Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [z_scale] Re: Front coupler on steam locomotive?

Expand Messages
  • Anders Lattermann
    Hi! ... 8807 and 8808 has the same chassi as 8827 and others. You can put the front runner from a 8895 on that one. The cow catcher (or whatever it s called)
    Message 1 of 10 , Oct 1, 2000
      Hi!

      > I'm thinking of the locomotive body Marklin uses for all their
      > US-prototype 4-6-2 "Pacific" and 2-8-2 "Mikado" locomotives. 8807, 8808

      8807 and 8808 has the same chassi as 8827 and others. You can put the front
      runner from a 8895 on that one. The cow catcher (or whatever it's called)
      might be in the way and you probably have to file it down/saw it off.

      > , and 8810 are examples.

      8810 seams trickier, it has the same chassi as 8885 and others and I have
      never seen a factory made chassi like this with hook or coupler in the front
      which means you have to invent something. You might be able to glue (with
      super glue) a metal piece bent into the same shape as the 8895 hook to the
      front runner. Soldering is probably better but is trickier if you don't have
      any soldering experience for metal.

      Good luck and best regards from Stockholm/Sweden!
      /Anders Lattermann

      -------------------------------------
      The amaZing Z-scale site:
      http://www.lattermann.com/amaZing
      -------------------------------------
    • zscale@retrograde.net
      Thanks for the info, Dan (and everyone else, too). It just so happens that both my Mikados arrived today (!), so I can take a close look at them. I suspected
      Message 2 of 10 , Oct 2, 2000
        Thanks for the info, Dan (and everyone else, too). It just so happens
        that both my Mikados arrived today (!), so I can take a close look at
        them. I suspected I'd need to cut a rectangular hole in the front, so
        your description confirms that. Since your Mikado is currently living
        in your toolbox, does that mean you haven't had a chance to road-test
        the new coupler yet?

        Reynard, as you mentioned, the goal is indeed to "double-head" a pair
        of Mikados. I've seen it done in a number of old photographs, and in
        the area I'm hoping to model (well, roughly anyway), I understand
        steam double-heading was quite common. Plus, it seems like just the
        thing to pull longer trains up the grades -- without resorting to my
        F7 A-B <grin>.

        While Marklin's American 2-8-2 has a virtually identical body to
        their American 4-6-2, its chassis is probably slightly heavier and
        its drivers are smaller, so I hope for a little less wheel slippage
        on hills.

        It's interesting that despite the number of "powered axles"
        advertised by Marklin, the 2-8-2 and the 4-6-2 have the same number
        of powered wheels doing the work -- four! The other drivers don't
        quite touch the rails. Why are they designed this way? For better
        traction or better electrical contact? Some other reason?

        -- Andy


        > Yes, I have one on my 2-8-2. I added a Kadee to it. This involved
        > drilling a hole out in the front pilot, squaring it up to accept a
        Kadee
        > coupler box, as well as trim a bit off the front of the pilot to
        clear
        > the "air hose". I then drilled a hole thru the pilot sill, tapped
        it for
        > a Kadee screw and viola. The little nub that represents the coupler
        > was cut off with a hobby knife.
      • Jeffrey MacHan
        ... The reason is to allow the long wheelbase locos to negociate the tightest of M s curves. JRM
        Message 3 of 10 , Oct 2, 2000
          >
          >It's interesting that despite the number of "powered axles"
          >advertised by Marklin, the 2-8-2 and the 4-6-2 have the same number
          >of powered wheels doing the work -- four! The other drivers don't
          >quite touch the rails. Why are they designed this way? For better
          >traction or better electrical contact? Some other reason?
          >
          >-- Andy

          The reason is to allow the long wheelbase locos to negociate the tightest of
          M's curves.

          JRM


          _________________________________________________________________________
          Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

          Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
          http://profiles.msn.com
        • Garth A. Hamilton - VE3HO
          I do not believe that this is correct since the electrical pickup is only on the drivers at the extreme ends of the locomotive, the other interior axles are
          Message 4 of 10 , Oct 2, 2000
            I do not believe that this is correct since the electrical pickup is only on the drivers at the extreme ends of the locomotive, the other interior axles are elevated to place more weight on the drivers and hence on the track ensuring better electrical pickup. The adhesion comes from the total weight of the locomotive on the rails and is not a function of how many wheels are on the rail. The weight is divided by the number of driving wheels on the rail. Increasing the number of wheels on the track just reduces the adhesion per wheel but the total remains the same so the engine does not pull more just does with a better electric supply.

            On uneven track without the interior axles being elevated you could loose electrical contact on one or more axles. I enhance the loco's performance by adding a wiper to the other drivers and have even added tender pick up on some. Whenever I add the additional electrical pickup I also file the small tit on the cover plate that elevates that interior axle bringing it down to the track. These two things increase the electrical pickup and engines are less likely to stall. The trick is finding the fine phosphor bronze sheet stock in the right size. Some times When I run out of sheet stock I use a brass wire wiper which has an inverted V shape at 90 degrees to the wiper arm and runs on the tire at the top of the wheel where it is out of site and this can also act as a spring on the interior driver to keep weight on the driver placing it on the track most of the time. This adds drag to the drive train and is not as efficient as the wide wiper strips, but it is better than no wiper.

            Garth

            At 01:02 AM 10/03/2000 +0000, you wrote:
            >>
            >>It's interesting that despite the number of "powered axles"
            >>advertised by Marklin, the 2-8-2 and the 4-6-2 have the same number
            >>of powered wheels doing the work -- four! The other drivers don't
            >>quite touch the rails. Why are they designed this way? For better
            >>traction or better electrical contact? Some other reason?
            >>
            >>-- Andy
            >
            >The reason is to allow the long wheelbase locos to negociate the tightest of
            >M's curves.
            >
            >JRM
            >
            >
            >_________________________________________________________________________
            >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
            >
            >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
            >http://profiles.msn.com
            >
            >
            >
            >"Z" WARNING! HANDLE WITH CARE! Highly addictive in Small DoseZ!
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.