Large Scale Central

Does the gearing really not matter?

General Discussion
#101

First of all, The K-27 gearbox HAS a worm gear and a double thread at that. I have the gearbox and it is opened so I can examine and measure.

Second, The spec sheet for the 8000 series motor is not for the best performing motor, in my opinion and experience. I went through the 8000 series spec sheets 15 years ago and selected the highest performing version available in the optional specs. I selected the 19.1 volt version for the best mix of specs and the best match to the powerpack output at the time. NOTE: the 19.1 volt version can tolerate 30 volts for short periods, not recommended, but is it’s “safety factor”. I selected the ball bearing version due to the zero-end play availability. In the first few orders I had the motors delivered with single shaft and end terminals. I changed that order to get the side terminal version. The reason was that the end terminal version does not permit changing the brushes without special equipment, the side terminal version I can change out. This meant having to buy a 50 brush sets. I also ordered the side terminal version with double shaft (the shaft is out both ends of the motor). I also specified .125" diameter shaft. Standard shaft is 5/32, in hindsight, I could have used the stock size shaft, but I started out buying what was commercially available and some years later had my own worms developed.

NOTE: An"Order" is for a quantity of 100 motors.

I’m sure I have forgotten something, but this should do for now.

Barry - BBT

#102
mike omalley said:
I've been following this thread for a while now, and I've learned a lot. Mostly I've learned that I want to avoid ever venturng into 1:20

But it seems to me, and I speak as a total novice with little or no experience, who has never beheld a Bachmann K in real life, much less run one–that this argument is yet another instance of the track power vs. battery war. The problem with the stock K is that as geared, it draws too much current and runs the batteries down too soon. Am I wrong about this? It seems to me, based on Zbigniew’s argument, that if you are running on track power it’s not going to matter, and if you are running on battery it’s only going to matter in that it runs the batteries down sooner than it would if you geared it differently. Which makes it less than optimum, and suggests that it was designed with DCC or DC in mind

Is that what all this heat and insulting is about? Because if so, it makes sense. If I’ve learned one thing in my year of so of engagement in this hobby, it’s that Battery vs track power is a holy war, in which the stakes are extraordinarily high, and that no prisoners may be taken and the enemies fields must be sown with salt.


Mike you could be onto something here…but methinks there is much more in common with the Battery Guy and the Plain Ol’ DC Track Power guy than some may see…just a for instance go back and look into the 3 truck Shay “Quasinami” and how with regular ol’ track power and battery power it didn’t operate as suggested or even advertised (no Vol adjustment, no triggers for sound or ability to ring bell or blow whistle, etc…), it is also my understanding that it took almost 8VDC to even begin moving the loco!..but if you placed the same loco on a DCC layout…supposedly it did just as promised and could be tweaked to the customers desires.

as to a “Jihad”…as wiki puts it = “the struggle.”…one can assert the argument is one of a struggle…but one I think the two sides may need join together against the louder fish that shares the pond, and seek concessions for All control practices to be accepted and catered to!

wow, that could be the subject of a whole 'nuther 7+ page topic.

cale

I’d also like to add…if you read the above observations on the 3 truck, it appears “that it was designed with DCC” and not DC or Batt “in mind”.

#103
Chuck Cole said:
Also stated, This is a bull-gear drive so there is no worm gear and pushing the locomotive will cause the drivers to turn. When you attempt to roll it you will feel the friction of gear reduction, however. I actually prefer this arrangement and compliment this model's designers for it. I found I could stop the locomotive with a heavy train on any sort of hill and it would stay putthere so this isen't what you would call a free rolling situation.
Chuck: Thanks for citing this review. If the writing is as you reported, the review is incorrect.

The K-27 has a worm / gear set as the primary speed reducer in the drive train, so the Model Railroad News review is wrong. I also understand that Mr. Sipple went out of his way to report the lack of a worm drive, rather than, if he doesn’t know the facts, just not mentioning it. That makes the entire review close to worthless, as one can only assume he didn’t have the locomotive, or doesn’t have enough knowledge to write about what he is seeing, or has deliberately mis-represented it.

I really don’t have any respect for so-called expert publications that are nothing more than fluff purveyors, or worse yet deliberately mis-represent the truth. Just my opinion, but one of those would seem to be the case here.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#104
Steve Featherkile said:
Jon,

So, where’s the bull? :smiley:

Mike,

I suppose that you could say this is a holy war, and that villages must be burned and the fields sown with salt. That said, I get the notion that the K works fine at Warp 8-10, but not on 1/4 Impulse, even with DCC. Since many of us here are more interested in operating our railroads as the big boys do, that requires reliable slow speed ability. To mix a metaphor, it is as though a shipbuilder required the captain to approach the pier at Flank Speed, because the ship’s engines are not reliable at anything less.


I have a very simple set up. I use an MRC 9500 controller on an indoor layout with nickel silver rail. The layout is only 18’ X 24’.
Anyway, the MRC 9500 has a maximum output of 20V, 3A and my K-27 absolutely crawls when I want it to. But… I only run 4 to 5 car trains and the maximum grade is 3%. The MRC 9500 has what the company calls “Advanced Proportional Tracking Control” which helps in slow speed performance. At any rate, at least in my situation, the K runs fine.

George

#105
Stan Ames said:
This is a question you should ask Bachmann as it relates to a product they have yet to release.

Stan


For those that are following, I did post this very question on the Bmann board…see it here:

http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php/topic,7221.0.html

cale

#106

Basically, the ‘problem’ is what one anticipates from their model. For some the ‘K’ is the be all and end all of what is good. For others there are improvements to be made to make a good locomotive better. Many simply do not know any better and think that what they see is as good as it gets.

I will draw an analogy with the Aristo wide-radius switch. For five years modellors have been lamenting the short comings of this product. Forums have a ton of information on how to improve the switch for more reliable operation. Aristo-Craft have initiated some improvements over the years and have just released a revised frog moulding as a replacement part for earlier switches. Many supposed modellors have responded - “Lewis, how do I know if I need the replacement frog on my wide-radius switches?” Have these people been living under a log for five years.

This hobby is plagued by supposed modellors who know none of the basics and simply accept whatever the manufacturer dishes out and comment how good the item is. There are many who do not even check their wheels are within gauge. Many have not even heard of a wheel ‘back to back’ measurement and accept poor performance through trackwork as normal. I am staggered by the high percentage of inexperienced, supposed hobbyists, who venture into largescale and always have an opinion on a topic. I would prefer that those who have very limited experience reserve their observations for around their dinner table discussion.

#107
mike omalley said:
I've been following this thread for a while now, and I've learned a lot. Mostly I've learned that I want to avoid ever venturng into 1:20

But it seems to me, and I speak as a total novice with little or no experience, who has never beheld a Bachmann K in real life, much less run one–that this argument is yet another instance of the track power vs. battery war. The problem with the stock K is that as geared, it draws too much current and runs the batteries down too soon. Am I wrong about this? It seems to me, based on Zbigniew’s argument, that if you are running on track power it’s not going to matter, and if you are running on battery it’s only going to matter in that it runs the batteries down sooner than it would if you geared it differently. Which makes it less than optimum, and suggests that it was designed with DCC or DC in mind

Is that what all this heat and insulting is about? Because if so, it makes sense. If I’ve learned one thing in my year of so of engagement in this hobby, it’s that Battery vs track power is a holy war, in which the stakes are extraordinarily high, and that no prisoners may be taken and the enemies fields must be sown with salt.


No Mike.
This is not an argument about battery - v - track power.
This is about how Bachmann were given (via Mr Stanley Ames) gearbox specifications for the K-27 provided by Barry Olsen and Dave Goodson, that required 1:30 ratio with a double start worm.
Of that there is no dispute. Documentary evidence exists that this scenario took place.

The story from that point is a little hazy but basically went like this.
The factory duly produced a lovely 1:30 gearbox but with a single start worm.
Only problem is it behaved like all other single start worm gearboxes Bachmann have produced. It bucked and jumped going downgrade.
An urgent call went out from the “involved party” (who shall remain nameless) to fix it and put in a twin start worm to smooth out the drive.
This the factory did poste haste.
Only problem was the “involved party” did not check that the factory had not only replaced the single start worm with a double start worm, but had also adjusted the ratios to compensate. They had not adjusted them so the K-27 was issued with the wrong gearbox ratios.

This dispute is over the BS reasons now given to justify why the K-27 ended up with 1:14.5 ratio and not the specified 1:30.
It would be very interesting to find out exactly who the “involved party” is and how come they screwed it up and are now resorting to a cover up.

#108

Mike,
a lot happens in the background and we only get to hear a very small part of it. The LGB saga was one such event. The B’mann 3-truck Shay/DCC saga. The B’mann/Tsunami saga, another and the B’mann gearbox saga is another. If one follows the evidence there is one party/individual involved in all the B’mann fiascos. One thing is certain in that the truth is out there, but the truth will remain hidden and we can only speculate.

#109

…and ohhhh do some people “Speculate…” !!!

#110
TonyWalsham said:
This is about how Bachmann were given (via Mr Stanley Ames) gearbox specifications for the K-27 provided by Barry Olsen and Dave Goodson, that required 1:30 ratio with a double start worm. Of that there is no dispute. Documentary evidence exists that this scenario took place.

The story from that point is a little hazy but basically went like this.
The factory duly produced a lovely 1:30 gearbox but with a single start worm.
Only problem is it behaved like all other single start worm gearboxes Bachmann have produced. It bucked and jumped going downgrade.
An urgent call went out from the “involved party” (who shall remain nameless) to fix it and put in a twin start worm to smooth out the drive.
This the factory did poste haste.
Only problem was the “involved party” did not check that the factory had not only replaced the single start worm with a double start worm, but had also adjusted the ratios to compensate. They had not adjusted them so the K-27 was issued with the wrong gearbox ratios.

This dispute is over the BS reasons now given to justify why the K-27 ended up with 1:14.5 ratio and not the specified 1:30.
It would be very interesting to find out exactly who the “involved party” is and how come they screwed it up and are now resorting to a cover up.


Tony, I find it hard to believe that professionals at any respectable factory would be phoning or asking for advice or specification external people who essentially are amateurs and hobbyists and have no affiliation with the factory - therefore zero responsibility… and perhaps even worse, some personal preferences or hidden agenda. If so, then we are in a real trouble!! I really think that if you have any proofs for your story you should make it public, because without a proof this is just a “hazy story” as you say and rather difficult to believe I must say… But whatever the story, we will never learn what was taking place at the factory and which decisions were taken there - someone must have designed this locomotive including the drives and this was not a weekend job or a hundred dollars investment… Whichever way, we now have the final product only and so we better learn what it is good for, and this is exactly what we have been trying to do in this thread. Best wishes, Zubi

#111
Tim Brien said:
............

This hobby is plagued by supposed modellors who know none of the basics and simply accept whatever the manufacturer dishes out and comment how good the item is. There are many who do not even check their wheels are within gauge. Many have not even heard of a wheel ‘back to back’ measurement and accept poor performance through trackwork as normal. I am staggered by the high percentage of inexperienced, supposed hobbyists, who venture into largescale and always have an opinion on a topic. I would prefer that those who have very limited experience reserve their observations for around their dinner table discussion.


Timmer,

I like it! :lol: :lol: And how upset they get when you tell them it ain’t so!

#112
mike omalley said:
[...] The problem with the stock K is that as geared, it draws too much current and runs the batteries down too soon. Am I wrong about this? It seems to me, based on Zbigniew's argument, that if you are running on track power it's not going to matter, and if you are running on battery it's only going to matter in that it runs the batteries down sooner than it would if you geared it differently. Which makes it less than optimum, and suggests that it was designed with DCC or DC in mind
Mike, rather than commenting on the holy war, let me answer your question here. There is no problem with the battery power. You either need to use twice the voltage (batteries in a series) or twice the current (batteries parallel) so you need the same number of batteries and they will last precisely as long (assuming that the efficiency of the motor is the same in both scenarios - which in general is not true but the difference is not that great I think). Since many battery packs are 10-15 Volt, it is quite easy to use these for battery power, you would need to look for 20+ Volt batteries to achieve the same with gear ratio half the numerical value. On the contrary, if you use DC or especially DCC, higher current will cost you a bit more because you need to use a heavier transformer and control electronics to handle double current values. Double voltage is cheaper when you use wires and electronics. The same applies to the electronics used to control the engine from battery power. So it is more expensive on electronics and current handling devices if you use 1:14.5 rather than 1:29 but it makes little difference to batteries which you need - or rather, it is easier to get lower voltage ones but higher capacity and higher current. Best, Zubi
#113

Zubi,
Stanley has never digressed from his association with the K-27. As soon as the Biles-Coleman mallett is mentioned, the response is contact Bachmann for information. It is highly conceivable that a certain ‘consultant’ was asked to assess the criteria for the K project and sought the advice of two of the most respected modellors in the States as regards B’ann locomotives. Dave has been a close friend of the Bach-man for many, many years and was in constant communication with Ray over that time. Dave assessed new production and reported on his findings in a factual unbiassed manner. Barry Olsen is renowned for his replacement drives for B’mann chassis and highly skilled and respected in his trade. Who better would one turn to for advice?

   In so far as private discussions, admissions and retractions,  well one needs to not be a doubting Thomas and at least consider for the

moment, that such discussions took place.

#114
Tim Brien said:
I am staggered by the high percentage of inexperienced, supposed hobbyists, who venture into largescale and always have an opinion on a topic. I would prefer that those who have very limited experience reserve their observations for around their dinner table discussion.
The nerve of these people, having opinions and expressing them! My classrooms are full of students who have no information about or experience in American history, and yet they feel entitled to an opinion! Free speech!

I’m exactly the beginner you’re talking about. I have a wheel gage, i started to check it on everything, but then I said to myself “wait, everything’s running fine. if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I’ve learned a lot here for which i’m very thankful. But to be very honest, on a lot of the threads in this particular forum, I can’t for the life of me figure out what the %$# is going on.

#115

HJ,
well I have hooked one so far. If you are going fishing, you need the right bait.

Mike,
if one has the experience to criticise another’s statements, then that criticism is valid. If one has no experience on a topic and still feels the need to criticise, then how valid is the criticism? Merely expressing an opinion is irrelevant when one is talking from a standpoint devoid of substance. There was a member on a manufacturer’s forum who had a bad experience with the personnel on the site, probably because of his abrasive, brash personality. He was deregistered from the site and yet continues to criticise the product line on at least two other forum sites that I know of. He is an inexperienced modellor and yet he feels he has the supposed experience to criticise the product line of a particular manufacturer. The truth is, he is disgruntled that he could not peddle his abusive personality across the internet and sought revenge on the site that had the courage to deregister him. Do you feel that his criticism of the manufacturer’s product line is valid? Yes, he has freedom of speech and has the opportunity to express an opinion, but, in reality, his opinion is based on spite and not fact.

#116

Everyone becomes an “Expert” once they spend the bucks and own a “K”, it seems…
The “Experts” don’t all expect the same from any given product…so some will think it is great, others will find fault due to the use they find for it.

This hobby is filled with “Our-of-the-box” hobbiests who will either find no problems, or a colosal failure…then there are the Model Railroaders who are more critical. Some have half an idea of what a locomotive will do, and others don’t have a clue. Add in those that know everything no-mater if they ever operated a locomotive, or just read reviews in GR…which sometimes are rather sparse on facts due to questionable editing…and research.
…but what do I know…I just operate a railroad and am not buying any more locomotives as I have all that I need.
My only real comment of any value, is that I would still wait before buying, any LS locomotive, of any manufacture, until I could read a review by Dave Goodson…direct from Dave, and NOT edited by anyone.

#117

Does the gearing really not matter?

Not to me, unless it doesn’t hold up, says the owner of a brand new Backmann Connie with a broken main plastic piece of s$%# gear.
The most important part of the loco is the gear.
How can a tiny plastic POS of a gear support the engine and it’s train?

Backmann, looks are only skin deep, as I’ve said many times.
Spend less time prettying up a loco and more time improving the guts!

#118
Tim Brien said:
Zubi, Stanley has never digressed from his association with the K-27. As soon as the Biles-Coleman mallett is mentioned, the response is contact Bachmann for information. It is highly conceivable that a certain 'consultant' was asked to assess the criteria for the K project and sought the advice of two of the most respected modellors in the States as regards B'ann locomotives. Dave has been a close friend of the Bach-man for many, many years and was in constant communication with Ray over that time. Dave assessed new production and reported on his findings in a factual unbiassed manner. Barry Olsen is renowned for his replacement drives for B'mann chassis and highly skilled and respected in his trade. Who better would one turn to for advice? 
   In so far as private discussions, admissions and retractions,  well one needs to not be a doubting Thomas and at least consider for the

moment, that such discussions took place.


Tim, OK, I am happy to consider this for a moment. But even in that case, the actual decisions are taken within the factory. The same holds for other factories, for example those starting with ‘A’. There may be advisors, even very knowledgeable ones, but the actual person in control is the one that invests the money. If the company invests the money they will most likely stay in control. The sad and hazy story as told here only proves that the individuals in question did not have the capacity to implement and verify the execution of their advice, which to me qualifies their ‘association’ as rather loose. Now we are discussing whether this is actually good or bad for the product - irrespective of the strength of the association of said individuals with Bachmann;-)))…

Now back to the facts, Barry Olsen stated here that he is mainly (or exclusively) using the 8000 series in his drives. I compared the specifications of the two 24V motors from both 8000 series and 9000 series and if I were to apply them, I would use (about) half numerical ratio of the gearing for the 9000 as compared to the 8000 - there is about factor two between essential parameters in both series:
http://www.clickautomation.com/products/index.php?func=show&pid=335&cid=142
http://www.clickautomation.com/products/index.php?func=show&pid=345&cid=143
If Barry applied his experience with 8000 to 9000 series without adjusting it to different specifications, this could account for the discrepancy between the advised gear ratio and the one actually used after the soundness of the advice has been verified at the factory.

Best wishes from Tokyo, Zubi

#119

John Bouck; You do have a point there. I bought a third Connie, and several Annies, just for parts, in case the others had gear problems. I doubt that B’mann will continue supplying replacement gears forever.
BBT may come up with replacement gears, of metal, in the future, but I’m inclined to think that we will all be stuck with a major cost, replacement job before long.
It wouldn’t be too bad replacing the spur gears in the gear box, by the average person, but replacing the gear on the driver axle, will be beyond most.
I can’t see Barry providing a replacement service for less than the price some of us paid for the loco on sale.

Not to just bash B’mann…

The same goes for USTrains and their continuing gear problems, that don’t make headlines lately…but still exist.
Metal gears were proved to be the standard in the smaller scales, long ago, but we are still learning in LS, and will in the next 5 years, see many junkers on the market lacking replacement gears at an affordable price.

#120

Mr. Brien thank you for the recognition.

Fred, I run a mix of gear materials. The law in regard to mixing materials is that the driving gear is always harder material than the driven gear. I use a brass worm to an acetal worm gear. On the same shaft with the worm gear I mount an aluminum spur gear, driving an acetal axle gear. The acetal gears have brass hubs.
These little open gear trains are proving themselves to be remarkably dependable. I provide a starter portion of synthetic grease and have always put a lube port on the bottom of the drives for access to lube the gears. Every manufacturer wants his mechanisms lubricated, I have just tried to make it easier. I am working on a replacement gearbox and motor for the Bachmann Consolidation. I hope to start shipping in January. Concurrently, I am working on a modification to the K-27 gearbox which can easily be done and will lower the gear ratio to something more compatible with our experience (if that doesn’t work out I will announce that as fact and recommend keeping the factory setup).

I also do something no other manufacturer has done to my knowledge. It is becoming less and less an advantage, but I do warrant my drives for life (mine not yours). Your only cost is to send it to me, I will repair,etc. and pay for the return shipping. This does not apply to misuse, abuse or explosions or house fires.
I mentioned in an earlier entry that I had initially used an adjustable motor mount, to the best of my knowledge these have all been replaced at no cost other than shipping by the owner. A few customers have bought my drives on ebay, or privately, they are still covered, I warrant the drive not the ownership. Not too bad for one without the formal credentials referred to earlier.

Barry - BBT