I remember some time back, someone mentioning turning one of the trucks around for better running.
How hard was the work and was it worth it?
Thanks
I read that too. Never tried it, but it makes sense, putting the sprung axles on the outside reduces the rigid wheelbase.
Yes.
The reason is that the rigid wheel base is way too long making the RDC prone to derailing on track that is not level sideways.
The swiveling axles should be on the outside to shorten the rigid wheelbase.
I do it by turning the motor blocks around in the truck body. That means it is necessary to cut a slot in the spacer bars underneath the truck swivel so the pick up and motor wires can get to the other side.
For track power it will mean reversing the truck motor wiring at the plugs on the chassis.
Well worth doing with any long wheel base Aristocraft locos with the two axle trucks.
My three RS3’s and two centre cabs run fine. The occasional derailment is usually something that is track orientated, such as uneven track after very heavy rain or birds seeking seeds, twigs, snails or other intrusion on the ROW.
However, my FA-1, which is a taller locomotive and has a different c of g, has benefited by the reversal of the trucks.
My good friend Ed, in Lakeland FL, taught me that trick.
Alen
I don’t mind tuning the track once in a while…Not every time I run those units!
You would think If the Hudson ran great without problems then the RDC’s…;(
Hi Sean,
I had a 3 car set I sold off a while back that were modified. I was able to make aluminum leaf springs under the carbody that allowed the trucks to negotiate uneven track while leveling off to center. In addition to tracking better, I thought the cars also looked more natural on rough track. The only downside, was that it required raising the car body slightly to allow room for the suspension.
The RDC is the most finicky loco Aristo has made, and I concur with Tony’s observations.
Other things that will help is removal of the traction tires, which makes that axle grab but not the other and it causes the truck (combined with curves and the length) to try to climb “out” of a curve.
I did not have to reverse the trucks after removing the traction tires, running on minimum 10’ diameter and making sure the trucks swiveled freely.
Greg
p.s. it is my “track test car” for these reasons and it has the worst overhang of any car or loco I possess.
But what would I do if I remove the traction tires? Doesn’t that leave on wheel with a “Groove” in it?
Lou Luczu said:
But what would I do if I remove the traction tires? Doesn’t that leave on wheel with a “Groove” in it?
Yes Lou you would be Groovy! 
On Gregs website he tells you the part # of the wheels you need to get. But can you get them…Hmmm
Yeah, the wheel w/o traction tire was a popular part, you may have to call around a bit to find them.
http://www.elmassian.com/trains/motive-power-mods-aamp-tips/aristo-motive-power/rdc
(some people claim that running the wheel w/o the traction tire is fine, but that is not my experience)
Greg
Thanks, y’all!
Sean i did it was not hard i also lowered and made the rear truck free wheel there was a person that lowered his lives by you sent me pics. and i went from there. it seems to work well.
richard
Still got the pics?
i should have if not i can get you pics of mine still in fl.
richard
Hi 70’s Sunny @ Home in mass.
Well I’ve never had issues with the RDC cars derailing. I did remove the wheel sets with the traction tires tho. I also maintain level track. Track that is poorly lined and not kept at 0 X-level is the biggest reason for equipment to derail. Sure a lot easier than trying to modify your cars and locos. Later RJD