Michael Tondee

Over in another discussion the practice of over weighting of cars came up. Not wanting to hijack that and having some questions, I thought I'd start a new thread as other discussions on the subject are buried kind of deep in threads.

Most modelers cars are weighted by NMRA standards but I've never been a fan of standards anyway so it's interesting for me to note that guys Like Mike Confalone  and now Joe Fugate have  been exceeding the recommended standards in order to get more reliable operation. I'd say I have pretty smooth trackwork  but one thing I hate is seeing cars " wiggle" over the slightest bump.  After fine tuning my trackwork I think I might try this over weighting practice to see what kind of results I might get. Some of my more obvious questions are as follows....

How is the weight being added? Lead, tungsten or some other source. What other alternatives might there be?

How is the pulling power of locos affected?  My little Bachmann Moguls aren't great pullers to start with.

What about grades?  I have a 4 % mine branch grade  that I eventually plan to be  servicing with a two truck Climax when I get it. Should I stop short of over weighting my ore cars?  No where to put it anyway in an empty car.  Or maybe the weight may increase tractive effort of the whole train?

That's good for starters I guess but please everyone feel free to "weigh" in with your own questions or thoughts and ideas.....

Michael

Michael, A.R.S. W4HIJ

 Model Rail, electronics experimenter and "mad scientist" for over 50 years.

Member of  "The Amigos" and staunch disciple of the "Wizard of Monterey"

My Pike: The Blackwater Island Logging&Mining Co.

Reply 1
Michael Whiteman

It sounds like a good idea for more

reasons than one.  The easiest way to see for yourself is to get a large nut and bolt and just lay it on the floor of a boxcar and scotch tape it down.  I think the extra weight of the car would be canceled out if you had super free rolling trucks.  It's sure nice to have the car your coupling on to remain still instead of rolling backwards a little.  Obviously open cars are going to be more of a challenge, as well as tank cars.  I'm not sure I would want to take a highly detailed tank car apart to add weight to the inside.  Maybe drill a hole in the bottom, fill it up with lead shot and then plug the hole.  It will be interesting to hear how others have done this.

Reply 2
joef

Weighting tank cars

For weighting tank cars I drill a hole in the bottom, pour in the amount of plaster+water I weighed out that is needed and let it set up. Since setting of plaster is a chemical reaction, not the result of water evaporating, the wet mixture weight works. I plug the hole with dark gray modeling clay and turn the car upright to let the plaster set up.

Again, because the plaster setting is a chemical reaction, there's no need to have the hole open.

I use a type of modeling clay that sets up when exposed to the air, so I let it harden. Once it's hard, I paint over the modeling clay plug with the appropriate paint to match the rest of the car bottom.

Joe Fugate​
Publisher, Model Railroad Hobbyist magazine

[siskiyouBtn]

Read my blog

Reply 4
Larry of Z'ville

Running weighted cars

Has some down sides.  How it effects you will depend on how you run your trains and how they run on your layout.  All things being equal, if you double the wright, to run the train at the same speed as before, you will have to reduce the cars in half.  This speed is at the critical resistance point.  That would be a combination of local grade, curve and track quality.  You may have more power available to make up for the weight, but likely you will have to reduce the train length.  

You can compensate for some of this if you can add weight to your engines.  You generally will get .25 oz draw bar force increase for every ounce you add to the engine weight.  Your engine draw bar force is likely around 2.5 oz.  if your running two in combination, then you have 5 oz max.  If you assume your running at 80 percent capacity, then your using 4 oz.  in order to maintain the same train length for cars that are twice as heavy, then you need an additional 4 oz in draw bar force. To do it with weight addition, you will need to add 16 oz (1 pound) to the total engine package, 8 oz to each.  Possible, but unlikely.  

This example is extreme, but it points out the down side of adding weight to cars.  

Your four percent grade is a big problem.  Going from level to four percent, your engine pulling capacity has been reduced by nearly a factor of four.  

What to use for weight, anything you can load on that is not visible.  Obviously the denser the object the better.  Lead is always the cheapest, but you need to handle with care.

it is understandable where Mike & Joe are coming from, but they are adding engines when they need them.  More realistic, yes, but may not be appropriate for everyone.

So many trains, so little time,

Larry

check out my MRH blog: https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/42408

 or my web site at http://www.llxlocomotives.com

Reply 2
Russ Bellinis

Typically model diesels can carry more weight

and get more tractive effort than model steam.  Those little Bachmann moguls are not going to have much tractive force or much space to add weight.  One big advantage of diesels on the prototype is that they can be mu'd without the need for a complete engine crew for each loco.  I like to run cars a little heavier than the NMRA standard, but I would not try it with steam.  On the other hand, I checked a book out of a local library titled Railroads of the Coeur D'Lines (spelling?).  There was a photo taken in 1910 of a 2-6-6-2 that looked exactly like the Mantua logging mallet with the tender.  It was pulling 5 cars and a caboose, and the caption said that was the maximum load that it could pull up those grades!

Reply 2
Bill Brillinger

Hi, I'm Bill and...

Hi, I'm Bill and I'm an overweighter.

I run my rolling stock at roughly 1oz to the inch and the cars really do perform better. They stay where you put them, they don't run away from an approaching coupler during switching, they don't derail, and they don't jitter or rock.

I use stick on 1/2 oz automotive wheel weights as suggested by Mr. Confalone, and I also use steel punch outs I found at a local manufacturer.

I love it!

Bill Brillinger

Modeling the BNML in HO Scale, Admin for the RailPro User Group, and owner of Precision Design Co.

Reply 4
Benny

...

The biggest hit will be on the wear on your locomotive wheeils.  If they are only nickle plated, they will be bald and soon.

--------------------------------------------------------

Benny's Index or Somewhere Chasing Rabbits

Reply 4
Greg Baker Mountaingoatgreg

NMRA Standard

Does anyone know what the original NMRA standard was based on?  Also when was the last time it was reviewed or updated?  I think that for the most part the pulling power and locomotive quality has improved and probably could be increased. 

My thought would be to weigh my cars in a manner that allows realistic operation. If I have to add helpers on a train to get it up the I would like the train to actually need the helper to get up the hill. Most operations model a ratio of a train since most people have a limited amount of space. Not sure it would work out every time but maybe if you model say 75% of an actual train you could over weigh each car 25% above the NMRA standard. 

Reply 2
ctxmf74

"This example is extreme, but

Quote:

"This example is extreme, but it points out the down side of adding weight to cars."

    The big downside to me is extra weight is extra weight that must be bought, installed, then moved around the layout constantly. Extra weight puts extra strain on bearings, gears, drive components ,and power supply. I prefer to fix any operational problems by fixing them not by masking them with weight. As long as all the cars are approximately matched in weight I have no problems running under NMRA recommended standards and could go even lighter if it didn't require more work :> ) ......DaveB 

Reply 3
Michael Tondee

It should be noted that.....

...... my 4% grade is only on the mine branch of my layout.  Everything else is on a level grade.  The only thing going up that branch will be some Tichy ore cars.  That run should be handled by the forthcoming Bachmann two truck Climax but I have no idea of it's pulling or pushing power. I know my Moguls barely get three boxcars up it pushing  but this is a small layout so short trains are the norm.  At any rate, the grade was a necessary compromise I made in order to have a certain scenic effect I want so I'm prepared to live with whatever limitations it puts on the mine branch. I'd just like my Box, Stock and Tank cars to track better than they do on the level portion of my layout which for all intents and purposes is a switching layout.

I'm certainly aware that diesels are probably going to pull better but they just don't fit my layout concept and era.

My maximum car length on this layout will probably be 40 ft. . I don't anticipate buying even a 50 footer and certainly nothing longer than that.

Michael

Michael, A.R.S. W4HIJ

 Model Rail, electronics experimenter and "mad scientist" for over 50 years.

Member of  "The Amigos" and staunch disciple of the "Wizard of Monterey"

My Pike: The Blackwater Island Logging&Mining Co.

Reply 2
Verne Niner

Selective overweighting

I have been 'overweighting' my cars for years, never really thought of it that way. I weigh them up to where they operate smoothly and create the illusion of being 'heavy'. In smaller scales that may not be as easy for the eye to detect, but in O it can make a big difference.

I ran very light styrene ore cars on the 4% grade on my switchback, and even with metal trucks to add weight they were far too light. A real load of rock solved that problem. As the ore is coming downhill, that is not an operating problem. The light empties track ok because they are going uphill, but not as well as the loaded cars. Other equipment on the grade is intentionally lighter, to enable my Porters to haul more than one car, but they are usually limited to two 18' cars, or four 9' cars. Longer cars on my mainline are weighted over the NMRA standard.

Weighting improves tracking and reliability, but it also improves the appearance of trains as they move, in my opinion. That appearance requires attention to bolster tolerances, and trouble-free trackwork.

Reply 2
dark2star

Weight to mask problems

Hi,

as far as I get the discussion - and the original post - there are two sides to the medallion.

One is that there seem to be mechanical problems (wiggling, tracking, ...). These can be masked by extra weight but it might be a better solution to address them directly. There is a nice discussion on Bernhard 1900's web site ( http://us-modelsof1900.de/?p=1537 - sorry, in German). Basically it boils down into a list of things to check:

  • free running axles
  • freely turning trucks
  • three-point "suspension" (one truck should wobble sideways, the other one shouldn't)
  • Joe, Mike and clubs have "maintenance checklists" for their cars and I'm sure they go over these checklists before adding weight, right?

After solving all mechanical problems (tedious, I know), the cars should run rather well if weighed consistently.

Two is that overweight cars have more mass and thus handle a bit more sluggish - like on the real railroads. Which is nice. They will also track better (to an extent). But the extra weight will wear out the bushings quicker.

I think that consistency in weighing cars is more important than the actual weight to length ratio standard. It is probably sensible to modestly overweigh all cars by 10% or 25%, if your locos can still pull your trains well. But I don't think overweight is a cure for any but the slightest mechanical problems.

Have fun!

Reply 2
Jazzbass

proto 87 stabilizers

Has anyone tried the Proto 87 "stabilizers"?  http://www.proto87.com/model-railroad-fast-n-easy-riders-working-suspension.html

If they work it might be a better idea than over weighting. Thoughts? Experience?

 

Bob

Reply 2
kleaverjr

Not to be techinical,

it should be noted it is an NMRA Recommended Practice, and NOT a Standard, concerning the weighting of cars.  Standards, as has been explained to me by those on the committee that deal with Standards and RP's, tend to be things that concern with interoperability of equipment.

Ken L.

Reply 2
robertw144

Double the weight of my passenger cars

For the 40 and 50 foot cars, I follow the NMRA standards. For passenger cars I double the weight. I use stick on automotive wheel weights. They are the same exact as the A-line but, ounce for ounce, they are much cheaper. The double weight in the passenger cars make a huge difference, especially if you find the need to back a train out of a terminal.

 

Robert Gross

Reply 2
modelsof1900

Wobble - a problem of car weight ?

Quote:

... I hate is seeing cars " wiggle" over the slightest bump.

No, I think absolutely not a problem of car weight!

Cars "wiggle" because missing of a good working three-point suspension on cars! This is not a problem that can be solved by a steadier fixing of screws. Trucks need a free movement for following also a bad trackage. However not both trucks need should be absolutely free swivel, one yes, the second in a light limited manner.
Look the pictures and you know what I mean (and what I do with all my cars).

One frame bolster is equipped with a washer for an increased position which fits the correct high of couplers and so this truck can swivel free over its center in all directions!

The second truck lies on two off-center points so that the truck can not swing sideward. This is a typical three-point constraint that avoids wiggle of cars.

Here yet a different solution for the truck with the sideward bracing - short square brass profiles are glued on car boolster and the truck received two nails (or small bolts) on right position.

 

@dark2star,

sorry, I have seen your link to my website to late. Now the pictures were posted and so they should be here.

________________________________________________________________________

Cheers, Bernd

My website http://www.us-modelsof1900.de - my MRH blog http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/blog/20899

and on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/bernd.schroter.566 where I write about all my new projects.

Reply 3
Bill Brillinger

The best thing I found...

The best thing I found about overweighting my cars was the realistic performance enhancement, and this is the primary why I did this.

When you approach a string of cars, they have enough mass to not jump away. They stay put while coupling, and when rolling along on straight and level track, the couplers do not jitter. They stay tight or slack depending on the direction of travel.

Cars that are only at the NMRA recommended weight simply do not behave this way.

Bill Brillinger

Modeling the BNML in HO Scale, Admin for the RailPro User Group, and owner of Precision Design Co.

Reply 2
Chris VanderHeide cv_acr

Open Cars

Gondolas and flatcars can be difficult to try to add additional weight to however.

Reply 2
Ironrooster

Formula?

One thing the NMRA RP does, is provide a formula for weighting cars.

For those of you overweighting your cars, do you have a formula? 

Enjoy

Paul

Reply 2
steve ackerman

overweight?

A USRA 40' double sheathed boxcar has an empty weight of 45,000 lbs.  In HO scale this car would weigh over 500 pounds!  How can anyone say a 7oz. model of this car is overweight?  It is drastically underweight.  NMRA recommended weight was to get modelers to add some weight to their way too light models.  No where has the NMRA said not to exceed this weight, just not go lighter than this practice.

Reply 3
LKandO

overweight

Quote:

In HO scale this car would weigh over 500 pounds!

Scale weight is cube root. Car would weigh 35 lbs in HO. Still, same point made.

Alan

All the details:  http://www.LKOrailroad.com        Just the highlights:  MRH blog

When I was a kid... no wait, I still do that. HO, 28x32, double deck, 1969, RailPro
nsparent.png 

Reply 2
Larry of Z'ville

My math

Has a 45,000 lb car weighing 1.1 oz in HO scale.  87 cubed is 658,503.  45,000 lb is 720,000 oz.  Thus 720,000/658,503 is approximately 1.1 oz.  Cubed is a little strong, based on my previous life.  4 oz is not a bad place to be.

So many trains, so little time,

Larry

check out my MRH blog: https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/42408

 or my web site at http://www.llxlocomotives.com

Reply 2
ctxmf74

"Scale weight is cube root.

Quote:

"Scale weight is cube root. Car would weigh 35 lbs in HO. Still, same point made."

   You have to cube root the volume of material  then use material that's 1/87 the real mass so the 35 would get divided by one more 87 or about .40 of a pound. Actually real weight has noting to do with model weight, what matters is the best engineering of the model operational factors. We have electronics to replicate weight in starting and stopping and we don't need to worry about payload so we can basically haul empties all the time with the reduced stress that puts on everything. The real railroads would love to have our "problems" .......DaveB

Reply 2
LKandO

Correction

Quote:

the 35 would get divided by one more 87 or about .40 of a pound.

I stand corrected. Thanks. Blasted through the calculation a bit too fast.

Alan

All the details:  http://www.LKOrailroad.com        Just the highlights:  MRH blog

When I was a kid... no wait, I still do that. HO, 28x32, double deck, 1969, RailPro
nsparent.png 

Reply 2
mikeconfalone

Allagash tonnage philosophy - add LOTS of lead!

Bill,

Glad to hear you are a super-weight convert! Here is my philosophy on the matter, taken right from the Allagash Ebook Volume 3.

In book 2, I discussed the planning and building of the AGR’s freight car fleet. Now let’s talk about freight car performance in general. What are the keys to excellent freight car performance? Aside from the obvious answers of metal wheels and metal Kadee-type couplers, there is only one word you need to remember. Lead.

Most freight cars come from the factory far too light.  I realized early on that if I wanted not only reliable, but prototypical performance from my freight cars, I would need to think big, think heavy. The AGR freight car fleet is large, numbering somewhere near 300 cars or more. Over time, I’ve added a significant amount of lead weight to each freight car. I buy lead wheel weights by the box at the local auto parts store. These are the adhesive-backed ¼ or ½ oz. stick-on weights used for wheel balancing.

Most ready to roll boxcars are easy to deal with. The roof usually pops right off. Same for covered hoppers. I typically add lead weight to each car until the total weight reaches somewhere between 9 and 13 oz. No, that’s not a typo! My freight cars are extremely heavy. For tank cars, it’s a bit more troublesome. I drill a hole in the bottom of the car, and fill the car with fine sand, then plug the hole with construction adhesive. For the wood chip hoppers, I put lead in the belly of the car and paint the lead the color of the car so it blends in. Flat cars are pretty much impossible. I generally block empty flat cars at the end of trains in order to avoid operational trouble.

Bringing the weight up to this level accomplishes several things. First and foremost, derailments are virtually non-existent on the Allagash. We have the occasional car come off, but it is rare, and there is usually some other mechanical problem with the car that needs to be addressed, or it is a car that I was not able to get sufficient weight into. Second, the performance of the freight cars in switching is most evident. When drilling cars in a yard, the cars don’t bounce around and jerk all over the place. There is a naturally-occurring inertia battle between the locomotive and the heavy freight cars. The switching shove and pull moves smooth out, and occur more naturally. To put it in perspective, a typical 10-car cut in a yard may weigh 7 lbs or more!  A single unit can handle this on mostly level track, but what happens when you introduce grades? Well, things get interesting!

Another advantage to adding serious weight is that the tonnage ratings of locomotives are now closer to what a prototypical tonnage rating would be for that locomotive. As it is, most model locomotives can pull far too many freight cars, especially up a grade. The tractive effort/tonnage ratio is askew because model railroad freight cars are feather light out of the box. Adding lots of weight brings this ratio back in line and enables me to practice prototypical power management practices. Yes, I could simulate the tonnage by going slow and using manual notching, but I prefer to have real tonnage onboard and plan accordingly to get the train over the hill. If we stall, we double the hill. Or we shove if we know the tonnage is too high. These practices are not only prototypical, but they add operational interest.

Mike Confalone

Reply 6
Reply