Trucks

Chris,

take a look at the Tichy trucks they offer  - If I'm not mistaken, archbar trucks would be appropiate for that period, but I fuly expect to be corrected, as my knowledge of the truck eras is still sketchy.

The Hookset show is this weekend, maybe you can find some trucks there. I won't be attending, as our own Lebanon show is also this Sunday, so there's no need for me to drive.

I'm also happy to hear that you're considering changing scales. Not because I'm against N scale in any way shape or form, but because you've talked about turn of the century railroading at length time and time again. I think it is important you follow your own lead on this.

Yes.. gotta follow the heart..

The feeling almost like relief when I decided to seriously explore doing an early steam layout tells me I am headed in the right direction. I also am excited to be able to try the HO products that I have been lamenting not having in N..

I really liked my ideas for my St Johnsbury layout. However, some things made it easier for me to leave it behind..

1) The cost of building what would be a large N-scale layout and populating it with rolling stock. A 15 foot long 7 track classification yard swallows a lot of cars. The interview on MRC with Lance Mindheim who felt his N scale layout was too big was also influencing this realization.

2) I operate on almost a weekly basis on a large triple deck layout.. I get to scratch that N-scale diesel itch on a regular basis.

3) The space I felt I could enclose for heating in the winter NOW was smaller then the space I originally considered. I know its odd to go to a larger scale in that case but in my mind I was having to comprimise too much for my N-scale ideas which was making it easier to switch gears completely and work on something fresh..

4) I operated on a 20s era HO steam layout in about my space that was just amazing fun. I came away from that operating session deeply moved by how cool it was..

Chris

Sprung or unSprung?

I noticed these are one piece plastic.. how do you feel about the trucks not being sprung?

Chris

Sprung vs Unsprung

Wiser, more experienced heads will hopefully respond, but I find the unsprung just fine. I put intermountain wheels in mine, and they roll great.

I do have some metal sprung trucks, and they work well as well, but I haven't seen a big difference in the rolling stock as it's moving. I don't have a lot of bolster rocking, for instance, and with the Sergents I don't get the forward and back spring motion at the end of a train that can occur with Kadees.

Again, I know there a few folks who swear by sprung trucks, so hopefully we'll hear more from them. It would seem that with a much smaller fleet that you're describing, the difference in cost shouldn't be prohibitive for you.

Trucks and Wheels

Yup, andrews or archbar trucks would be your choice. Here's a link for a low-down on trucks that I found. It's sure helped me.

http://tinyurl.com/yyv6unj

I've tried different truck manufacturers and do like the various Kadee sprung trucks. Their wheels aren't the best, but they're ok to start. I do like the Proto wheels, they are smooth. I've tried the River City Railroad wheels and found the axles a touch long. They needed some work to fit some trucks.

Hope this helps. Welcome to HO.

Roy

Editor: Replaced URL with (Tiny URL)

Thanks!

Thanks!

The Tichy trucks seem to cost half as much as the Kadee.. but come with plastic wheels..

Two quesitons:

Any issues with proto wheels? NWSL for instance has four tread widths. It looks like the 88 would be a nice comprimise. I plan to hand lay track (another advantage of HO..) so maybe I could go with a finer wheel?

What does "self-centering" trucks do? I read the patent but don't really understand what it is saying..

I am not going to sweat too much on couplers. I should be using an eary Janney (type-D?) but I think all that sergent offers is type E which (I think) were introduced in 1932.Corrections welcome. In this I have to bow to operational reality.

Chris

btw - I have that book. Good book.. but it tends to gloss over very early era stuff. I am trying to get a copy of "The American Railroad Freight Car: From the Wood-Car Era to the Coming of Steel" at a reasonable price but have come up short on the last few auctions I tried.

Couplers trucks

Bitter Creek has old time all metal trucks. Use to be BC Models owned at one time

I have an old time Superior Detritus 36ft car kit that came with the #78 which look pretty good.

For plastic trucks, I replace with all metal wheelsets.

There is an Yahoo old time Group that is quite active. There is a lot of 1900 era HO scale info/kits available on the 'Net.

Below is a small sample.

http://www.housatonicrr.com/

Rich

Edit: Added link to housatonicrr.

Craig's site

Craig's site and his presence on MRC has been a strong influence on my decision to give this a try.

Thanks for the tips, I wil check out the kadee couper and the Bitter Creek trucks. I am leaning toward trying Sergents, I like how they work, but I am keeping an open mind.

Chris

This is theory, not from experience.

Even if the Sergent's coupler is of a later design than the time period you are modeling, I would think that the Sergents being scale size would be a better choice of coupler than the Kaddees, unless you really don't want to use the Sergents uncoupling wand or have other reasons for not using Sergents. 

Regarding the kaddee sprung trucks, I recently read somewhere (MRH April newsleter maybe?) that Kaddee has changed their springs in the sprung trucks due to the original springs being too stiff to function.  I have not had any problems with cast plastic trucks on more modern freight cars from various manufacturers, so I have not seen the need to go to Kaddee sprung trucks, and the price difference is significant when you consider changing over a fleet.  Of course, if you try a couple of cars, one with the Kaddee sprung trucks and one with cast plastic while just starting, you can make a decision before you make the big commitment of an entire fleet.

Self Centering

This ensures that the truck is centered on the car, assuming of course that the hole for the screw is centered.. There is a little bevelled insert that goes into the truck before you put the screw through the truck. This insert seats itself into the truck and keeps the truck centered on the screw. At least that's my layman's interpretation. 

What benefit?

Is that to make it easier to rerail or something? I am not sure I see the benefit..

Early Rail Resources

Chris,

If you haven't found them already here are a few links for you:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EarlyRail/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/1914to1940RRing/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ArtGriffinHODecalsPhotosandResinKits/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/handlaidtrack/

If you get a copy of "The American Railroad Freight Car: From the Wood-Car Era to the Coming of Steel" most any questions you have about the prototypes will be answered.

1895 railroading

Turn of the century railroading?

You might want to check out Craig Bisgeier's website ...

http://www.housatonicrr.com/

Craig's layout is featured in issue 6 or MRH.

Good luck in this endeavor.

Charlie

Old time railroading

The below site use to be owned by Bob Cook of BC Models. I have Bob's original catalog which you can see at the HO Seeker site. The new owner was supposed to release the rolling stock last year but I have not seen anything yet. He does have parts and trucks.

http://www.bittercreekmodels.com/

More stuff

http://www.55n3.org/

http://www.earlyrail.org/freight-cars.html

http://libertystreet.allhyper.com/EngineHouse/article040.html

http://www.earlyrail.org/earlyrail-links.html

http://www.cwrail.com/index.html

A Whimsy project.

http://fullcmodels.com/products.php

I use to buy Cape Line all metal trucks from a fellow in Springfield MA some years ago but he closed up shop. I do not know who might have bought out his business.

Rich

Mistake

Hi All

I cannot edit the above message. I did something wrong and the links are not clickable. The text below my name I cannot remove. This site is not very intuitive. Maybe someone can clean it up for me. I tired to delete the message but that option does not seem to be available.

Rich

Self Centering

Not sure of the real benefit, Chris. About the only thing I can think of is smoother turning of the truck and enabling the truck to better handle the irregularities of track. I have used both types as well one piece unsprung trucks. To be honest, I can't tell the difference between one truck and another when they are running. I do like sprung trucks though. They just look better.

Great Links

Great Links! Thanks for the help!

I have been to some of these and lurked in the early rail group for a while but a lot of these are new!

Chris

Regarding sprung trucks

I've found sprung trucks introduce one more variable into car tracking that's hard to control.

Instead, I get more reliable tracking from solid sideframe trucks and the "3-point" system for mounting the trucks.

Tighten one truck screw down enough that the truck only rotates but does not rock. On the other truck, don't tighten the truck screw down so much - allow the other truck to rock or wobble as well as rotate.

This gives the car a very good ability to follow variations in the track, yet the car will not wobble in an unrealistic manner.

My general rule these days is if the model has sprung trucks, I replace them with solid sideframe trucks and use the 3-point truck mounting system to get reliable tracking. Sprung trucks add uncontrollable variation in how a car tracks, and in my experience that lack of control leads to more derailments, not less.

New HO freight car truck manf.

Tahoe Model Works has been producing some exquisite HO scale freight trucks. They come with either semi-scale code 88 metal wheelsets or the standard wider metal wheelsets. Their AC&F arch bar truck is the finest looking and rolling arch bar truck on the HO scale market. They offer several other freight car trucks that are applicable for many freight cars built after 1920. Tahoe Model Works doesn't seem to have  aweb presence yet, but Peach Creek Shops has images of the product on line.

http://www.bearweb.com/peachcreek/genprods.php3?UID=2008061705103966.249.66.8&val=Tahoe+Model+Works

The variety of turn-of-the-century freight car trucks is pretty slim. If more people were modeling that era then I'm sure we would have a 5-foot wheelbase arch bar metal (most ar 5-foot 6-inch), arch bar trucks with different types of bolster ends, and maybe a few other types of early freight car trucks. Some of the products mentioned in earlier posts are decent, but the quality of the castings/molds are a few decades old. Foretunately, the AC&F arch bar truck was pretty common and the Tahoe product is a real winner.

Eric 

Tahoe models trucks

Fellows ,

Tahoe models trucks are examples of exquisite pattern making . I have some on the layout and am entirely satisfied with them . I believe the trucks are offerd as " fine scale " { 88 thous tread ?}or regular which means 110 thousanths wheels treads.?.

As I recall , the  pattern maker in question was a pattern maker for Model die casting nee roundhouse when they were  in Carson City , Nevada .

I see him from time to time in the hobby shop in Reno  ..High Sierra hobbies..He did not move back to LA when Athern bought them and moved the operation.

I have no interest other than knowing that these are quite nice detailed models of a variation of differing trucks. These have solid sideframes , Which I prefer no matter the manufacturer. .

Roundhouse/MDC always used to

Roundhouse/MDC always used to come with a pretty decent Archbar truck....you might try finding some, or snag them if you see them.  They're in the 3-N-1 kits, those that contain freight cars at least.

I just finished a section that turned out to be a very satisfying end to my layout designing dabbling this week.  Basically, I wanted to go from Skull Valley, Arizona to Prescott, Arizona, with as little tunneling as necessary to keep track and trains fully accessible [aka no super helixes more than one turn] and rather faithful lean towards a couple prototype locations.  This section would basically be the connector between a lower level layout and the overlaying upper level [mushroom or otherwise].  The prototype goes from 4500 feet to 6000 feet in roughly 10 miles, maybe less; needless to say, the prototype was not very "sincere" as I think it was Armstrong would say, and the grades were a bit horrendous throughout the section!  The model simply had to make a connection between a lower level at 30" and an upper level at 54", with a ruling grade of 2%, a minimum radius of 30" [hmmm...34"?] and the little complicaiton of the Faller road system thrown in just for fun!  The result makes me long for the days of too much space, too much time, and too much money...HA!!!

It's a fun plan but alas...imagine a helix that takes up an area about the size of two automobiles....someday?  Who knows!  I do know the upper and lower levels make nice "little" layouts of and unto themselves!! 

The point is, it doesn't matter how much space you have to play with nor what scale you are dabbling in, ultimately it will only get as out of hand as you allow it to get!

I like those trucks!

I like those Tahoe trucks! Being able to get trucks with semi-scale wheels included will keep the total soup to nuts cost down. I think Joe's comment about sprung trucks makes a lot of sense so I think I will avoid those for now. The three point suspension is what I have always done in N scale.

I found a PDF flyer with a direct ordering address and a nice big picture of a set painted up through google so I may give that a try. Their shipping cost was only $3.

Not the cheapest trucks, but I think it ends up being about the same if you add in the cost of a wheelset.

Chris

Before this gets confusing...

Let's take a quick look at HO scale wheels. Here is what I understand. The NMRA established wheel standards many years ago for each scale. Standard S-4.2 covers HO scale wheels that follow the standard of 0.110 inches wide. This is also known as code 110, a term that follows the rail height for a similar dimension. Standard S-4.1 covers HO scale wheels of scale prototype width wheels, also called fine scale in the model press. The width of a scale HO wheel would be no more than 0.075 inches and no less than 0.063 inches. These wheels that conform to scale prototype dimensions cannot be used on HO track and turnouts that meet normal NMRA specs because of certain factors when the track standards were determined. Here's teh index page for the NMRA standards:

http://www.nmra.org/standards/sandrp/consist.html

A manufacturer or two recognized a demand for a more scale width wheel and found a 0.088 inch wide wheel (code 88) would negotiate the common NMRA HO scale track standards. These have caught on in popularity and are commonly referred to as semi-scale wheels.

I admit this is a very rough overview. The main point is that regular and semi-scale HO scale wheels will operate through commercial turnouts and handlaid turnouts built to regular NMRA standards. If you decide to switch to the fine scale, or prototype wheels, then your track must be built to much finer tolerances.

I model 1926 and settled on the semi-scale wheelsets a while back. They look especially good under the Proto2000 tank cars, and other highly detailed freight cars. I have had zero problems with these wheels negotiating a wide variety of commercial HO scale turnouts. The best way to find out more is to invest in a package and convert a few cars. As we push our modeling ideas and skill sets along, we each determine a new standard to aim for and build to.

Eric

Semi Scale wheels seem like a good idea

I was looking at the wheel sets in the NWSL website.. they have a nice image with all the wheel set standards stacked up with each other making for easy comparison. I thought the 88s were a nice comprimise of appearance vs operaibility. Its what I plan to unless reality teaches me otherwise.

Regards,

Chris