|
|
Post by espeenut on Oct 22, 2014 19:37:25 GMT -8
...hi guys, I just received an HO scale GE Dash 8-40CW in the mail from Atlas last night, its the Union Pacific # 9448, the only Dash 8 ever painted in the 'Building America' flag scheme, and its still earning its living today. I am a member of the Atlas Golden Spike Club and this model was an exclusive offer to club members back in 2011/12. My question is for those who are familiar with current Atlas releases. The last Atlas models I purchased were three SP GP40-2's and they came in the same packaging that this Dash 8 does. I have another Atlas Dash 8-40CW in BNSF markings and the boxing is totally different - much larger box with a lot of foam padding.
The interesting difference is between the two models. The BNSF model, bought back in 2005, doesn't appear to be as finely molded as the "new" UP model. The windows are quite thick on it and the molding doesn't seem quite as fine as on the "new" one. The windows on the UP one are crystal clear - easy to see the crew - and the data lettering on the side of the hood is now scale whereas on the older model this is definitely over scale.
I know Atlas, along with other manufacturers, has been having problems with production in China, and this model took almost two years to arrive after being announced. So what's the story with this? Is this an "all new" or slightly tweaked model based on the original molds but done in a different factory? I'm actually quite happy with its appearance and it seems to run OK (although I haven't really had it on the club layout yet to run it through its paces yet) This is an exclusively unique release of a exclusively unique locomotive so, and even though I model the SP, I felt it would be a good fit in my small collection of UP motive power...
cheers,
Lorne Miller
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Oct 23, 2014 2:59:56 GMT -8
It isn't all new
Almost surely built in a new factory which might have used different plastic and tweaked the molds and used better painting.
|
|
|
|
Post by drolsen on Oct 23, 2014 7:16:51 GMT -8
The last Atlas models I purchased were three SP GP40-2's and they came in the same packaging that this Dash 8 does. I have another Atlas Dash 8-40CW in BNSF markings and the boxing is totally different - much larger box with a lot of foam padding. Lorne, the Silver Series models (non-DCC/sound) come in the narrow box with the window in the lid, while the DCC/sound-equipped Gold Line models come in a larger, foam-lined box with a solid lid (no window). Dave |
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Oct 23, 2014 7:43:30 GMT -8
The last Atlas models I purchased were three SP GP40-2's and they came in the same packaging that this Dash 8 does. I have another Atlas Dash 8-40CW in BNSF markings and the boxing is totally different - much larger box with a lot of foam padding. Lorne, the Silver Series models (non-DCC/sound) come in the narrow box with the window in the lid, while the DCC/sound-equipped Gold Line models come in a larger, foam-lined box with a solid lid (no window). Dave The newer Gold engines come in the same size box as the Silver engines. |
|
|
|
Post by thebessemerkid on Oct 23, 2014 11:56:12 GMT -8
Does anyone have side by side pics of the old/new engines?
|
|
|
|
Post by espeenut on Oct 23, 2014 12:14:26 GMT -8
...the box that my new Dash 8 came in is the same type as the ones that my Atlas Gold GP40-2's came in, no windows, just a mixed material cradle in a box with a lid and a sliding cover over that. One difference that I didn't mention is the dash 8 is held into the cradle with two screws into the fuel tank. There are corresponding plastic plugs that fir into the screw holes on the bottom of the tank.
Another thing to mention, with the exception of two sun visors, all parts are installed, including the end hand railings, something you used to have to install yourself after taking the unit out of the box, the only items that need to be attached are the previously mentioned screw hole plugs...
|
|
|
|
Post by thebessemerkid on Oct 23, 2014 13:15:17 GMT -8
...the box that my new Dash 8 came in is the same type as the ones that my Atlas Gold GP40-2's came in, no windows, just a mixed material cradle in a box with a lid and a sliding cover over that. One difference that I didn't mention is the dash 8 is held into the cradle with two screws into the fuel tank. There are corresponding plastic plugs that fir into the screw holes on the bottom of the tank. Another thing to mention, with the exception of two sun visors, all parts are installed, including the end hand railings, something you used to have to install yourself after taking the unit out of the box, the only items that need to be attached are the previously mentioned screw hole plugs... The fuel tank screws are a great idea. That is until someone forgets to remove them and tries to start a train... |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Oct 23, 2014 16:32:06 GMT -8
...the box that my new Dash 8 came in is the same type as the ones that my Atlas Gold GP40-2's came in, no windows, just a mixed material cradle in a box with a lid and a sliding cover over that. One difference that I didn't mention is the dash 8 is held into the cradle with two screws into the fuel tank. There are corresponding plastic plugs that fir into the screw holes on the bottom of the tank. Another thing to mention, with the exception of two sun visors, all parts are installed, including the end hand railings, something you used to have to install yourself after taking the unit out of the box, the only items that need to be attached are the previously mentioned screw hole plugs... That model was likely one of the new ones built in the same factory as the new Bowser units, which use a very similar type of packaging. |
|
|
|
Post by diburning on Nov 9, 2014 21:32:51 GMT -8
From what I've heard, the newer Dash 8s were built in a factory that builds Bowser and Intermountain's locomotives. This explains the fuel tank screwed into the box, and the same crappy underpowered motor in the model that is used in Bowser and Intermountain locos.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Nov 10, 2014 20:08:53 GMT -8
From what I've heard, the newer Dash 8s were built in a factory that builds Bowser and Intermountain's locomotives. This explains the fuel tank screwed into the box, and the same crappy underpowered motor in the model that is used in Bowser and Intermountain locos. Those motors make no sense. A good motor is not expensive. And what else matters in a pulling locomotive ?' |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Nov 10, 2014 22:05:39 GMT -8
Those motors make no sense. A good motor is not expensive. And what else matters in a pulling locomotive ?' Weight, wheelsets, gear ratio, anything that may interrupt power (diode lighting circuits wired into the motor), flywheels...but the motor plays a big part.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gary P on Nov 11, 2014 4:45:52 GMT -8
Yeah, I received one of these also. As an Atlas Golden Spike Club member, I ordered this exclusive model a long time ago, but had forgotten about it! The model was delayed, and my memory is not what it used to be!!! LOL. I have not even taken it out of the box yet..... may have to get the old test track cleared off and fire this up soon.  |
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Nov 11, 2014 6:20:20 GMT -8
Is the pulling issue the motor, the decoder, or the design? A vocal group keeps saying that 2 cars for each set of drive wheels. Basically all a B-B unit needs to pull is eight cars. That would be a design change. Larry Check out my blog: www.llxlocomotives.com |
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 11, 2014 9:36:09 GMT -8
They are trying to pull 30-50 car on a 4% grade around a helix and once the engine/motor stalls its classified as junk and the manufacture is shunned for life.
|
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 11, 2014 10:03:14 GMT -8
The motor should have enough torque to spin the wheels in a stall. When you consider Atlas previous motors could do that, and the fact Bowser and Atlas want a different motor, and for sure Bowser is working to develop one, what does that tell you?
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by iccn1000 on Nov 11, 2014 10:57:37 GMT -8
I have a new one and and old one, both weighted at around 20 oz pulling a 35 car grain up a 1.5% helix with no problems... I dont think the motor is as weak as everyone claims. Your mileage may vary.. Thanks Rob Gruber www.dcctrain.com |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 11, 2014 12:51:53 GMT -8
I have a new one and and old one, both weighted at around 20 oz pulling a 35 car grain up a 1.5% helix with no problems... I dont think the motor is as weak as everyone claims. Your mileage may vary.. Thanks Rob Gruber www.dcctrain.comLoad them down until they stall. See if both will slip wheels or not. Dave |
|
|
|
Post by markfj on Nov 11, 2014 13:31:12 GMT -8
...the box that my new Dash 8 came in is the same type as the ones that my Atlas Gold GP40-2's came in, no windows, just a mixed material cradle in a box with a lid and a sliding cover over that. One difference that I didn't mention is the dash 8 is held into the cradle with two screws into the fuel tank. There are corresponding plastic plugs that fir into the screw holes on the bottom of the tank. Another thing to mention, with the exception of two sun visors, all parts are installed, including the end hand railings, something you used to have to install yourself after taking the unit out of the box, the only items that need to be attached are the previously mentioned screw hole plugs... The fuel tank screws are a great idea. That is until someone forgets to remove them and tries to start a train... Off topic: So, what’s really happening in this video? Is this a malfunction or is the engineer making the wheels slip on purpose? I thought all new locomotives were equipped with computers that prevented wheel slip to save the traction motors from burning out. With that much fiction I imagine the rail heads got deformed and the wheels destroyed. Thanks, Mark Now back to your regularly scheduled post! |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 12, 2014 4:03:19 GMT -8
They are trying to pull 30-50 car on a 4% grade around a helix and once the engine/motor stalls its classified as junk and the manufacture is shunned for life. And all of those 30-50 car is weigh to NMRA RP20.1 or heavier. I've seen it and even bought one guy's "crappy" Athearn RTR engine for pennies on the dollar.It has given 18 months of flawless service. |
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Nov 12, 2014 6:07:56 GMT -8
The question about pulling power always comes down to relative to what? I'm convinced that the requirements for great sound has pushed every bit of excess torque out of the system. The comment about stalling without spinning its wheel concerns me. That means the motor is locked up and is sitting there cooking on stall current. Which is roughly three times what max load current should be. How can that happen, without some drive bind? The wheels have to be biting into the track. That can only happen with a heavy engine. With a torque to weight ratio that low, I'm surprised the engine will move on its own. I would suspect a bad individual motor and not necessarily motor type. Even new all mechanical systems have variation, and that includes motors. Every HO engne I've tested so far would easily spin its wheels. Larry Check out my blog: www.llxlocomotives.com |
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Nov 12, 2014 6:26:12 GMT -8
The question about pulling power always comes down to relative to what? I'm convinced that the requirements for great sound has pushed every bit of excess torque out of the system. The comment about stalling without spinning its wheel concerns me. That means the motor is locked up and is sitting there cooking on stall current. Which is roughly three times what max load current should be. How can that happen, without some drive bind? The wheels have to be biting into the track. That can only happen with a heavy engine. With a torque to weight ratio that low, I'm surprised the engine will move on its own. I would suspect a bad individual motor and not necessarily motor type. Even new all mechanical systems have variation, and that includes motors. Every HO engne I've tested so far would easily spin its wheels. Larry Check out my blog: www.llxlocomotives.comI have three Bowser Centuries and had to replace all three motors. They would simply sit there with the throttle wide open, not spinning. I replaced a set of trucks on one of them, and it still barely moves with the throttle wide open. This is with a train behind it, of course. |
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 12, 2014 6:43:45 GMT -8
Was any of the engines tried with bemf turned off? Dc only?
People are making claims of this that and the other but I know for a fact getting aggressive or adjusting the bemf to a certain point will cause a motor to stall.. I did a tsunami once like that and almost killed a kato motor and its still not right after cool down and cleaning it up..
The only mabuchi look alike motor I got I kept making adjustments in the bemf cvs and created what you are all complaining about so I can see the frustration.
|
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Nov 12, 2014 7:34:26 GMT -8
After posting the above, I started thinking more about the tractive effort vs speed curve. This is the classic way of thinking about train capacity.
Under the adhesion line, there is a large region where the system is at zero speed with some power applied. It is possible to have the maximum power line fall below the adhesion curve. The maximum loco only speed would be finite, but reduced relative to one where the adhesion line is exceeded at maximum load. It is hard to get around these physics.
For us this situation is not good. As I indicated before, you can drive this loco into stall current by just adding cars to the train. any resistance, grade, curves etc, will also cause it to happen. While the levels of stall currents are down on the newer models, the problem is relative to the design point. I would expect operating at or near high power stall current for protacted periods to be life limiting. The excess torque capacity that existed in older motors would act as a relief valve on maximum current. The impact of the spinning wheels is to effectively unload the motor and reduce the operating current well below the stall value.
There is still a question regarding the continuous low speed operation with a train load that is just below the loco adhesion line. In that case you are flirting with the stall current at the voltage level the motor is seeing. In the case of pulse from the power supply, be that be a decoder or transformer, it is probably the integral value. It seems like that would also play havoc with the motor life.
It would be interesting to know some current and speed numbers on this new Atlas model vs the older similar models.
Something to think about,
Larry
Check out my blog:
www,llxlocomotives.com
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Nov 12, 2014 11:18:39 GMT -8
Was any of the engines tried with bemf turned off? Dc only? People are making claims of this that and the other but I know for a fact getting aggressive or adjusting the bemf to a certain point will cause a motor to stall.. I did a tsunami once like that and almost killed a kato motor and its still not right after cool down and cleaning it up.. The only mabuchi look alike motor I got I kept making adjustments in the bemf cvs and created what you are all complaining about so I can see the frustration. My three were DCC ready, on DC power. We did determine the problem seems to be about half mechanical resistance and half motor torque. |
|
|
|
Post by iccn1000 on Nov 12, 2014 11:37:11 GMT -8
I have a new one and and old one, both weighted at around 20 oz pulling a 35 car grain up a 1.5% helix with no problems... I dont think the motor is as weak as everyone claims. Your mileage may vary.. Thanks Rob Gruber www.dcctrain.comLoad them down until they stall. See if both will slip wheels or not. Dave I mean honestly, we both know the answer to this. :-) But I'm not going to bash them stating that they can't "pull". Rob Gruber www.dcctrain.com |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 12, 2014 12:31:16 GMT -8
That's fine if you won't but I won't hesitate to state the truth either.
Dave
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2014 16:30:47 GMT -8
I few years ago, I purchased an Intermountain CN SD40-2W with sound. This locomotive couldn't pull its way out of wet paper sack. It had the mu-crappy motor or as I called it "peanut" for it was not only small in stature it was puny in torque. My "layout" at the time was a massive flat as a pancake 5' x 9'. The Intermountain unit struggled with 15 cars and the Athearn RTR SD40-2 walked away with the train.
I've been in model railroading long enough to know disappointment with a purchase. That SD40-2W is in the top ten. Its a shame when the Mubachi clone which is supposed to be superior to the old Athearn "gold standard" motor, gets its butt kicked by the now decades old Athearn motor.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Nov 12, 2014 19:21:34 GMT -8
Wow I must be missing some bad engines.
Can't say I ever had an engine that simply would not even move itself, although some old Tyco units came close.
Are these things really that bad?
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Nov 12, 2014 21:29:43 GMT -8
This sums up that new motor nicely:  |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 13, 2014 3:24:27 GMT -8
That's fine if you won't but I won't hesitate to state the truth either. Dave Dave,Some points to ponder about "truth" on the internet. I know modelers that added weight to their cars that could barely roll at stock weight and yell,cuss and rave about their engines not pulling 3 cars up a 5% grade. I seen good engines killed by DCC CV settings-the owner had no real clue just followed some bad advice. Again more cussing and yelling about "junk" engines or "junk" decoders. Like that bunny on TV I could go on and on and on and on... Internet "truth" and salt goes hand in hand since we do not know the background story and that background story could reveal a lot of things.. |
|
