Large Scale Central

When size matters!

Mik,
all help and your excellent photographs and cutaway diagrams most welcome. In so far as added weight, then I have a modified stock weight on the lead drive (required reshaping to allow for swing clearance) and at present, a single weight on the rear drive. I have decided to imbed an additional weight over the rear drive. This is how I did my previous Mallet build. The two weights are bonded inside the rear shell side by side over the rear drive.

 During testing I found that more weight was needed over the rear drive to counteract the tendency for the rear wheels to lift when the front drive approached a dip in the track.  This caused the forward drive to drop slightly,  resulting in the rear wheels lifting.  I have allowed more downward movement on the front drive to overcome this,  but feel more comfortable with the addtional rear weight to assist tracking.  On my curves the drive is at its minimum limit and additional weight assures me the drive will remain on the rails.

Progress to date. Both drives built and wired, awaiting completion of body to fit. Body primed. Lionel ‘1/24’ scale person shown for size comparison.

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/tim_brien/_forumfiles/1zmhz.JPG)

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/tim_brien/_forumfiles/1zmhx.JPG)

(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/tim_brien/_forumfiles/1zmhy.JPG)

“It’s as big as a battleship!”

Wow.

tac

It looks great Tim even if it is a monster: I reckon it wont do R1’s lol

That looks awesome!

Very nice Tim!

Loco is now completed. While it does run perfectly, it does not operate on my ten-foot diameter curves. There is too much resistance in the curves. The weight ensures that it does not derail, but I will not run it on my elevated track, as nine kilograms hitting the ground would make a big impact on the look of the model. On larger curves the loco runs very smoothly and while I cannot run it on my railroad, it is still a success.