|
Post by iccn1000 on Nov 13, 2014 8:00:21 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2014 8:24:19 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.. So in this statement you are calling Dave a liar. Were you standing by Dave when he's performed his runs of the C-636's? Dave is relaying his own personal experiences. He is also a modeler that knows his stuff so if cars are overweight or DCC is screwed up he knows that and wouldn't be pulling his hair out with these motors. He has stated in the past he's tested the brace of C-636's in various settings and the results are still the same. These motors lack torque. My experience with the Intermountain SD40-2W had factory built cars with no weight added and I didn't fiddle with the CV's. Everything was factory set, except the address of the unit. My layout was as flat as a pancake and that engine struggled while the Athearn RTR SD40-2 could easily out pull the Intermountain. Again, the Athearn engine had nothing but a Digitrax DH163 decorder installed with no CV changes. How many times have we on this and the old Atlas forum seen the Athearn "gold standard" motor in the RTR line get ripped by people time and time again? Yet, when people express displeasure with the mu-crappy motor, some seem to be highly offended and the apologists are out in force? Its perfectly fine to drag Athearn through the mud, but don't you dare say anything negative about Atlas, Intermountain or Bowser? The TRUTH is it cuts both ways. This motor isn't that good.
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 13, 2014 8:40:59 GMT -8
For the record, the cars on our club layout are all NMRA weighted, ride on Intermountain wheelsets, and are nothing over 60' unless it's passenger car or TOFC used for show train operation. My test trains are 30 cars long, 50-60' cars used for our op sessions. As far as decoder programming, I'm not just adjusting CV's all willy nilly. I'm using deocder pro to put in a linear speed curve, change the address, and adjust sound levels. I also use the Loksound autotune feature on these three engines when setting them up.
As far as my experience, I used to write reviews for MRN, my specialty being HO diesel locomotive reviews, and I did this for nearly 8 years, so I know something about what I speak of. On top of that, Lee English of Bowser has a new motor being developed which was publically posted on the Bowser FB page. Rob Pisani at Atlas let me know they were also talking with the factory about motor issues with this new motor they are using. So, if it's just a few idiots complaining, why is Bowser changing and Atlas complaining to the factory?
Lastly, beyond the fact the motors in these models are sub par, I think we have a signal problem on our layouts older section we are testing to locate. Still doesn't excuse or explain away the weak motors.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 13, 2014 8:46:25 GMT -8
I believe and agree with above statement every last athearn I own does not have a gold can motor but only due to noise not pulling power.
I think this mabuchi motor is fine in smaller based engines and should stay out of any 12 wheeler drag weight resistance and bemf is killing this motor..
Who knows??
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 13, 2014 8:47:59 GMT -8
So in this statement you are calling Dave a liar. --------------------------------------- Not calling Dave a liar at all..Just some points to ponder and nothing more.
I for one use salt with most things I read on the internet since we have no clue who the poster may be..There are some posters like Dave I trust then there are those I must wonder about since they rack up a lot of complaint postings.
I have old Atlas yellow box engines that is supposedly powered by junk motors yet mine runs quite well after all these years.
I have 2 Athearn engines that is close to 40 years old and still runs--again according to some those are junk motors..
I can not complain about my Athearn RTR engines but,I do not judge them by Kato,Atlas or even Genesis running qualities like most try to do..
As far as the IM SD40-2w I would need to disassemble it and look for any issues in the drive train or maybe the DCC ready light board.
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 13, 2014 8:57:11 GMT -8
Curious has anybody found split busted gears upon inspection?
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 13, 2014 9:11:19 GMT -8
Not so far.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 13, 2014 9:18:20 GMT -8
Thanks
You think atlas will go back to the rebuildable motor?
I've been snagging atlas motors on eBay because of this cause my next atlas or bowser might be a turd
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2014 9:25:43 GMT -8
So in this statement you are calling Dave a liar. --------------------------------------- Not calling Dave a liar at all..Just some points to ponder and nothing more. I for one use salt with most things I read on the internet since we have no clue who the poster may be..There are some posters like Dave I trust then there are those I must wonder about since they rack up a lot of complaint postings. I have old Atlas yellow box engines that is supposedly powered by junk motors yet mine runs quite well after all these years. I have 2 Athearn engines that is close to 40 years old and still runs--again according to some those are junk motors.. I can not complain about my Athearn RTR engines but,I do not judge them by Kato,Atlas or even Genesis running qualities like most try to do.. As far as the IM SD40-2w I would need to disassemble it and look for any issues in the drive train or maybe the DCC ready light board. My SD40-2W had the factory Tsunami 645 turbo board. I did check the drive and other than being over lubricated which I dealt with, it still under performed compared to the Athearn. If the chip being run on DCC on a peanut sized layout is killing the performance of the motor, it is still the FAULT of the manufacturer for not doing its job to properly mate the motor and board. The motor in the SD40-2W was a torque less turd compared to motors found in other premium priced factory sound equipped locomotives I've owned like Athearn Genesis and the "old" Atlas Master Gold line. Like Dave stated there is a reason Atlas and Bowser are or are looking to change the motor. A couple people flapping their jaws or fingers on an internet forum doesn't make a catastrophe, but it would be interesting to know how many e-mails, calls and letters have bombarded Atlas and Bowser to zero in on the motor.
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 13, 2014 9:27:41 GMT -8
I wish I knew. All I know is a motor is being developed, but I don't know if it will go into Atlas and IM also.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 13, 2014 9:38:14 GMT -8
Too bad atlas couldn't sweet talk bowser in a showcase trial run
Wishfull but we gotta dream a little
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Nov 13, 2014 9:52:31 GMT -8
I wish I knew. All I know is a motor is being developed, but I don't know if it will go into Atlas and IM also. Dave Dave,It would be nice to have a standard motor for all brands--other then Kato of course.
|
|
|
Post by llxlocomotives on Nov 13, 2014 16:09:19 GMT -8
I still think the issue is noise and current budget. To satisfy both of these masters, the motor specs took all of the excess power out of the motor. This leads to most of the complaints above. The "gold" standard motor has the excess power, but will gobble current and interfere with the engine concert. The needle is hard to thread here. I would bet that returns are the reason for the desire for a new motor. Or it may be for a different reason all together. Good product development is not for solving today's problems as much as positioning your self for where you think the market is heading. It would be interesting to see what the design specs are for the new motor. Larry Check out my blog: www.llxlocomotives.com
|
|
|
Post by sd80mac on Nov 13, 2014 21:18:57 GMT -8
I picked up one of the new Dash 8s last week. It does seem to be a bit weaker in pulling power compared to my older Master series Dash 8s, but the paint and overall model do seem to be a little more finely molded. The loss of pulling power doesn't bother me, I'll just add another unit
|
|
|
Post by espeenut on Nov 13, 2014 21:58:26 GMT -8
I picked up one of the new Dash 8s last week. It does seem to be a bit weaker in pulling power compared to my older Master series Dash 8s, but the paint and overall model do seem to be a little more finely molded. The loss of pulling power doesn't bother me, I'll just add another unit ...my thoughts exactly, my new one, the UP 9448 Golden Spike Special, has much better paint than my older one which is done in BNSF H2. The difference is in the degree of glossy finish on the BNSF one vs a more scale appearing semi gloss finish on the new UP version. I haven't pulled any long trains with the new one as our layout isn't that large so I really can't really detect that much difference in performance, so far I'm a happy camper with the new one...
|
|
|
Post by WP 257 on Nov 14, 2014 5:45:46 GMT -8
From what I have heard, Bowser generally does not receive that many complaints (at least relative to all the products sold) but there have been "a few". Also, in the recent past some folks did not like the Buhler motors when they used those. As a result, Bowser switched to something they thought was "better" at the time, so this is not the first time they have switched motors. Also regarding the new motor being "in development" the GMD SD40-2 pilot models came with it already installed.
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Nov 16, 2014 13:55:27 GMT -8
Bowser and Atlas should just bite the bullet and go back to KATO Motors. how much could the Price increase?,,,,maybe $10.00 ?? would be worth the Premium here. Spikre
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Nov 16, 2014 18:41:47 GMT -8
From what I have heard, Bowser generally does not receive that many complaints (at least relative to all the products sold) but there have been "a few". Also, in the recent past some folks did not like the Buhler motors when they used those. As a result, Bowser switched to something they thought was "better" at the time, so this is not the first time they have switched motors. Also regarding the new motor being "in development" the GMD SD40-2 pilot models came with it already installed. Many people don't complain they just don't purchase the product. Any company that defends itself on a problem by saying nobody is complaining is avoiding reality.
|
|
|
Post by WP 257 on Nov 16, 2014 19:52:40 GMT -8
Ahem, I never said "nobody". I said "a few". There is a difference.
It's not like they keep score. Being a business, there's little time for that, and I don't think they like to dwell on negatives.
I do think they have been commendably above board regarding recent issues. If somebody has a problem, and that somebody contacts Bowser directly, they have been taken care of, whether it's new trucks, gears, etc. I think they've been doing an outstanding job of helping people out when there is a problem.
My opinion, YMMV.
Spikre--
I personally do not like DCC, but how do we know that old Kato motor would play well with some of the DCC boards now being used? Even if the Kato motor would play well with the DCC boards now being used, how do we know Kato would desire to share their motor with the competition any longer? That might require making a lot more motors. Maybe they don't have production capacity to do so? Maybe even if they have the capacity, they don't want to share them with their competitors?
Since it's been many years since Atlas and Stewart both used the Kato motor, it seems the ship sailed long ago?
Since the new motor, according to Bowser's own statements, already won a pulling contest against a highly regarded unit from the competition, doesn't it deserve a chance?
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Nov 16, 2014 20:00:52 GMT -8
Ahem, I never said "nobody". I said "a few". There is a difference. It's not like they keep score. Being a business, there's little time for that, and I don't think they like to dwell on negatives. I do think they have been commendably above board regarding recent issues. If somebody has a problem, and that somebody contacts Bowser directly, they have been taken care of, whether it's new trucks, gears, etc. I think they've been doing an outstanding job of helping people out when there is a problem. My opinion, YMMV. No, it's not just your opinion; it's fact. Lee's been incredibly standup about rectifying the C636 issues. Dave
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 16, 2014 20:07:40 GMT -8
Kato motor not playing well with decoders?
I've yet seen this an issue
|
|
|
Post by bigblow69 on Nov 17, 2014 6:24:41 GMT -8
I've repowered older 8-40CW's with Kato motors and they work with little modification. The new Atlas 8-40C I bought is in pieces in the box it came in. Just keeping the parts for the other running ones.
|
|
|
Post by grabbem88 on Nov 17, 2014 6:34:52 GMT -8
I was at the store yesterday and was thiumbing through the latest model railroader and the atlas c424 was reviewed with high regards. The pull meter had it at thirty something cars maybe 34 I can't remember..with that crappy motor,??
I know magazines fluff up adds and such but 30 is a far cry from 3...lol.
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Nov 17, 2014 10:44:30 GMT -8
RSD-5, there is No DCC here, so could care less about the Kato Motor buzzing out decoders. someday maybe there will be a loco wanted here that Only comes with DCC,Sound,Smoke,and a miniature Engineer to run the thing,but until then there wont be any DCC here. for now the Kato and Mashima motors are highly thought of here. I would pay extra if Atlas and Bowser had the Kato Motor as an Option above the Mabuchi canned motors they are using now. the Old Atlas locos were produced by Kato,they had the Capacity then,with few HO locos being produced by Kato now supplying Motors should just make Their bottom line more profitable. Spikre
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Nov 17, 2014 11:32:36 GMT -8
I ordered one of these way back when, but never received it. Just the other day, I was wondering what happened to the order. Maybe I will get it shortly.
|
|
|
Post by WP 257 on Nov 17, 2014 12:29:10 GMT -8
Spikre--
Understood. Completely.
However, every time the Chinese pack engines, a few lucky buyers receive the full sound/DCC versions in a DC-only box (as documented in some of the posts on these forums), and vice versa--now you want the Chinese to have 2 different motors to pick from, as well? I think that would become a challenge for them. Also, 2 different motors can actually become two different frames and gearboxes, too (as at least one manufacturer has already stated).
Plus at this point any motor they use has to be compatible with the 21-pin plug, etc. that the manufacturers are moving toward.
Not being an electrician, I was only surmising that the old Kato motor might possibly not be fully compatible, in addition to being likely more expensive--and some buyers get really upset with every $10 price increase. It's a "swag", only--a "scientific wild-a$$ guess". (Pardon the use of real world design engineering lingo).
Maybe $10 to you would be nothing, but others would surely complain about the price point for no perceived "added value" that they cannot readily see.
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Nov 17, 2014 13:29:54 GMT -8
NdeM, if that would confuse the assemblers too much, Atlas and Bowser could sort of copy the Genesis SD45 Drop In kit. but with a slight difference, You buy the version wanted, remove the Factory Motor, send it back with whatever the Drop In replacement Kato set up costs, and They make sure it drops in. they get a supply of the Stock motors for warrenty replacement, You get a unit with a Superior motor. should be a Win-Win if the current motors are really that bad. since Atlas at least has slowed on new locos, this should be workable with road sized locos. or another size for the RS-3/11/32/36 group, which would also cover the RSD-4/5,RSD-12. the RS-1 could use a motor that also fits the new S-2/4s. think this could work if the Company committed to the Program. Spikre
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 16:06:30 GMT -8
Spikre-- Understood. Completely. However, every time the Chinese pack engines, a few lucky buyers receive the full sound/DCC versions in a DC-only box (as documented in some of the posts on these forums), and vice versa--now you want the Chinese to have 2 different motors to pick from, as well? I think that would become a challenge for them. Also, 2 different motors can actually become two different frames and gearboxes, too (as at least one manufacturer has already stated). Plus at this point any motor they use has to be compatible with the 21-pin plug, etc. that the manufacturers are moving toward. Not being an electrician, I was only surmising that the old Kato motor might possibly not be fully compatible, in addition to being likely more expensive--and some buyers get really upset with every $10 price increase. It's a "swag", only--a "scientific wild-a$$ guess". (Pardon the use of real world design engineering lingo). Maybe $10 to you would be nothing, but others would surely complain about the price point for no perceived "added value" that they cannot readily see. A motor is still a motor. It has two wires running to it from the decoder, just like in straight DC. There is a positive and a negative. Whether you 21 pins or 9 pins it doesn't matter to the motor. What currents and amperage's the decoder dishes out to the motor is what is going to effect the motor. I'll take a "swag" and guess that the additional cost of a Kato motor is going to be closer to $20+ versus the in house Mu-junky. All the manufacturers would have to almost make their drives the same so you'd only need one motor and flywheel combination. Otherwise the more variations the fewer the number of a particular type and the higher the cost. Bowser, Intermountain and Atlas may be getting their choo choos out of the same factory, but their drives are all different. The cost to standardize a drive between the manufacturers would be costing someone more money, which in the end would mean that $300 MSRP locomotive may be over $325 and heading for $350.
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Nov 17, 2014 17:43:05 GMT -8
Ahem, I never said "nobody". I said "a few". There is a difference. It's not like they keep score. Being a business, there's little time for that, and I don't think they like to dwell on negatives. I do think they have been commendably above board regarding recent issues. If somebody has a problem, and that somebody contacts Bowser directly, they have been taken care of, whether it's new trucks, gears, etc. I think they've been doing an outstanding job of helping people out when there is a problem. My opinion, YMMV. Spikre-- I personally do not like DCC, but how do we know that old Kato motor would play well with some of the DCC boards now being used? Even if the Kato motor would play well with the DCC boards now being used, how do we know Kato would desire to share their motor with the competition any longer? That might require making a lot more motors. Maybe they don't have production capacity to do so? Maybe even if they have the capacity, they don't want to share them with their competitors? Since it's been many years since Atlas and Stewart both used the Kato motor, it seems the ship sailed long ago? Since the new motor, according to Bowser's own statements, already won a pulling contest against a highly regarded unit from the competition, doesn't it deserve a chance? It is the poor motors we are talking about here that they use by choice at their factory.
|
|