A weighty problem indeed and I am surprised at the amount of lead that must be added, including inside the cab area of the locomotives. I doubt if I will be running anything to those lengths used on McKinley, but I was worth seeing such a long-raked train Kate Bushing it up that gradient (song: Running Up That Hill).
Another alternative might be tungsten weights, such as those used in pinewood derby cars. There are several websites that sell these in various sizes and configurations including very small pieces designed to fit into models. From my reading it looks like tungsten would be about 65% more dense than lead with density of 18.8 g/cm3 while lead has around 11.4 g/cm3. There are also products called Tundra which provide the same density as lead, can be cut and sanded, but doesn't have the risks of lead.
Good to see this done in OO also. I started doing this to my N gauge steam locos over the past year but it can be difficult to find the space for the lead. I have also invested in Tungsten fishing weight that can be pressed into difficult places like you would with Blu Tac. The Pannier tanks only manage an extra handful of grams but it makes all the difference running rakes of 30 odd wagons.
I have a similar problem with my garden layout, all my loco's are 1930's steam era and most are the old Hornby tender drive. I was originally having wheel spin with all the loco's until I, as you have, realised that extra weight in the loco over the driving wheels was essential. It helped but didn't completely cure the problem of the return climb back to the base-board, I call it the long drag as it is about 15 yards of steady but straight climb. I saw an advert for DCC Concepts Power Base system so invested in a few packs which also included High-power magnets which are fixed to the underside of the driving chassis, I haven't upgraded all my loco's yet but the 'Duchess' loco's handle the climb quite comfortably now. The weights which I have been using are motor wheel balance weights which are steel, not as dense as lead but safer for me. A very informative video David, many thanks.
Excellent! In my experience it is always lack of traction and never lack of power that causes the problem. On my tightly curved 1 in 40 gradient even 25 trucks or 8 coaches only take about 300 mA at 10 V ( normal dc control). I turned to DCC Concepts Powerbase for a solution but think extra weight would have bee preferable. I will start with a particularly troublesome Hornby King. My 14xx with 2coaches might be more difficult as all of the weight is already on the rear driven axle. Thanks again for the inspiration.
Hi Graham, Good luck with the journey... The smaller locos are always more of a problem. I gave up with the Dukedug. She will be reserved for a "scenic" SLS special coming in from Wales with just two coaches...
Great tutorial on how to asess the need for and then add weight in the right places and amounts. I would completely agree that a uniform weight per model-foot is a must for a serious modeller - leaving that to chance is asking for trouble - which you will definitely get! Suprised though that your conclusions differed so much from NMRA - but I suppose there are a lot of reason why that might be - longer vehicles on the average and larger layouts with less agressive inclines may be among those? A couple of questions: When you have added the extra weight to the model, how much additional power does it consume (if any)? The other question - which I doubt anyone can answer really - is how does such work affect the lifetime of the motor and the drive train in the loco? Adding weights is essentially allowing the communication of more load to the worm drive and the motor parts - so I wonder if that adds a lot of wear and/or heat in those areas? Clearly it is worth doing if you can't use the loco without doing it, but it'd be good to know if it - for example - halves the working life of the model's motor or drive train. Pretty sure nobody can put a number on those factors - and it has to be said that even metal on metal wheel slipping is probably creating massive amounts of wear when weights have not been added! Thanks David, Peter and Charlie for another very interesting view into the wonderful world of McKinley. Must get down to Dorset to visit some time!
Hi Alan. We notice very little extra power consumption if any. I have given a fully reply to your second question posed by Peter Kazmierczak. Have a read there. In summary, experience shows that the problems are more to do with design and manufacture rather than wear. Some models fail relatively quickly for no good reason. Other trundle on for years...
Love the video, would love to see a video where you just look at the locos that you have on the railway like a meet the fleet it would be interesting to see what you run more as I see from your videos there are a wide variety!
@@dattouk I've been following your progress for some time now and always thought that would be cool to see! Look forward to seeing how the phase 2 side comes along more too.
Nice to see some trains in action. The 8F looked (and sounded) delightful. In the long term though, will the additional weight put more pressure on the locos electric motor and wheel bearings? Just a wondering...
Yes Peter I anticipate it will. However, thats a relatively small price to pay and is often not the cause of failures to date. Design flaws, poor manufacturing quality etc make up 90% of our problems. However I do intend to start a maintenance regime based on miles run at some stage. Out of interest the old Mainline wagons have been weighted and run on McKinley for 20 years and show no real signs of bearing wear. A humorous aside - I went to Wunderland Hamburg a couple of years ago with Darren. I was super interested in how they execute loco maintenance - Their models are run far more intensively that I envisage McKinley running. I was expecting something out of the Audi adverts.. To my surprise, the answer was not what I expected! They run them until they break down - end of.. So we will find out whether a series of "Exams" based on mileage helps to reduce the problems or are we doomed to fixing spurious problems forever! Time will tell, David
David, You made mention of 4-4-0's. Maybe you could use the "Pendon" method to improve loco running. Pendon have the loco and tender as one unit. As well as weight in the boiler they place weight in the tender front. Turning the loco into a 4-6-4.It was nice to hear the 8F working up the incline. Cheers, Chris Perry.
Hi Chris, Ahh. Thats a cunning idea. putting a bogie motor in the tender. When we have got the railway running, I'll give Pete that challenge.. He'd love it. Thanks, David
@@dattouk David, Pendon's 4-4-0's don't have a motor in the tender. The 4-4-0 and tender is one fixed unit with the weight's in the front of the loco smokebox over the top of the 4 driving wheels and into the front half of the tender. Making the centre of the loco an 0-6-0. The centre tender wheels have 1mm side play movement. The rear tender wheel's have no movement. On reflection I fear your radius curves might be to tight to make use of this ruse. Pendon does have a G.W.R. 2-8-0 that has a large motor in the tender, which drives a flexible drive under the cab to the driving wheels. This loco can be seen with it's train of 100 private owner coal wagons. It's all fun and games really. Cheers, Chris Perry.
@@ainsleyperry5192 I think we need a drawing. 4-4-0 (or a 2'B in UIC classification) + 3 axle tender (guessing the axle numbers of it) -> 4-6-4 (or a 2'C2' in UIC) ??? Or alternativ "Pete challange" making the tender a second loco 4-4-0 + 0-3-0 / 4-4-3-0 (or in UIC a 2'BC' as it actually became a mallet loco that way).
In the 1960s we added lead to the Britannia body shell but in that case it was a 4-4-2 because there was no contact between the middle set of wheels and the track. Even with the added weight it still wasn't as good as my Hornby Dublo 2-6-4 tank which had a cast body. When re-doing our bathroom we found unused lead piping under the floor, which I kept for such a purpose.
Hi Don, You can buy some super skinny lead on eBay that is only 0.5mm think. Its more malleable than old lead pipe.. We bought a set of Bachmann J11s. Ideal I thought - having a cluster of 0-6-0s - Add a bit of weight and bingo. Opps. We found they were high on one side of the centre axles. That made then 0-3-0. After some gentle fettling of the horn blocks we got our 0-6-0s back. We added some weight and voila - 25 wagons up a 1/60 slope.... Good luck with your lead. David
@@dattouk Thanks for the response. Having my lead pipe free, I think I will stick to gloves, metal snips and hammer. I can measure the right amount. After having wagons coming off the track I found weighting them to 35-45gm was about right using the said lead weights. I did find that the lower the weight could be put the better although a thin layer of lead at the bottom of a mineral wagon, painted black and sprinkled with coal dust looked alright and seemed to run OK. Not to your standard however. Thanks for the video. I particularly liked the one on weathering.
Have just finished converting a 1980s HST to EM gauge and fitting the latest Hornby HST bogies and central drive motor; thread on RM Web. Struggled a bit on the flat with 3ft radius curves pulling 7 Mk 3 coaches and a dummy power car. Clearly need to add more weight to the power car. Worked out your locos have 85~100 grams per axle (driven and pony) so will be looking to add around 85 grams to the 275 gram power car to bring it up to 90 grams per axle. Hopefully, that will do the trick. have a roll of lead flashing doing nothing but might look at selling the roll to a scrappy and investing in the thin stuff you recommended. Excellent video, as always.
Hi Patrick, It has always cheesed me off that Hornby HSTs were clones of the Lima model of one power and one dummy. You might consider adding a second power car. If you look on eBay you can find this "LEAD SHEET 300mm x 100mm x (.5mm code 1 thickness)" It is perfect for adding lead in thin strips.. Your point about weight per axle is interesting. That has got me thinking. Thanks for watching. David
@@dattouk Glad it was thought provoking but perhaps it should be total weight on the driven axles which comes out as 250g for the Black 5 and 400g for the 8F. Thanks for the eBay tip, lead ordered in a variety of thicknesses to reduce cost.
I have been playing about with adding weight and assessing performance a lot over the last few weeks following a bit of disaster trying to convert a Railroad HST to EM gauge with the correct sized wheels. Managed to do it but, without traction tyres, it had the pulling power of a gnat and only just manged to pull itself and the dummy car. I now measure weight on each driven bogie or set of driven wheels and measure drawbar pull using a spring balance. Rule of thumb is 25% conversion of weight to drawbar pull for the metal wheels and 75% for those with traction tyres. Where the conversion is under it usually mean the motor is underpowered for the loco. The railroad HST was low with traction tyres and seriously low with all metal wheels. I purchased 3 cheap, small, 0~500g scales on Amazon and can measure both bogies for a diesel and the pony, drivers and truck for steam at the same time. Allows me to fine tune where to put the additional weight or where to shift weight whilst keeping the overall weight the same to improve traction but minimise wear due to additional weight. Started a thread on RMWeb for those interested.
Start converting some of those lead soldiers you have hidden away to become crews. Any scope for placing lead beneath the locos in between the wheels? This does make the idea of white metal kits more attractive.
Thank you David for another great video. I was very interested to note that your 4-wheeled wagons are weighted to around 45 grams. Quite some years ago (some 40 odd) when looking at wagon weights and the NMRA standard I too came to the figure of 45 grams for my 4-wheeled wagons. My models are HO scale models of the Victorian state government railways here in Australia. (We here in Australia have similar issues with our steam locomotive models, most of our steam locos are small by comparison to American locomotives also.)
Hello Philip.. We couldn't get to the NMRA weights, but their principles are sound. i.e. balanced weights along the train. I remember my Civil Engineering days - There was an acronym - UDL - Uniformly distributed load. Interesting that we ended up at the same weights.
It's always difficult to work out weights of rolling stock especially kit built wagons. too much weight and the loco can't pull it, or too little and the wagon derails, thanks for that video
Weighting loco models ! I discovered this problem 10 years ago, when returning to British Outline. Mainly because British manufacturers seem reluctant to entertain traction tyres, unlike virtually all other manufacturers on the planet ! My planned 80ft x 25ft exhibition layout required a (virtually straight) 1 in 100 real life gradient, & locos to pull up to 12/13 coach trains, up this gradient. The lack of adhesion is mainly restricted to steam outline models, where serious dificientcies in weight (Hornby), or cast driving wheels (Bachmann) both result in gutless performance ! For those worried about "side effects" of adding weight. Hornby Diesel Models clocking in at (around 500g) double the weight of many of the steam models (240-300g), use the same range of motors as the steam models, without any noticeable detrimental effects. The axle bearing system used in both steam & diesel models also uses similar methods, and of course are all produced on similar tooling. The Bachmann situation is now similar to Hornby, so no problems should be expected. Fishing Tackle Lead shot. Locos deficient in weight, I therefore added fishing tackle lead shot inside the boiler area, with due regard to maintaining the balance of the loco. I use UHU glue, so I can remove any of the lead shot should this be necessary, for example during a complete strip down & overhaul. New Nickel Silver wheels. The Bachmann locos were in most cases already stuffed with weight, but their cast metal wheels causes vibration, which then encourages wheel slipping to set in, on gradients. The solution for this is more complex, as it requires Romford or similar, Nickel Silver wheels to replace the Bachmann cast ones. This also requires mods to the valve gear. But in the case of a Bachmann N Class 2-6-0 with 5ft 6in size drivers, I rebuilt. It added roughly 45% more power, and made it far quieter. So good was that rebuild, I rebuilt another N class into a similar looking U1 (with slightly larger 6ft Driving wheels), & it also exhibits around a 40% increase in hill climbing ability, and also became far smoother & quieter !!! New Bachmann steam from around 2019 are now produced on totally new tooling and come fitted with Nickel silver wheels, so are much quieter, and somewhat more powerful. Hornby Lightweights ! One of the best examples of weight issue with recent Hornby steam locos is their very nice looking SR Lord Nelson. Thinking I could save time & replace my three wheel grinding & rumbling Bachmann Lord Nelsons, I bought two of the new Hornby locos. Even as I took the first out of its packet I could feel the loco was far to light. Just 242g in fact. Not enough to pull more than 9 coaches even on the level ! Both locos required around 110g of extra lead shot to be added to haul 12 up my gradient. Gradients & the Laws of Physics ! A straight gradient of 1 in 100 becomes effectively MUCH steeper if curves are included, and of course the sharper the curves the worse the problem, due to a law of Physics which states: With every degree of curvature the power required in the locomotive must be increased by the Square root !!!!!!!!!!!! In other words a Hornby Flying Scotsman will happily haul 13 coaches around my 5ft minimum radius curves, but will only haul 5 coaches around a Hornby 438mm radius 2 curve, and that's before you even think about gradients !!! Commercial model Assembly Faults. Dealing with the pulling capacity of locos, revealed another problem. I test new locos on my work bench, just to ensure they work properly. I then immediately take them to pieces as I have found so many have internal assembly faults. Many of which would pretty quickly disable the model. The most common fault on Hornby tender engines, are problems with the four wires between loco & tender, and all these problems have been hidden under the cab area. Indeed the Hornby 28xx/38xx GWR 2-8-0 had a slot through the chassis block for these 4 wires, which was too small & tight to accommodate the wires. Two of the wires were already damaged, and sooner or later would have either caused a short circuit (by touching the metal chassis), or been broken. On Hornby Schools Class 4-4-0 models a number have come with issues relating to the front bogie, and its springing, by being assembled partly upside down. One of my Hornby King Arthur's also had this problem. In other respects as the Schools class model comes with two traction tyres, these models can haul 12/13 coach trains up my 1 in 100 gradient without needing any additional weight, so I have 6 of them !!! Bulleid Rebuilt WC/BB Pacifics until a chassis redesign around 2015, had a design fault. Whereby the front of the motor had NO secure method of stopping the front of the motor rising slightly. This immediately allows the brass worm gear to start chewing up the primary (plastic) cog. A couple of hours running and the motor then whirs but the loco does not move ! Knowing that I modified all further WC/BB models before even testing them, by adding my own brass strip over the motor front, and securing it to the chassis. Happy Modelling 😝.
As regards defects in Hornby models out of the box, I have just taken delivery of a Stanier Black 5, DCC ready. Looking carefully at the loco, I noticed really by chance that where the connecting wires to the tender emerge from the keeper plate, they were fouling on the rear right hand driving wheel. There was too much wire between loco and the plastic tender socket Obviously after a short time this would lead to failure. I had a difficult job anchoring the wire permanently clear of that driving wheel but a piece of double sided tape has now done the job. This is just bad engineering by Hornby rather than bad assembly because the keeper plate hole is immediately behind the driving wheel. On the traction tyre front, I have a loco drive Hornby 2P with tyres on the front drivers. They refuse to stay on, despite working on no less than the minimum radius ciurve specified and even though the loco is quite new. So I have dispensed with them but have no short circuits from them on my DCC layout. But the loco hardly weighs anything limiting its pulling power. So weight needs to be added and I am grateful for your suggestion because with a small boiler there is very little room for weights of a fixed size. Fitting cab weights only will unbalance the loco.
I regret falling behind on watching this series; this video in particular is quite relevant to me! I saw in some of the other comments that you seem to have already decided to use motorized tenders for the lighter locos (4-4-0s, etc). If that doesn’t provide the “oomph” you’ve been hoping for, have you considered tungsten weights? While expensive compared to lead (so might only be worth trying out on a single loco), tungsten is 1.7 times as dense as lead, so a bit more weight taking up the same space. I believe they also sell it in putty form to fill in whatever nooks and crannies might be available. Of course with me being three months late to the party my suggestion might be moot by now, but oh well; might somehow be useful in the future. Bang-up job you’ve all done so far; here’s to an unqualified success for the expansion!
Hello Mew, We haven't used motorised tenders yet. We have been focused on building the extension, but the stock is fast coming into focus. I am intrigued about Tungsten. Never thought about that before! Thank you.
If you want heavy locomotives kit build is the way to go. I have a 4-4-0 which is 300g not including the tender! When I build the tender it will be even more. My 4-6-0 GWR star is around 450g with on weigh added. Providing you get the right motor and gearbox they are great. Of course I don't have any gradients on my layout as I decided I just didn't have the space to do it right.
Hi EM, You might consider buying the skinny stuff on eBay - Look for 0.5mm lead sheet. It's a modeller's dream to work with. Much easier that the Code 3 stuff sold at DIY stores.
~1:50 for Europe (without GB/00) it would be NEM302 Wagon Mass / Wagenmasse / Masse des Véhicules Minimum Mass: Z 0,12g/mm, N 0,17g/mm, TT 0,25g/mm, H0 0,40g/mm, S 0,60g/mm, 0 1g/mm, I 2g/mm, II 4g/mm "The car mass according to the table should not be increased by more than 30%. ..."
Hi Lass, Well this is very interesting. 0.4g per mm only gets us to 32g for a 80mm wagon. Is that what the NEM HO specs states? That is only 70% of what we found we needed on McKinley. Out of interest, we cut down our loads after looking at the NMRA specification. McKinley is 40% less than the NMRA spec. Can you check your numbers please? Have you tried this? Does it work? David
@@dattouk Yes, NEM302 (to be found at MOROP s homepage) from 2015 says for H0 min 0,4g/mm, max would be (30% more) 0,52g/mm. As I am in middle Europe with stock mainly from märklin, the units of measurments NMRA uses are strange to me. The equivalent in H0 to your (rather short) 80mm standart BR wagon would be a 115mm long number 4410 waggon from märklin at 49g or one of the 115mm long cooling waggons with advertisement at 54g. As some other examples a 100mm silo wagon number 4661 at 46g or a 108mm Trix tank wagon at 48g. But then there are some older märklin models for example a 240mm long coach 4112 at 177g and a ~190mm wood wagon at 138g being to heavy to NEM302, but maybe have been correct to a older rule when they came out. I got two jouef wagons both been to light, gave those more wight by guessing years ago, a 120mm only has 36g without, 63g with added wight (therefore nowadays to much). And yes, they all work on a märklin layout. Back to OO; as sad you are out of the rule book and 80mm for a wagon is short in the middle European view, your scale is somewhere between H0 and S scale therefore my suggestion would be ~0,5g/mm for minimum and ~0,65g/mm for maximum -> 40-52g for a 80mm OO standart brown BR wagon, you say you got them to ~45g (right?), therefore we agree with each other, but came there on different ways!
One more point NEM302 is a recommandation, not a rule -> therefore the manufacturers mediated / agreed to it can have exceptions (cran wagen for example needs counterweight to work, older models can stay unchanged, ...).
You mentioned many times that the test area was a punishing gradient but I didn't hear you say exactly what the gradient was. I'd be very interested to know as I have a layout planned that will require quite tough gradients and I would like to be sure most of my steam locos can be modified to manage it. Nice tutorial btw.
Hi Gerry and Graeme. Yes, two percent is tough. thats 2cm in 100cm of travel. We have compounded that on the temporary connection. It is hornby 3rd radius to boot. Our guiding logic for 95% of the layout is 1% (1cm per metre) with 20cm radius curves in the hidden sections. That is do-able providing you put the effort in on the steamers.
I found it strange that you added lead to the black 5 tender. This increases the tender's drag, negating a fair amount of the increased traction from the locomotive lead. Your tender needs only to have about 50g to stay on the track with the weight system you are using. My experience with 4-6-0 locomotives is you can increase the tractive effort considerably by removing the leading bogie spring if your trackwork and wheels are properly gauged.
A question about adding weight to the tender: doesn't that increase the weight of the train that the locomotive has to pull? I guess the intention of adding weight to the locomotive is increasing the traction, but extra weight in the tender doesn't seem to contribute to that objective.
It's the same concept as adding weight to the wagons, it improves stability during running. All the wagons they pulled up that grade were weighted as well, out of the box the locos probably could have handled them. It's a balancing act.
A weighty problem indeed and I am surprised at the amount of lead that must be added, including inside the cab area of the locomotives. I doubt if I will be running anything to those lengths used on McKinley, but I was worth seeing such a long-raked train Kate Bushing it up that gradient (song: Running Up That Hill).
Another alternative might be tungsten weights, such as those used in pinewood derby cars. There are several websites that sell these in various sizes and configurations including very small pieces designed to fit into models. From my reading it looks like tungsten would be about 65% more dense than lead with density of 18.8 g/cm3 while lead has around 11.4 g/cm3.
There are also products called Tundra which provide the same density as lead, can be cut and sanded, but doesn't have the risks of lead.
Superb video very informative
Glad you liked it
Good to see this done in OO also. I started doing this to my N gauge steam locos over the past year but it can be difficult to find the space for the lead. I have also invested in Tungsten fishing weight that can be pressed into difficult places like you would with Blu Tac. The Pannier tanks only manage an extra handful of grams but it makes all the difference running rakes of 30 odd wagons.
Hi Ashley,
The Tungsten idea was suggested by someone else as well. I had never heard of that. We shall experiment. Thanks for watching.
I have a similar problem with my garden layout, all my loco's are 1930's steam era and most are the old Hornby tender drive. I was originally having wheel spin with all the loco's until I, as you have, realised that extra weight in the loco over the driving wheels was essential. It helped but didn't completely cure the problem of the return climb back to the base-board, I call it the long drag as it is about 15 yards of steady but straight climb.
I saw an advert for DCC Concepts Power Base system so invested in a few packs which also included High-power magnets which are fixed to the underside of the driving chassis, I haven't upgraded all my loco's yet but the 'Duchess' loco's handle the climb quite comfortably now.
The weights which I have been using are motor wheel balance weights which are steel, not as dense as lead but safer for me.
A very informative video David, many thanks.
Hi Peter, It's good to hear you have had success using the magnet technology. Good luck and thanks for the feedback.
Excellent! In my experience it is always lack of traction and never lack of power that causes the problem. On my tightly curved 1 in 40 gradient even 25 trucks or 8 coaches only take about 300 mA at 10 V ( normal dc control). I turned to DCC Concepts Powerbase for a solution but think extra weight would have bee preferable. I will start with a particularly troublesome Hornby King. My 14xx with 2coaches might be more difficult as all of the weight is already on the rear driven axle. Thanks again for the inspiration.
Hi Graham,
Good luck with the journey... The smaller locos are always more of a problem. I gave up with the Dukedug. She will be reserved for a "scenic" SLS special coming in from Wales with just two coaches...
Great tutorial on how to asess the need for and then add weight in the right places and amounts. I would completely agree that a uniform weight per model-foot is a must for a serious modeller - leaving that to chance is asking for trouble - which you will definitely get! Suprised though that your conclusions differed so much from NMRA - but I suppose there are a lot of reason why that might be - longer vehicles on the average and larger layouts with less agressive inclines may be among those?
A couple of questions:
When you have added the extra weight to the model, how much additional power does it consume (if any)?
The other question - which I doubt anyone can answer really - is how does such work affect the lifetime of the motor and the drive train in the loco? Adding weights is essentially allowing the communication of more load to the worm drive and the motor parts - so I wonder if that adds a lot of wear and/or heat in those areas? Clearly it is worth doing if you can't use the loco without doing it, but it'd be good to know if it - for example - halves the working life of the model's motor or drive train. Pretty sure nobody can put a number on those factors - and it has to be said that even metal on metal wheel slipping is probably creating massive amounts of wear when weights have not been added!
Thanks David, Peter and Charlie for another very interesting view into the wonderful world of McKinley. Must get down to Dorset to visit some time!
Hi Alan.
We notice very little extra power consumption if any.
I have given a fully reply to your second question posed by Peter Kazmierczak. Have a read there. In summary, experience shows that the problems are more to do with design and manufacture rather than wear. Some models fail relatively quickly for no good reason. Other trundle on for years...
I added up your Railway and it comes to 26 thousands pounds. Wow that's dedication for you. Excellent stuff guys
Dear TV, I love your maths. I'd be a happy camper for 26K .. If only.....
My question to you is: Why do the maths?
@@dattouk to start charging the team at the door David. Annual Membership fee I say 295.00 pounds a year and tea included
Love the video, would love to see a video where you just look at the locos that you have on the railway like a meet the fleet it would be interesting to see what you run more as I see from your videos there are a wide variety!
Good idea We will do that.. It will look quite something...
@@dattouk I've been following your progress for some time now and always thought that would be cool to see! Look forward to seeing how the phase 2 side comes along more too.
Nice to see some trains in action. The 8F looked (and sounded) delightful. In the long term though, will the additional weight put more pressure on the locos electric motor and wheel bearings? Just a wondering...
Yes Peter I anticipate it will. However, thats a relatively small price to pay and is often not the cause of failures to date. Design flaws, poor manufacturing quality etc make up 90% of our problems. However I do intend to start a maintenance regime based on miles run at some stage. Out of interest the old Mainline wagons have been weighted and run on McKinley for 20 years and show no real signs of bearing wear.
A humorous aside - I went to Wunderland Hamburg a couple of years ago with Darren. I was super interested in how they execute loco maintenance - Their models are run far more intensively that I envisage McKinley running. I was expecting something out of the Audi adverts.. To my surprise, the answer was not what I expected! They run them until they break down - end of.. So we will find out whether a series of "Exams" based on mileage helps to reduce the problems or are we doomed to fixing spurious problems forever!
Time will tell,
David
David, You made mention of 4-4-0's. Maybe you could use the "Pendon" method to improve loco running. Pendon have the loco and tender as one unit. As well as weight in the boiler they place weight in the tender front. Turning the loco into a 4-6-4.It was nice to hear the 8F working up the incline. Cheers, Chris Perry.
Hi Chris,
Ahh. Thats a cunning idea. putting a bogie motor in the tender. When we have got the railway running, I'll give Pete that challenge.. He'd love it. Thanks,
David
@@dattouk David, Pendon's 4-4-0's don't have a motor in the tender. The 4-4-0 and tender is one fixed unit with the weight's in the front of the loco smokebox over the top of the 4 driving wheels and into the front half of the tender. Making the centre of the loco an 0-6-0. The centre tender wheels have 1mm side play movement. The rear tender wheel's have no movement. On reflection I fear your radius curves might be to tight to make use of this ruse. Pendon does have a G.W.R. 2-8-0 that has a large motor in the tender, which drives a flexible drive under the cab to the driving wheels. This loco can be seen with it's train of 100 private owner coal wagons. It's all fun and games really. Cheers, Chris Perry.
@@ainsleyperry5192 I think we need a drawing.
4-4-0 (or a 2'B in UIC classification) + 3 axle tender (guessing the axle numbers of it) -> 4-6-4 (or a 2'C2' in UIC) ???
Or alternativ "Pete challange" making the tender a second loco 4-4-0 + 0-3-0 / 4-4-3-0 (or in UIC a 2'BC' as it actually became a mallet loco that way).
Great video - I have a few locos that need some extra weight, and you have inspired me to get working on them.
Go for it!
In the 1960s we added lead to the Britannia body shell but in that case it was a 4-4-2 because there was no contact between the middle set of wheels and the track. Even with the added weight it still wasn't as good as my Hornby Dublo 2-6-4 tank which had a cast body. When re-doing our bathroom we found unused lead piping under the floor, which I kept for such a purpose.
Hi Don, You can buy some super skinny lead on eBay that is only 0.5mm think. Its more malleable than old lead pipe.. We bought a set of Bachmann J11s. Ideal I thought - having a cluster of 0-6-0s - Add a bit of weight and bingo.
Opps. We found they were high on one side of the centre axles. That made then 0-3-0. After some gentle fettling of the horn blocks we got our 0-6-0s back. We added some weight and voila - 25 wagons up a 1/60 slope.... Good luck with your lead. David
@@dattouk Thanks for the response. Having my lead pipe free, I think I will stick to gloves, metal snips and hammer. I can measure the right amount. After having wagons coming off the track I found weighting them to 35-45gm was about right using the said lead weights. I did find that the lower the weight could be put the better although a thin layer of lead at the bottom of a mineral wagon, painted black and sprinkled with coal dust looked alright and seemed to run OK. Not to your standard however.
Thanks for the video. I particularly liked the one on weathering.
Have just finished converting a 1980s HST to EM gauge and fitting the latest Hornby HST bogies and central drive motor; thread on RM Web. Struggled a bit on the flat with 3ft radius curves pulling 7 Mk 3 coaches and a dummy power car. Clearly need to add more weight to the power car. Worked out your locos have 85~100 grams per axle (driven and pony) so will be looking to add around 85 grams to the 275 gram power car to bring it up to 90 grams per axle. Hopefully, that will do the trick. have a roll of lead flashing doing nothing but might look at selling the roll to a scrappy and investing in the thin stuff you recommended. Excellent video, as always.
Hi Patrick, It has always cheesed me off that Hornby HSTs were clones of the Lima model of one power and one dummy. You might consider adding a second power car. If you look on eBay you can find this "LEAD SHEET 300mm x 100mm x (.5mm code 1 thickness)" It is perfect for adding lead in thin strips.. Your point about weight per axle is interesting. That has got me thinking. Thanks for watching. David
@@dattouk Glad it was thought provoking but perhaps it should be total weight on the driven axles which comes out as 250g for the Black 5 and 400g for the 8F. Thanks for the eBay tip, lead ordered in a variety of thicknesses to reduce cost.
I have been playing about with adding weight and assessing performance a lot over the last few weeks following a bit of disaster trying to convert a Railroad HST to EM gauge with the correct sized wheels. Managed to do it but, without traction tyres, it had the pulling power of a gnat and only just manged to pull itself and the dummy car. I now measure weight on each driven bogie or set of driven wheels and measure drawbar pull using a spring balance. Rule of thumb is 25% conversion of weight to drawbar pull for the metal wheels and 75% for those with traction tyres. Where the conversion is under it usually mean the motor is underpowered for the loco. The railroad HST was low with traction tyres and seriously low with all metal wheels. I purchased 3 cheap, small, 0~500g scales on Amazon and can measure both bogies for a diesel and the pony, drivers and truck for steam at the same time. Allows me to fine tune where to put the additional weight or where to shift weight whilst keeping the overall weight the same to improve traction but minimise wear due to additional weight. Started a thread on RMWeb for those interested.
Start converting some of those lead soldiers you have hidden away to become crews.
Any scope for placing lead beneath the locos in between the wheels?
This does make the idea of white metal kits more attractive.
I think some of those lead soldiers, if they're in good nick, may be worth a few bob as they are.
Thank you David for another great video. I was very interested to note that your 4-wheeled wagons are weighted to around 45 grams. Quite some years ago (some 40 odd) when looking at wagon weights and the NMRA standard I too came to the figure of 45 grams for my 4-wheeled wagons. My models are HO scale models of the Victorian state government railways here in Australia. (We here in Australia have similar issues with our steam locomotive models, most of our steam locos are small by comparison to American locomotives also.)
Hello Philip.. We couldn't get to the NMRA weights, but their principles are sound. i.e. balanced weights along the train. I remember my Civil Engineering days - There was an acronym - UDL - Uniformly distributed load. Interesting that we ended up at the same weights.
It's always difficult to work out weights of rolling stock especially kit built wagons. too much weight and the loco can't pull it, or too little and the wagon derails, thanks for that video
Weighting loco models !
I discovered this problem 10 years ago, when returning to British Outline. Mainly because British manufacturers seem reluctant to entertain traction tyres, unlike virtually all other manufacturers on the planet ! My planned 80ft x 25ft exhibition layout required a (virtually straight) 1 in 100 real life gradient, & locos to pull up to 12/13 coach trains, up this gradient. The lack of adhesion is mainly restricted to steam outline models, where serious dificientcies in weight (Hornby), or cast driving wheels (Bachmann) both result in gutless performance !
For those worried about "side effects" of adding weight. Hornby Diesel Models clocking in at (around 500g) double the weight of many of the steam models (240-300g), use the same range of motors as the steam models, without any noticeable detrimental effects. The axle bearing system used in both steam & diesel models also uses similar methods, and of course are all produced on similar tooling.
The Bachmann situation is now similar to Hornby, so no problems should be expected.
Fishing Tackle Lead shot.
Locos deficient in weight, I therefore added fishing tackle lead shot inside the boiler area, with due regard to maintaining the balance of the loco. I use UHU glue, so I can remove any of the lead shot should this be necessary, for example during a complete strip down & overhaul.
New Nickel Silver wheels.
The Bachmann locos were in most cases already stuffed with weight, but their cast metal wheels causes vibration, which then encourages wheel slipping to set in, on gradients. The solution for this is more complex, as it requires Romford or similar, Nickel Silver wheels to replace the Bachmann cast ones. This also requires mods to the valve gear. But in the case of a Bachmann N Class 2-6-0 with 5ft 6in size drivers, I rebuilt. It added roughly 45% more power, and made it far quieter. So good was that rebuild, I rebuilt another N class into a similar looking U1 (with slightly larger 6ft Driving wheels), & it also exhibits around a 40% increase in hill climbing ability, and also became far smoother & quieter !!!
New Bachmann steam from around 2019 are now produced on totally new tooling and come fitted with Nickel silver wheels, so are much quieter, and somewhat more powerful.
Hornby Lightweights !
One of the best examples of weight issue with recent Hornby steam locos is their very nice looking SR Lord Nelson. Thinking I could save time & replace my three wheel grinding & rumbling Bachmann Lord Nelsons, I bought two of the new Hornby locos. Even as I took the first out of its packet I could feel the loco was far to light. Just 242g in fact. Not enough to pull more than 9 coaches even on the level ! Both locos required around 110g of extra lead shot to be added to haul 12 up my gradient.
Gradients & the Laws of Physics !
A straight gradient of 1 in 100 becomes effectively MUCH steeper if curves are included, and of course the sharper the curves the worse the problem, due to a law of Physics which states: With every degree of curvature the power required in the locomotive must be increased by the Square root !!!!!!!!!!!!
In other words a Hornby Flying Scotsman will happily haul 13 coaches around my 5ft minimum radius curves, but will only haul 5 coaches around a Hornby 438mm radius 2 curve, and that's before you even think about gradients !!!
Commercial model Assembly Faults.
Dealing with the pulling capacity of locos, revealed another problem. I test new locos on my work bench, just to ensure they work properly. I then immediately take them to pieces as I have found so many have internal assembly faults. Many of which would pretty quickly disable the model. The most common fault on Hornby tender engines, are problems with the four wires between loco & tender, and all these problems have been hidden under the cab area. Indeed the Hornby 28xx/38xx GWR 2-8-0 had a slot through the chassis block for these 4 wires, which was too small & tight to accommodate the wires. Two of the wires were already damaged, and sooner or later would have either caused a short circuit (by touching the metal chassis), or been broken.
On Hornby Schools Class 4-4-0 models a number have come with issues relating to the front bogie, and its springing, by being assembled partly upside down. One of my Hornby King Arthur's also had this problem. In other respects as the Schools class model comes with two traction tyres, these models can haul 12/13 coach trains up my 1 in 100 gradient without needing any additional weight, so I have 6 of them !!!
Bulleid Rebuilt WC/BB Pacifics until a chassis redesign around 2015, had a design fault. Whereby the front of the motor had NO secure method of stopping the front of the motor rising slightly. This immediately allows the brass worm gear to start chewing up the primary (plastic) cog. A couple of hours running and the motor then whirs but the loco does not move ! Knowing that I modified all further WC/BB models before even testing them, by adding my own brass strip over the motor front, and securing it to the chassis.
Happy Modelling 😝.
As regards defects in Hornby models out of the box, I have just taken delivery of a Stanier Black 5, DCC ready. Looking carefully at the loco, I noticed really by chance that where the connecting wires to the tender emerge from the keeper plate, they were fouling on the rear right hand driving wheel. There was too much wire between loco and the plastic tender socket Obviously after a short time this would lead to failure. I had a difficult job anchoring the wire permanently clear of that driving wheel but a piece of double sided tape has now done the job. This is just bad engineering by Hornby rather than bad assembly because the keeper plate hole is immediately behind the driving wheel.
On the traction tyre front, I have a loco drive Hornby 2P with tyres on the front drivers. They refuse to stay on, despite working on no less than the minimum radius ciurve specified and even though the loco is quite new. So I have dispensed with them but have no short circuits from them on my DCC layout. But the loco hardly weighs anything limiting its pulling power. So weight needs to be added and I am grateful for your suggestion because with a small boiler there is very little room for weights of a fixed size. Fitting cab weights only will unbalance the loco.
I regret falling behind on watching this series; this video in particular is quite relevant to me!
I saw in some of the other comments that you seem to have already decided to use motorized tenders for the lighter locos (4-4-0s, etc). If that doesn’t provide the “oomph” you’ve been hoping for, have you considered tungsten weights?
While expensive compared to lead (so might only be worth trying out on a single loco), tungsten is 1.7 times as dense as lead, so a bit more weight taking up the same space. I believe they also sell it in putty form to fill in whatever nooks and crannies might be available.
Of course with me being three months late to the party my suggestion might be moot by now, but oh well; might somehow be useful in the future. Bang-up job you’ve all done so far; here’s to an unqualified success for the expansion!
Hello Mew,
We haven't used motorised tenders yet. We have been focused on building the extension, but the stock is fast coming into focus. I am intrigued about Tungsten. Never thought about that before! Thank you.
If you want heavy locomotives kit build is the way to go. I have a 4-4-0 which is 300g not including the tender! When I build the tender it will be even more. My 4-6-0 GWR star is around 450g with on weigh added. Providing you get the right motor and gearbox they are great. Of course I don't have any gradients on my layout as I decided I just didn't have the space to do it right.
Hi Paul,
We couldn't face kit-building hundreds of models, but I accept your logic...In an ideal world...
Great article I have the same problem with my model railway,I have a twin helix 🧬 and the steam engines do struggle can you still get lead sheet ?
"can you still get lead sheet ?" - Yep, Wickes (other DIY warehouses are available) sell it, look for roof flashing.
@@theelectricmonk3909 thanks will purchase some and give it a go and wear gloves 🧤
Hi EM, You might consider buying the skinny stuff on eBay - Look for 0.5mm lead sheet. It's a modeller's dream to work with. Much easier that the Code 3 stuff sold at DIY stores.
~1:50 for Europe (without GB/00) it would be NEM302 Wagon Mass / Wagenmasse / Masse des Véhicules
Minimum Mass: Z 0,12g/mm, N 0,17g/mm, TT 0,25g/mm, H0 0,40g/mm, S 0,60g/mm, 0 1g/mm, I 2g/mm, II 4g/mm
"The car mass according to the table should not be increased by more than 30%. ..."
Hi Lass,
Well this is very interesting. 0.4g per mm only gets us to 32g for a 80mm wagon. Is that what the NEM HO specs states? That is only 70% of what we found we needed on McKinley. Out of interest, we cut down our loads after looking at the NMRA specification. McKinley is 40% less than the NMRA spec. Can you check your numbers please? Have you tried this? Does it work?
David
@@dattouk Yes, NEM302 (to be found at MOROP s homepage) from 2015 says for H0 min 0,4g/mm, max would be (30% more) 0,52g/mm. As I am in middle Europe with stock mainly from märklin, the units of measurments NMRA uses are strange to me.
The equivalent in H0 to your (rather short) 80mm standart BR wagon would be a 115mm long number 4410 waggon from märklin at 49g or one of the 115mm long cooling waggons with advertisement at 54g. As some other examples a 100mm silo wagon number 4661 at 46g or a 108mm Trix tank wagon at 48g.
But then there are some older märklin models for example a 240mm long coach 4112 at 177g and a ~190mm wood wagon at 138g being to heavy to NEM302, but maybe have been correct to a older rule when they came out.
I got two jouef wagons both been to light, gave those more wight by guessing years ago, a 120mm only has 36g without, 63g with added wight (therefore nowadays to much).
And yes, they all work on a märklin layout.
Back to OO; as sad you are out of the rule book and 80mm for a wagon is short in the middle European view,
your scale is somewhere between H0 and S scale therefore my suggestion would be ~0,5g/mm for minimum and ~0,65g/mm for maximum -> 40-52g for a 80mm OO standart brown BR wagon,
you say you got them to ~45g (right?),
therefore we agree with each other, but came there on different ways!
One more point NEM302 is a recommandation, not a rule -> therefore the manufacturers mediated / agreed to it can have exceptions (cran wagen for example needs counterweight to work, older models can stay unchanged, ...).
You mentioned many times that the test area was a punishing gradient but I didn't hear you say exactly what the gradient was.
I'd be very interested to know as I have a layout planned that will require quite tough gradients and I would like to be sure
most of my steam locos can be modified to manage it.
Nice tutorial btw.
I have been through some earlier Episodes and found 1:50, not what this is in %, so it might mean a trip back to The School Books to work this out
@@graemewilson4126 Thanks for that. 2% then I think. I was looking at a 2.5% gradient but on the straight so a bit easier to manage.
Hi Gerry and Graeme. Yes, two percent is tough. thats 2cm in 100cm of travel. We have compounded that on the temporary connection. It is hornby 3rd radius to boot. Our guiding logic for 95% of the layout is 1% (1cm per metre) with 20cm radius curves in the hidden sections. That is do-able providing you put the effort in on the steamers.
Can we have some running sessions on the scenic sections
In about a year or two yes... By then it will all physically complete and we can add trees etc.. Stay tuned.
I found it strange that you added lead to the black 5 tender. This increases the tender's drag, negating a fair amount of the increased traction from the locomotive lead. Your tender needs only to have about 50g to stay on the track with the weight system you are using. My experience with 4-6-0 locomotives is you can increase the tractive effort considerably by removing the leading bogie spring if your trackwork and wheels are properly gauged.
A question about adding weight to the tender: doesn't that increase the weight of the train that the locomotive has to pull? I guess the intention of adding weight to the locomotive is increasing the traction, but extra weight in the tender doesn't seem to contribute to that objective.
It's the same concept as adding weight to the wagons, it improves stability during running. All the wagons they pulled up that grade were weighted as well, out of the box the locos probably could have handled them. It's a balancing act.
I put so many magnets on my refrigerator the motor quit running.
Best reply of the year. Made us laugh. Thanks.
stop touching the live track, it interferes with your microphone, there is a small humming
We'll check for that in future.