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

Re:Pullingpower

Expand Messages
  • stevegail
    Matt--something else to consider is the cost of your Rail Empire. You say your on a fixed income/limited budget. Your proposed rolling stock cost is $2500+
    Message 1 of 13 , Apr 1, 2009
      Matt--something else to consider is the cost of your Rail Empire. You say your on a fixed income/limited budget. Your proposed rolling stock cost is $2500+ US, your track plan will run you between $2000 and $2500 for track plus an undetermined amount for switches. Then you will need wire, lumber, etc. You really should figure your cost going in so you will see where you need to go.
      --Steve
      -- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, "stevegail" <sschulman541@...> wrote:
      >
      > Matt--if you try to run your 4 trains with DC you will need to set up more blocks than you can possibly imagine OR you will have all trains running into each other and chugging around elephant style in just a few laps of your layout.
      > Your goal is commendable, but I think you are setting yourself up to fail. You have very lofty goals, but they are to grand for a beginner. My first (and still only) 2x4 module took me 6 months to build and there are no blocks, helixes, or mountains on it. Just buildings. I'm retired so I worked on it every day. And when I finished it I was burned out. No trains for a while. My advise is scale back and set a goal that is obtainable, and then incorporate it into some thing larger until you reach your eventual goal.
      > --Steve from the other Phoenix
      >
      > On my layout, I will be having my trains go up and down a 2% grade over 24 feet with two single helix's one at each end. I had orginally intended on pulling a max of 50 cars, but I'm thinking that this may be a bit too much of a stretch in as far as looks and strain on the engines. So I'm limiting my length's to no more then 35 cars not counting caboose. When complete, I will have 3 trains of 30 to 35 cars running and a 4th as strictly a passenger trains of of no more then 15 max. And much to everybodies dismay, I'm going to be running DC.
      > >
      >
      > >
      > > [
      > >
      >
    • Matthew Parker
      Hey Steve: I ve already got an idea of what my layout is going to cost, but don t forget, this is a 15+year project. As more and more of my investments come
      Message 2 of 13 , Apr 1, 2009
        Hey Steve:

        I've already got an idea of what my layout is going to cost, but don't forget, this is a 15+year project. As more and more of my investments come due and pump some money into my bank account, I will be able to increase my budget. And this layout is something that I will spend most of the winter months on since I can't do any gardening. If I plan things right, I will only need 4 blocks for each of my three main lines. And a couple for my yard and industrial complex. The wire I can get for free as my son is an electrician and he gets me all the wire I need for any project I undertake.

        I've got 15 years to put this all together and if it takes longer then that, well if I'm still alive and have the energy, so be it. After all what the hell else am I gonna do? Stand on the street corner and chase pretty girls. Yeah right?

        The 4 trains I will be running will have their own tracks. Or at least 3 will. My passenger train will not be running all the time. It will replace one of the freights when I decide to run it. I will have two crossover so I can switch trains from one track to the other as the need arises. But they won't be running elephant style or running into one another.

        In as far as scaling back, I already have revised my initial track plan because I found that I will not have the space in my basement as I first thought with my original design. So instead of a rectangular layout, I'm going with and inverted L with a turnaround loop at each end for continuous running on one line, and the other line which will be a double will be a variation of a standard oval.

        I do have a 2x4 module that I recently acquired and I'm running my trains on that while I work on phase 1 of my layout. So as many have suggested, I will have time to play.

        Thanks for your concern though.



        To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
        From: sschulman541@...
        Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:17:11 +0000
        Subject: [Z_Scale] Re:Pullingpower





        Matt--something else to consider is the cost of your Rail Empire. You say your on a fixed income/limited budget. Your proposed rolling stock cost is $2500+ US, your track plan will run you between $2000 and $2500 for track plus an undetermined amount for switches. Then you will need wire, lumber, etc. You really should figure your cost going in so you will see where you need to go.
        --Steve
        -- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, "stevegail" <sschulman541@...> wrote:
        >
        > Matt--if you try to run your 4 trains with DC you will need to set up more blocks than you can possibly imagine OR you will have all trains running into each other and chugging around elephant style in just a few laps of your layout.
        > Your goal is commendable, but I think you are setting yourself up to fail. You have very lofty goals, but they are to grand for a beginner. My first (and still only) 2x4 module took me 6 months to build and there are no blocks, helixes, or mountains on it. Just buildings. I'm retired so I worked on it every day. And when I finished it I was burned out. No trains for a while. My advise is scale back and set a goal that is obtainable, and then incorporate it into some thing larger until you reach your eventual goal.
        > --Steve from the other Phoenix
        >
        > On my layout, I will be having my trains go up and down a 2% grade over 24 feet with two single helix's one at each end. I had orginally intended on pulling a max of 50 cars, but I'm thinking that this may be a bit too much of a stretch in as far as looks and strain on the engines. So I'm limiting my length's to no more then 35 cars not counting caboose. When complete, I will have 3 trains of 30 to 35 cars running and a 4th as strictly a passenger trains of of no more then 15 max. And much to everybodies dismay, I'm going to be running DC.
        > >
        >
        > >
        > > [
        > >
        >









        _________________________________________________________________
        Create a cool, new character for your Windows Live´┐Ż Messenger.
        http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9656621

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Cliff Travis
        Message 3 of 13 , Apr 2, 2009
          --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, Matthew Parker <echo31a@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > A very interesting read Cliff, thank you for your insights. I'm still experimenting with grades and curve radii. I'm just going to have 3 one level helixs with a 2% grade and in all my testing I've put my heaviest cars in the lead. There are only 6 and they consist of two 6o' flats, a 60' bulk carrier, two 60' boxcars, and one 60' gondola with load. The rest are all light. Boxcars, covered condolas, a tanker, a longer and cabooses. 26 in all. I've managed to pull them successfully around a 9.5 in curve up a 2% grade overe 18 feet, with one AZL DS75 and 3 MTL GP9's. As I've said, I have also 2 GP35's but neither of them run well either alone or in consist.
          >
          > I have experienced the difference in pulling power and speed amoung all of them. With my 3 GP9's I currently have my slowest one leading and my fastest one in the rear to keep tension on the cars as someone here does with theirs, but then the other two are being pushed. I did try it with my fastest one leadind and the other two in order of speed with the slowest in the rear and I have them numbered this way. This seemed to work better but I did see the jerking as you mention. Not only with the engines but with some of the cars as well.
          >
          > On my layout, I will be having my trains go up and down a 2% grade over 24 feet with two single helix's one at each end. I had orginally intended on pulling a max of 50 cars, but I'm thinking that this may be a bit too much of a stretch in as far as looks and strain on the engines. So I'm limiting my length's to no more then 35 cars not counting caboose. When complete, I will have 3 trains of 30 to 35 cars running and a 4th as strictly a passenger trains of of no more then 15 max. And much to everybodies dismay, I'm going to be running DC.
          >
          > I can't say with any degree of certainty, how old these 35's are, but they have both been well used and I have not tried to run them together with the 9's. Perhaps I should just to see what they can do together. I don't have any F7's powered. I hope too someday. I do have and F7B unpowered though.
          >
          > Although I haven't checked all of them, the cars that I have checked are running with plastic couplers and I don't seem to have much of a problem except for the fact that the couplers on some seem to ride higher then others. I haven't experience many premature uncouplings, but having said that, there have been one or two and I've remedied this by switching cars around. It works.
          >
          > I'm currently running with a Tech 4 220 and an MRC 1300. I keep the 220 at 10 volts and the 1300 at about 9. When I was testing the SD75 with both powerpacks I never ran over 8 volts with either as per manufacturers specifications. With the acceptions of the GP35's, all the rest ran well either by themselves or in conjuction with other engines.
          >
          > So I'm learning what is what and discovering certain things and hopefully when I have finished with my mock up of the central focus of my layout, I can start running full blown tests to check track alignment, curve radius and grades as well as pulling power etc. Then I can make the necessary adjustments before final construction.
          >
          > I have already posted some of my pics in my album Matt's Stuff in this group, and I have new one's to post of my recent experiments which I was hoping to get to today, but will now have to wait until this weekend.
          >
          > I will admit this. Z scale is definitely a challenge and as one z scaler here pointed out, is definitely not for the timid. While I have considered throwing in the towel, I'm also determined to see my dream come to fruition. And if it takes 15 years or 25 years, then that's how long it will take. I'm not in a hurry unless I'm told I only have 18 months to live. Then things could get a bit rushed.
          >
          > I take every scrap of advice and yes, criticism from the members here, anything that is the least bit helpful, print it off and put it in my railroad binder as references as I go along. Some here seem to think I'm not paying attention or don't want to take their suggestions or advice. NOT TRUE. But when one gets conflicting advice or suggestions, then one has to take the time to see which one is right. Experimentation is the name of the game and it's a game I will continue to play until I achieve my ultimate goal.
          >
          > Thanks so much again for your helpful comments. Another page to add to my binder.
          >
          >
          >
          > Matt
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
          > From: cliff@...
          > Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:30:39 +0000
          > Subject: [Z_Scale] Re:Pullingpower
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Matt
          > I have read all of the info you have gotten in the past few weeks and think that some of my observations may be helpful to you.
          >
          > Power packs: I use an MRC 260 which provides 2 controlled circuitswith 11.7 V each. Dial readings : 10-1.3v;20-2.1v;30-3.1;
          > 40-4.5v;50-5.7v;60-7.0v;70-8.3v;80-9.8;80-11.6v;10-11.7v. Readings in themselves hve nothing to do with MPH.
          > If the knob does not go above 80 you areOK with Z equipt. You will never go that high unless you are playing "toytrains"
          > You can power and control two separate DC blocks
          >
          > I do not have any AZL engines but I have been running many MTL F7s and GP35/9s. I consider the GP35s and GP9s as one type since they are intended to be mechanically and electrically IDENTICAL. and they perform EQUALLY and very well when manufactured to specifications.
          > As this is not always the case some run fast and some slow. Some start at the lowest powerpack setting while others don't move until the control lever is much advanced.Most run quietly and some are noisy.This is true with DC & DCC.
          > All of this is known and is reasonably well documented on this and other forums as well.
          > I have two of the earliest GP35s (One DC and & one DCC) which run perfectly and many others with many problems. Those purchased recently have been running very well. (MTL is currently producing GOOD GP35/9s and is very good about taking care of problems if any arise.)
          > F7s,when well set up,run very well at VERY SLOW speeds,and will out pull almost anything, will also run on any turnouts and on curves of very low radius (5 inch) . They are at their best when equipped with wheel wipers and overhauled by Glen Chenier.
          > With regard ro AZL ,I have seen a new E7running very smoothly on our modules whereas an older AlcoPA1 Stumbled on the Marklin Expandable tracks(used to join modules) and when negotiating MTL turnouts. It would appear that gauge problems have been corrected on newer AZL equipt.
          >
          > I invariabely run with engines in consists of 2 and try to keep them matched in speed. If one is SLIGHTLY faster it goes first as it keeps some tension on the couplers which helps to eliminate most of the longitudinal jerking allowed by the springs in the MTL couplers I think that the jerking is a major cause of derailments and uncoupling. on one of my mudules, I have a Helix with a grade of over 3% and I make a point of having all travel go up-grade as jerking becomes violent on descending trains. There is no problem with ascending trains as tension is automatically maintained. If following engines are faster it also promotes jerking between the engines.
          > If I have any problems with uncoupling or derailing I watch the trains very carefully in an effort to discover what kind of an anomaly might have caused it.
          > With regard to pulling power I have found that curves seem to be the most limiting factor. Others are : Weight of cars,type of wheels-Metal or plastic. Type coupler. I recently ran tests on 2 of my modules with 180 Degree with 10"rad. end modules.
          > Ngines were MTL GP35/9s. Track was all Flextrack which was.. well "broken in" and well cleaned. Ther were 4 Marklin switches and 6 expansion tracks. Cars included *MTL Gundersons each with 2 containers,9 Full Throttle tubular hoppers,
          > 4 MTL 50ft bulkhead Flats with Loads, The rest were MTL 50ft Boxcars and 40 & 50 ft Hoppers. the heaviest cars were first to minimize the possibility of bowstringing.
          > I started with 2 engines & 20 cars adding cars until there was a bit of slipping on curves, Added a 3rd engine and cars until ther was some slipping around 40. The train was getting long enough to be on both curves. 4th engine was added and cars were added until there were 70.I got tired of opening boxes so I decided that that was enough and lelt the train run for about half an hour which it did with no strain.
          > Actually if I were at a show I would probably stop at 30 cars or less but might stay with 4 engines because it "looks good"
          > One thing that was evident was the slight slowing when the engines were on the curves. We also ran on (9"rad curves which was harder for the engines.
          > Incidentally, about10 of the cars had been converted to the use of the new AZL trucks with latching couplers & metal wheels and they worked well in all respects coupling easily and consistently with MTL couplers.They did seem to cut down on "jigging" and they roll VERY freely. While they are not adaptable to any uncoupling system they are easier to manually uncouple as the is no hook to get in the way.
          >
          > Cliff
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > _________________________________________________________________
          > Internet Explorer 8 helps keep your personal info safe.
          > http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9655581
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Loren
          Please guys, edit your posts before sending. Too much band width spent on unnecessary repeating of info already read..... Loren ... From: Cliff Travis
          Message 4 of 13 , Apr 2, 2009
            Please guys,
            edit your posts before sending. Too much band width spent on unnecessary
            repeating of info already read.....
            Loren

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Cliff Travis" <cliff@...>
            To: <z_scale@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 2:13 PM
            Subject: [Z_Scale] Re:Pullingpower


            > --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, Matthew Parker <echo31a@...> wrote:
            >>
            >>
            >> A very interesting read Cliff,

            snip.............
          • craz3474
            Loren, I m getting used to the yahoo forums. Question: is there an easy way to remove the previous post other than hi lighting it and deleting? Thanks, Jerry
            Message 5 of 13 , Apr 2, 2009
              Loren,
              I'm getting used to the yahoo forums. Question: is there an easy way to remove the previous post other than hi lighting it and deleting?
              Thanks,
              Jerry

              > edit your posts before sending. Too much band width spent on unnecessary

              > Loren
            • Glen Chenier
              Was discussed a few months ago, some email handlers and chosen message email format may not allow edit of the original post other than complete deletion. If
              Message 6 of 13 , Apr 4, 2009
                Was discussed a few months ago, some email handlers and chosen message email format may not allow edit of the original post other than complete deletion.

                If this is the case and one cannot edit the original post in your emailed reply, an easy work-around is to open up a browser and reply through the list site instead. This will always allow pruning of the prior post to only those paragraphs to which one is specifically responding.


                --- In z_scale@yahoogroups.com, "craz3474" <craigjscott@...> wrote:
                >
                > Loren,
                > I'm getting used to the yahoo forums. Question: is there an easy way to remove the previous post other than hi lighting it and deleting?
                > Thanks,
                > Jerry
                >
                > > edit your posts before sending. Too much band width spent on unnecessary
                >
                > > Loren
                >
              • Loren
                Jerry, You can only delete your own post. Haven t done it in awhile, but it can be done by only you and the moderators. Loren ... From: craz3474
                Message 7 of 13 , Apr 4, 2009
                  Jerry,
                  You can only delete your own post. Haven't done it in awhile, but it can be
                  done by only you and the moderators.
                  Loren

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "craz3474" <craigjscott@...>
                  To: <z_scale@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 9:55 PM
                  Subject: [Z_Scale] Re:Pullingpower


                  > Loren,
                  > I'm getting used to the yahoo forums. Question: is there an easy way to
                  > remove the previous post other than hi lighting it and deleting?
                  > Thanks,
                  > Jerry
                  >
                  >> edit your posts before sending. Too much band width spent on unnecessary
                  >
                  >> Loren
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > Z-scale: minimum siZe, MAXIMUM enjoyment!
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • Manfred G
                  Just go to the account setup in your email client and uncheck the box that says something about Quote replied to post or automatically quote the original
                  Message 8 of 13 , Apr 5, 2009
                    Just go to the account setup in your email client and uncheck the box
                    that says something about Quote replied to post or automatically quote
                    the original message when replying or a statement to some such effect. I
                    don't think there is a way to do that if you are on the group site
                    reading directly.

                    Manfred

                    craz3474 wrote:
                    > Loren,
                    > I'm getting used to the yahoo forums. Question: is there an easy way to remove the previous post other than hi lighting it and deleting?
                    > Thanks,
                    > Jerry
                    >
                    >
                    >>edit your posts before sending. Too much band width spent on unnecessary
                    >
                    >
                    >>Loren
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    > Z-scale: minimum siZe, MAXIMUM enjoyment!
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.