suggests to me that it was probably iron or steel. If it is a tender truck from Baldwin, I would guess that is even more likely. That said, wood will be fine in the model, though I would use a stronger wood than redwood. I would go with oak myself but I do have scraps of all kinds of wood and the tools to work them.
It was a google search photo, nothing below… cropped creative.
John
As for the ejector I have some good drawings of that. I am just interested mainly in how the connection from the vacuum pot is made to the trucks and how each truck’s breaks work. I still am a bit confused on how the brakes are applied to each wheel of the truck. Both shoes are inside shoes so they have to push in opposite directions to apply the brakes. How is the motion of the rod going in one direction transferred to the shoes which are traveling in different directions.
Oak is a fine wood for such a project, a little water will not hurt it and rot is not an issue unless you leave your engine out in the weather for YEARS!
I been volunteering at the WW&F Railway museum and have been helping to restore an 1891vintage two foot gauge Forney with vacuum brakes. I will be molding the diaphram for its brakes as shown in that drawing If i can!
Devon there is a lever with a pivot point off center. the rod pulls on one end or the lever , the pivot pulls on one break beam, the rod attached to the other end of the lever pulls on the other brake beam.
Devon Sinsley said:
So I might have helped my cause considerably.
I found this site showing a guy assembling an arch bar truck. Its starting to come together.
Devon,
That’s an excellent set of illustrations. From studying Brill trucks as fitted to streetcars and the EBT M-1 gas-electric railcar, I developed some theories, yet to be confirmed.
This photo is the key:
What you see is the truck bolster sitting in a slot in the sideframe and resting on the springs. The springs rest on the sideframe, so as the truck moves up and down with the bumpy track, the bolster rides on the springs and cushions the ride of the tender.
Your truck (and thanks to Ken for reversing it so I could read it,) has a full-width crosspiece below the springs, and the bolster would be allowed a little side-to-side movement, to cater for small zig-zags in the rails. There are two pairs of ‘hangers’ preventing the truck from moving too far sideways.
You did comment that it only seems to have one spring. Erecting drawings like that often show one view on one side of the center line and a different view on the other. So you may be seeing the spring inside the hangers, and the other side shows the hanger outside the spring.
Is that the biggest image you have?
Devon,
There are those that do not believe that equalized (sprung) trucks assist in tracking. To that I say horse puckey. If rigid trucks were of no value, why would the railroads have spent so much money coming up with so many designs? Dave Maynard commented that he prefers rigid trucks, I do not. To expound on that point, I just finished replacing the springs in my Accucraft/AMS tank cars with the lighter (spring rate) springs from the AMS flat cars. All of my tanks now track through club track that they would not before. I identified the problem watching as I slowly ran the train through that section of track (which had a bit of a dip), and watching the ‘high wheel’ walk up and over the rial head. Yes I agree that the springs (even those I replaced) are WAY too thin in diameter, but I prefer performance over appearance. I also use both the Bachmann and USA rigid trucks. I modify both o allow for the side frames to somewhat ‘rotate’ in the assembly allowing the truck to equalize. I have reduced my derailments by 90% doing this.
The leaf springs used in tender and caboose trucks are commonly referred to as ‘buggy springs’. They are usually manufactured with a closed ‘eye’ on one end and an open ‘eye’ on the other. The open eye is large enough to slide the closed eye into, this being done on both ends of the spring. Many leaf springs are made using multiple leaves, each getting shorter as the stack is built. The assembly is held together with a ‘center bolt’ which goes through a hole in the midpoing of the spring. That defines the springs in question. The problem with leaf springs in the model world is that the ‘scale’ material thickness wold be so thin as to not be durable enough to stand up, and to get the thickness to a durable level you loose the flexibility required. I believe it was Hartford Products used to sell a ‘leaf spring’ truck where there were thin 1/2 leaves on the visible side that were separated by a coil spring underneath out of sight. Although not a rivet counter’s solution, that might be an available out to get the appearance you want with a more reliable functionality.
As others have said, please post a build thread should you choose to move forward with this project. Good luck, I am going to follow this thread.
Bob C.
I understand Devon, that you want to understand how the trucks work, and how the breaks on the trucks work. But since I doubt that you will actually be building working breaks on your trucks, its mostly an academic discussion.
Modeling the springs, working or not, would be necessary from a visual standpoint. Having some flexibility in the trucks, to allow them to track on less then perfect track, is helpful. Bob states that having actual springs have allowed his trucks to track better. I have found that too much flexibility in the trucks, and too much “give” in the springs can cause tracking problems on some track. Everyone’s experiences are different, and I am not saying that anyone is wrong on this point.
But I do have to question, from a time and cost standpoint, wouldn’t it be less costly to buy trucks, rather then build them? Sure scratch-built trucks would look better, but nestled under a tender, would the added effort of making them really be worth it? I am just asking. If you do build trucks, I hope you post a thread on how you do it, with a lot of pictures.