See?
edit:
Actually, see the thread on “Genral Malaise” Tim started.
Tight curves, run in circles, clueless on how they are supposed to run, trying to generically “prove” without ever once asking for the specific number of the motor in question (and using a generic 24VDC motor when it’s a 19VDC unit), jaded by release after release (Polk Fawning Phorum: “Gee, that was nice, What’s Next?”).
Not worth the effort.
Terry A de C Foley said:
Just trying to figure out why nobody over here in yUK seems to have any of the issues that plague you guys over there. Just like most of us with the first or even second generation Shays didn't have any problems either. Neither of my two Climaxi have had any problems and the Heisler and Connie are just plain boring..I have a 1st and a 2nd gen Bachmann Shay, both with their original power truck, and both are excellent runners, regularly hauling eight-ten home-built log cars with real logs on, not the lightweight placcy things.
I know a few over here with the new Bachmann K-27, mostly the spiffy green-boiler version, and asking around none of them have either ‘dragster’ start-up or balance weight issues.
So please tell me what we are doing wrong?
So far, we have nothing to complain about like you have, and are feeling pretty much left out of the fun you guys are having with your combined mass gripings, character assassinations and long-range insults.
tac
www.ovgrs.org
I too have a first run (Ely Thomas version) and second run (Pardee Curtin version) Shay from Bachmann. Both were factory equipped with the washer kits that TOC developed to solve a problem with the trucks. Bachmann recognized that problem, and incorporated the solution into locomotives they serviced and ultimately into locomotives they sold. So, at one point, the problem was at least accepted by the manufacturer as more than the figment of someone’s imagination.
Bachmann later replaced all four of those trucks at their own expense with trucks that were designed with heavier duty pickups and cast in plastic that was less likely to disintegrate. The company then made those new trucks available to anyone who had an older Shay, for a defined time, so that people with the problem they’d seen enough times in their Service department to respond to it and take on the expense of replaceing trucks for free … this tells me that the problem was real enough to Bachmann to do something about it, and not just the imagination of a money craving nutcase and his fanatic followers. Nobody I know made any money as a result. Oh, and the “balance weight issues” were another problem recognized by, and responded to, by Bachmann, shortly before the fellow who discovered the problem and its solution was summarily sacked; I suspect your exampled locomotives, if they are performing as well as you describe, may have come equipped with the solution.
Much of this was back when the board was yellow, and the Bach-Man waved his hat … and those of us who frequented it at the time were well aware of all of these things, and participated actively in the discussion of how to fix the problem … including the Bachmann representatives. Calls to Bachmann service were frequently referred to the same solutions, conceived by the same individual. Similarly, years later, when there were users who experienced problems with the 2-8-0 drive, the so called “screw mod” to tighten and threadlock the motor to the gearbox, and often to remove the problematic noise suppression components was pasted, and repasted, and repasted, to the point that when the question was asked, the Bachmann representative’s usual response was something to the effect of “I’m sure someone will post the solution shortly” referring to the procedure we all now know. And, even this week, in another popular forum, similar references to how to make the railtruck functional pointed back to the same man, making the same discovery about screws that were too long in the gearbox, and discovering a remedy that used existing parts and cost all concerned exactly NOTHING.
Now, of course, the political tide has turned. There’s a new sheriff in town, and some new deputies, and they’ve all learned to shout “Nothing to See Here Folks” over their bullhorns when asked what will be done about problems that arise. Some are inclined to believe there’s nothing to see. Some smell what they think is blood in the water, and ‘enthusiastically’ take the opportunity to inflate themselves without fear that someone who might know more about it than they do would offer an opinion and immediately make them look ridiculous. Others are more concerned with championing the honor of various friends who they feel need defense, and more than a few see an opportunity to run off at the mouth about something about which they know very little beyond what they’ve heard, but have decided to take up a banner anyway. So, we have discussion about “bashing” people and products when folks refuse to simply cave in and accept whatever they’re told. Since when does standing up for one’s self and what one stands for (never mind what you’ve worked hard for and can definitively prove) constitute bashing … unless such intimations are simply an attempt to find a new political way to silence the opposition?
Please don’t come into a thread where I’ve asked for real people to present real experiences with real locomotives and make statements that deny the existence of issues that even the manufacturer has addressed publicly, and used the information and efforts provided by the guy who’s raising the new issues here to fix. Just because the current political climate favors obfuscation and misdirection to information and solutions, let’s not allow them to rewrite history because it suits them. You have too much integrity to fall into that trap, and you know that even a good friend can be wrong; else you would be rabidly defending that the only models worthy of consideration as model trains would be both live steam, and made by Aster, in a scale of 1:22.5 … making the Accucraft 1:19 Garratt you own and love (and that we all envy) indefensible and an embarassment. I don’t discount that perhaps due to some brilliant stroke of luck that your locomotives have never experienced a problem because I believe you are an honest man … but you’re enough of a thinking man to understand that what you’re describing would be an exception among exceptions, and not the rule. For what it’s worth, I’m sorry that your friend, and others have taken such a pounding over this issue, and it was because of that that I started this discussion in the first place, with the idea that we could have some testimonials of actual applicable circumstances, and dispense with the banner waving.
Apparently not.
Matthew (OV)
Matthew. Wow, all I can is thats about the best description of the issue I’ve read. I agree, now that the “same individual ;)” has washed his hands of it, the boys at B are going to find out just how much brown matter those diagnosis and repair recommendations were averting from their doorstep.
Well said, Matthew!
Matt,
Terry was merely responding to his personal experiences with his B’mann locomotives. It is highly likely that his 1st generation Shay was a six screw truck fitted from the factory with Dave’s washer kit. It is possible that his K-27 (and the others he has experience with) were supplied with the crank kits already installed.
In so far as the apparent lack of performance on gradients, well, Terry is a devotee of live steam (as are most likely most of his friends) and we all know that livesteam locomotives, in Europe, are run like slot cars at breakneck speed in circles on flat tracks. Is it possible that they also operate their electric K-27's also at breakneck speed, on flat tracks and it is inertia that disguises the underlying low down torque problem?
I concur with your feeling of aggravation, but some simply do not have the experience to recognise and diagnose that a fault is present. When one runs a locomotive outside of the 'problem envelope', then the response will be, 'What problem, I do not have a problem. I see nothing'. A simple diagnosis of existing conditions will show that there is a problem. If one is using track power then how many actually slowly increase power to the track to initiate loco movement. Those who have experience with LGB locomotives know that onboard electronics delay loco movement until onboard sound systems/lights, etc are powered up. This then leads to a rapid start. The same operatos may be using the initial increased voltage input as an explanation of the 'jack rabbit' starts. Jack rabbit starts are either too much power applied to the rails, initially, or too higher gearing. Those with a bit of experience under their belts know that it is a gearing problem. Similarly, with the gradient faltering. It has been shown on another thread that the motor is powerful enough, so why does the loco falter on a grade. Could it be lack of torque and as our illustrious resident physicist has shown, torque is directly proportionally amplified by gear reduction. Now we have two scenarios that illustrate the need for a lower ratio gearbox. Of course, those of us in the supposed real world do not even acknowledge that jack rabbit starts and gradient faltering exist. It all boils down to how we personally diagnose the operating conditions.