|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 9, 2022 14:45:53 GMT -8
Hornby/Rivarossi got the message on the U25C/U28C.
Keep in mind that European manufacturers are not necessarily making models of American equipment so as to sell the stuff here. There's a goodly number of Europeans (and others, for that matter) who want to model American stuff but run it on European track. THAT may be who they're catering to.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Aug 9, 2022 14:52:11 GMT -8
Hornby/Rivarossi got the message on the U25C/U28C. Keep in mind that European manufacturers are not necessarily making models of American equipment so as to sell the stuff here. There's a goodly number of Europeans (and others, for that matter) who want to model American stuff but run it on European track. THAT may be who they're catering to. Ed 100% hit the nail on the head there Ed. Don't forget euro layouts can / do include the R1 (14.2") radius curves. The pizza cutters are to assist keeping things on the track. I do wish Piko, Trix, and others would give the option to purchase a different wheelset, but I'm sure the US market is tiny for those companies.
|
|
|
Post by 12bridge on Aug 9, 2022 17:19:09 GMT -8
For what its worth, Code 88 (Tangent and PWRS) do not bump at all on the new Walthers turnouts.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 9, 2022 18:53:00 GMT -8
A person could wonder if they raised the bottoms of the flangeways.
I know I do.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Aug 10, 2022 0:06:06 GMT -8
Piko primarily sells to a European market where tight curves and so forth are the norm and the models need deep flanges to negotiate that sort of track.
My eyes are getting to the point where I need glasses to read the data on freight cars; I would barely notice the flange difference. And I'm willing to sacrifice a bit to maintain operability.
Someone mentioned Arrowhead offering to swap out, I wonder if they could tell us what percentage of cars they sold got 110 wheels?
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 10, 2022 6:58:24 GMT -8
It is unclear to me how deep flanges are needed to keep trains from derailing on sharp curves.
Perhaps someone can explain that to me.
Ed
|
|
|
Post by columbusrrfan on Aug 10, 2022 12:47:56 GMT -8
While I switch all of my rolling stock over to code 88” wheels, I still think it makes sense for the manu’s to continue providing the traditional 110”. Probably most model railroaders will have more success running their trains with them. Fortunately most offer the code 88” as a replacement. Atlas doesn’t, but I can swap them out with Intermountain or Arrowhead. What bothers me is when a company like Scale Trains doesn’t offer a code 88” option, and has a proprietary truck design/ wheel axle length that doesn’t allow replacement. I’ve thought about modifying the bolster on a couple of SXT freight cars to swap out the trucks, but it looks like a major undertaking that I am not sure would even work. What I would like to see optional is included but not attached/ glued on air hoses. I spent years painting/ weathering these until I realized it was pretty much a waste of time (unless a static foreground or display model) due to their fragility and lack of prototype appearance in an assembled train.
|
|
|
Post by Colin 't Hart on Aug 10, 2022 23:32:39 GMT -8
What I would like to see optional is included but not attached/ glued on air hoses. I spent years painting/ weathering these until I realized it was pretty much a waste of time (unless a static foreground or display model) due to their fragility and lack of prototype appearance in an assembled train. Rubber air hoses!
|
|
|
Post by grabirons on Aug 11, 2022 0:05:48 GMT -8
About ten years ago, I put styrene shims that I filed down just enough so my rp25 code 110 wheels would not dip down into my atlas turnouts' frog's. There is a completely smooth transition across the frog with code 110, and 0.88 treads. I had a few cars that I tried some kadee code 88 wheelsets in, in some Accurail 4750 hoppers. To say the least, even with no wheel dip, the hoppers would still occasionally derail. Oddly enough, they would mostly derail when going through in a certain direction through each turnout! So, because I value operation, I changed the wheels out after a month to Intermountain code 110, 36inch all metal wheels and axles, which I have had zero problems with. Proto or more scale wheels would likely work best with scale track, frog's ect which I know there are some currently available and frankly, I do not have the want or will to go that route of hand laying because it is not important to me.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 11, 2022 4:49:56 GMT -8
I had just a few cars that I tried some kadee code 88 wheelsets in, in some Accurail 4750 hoppers. To say the least, even with no wheel dip, the hoppers would still occasionally derail. Oddly enough, they would mostly derail when going through in a certain direction through each turnout! At what point, and in what direction? Ed
|
|
|
Post by tom on Aug 11, 2022 7:10:53 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. I constructed my railroad about fifteen years ago using ME code 83 and 70 flex, Atlas flex in staging and Peco and ME turnouts. I built it so I would not have derailments with at that time code 110 wheelsets. Did nothing special other than make sure it was laid correctly such as no kinks, no dips, and smooth joints. My trains ran great. It was not laid to FineHo tolerances but just good track laying. When I eventually converted about 95% of my freight cars to code 88 wheels my long freight trains still ran fine with no derailments (except for human error). Still not sure why code 110 is that much more forgiving than code 88 wheels except when the rails are really too wide out of gauge.
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Aug 11, 2022 7:49:09 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. I constructed my railroad about fifteen years ago using ME code 83 and 70 flex, Atlas flex in staging and Peco and ME turnouts. I built it so I would not have derailments with at that time code 110 wheelsets. Did nothing special other than make sure it was laid correctly such as no kinks, no dips, and smooth joints. My trains ran great. It was not laid to FineHo tolerances but just good track laying. When I eventually converted about 95% of my freight cars to code 88 wheels my long freight trains still ran fine with no derailments (except for human error). Still not sure why code 110 is that much more forgiving than code 88 wheels except when the rails are really too wide out of gauge. It's more forgiving when track track isn't laid well like you did, which is probably pretty common. And Rob mentioned the turnout issues such as out of gauge Walthers curved turnouts and Atlas code 100 turnouts which cause dips as wheels pass over. Perhaps code 110 wheels cover a multitude of sins and the model manufacturers are factoring that in. If you have well laid track and good turnouts, code 88 may be fine. I at the very most, I would take Rob Spangler's philosophy, only worry about code 88 wheels where they shine the most.
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Aug 11, 2022 10:59:53 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. I constructed my railroad about fifteen years ago using ME code 83 and 70 flex, Atlas flex in staging and Peco and ME turnouts. I built it so I would not have derailments with at that time code 110 wheelsets. Did nothing special other than make sure it was laid correctly such as no kinks, no dips, and smooth joints. My trains ran great. It was not laid to FineHo tolerances but just good track laying. When I eventually converted about 95% of my freight cars to code 88 wheels my long freight trains still ran fine with no derailments (except for human error). Still not sure why code 110 is that much more forgiving than code 88 wheels except when the rails are really too wide out of gauge.
|
|
|
Post by schroed2 on Aug 11, 2022 11:20:05 GMT -8
one thing to consider with the Code88 wheelsets is also the distance between the wheels ("Back to Back" or B in NMRA speech):
The available Code88 wheelsets from Tangent, IM or Reboxx have usually a slightly smaller distance then stated as minimum in the Fine:HO standard (NMRA S4-1) with 14.5 mm or 14.6 mm instead of 14.8 mm or 0.581".
I am doing this from memory as my equipment is packed for an upcoming move.
|
|
|
Post by grabirons on Aug 12, 2022 6:11:43 GMT -8
I had just a few cars that I tried some kadee code 88 wheelsets in, in some Accurail 4750 hoppers. To say the least, even with no wheel dip, the hoppers would still occasionally derail. Oddly enough, they would mostly derail when going through in a certain direction through each turnout! At what point, and in what direction? Ed The Hoppers would derail when pushing through the diversion point of a turnout. Rolling straight through a turnout in either direction was fine but as soon as you directed it away from the turnout is when I would have the problems.
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Aug 12, 2022 6:33:03 GMT -8
I voted Make it Optional. I don't mind have to change them assuming the car isn't so delicate it collapses mid-task. Manufacturers should include both tread widths in the box so the modeller can change them if need be.
|
|
|
Post by fcixdarrell on Aug 12, 2022 7:21:38 GMT -8
I voted Make it Optional. I don't mind have to change them assuming the car isn't so delicate it collapses mid-task. Manufacturers should include both tread widths in the box so the modeller can change them if need be. And no problem paying an extra $5 or whatever per car for that choice, right?
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 12, 2022 7:45:46 GMT -8
The Hoppers would derail when pushing through the diversion point of a turnout. Rolling straight through a turnout in either direction was fine but as soon as you directed it away from the turnout is when I would have the problems. So the derailment happens when the car(s) are coming from the point end of the switch. And it happens only on the diverging route. That suggests that the flange is "picking the frog". And that suggests that the guard rail is not doing its job of keeping the flange adequately distanced from that point. And that suggests there is either a track gage problem there and/or excess clearance through the guard rail. "But how come it only happens to Code 88?" Besides the possibility of gauging problems of the wheel sets, there's also the interesting point that Code 88 flanges are typically narrower than Code 110. IF the wheels are then properly gaged, the back-to-back spacing of the wheels is WIDER for the Code 88 than the Code 110. And that would allow the Code 88 flange, as it goes through the frog, to be slightly more "engaging" with the frog point. The distance is about .01", which doesn't seem like much. Until it is. Code 88 wheels appear to have been developed for HO narrow gage (Code 110 wheels would look even dumber for narrow gage than standard gage, account the wheel diameter is smaller). NMRA standards show Code 110 flange width max to be .030". And Code 88 flange width is max of .025". The difference is .005". And twice that is the number I used just above. Ed
|
|
|
Post by el3625 on Aug 12, 2022 7:52:22 GMT -8
If you are going to pay $5.00 extra to get that choice of wheelsets, you may as well just buy the car as they are now (.110) and buy the .088 wheels and change them out. At $5.00 per car, that is $15.00 for three cars which is usually a 12 pack, and you can usually get for under $15.00 anyhow online. Buy in bulk and it is even cheaper yet. I do not want to pay extra for that choice when I have now .110 on all of my rolling stock and have ZERO derailments and I am very happy with that stat and my layout is large. I run trains and really never look at the wheels. Like I said before, unless you are looking at the wheels or can seem them very easily, you really cannot tell anyhow what scale they are. It is whatever you want them to have.
Bruce
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Aug 12, 2022 8:04:46 GMT -8
I voted Make it Optional. I don't mind have to change them assuming the car isn't so delicate it collapses mid-task. Manufacturers should include both tread widths in the box so the modeller can change them if need be. And no problem paying an extra $5 or whatever per car for that choice, right? I'll just buy less of them, going forward. I don't have time to run the cars I have already.
|
|
|
Post by MILWmodeler on Aug 13, 2022 13:10:05 GMT -8
We've recently had the discussion at Athearn about returning the Athearn Genesis line to Code 88 wheels. It would be more in-line with the brand goals. However there's a large percentage of our high end models being used on carpet. No manufacturer can afford to duplicate a product line with two different wheelsets. At the minimum, we're thinking of keeping semi-scale wheelsets in stock for those that want to convert, including locomotive wheelsets which seems to be an undeserved market.
|
|
|
Post by nsfantodd on Aug 14, 2022 7:29:30 GMT -8
We've recently had the discussion at Athearn about returning the Athearn Genesis line to Code 88 wheels. It would be more in-line with the brand goals. However there's a large percentage of our high end models being used on carpet. No manufacturer can afford to duplicate a product line with two different wheelsets. At the minimum, we're thinking of keeping semi-scale wheelsets in stock for those that want to convert, including locomotive wheelsets which seems to be an undeserved market. Semi-scale locomotive wheelsets would be great! Didn't buy enough NWSL, so I can see buying many sets. Are spinning bearings planned for the HTCR trucks? Was really bummed they didn't make it on to the latest aces or m-2s. Might as well rework the whole truck with traction motor detail, spinning bearings and available code 88 wheels. That would be great!
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Aug 14, 2022 18:14:29 GMT -8
My position on this is that it's largely related to commercial frogs. Typical commercial turnouts in HO allow at least some bouncing across the flangeways with code 88 wheels that tends to be absent with code 110. Most of us with large layouts have a lot of commercial turnouts that would be difficult and/or costly to retrofit so that code 88 wheelsets operate with no wobble to destroy the realism. For my own purposes, watching cars with semi-scale wheelsets exhibiting toy-like motion through turnouts, even if it's slight, negates any visual advantage from the narrower wheel treads. I'll also note that most viewing of cars on a layout tends to occur from the side, where wheel width is far less apparent than from the end. Were I a contest modeler I might think differently. I have no derailment issues with code 88 wheelsets, so I don't usually replace them, but there you have it - I prefer code 110, but won't refuse to purchase a car or a set of trucks if equipped otherwise. If manufacturers cooperated with better turnouts, I'd wager that acceptance of code 88 would gradually increase as older layouts aged out, and more serious modelers started replacing turnouts (as I would). I think your position is factual reality and is acknowledged - I contend that some of the other problems (point gauging, etc.) are NOT an acceptable reason for the hobby to be held back from mass .088 implementation. But I have enough respect and deference toward some of our leading manufacturers that have chosen to stick with .110s for their RTR products (David L.) for the various reasons that I've reluctantly accepted my fate to be on my own for replacing wheelsets. But I believe manufacturers have to give us the parts option, and SXT refuses to do so. And they're the only ones that you can't "get there from here."
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Aug 14, 2022 18:25:19 GMT -8
I was thinking of a SKU with code 88 wheels and another SKU with code 110 wheels. I talked to David Lehlbach about this a couple of years ago. For a small business, it means doubling everything including predictions for sales and order quantity to the manufacturer. This reminds me of the ruckus on the Old Atlas Forum when Atlas had the audacity to make buyers pay for a decoder socket on locomotives. I appreciate and respect manufacturers' decision to stick with .110s for the masses. I understand that's the right decision for them. Unfortunately, it doesn't change the FACT that .110 wheels are the only remaining part of modern high-end freight car models that are way off the bell curve of realism compared to every other part on the car (and couplers, but that's another conversation). I find end views of even the absolute "best" freight car models completely laughable because of the wheels. I think the reason most/many don't is only because of the conditioning of being used to looking at those wheels for half a century. But I contend that if you show our freight car models to an "objective third party" without knowledge of the mechanics of our history of operating and trackwork, perhaps a scale modeler from other fields, I'm pretty sure the first thing they'd see/ask is "WTF are wheels so wide and stupid-looking?!?" While I 100% support and understand RTR products still having .110 wheels, I also strongly support those that are more subtly saying 'enough is enough and at some point a change has to be forced' and are offering .088s on their RTR products.
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Aug 14, 2022 18:30:29 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. Donnell This is just plain wrong, as others have stated in this thread. I'll chime in that ME and CV+DW switches support an .088 fleet flawlessly.
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Aug 14, 2022 19:15:18 GMT -8
I'll chime in that ME and CV+DW switches support an .088 fleet flawlessly. I do look forward to ME and CV+DW producing #10 (and #15, for that matter) switches. Ed
|
|
|
Post by el3625 on Aug 14, 2022 19:45:18 GMT -8
Boy, after all of that I sure hope you feel better! I really do not care for Scaletrains trucks anyhow (no options), and I replace them usually with Tangents trucks. I said it once and I will say it again, and again, and again, if you really want .088 wheels just buy them and BE HAPPY with yourself. No sense of having a stroke over it, holy crap, it's only model trains!
Bruce
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Aug 15, 2022 0:08:23 GMT -8
In order for code 88 wheels to operate effectively, they need to be paired with track built to FineHO tolerances. No current track manufacturer produces turnouts and crossings to these tolerances. Donnell This is just plain wrong, as others have stated in this thread. I'll chime in that ME and CV+DW switches support an .088 fleet flawlessly. Okay. I'll give you Micro Engineering. The frog flangeway dimension for their #6 turnout is approximately .035", which technically falls in line with Fine:HO specifications. Concerning Details West frogs, according to their website, "Wheels with P-88 and P-110 work quite well. Frog rail spacing matches NMRA© standards."However, Details West does not manufacture track. As you have pointed out, they must be combined with additional products to be of any operational use. I have no problem amending my statement to say that no current track manufacturer, with the exception of Micro Engineering and possibly Peco Code 70/83, produce track within Fine:HO specifications. The key point was effective operation of code 88 wheels. Modifying standard turnout frogs to allow code 88 wheels to run on their flanges, while it does improve operation of the turnout, does not address the flange width issue. Utilizing Fine:HO tolerances during track construction does.
|
|
|
Post by delta767332er on Aug 15, 2022 8:39:41 GMT -8
Boy, after all of that I sure hope you feel better! I really do not care for Scaletrains trucks anyhow (no options), and I replace them usually with Tangents trucks. I said it once and I will say it again, and again, and again, if you really want .088 wheels just buy them and BE HAPPY with yourself. No sense of having a stroke over it, holy crap, it's only model trains! Bruce Here, I’ll type slower. You. Can’t. Buy. .088. Wheels. For. SXT. Trucks. Which was my complaint/comment in the other thread which [re]started this entire conversation and poll again. I’ll feel better when you stop missing the point, but no one’s having a stroke.
|
|
|
Post by el3625 on Aug 15, 2022 9:19:12 GMT -8
If you could read a little slower and comprehend English a little better, you would know that I know from my last post that Scaletrains has "no options" (wheels) for their trucks. I replace their complete trucks/wheels with some other brand, usually Tangent (many choices). I do not know why they have to be different from the others and no one makes wheels for them anyhow. Scaletrains trucks suck and they are way overpriced anyhow, just imagine how much they would charge for just wheelsets. Cheaper to go with someone else's trucks/wheelsets. I have had some contact with a few manufacturers and the consensus is they are not going to equip freight cars from them with .088 wheels, they make them to be purchased separately. I have had numerous issues with Scaletrains over the years and I have really distanced myself from purchasing anything from them. If you really want trucks with .088 wheelsets for your Scaletrains freight cars, you are going to have to purchase them elsewhere.
Bruce
|
|