Large Scale Central

MLGB E 10 (LGB20750)

General Discussion
#1

GARTENBAHNprofi ran an earlier test - prior to the recall by the manufacturer. The latest issue of GBp has an updated test/review.

Since this a European engine it probably is of limited interest, however here goes.

They ran the tests in late July/early August while the temperatures flucuated between 20ºC and the high 30s. Most of the time at around 30ºC (86ºF). Simultaneous to testing the E10 they were also running LGB’s BR101 and PIKO’s E 94.

One test track with R3 curves (4ft rad) and 1.5% grades, the other with 3.5% grades.

The recall was issued on account of insufficient tractive effort (5.5N), the improved version produces just a shade under 10N. The previous 4 traction tires have been reduced to 2. All wheels are now used for power pick-up, in total there are now 12 power pick-up points.

So far the good news!

The not-so good news: the power consumption of the motors with 3 LGB Bim cars was 2.8amp i.e. a 3A decoder will not be sufficient. Typical symptoms: the axles tend to slip at the culmination points of grades and the decoder’s Back-EMF function is unable to compensate and shuts down. With a 6A decoder it will take longer before the condition manifests (max 25 minutes).

The motors run very hot.

Conclusion: OK for indoor layouts and outdoor layouts with mild grades(1.5% max), larger than 3A decoder required if extended running is a must.

#2

I don’t know what the N stands for in tractive effort, perhaps Newtons?

Any idea why the locomotive has not lived up to its design? Does it need a larger motor? It sounds like that might be a large part of the problem if the motor runs hot and it is using 3 amps. Not enough weight also seems to be a problem, if the wheels are slipping on a grade.

Back to the drawing board.

Do these guys ever take their models out to the test range before they foist them on us, or are we supposed to be the Beta testers?

Did I just say that out loud? Again?

#3

My comment on one of the German fora regarding this was: “If they would have kept on the crew i.e. designers, toolmakers, production etc. they would have been ahead of the game some time ago.” They didn’t need the management layer.

Well if you design a four axle engine and you only power two of the four, then …

LGB had a fairly good testing set-up, but even then some stuff slipped through. More often then not because of the “R1” law.

#4

Ahh, the suits got involved. That always ruins the railroad.

#5

Steve,
the design is a new one. Marklin attempted to reinvent the wheel and suffered a puncture. Think the old Lionel largescale GP30 which had each axle driven by a vertical motor, thus two motors per drive block with both mounted vertically.

Now dumb this down to one vertically mounted motor driving one axle with no power pickups fitted. Forget Buhler quality, think a cheap and nasty 385 motor typically found in very old R/C cars. I believe another company used this motor on a recent 0-4-0 drive block. The old Lionel was renowned as a power hog, so no suprises the LGB adaptation behaved similarly. I am not aware of the current LGB design but assume it now has a second motor added to power both axles on the one driving truck.

Edit: the loco is a very nice minimal detail body designed with a relatively low entry price in the lower end of the European ‘standard’ gauge market. It was designed to compete with Piko Euro prototype. Alas, too many features were ommited to get the price relatively low (for a Marklin locomotive). If they had of stuck with their heritage’ drive block design then it no doubt would have been a spectacular release. When a children’s toy company takes over an adult toy company then the end result is a “child’s toy” designed for adults.

#6

So far Hans, Steve, and Tim have enough history on this site to know pre-sale testing is THE most repeated topic on this site. BLAST IT! Doesn’t Marklin know what a child-of-four would know: Test and stay the best! The product score card looks like PIKO is in the “trust” lead with enough consumers’ memory of Hartland’s performance to keep it in the running. USA may be strong with enough apologies for the gear glitches. Bachman earns keep with a product-by-product reputation.
Sorry Marklin, don’t screw up what’s left of your LGB retentive image that’s still got a cadre of consumers at the ready to give positive product testimony — however, they appear to be reducing in size.
Selah, Wendell

#7

MLGB…hmmmm

Maybe if they did a quick test market, with rather inexpensive single new mould, and produce an RPO to add to the old and long standing NA Western style passenger train equipment.

The other thing, might be a test issue of the North American style NG sightseeing car…modelled after the ones on the Silverton…

See how the market reacts to those two cars…that might give some sign of old customer loyalty,market them at less than the higher Collector Market prices, to help attract possible ordinary people, with an interest…

The only new moulds needed would be the sides/ends for the RPO…and a few detail parts, the rest would be from the old stock moulds…

The sightseeing car would be all old existing moulds…

I would spring for a couple of each, and I’m not in need of any additional equipment, really…

There still are a good number of people, still happily “Playing with”, or operating 1:22.5 scale equipment out here…maybe it’s a long overlooked market…if only they realized that more “Coke Cars” and cigar cars are not what we are interested in…

There is a large area of country in North America…and it still has some model railroaders on it…looking for a new car or two, and NOT those crappy Starter Sets, that are soon thrown out, or stashed away until next Christmas… Does Walthers, as a distributor, have a clue about marketing LS model Railroad equipment…or at least a few things that we in NA might be interested in ? There are others besides Collectors, out here…

Just a thought…

Fr.Fred

#8

Fred-
Good point: Market an American sightseeing car companion to what is running on the Durango/Silverton. For sure its Western and for certain it will be endorsed and “advertised” from modeling the real deal. The original Colorado series passenger cars were LGB identifiers – they are worth fully promoting again for the same reason. However, one condition: As long as the quality matches consumer memory of LGB associated with the early debut of those cars.

#9

Wendell;

LGB already produced the sightseeing car, a number of years ago. It was never heavily promoted. I only learned about it a few years after it went out of production… It did appear once in a sort of starter set, in gaudawful colours…two cars and a loco…

The reason I even mentioned it, was that to produce it again would not involve new moulds…

Of course…there is that old question;…who has the moulds now ?

I’m NOT talking about the newly built replacement car, that “The Silverton” had built to replace the old one that was lost in a fire years ago…

The sightseeing car I’m speaking of is a model of the “Covered gondolas” that the Silverton use daily on all their Summer trains.

I managed to acquire three of them a year or two ago…they are a nice model…and were not too expensive.

#10

Way back those could be had on blow-out sales. I bought quite a few, they are the basis for my heavt-weight kitbash passenger cars. Solid stuff.

The baggage car to go with those started out as a Bachmann kit.

Nope, no pictures.

:wink: :-p

PS good question, Padre. Right about now would be the time for MLGB to throw a re-run of US equipment on the market.