changing or upgrading to metal wheels

[csiguy68]

thanks very much to all of you very much for the advice. i think for now im going to start off by replacing couplers with the kadee #148. so far i have heard a lot of good things about them . then later this year i might start replacing wheel sets. again thanks very much the information did help me a lot.



todd

[Russ Bellinis]

I was told at my local hobby shop that Kaddee is dropping the #5 coupler as soon as they run out of current stock and replacing them with the 148. Apparently, too many products have draft gear boxes that won't fit the brass spring and most modelers who have tried them want the whisker type springs.

[doctorwayne]

I was told at my local hobby shop that Kaddee is dropping the #5 coupler as soon as they run out of current stock and replacing them with the 148. Apparently, too many products have draft gear boxes that won't fit the brass spring and most modelers who have tried them want the whisker type springs.

The problem with the 148 is that if the spring breaks, the coupler is scrap. At least with the #5 (and most of the other ones, which use coil springs) a cheap replacement spring can make the coupler serviceable again.

Wayne

[csiguy68]

when i was at my ls the other day , he said something along the same lines as russ mentioned, that kadee was going to do that. they already have done away with their 10 pack of couplers that they used to have and are only selling the individual packs and then the 20 packs.


good point though doc. i may have to re think this before i do anything.




todd

[BR60103]

But hasn't Kadee just brought out (well, in the last 10 -15 years) about 8 variations on the #5? Will these be whiskered? To say nothing of the shelf and scale variations?

[doctorwayne]

Yeah, there's a bunch of versions that use the #5 shank, including overset and underset heads, along with various shank lengths and the corresponding plastic versions, which are especially useful on brass steam loco pilots. If you look HERE, there are plenty of models which use the #5, but the blurb at the top of the first page is touting the "whisker" version for just about everything. I wonder if they're planning on making the whisker version for the plastic ones, too?

EDIT: If you click on their site in that link, then click on "Contact", and, on the next page "e-mail", you'll get a list of FAQs. Among them is one about discontinuation of the #5 - the short answer is that there are currently no plans to discontinue it.

Wayne

[Spitfire]

I bought a bunch of Kadee #5's a few years ago, but once they're used up I was planning to switch to the whisker style couplers anyway.

Also, one of the things I really enjoy is sitting down with several cars, some Kadees and metal wheelsets and replacing them. It makes me feel super-organized! LOL!! (and if you knew me, you'd know how rare that is!)

cheers
Val

[Fluesheet]

glad you gentleman started this thread . i to am planning on replacing all of my couplers and wheel sets in all of my rolling stock . im planning on usng 36 inch metal wheel sets. the question i have is what brand of metal wheel sets do you recommend? i was looking at the proto 2000 wheelsets today, but wasnt sure if there was anything out that is better than the protos. thanks very much for the help.
todd

I've never purchased Proto 2000 wheelsets alone, but I've found the ones that are in Proto's trucks have a high percentage of slightly warped (plastic) axles. That said, they are my best rolling trucks by a couple of feet and are good looking wheel faces as well, with a high level of sharp detail cast into the wheel faces. The axles and therefore the journals are plastic, axle lengths are 1.10"

My current favorites are Intermountain - they are nicely made, have metal axles with needle journals and roll well in about any truck you put them in. Currently I have both RP-25 and "semi-scale" examples in my modeling box - the former have 1.10" axles, the latter are 1.05". I've found both work fine in most trucks, though they border on sloppy in some examples (1.05" in Red Caboose trucks, for instance).

Branchline Trains semi-scale wheelsets are functionally identical to Intermountain (same axle lengths, needle point journals), but the face of the wheel is not as pleasing to me - it's too flat. Intermountain's are more "dish" shaped.

Kadee's have plastic axles, but I've never had a problem with warpage. Straight as an arrow. They have the longest axle lengths in my box - 1.15". I had some rolling problems with some cars and finally traced it down to a bad combination of tight trucks and long Kadee axles. They roll decently in Accurail trucks (my "control" truck), but roll best in Red Caboose equalized trucks, which are the loosest trucks I own. These wheelsets are the best looking out of the box, blackened, nice shape to the wheel face and good wheelface detail (not quite as sharp as Proto 2000, but at least it's there!).

I have a set of Red Caboose wheelsets with .992" axles - too loose for any trucks I currently own. They'll fall right out of my (ironically) Red Caboose equalized trucks!

Overall, the best performers (that I have experience with) in the widest variety of trucks have been Branchline or Intermountain wheels with 1.10" axles. I second the recommendation for the journal turning tool, as long as you keep in mind that it won't solve an over-long axle in an over-tight truck.

BTW, these were all 33" wheels, which are appropriate for my steam era freight cars.

Matt

Note: I did a big "roll" test a month or so ago with the intention of posting the results - the above has worked out to be the spoiler!

[doctorwayne]

Has anybody else found the cars that roll very easily difficult to pick up? And by "pick up", I mean with a loco, as in "pick up that NYC boxcar on Track 3". Unless your couplers work better than mine, you'll often end up chasing the car right to the end of the siding, as it repeatedly bounces away from the loco's coupler. It works somewhat better with a cut of cars, and, of course, if you only run trains, as opposed to operate them, then the rolling qualities may be an important consideration. And I certainly don't mean to denigrate those who merely run trains - I do it a lot, too. However, I've designed (well, I guess "designed" sounds too well-thought-out: maybe ended-up-with would be more accurate ) my layout to be operated, with almost no trains simply running from point A to point B. There'll be lots of single car switching in each town, and batting every car down a siding will likely get pretty annoying.
I do have some free rolling cars, but I have many more that aren't so free rolling (and a few that roll like bricks) and I also like to run heavy trains. Add in steep grades and plenty of curves, and moving a train can become an issue.
There are several ways which I've dealt with this, such as limiting the length of most trains - this is really a by-product of having limited layout space, which, in turn, has limited the length of passing sidings, which ultimately determines train length. I've also modified all of my locos to pull better - partly out of necessity, and partly because I enjoy the challenge. Most of the locos can handle a regular-length freight (one that will fit into a passing siding - usually the loco, 12 or 13 cars, and the caboose), while it takes two locos to move a loaded 12 car coal train (I use "live" loads, resulting in a weight of 100 ounces for the 12 hoppers and the caboose). Now, free-rolling cars might enable one loco to move this train, although I doubt it, but it might also make problems with only one loco trying to hold back the same train on a downgrade. Also, by requiring extra locos on heavy trains (or long ones - I've run trains over 70 cars long), I'm forced to roster enough locos to move the traffic. So, the money I save by not buying new wheels, which offer no benefits for my situation, can be put towards acquiring more locos, which will be of benefit.
This is not to say that you shouldn't re-equip your fleet with new wheels if you wish to. However, sometimes it's good to think the equation right through.

Wayne

[Russ Bellinis]

The freest rolling cars I've seen stock out of the box are Kato and Atlas. On the modular layout, occasionally we are set up on a floor that isn't level. In such situations it is not uncommon to have to derail cars that are dropped at sidings to get them to "stay put." When do you suppose the manufacturers will give us working brakes?

[ocalicreek]

First off, I've got a few of those rusty axles that Russ mentioned and he's absolutely right, they can and will affect performance. (Whaddya mean, rust doesn't act like graphite?)

Next, a comment on axle length. If you can afford it, a simple caliper (doesn't even have to have a digital or analog readout) that can open and close and be held firm by a screw or knob at a fixed length, is a great thing to have for determining the axle length. Measure them when you buy the kit and write the dimension on the box lid, instructions, wherever. Then on the next trip to the LHS or IHS (Internet Hobby Shop...I'm sure I'm not the first to use this abbreviation but I ain't seen it noplace else yit) you'll know what size to order, as long as you know the length of the replacement wheelset's axle, of course.

Here's a thought...doesn't the NMRA set standards for our hobby? Then how 'bout axle lengths for pointy axles as well as rollerbearing replacements. Sure would make it easier in the long run, right? Nah, nevermind, makes too much sense (and honestly isn't possible to be completely backwards compatible, I'd think).

Wayne - seems John Allen didn't like free-rolling rolling stock for similar reasons to what you've mentioned. I don't know if you've done this...betting you have...but anyway, the Kadee instructions actually give hints and tips for smooth operation. I had been using the couplers (started as a dumb teenager) for some time before I actually read them. I usually just tossed them after opening the package and looking around on any horizontal surface for those danged springs that fell out and sprung someplace no matter how carefully I tried to catch them.

What has helped me so far has been filing the knuckle face to remove that parting line, as well as filing the top and bottom of the shank and area around the hole, and the coupler box to remove any flash. Sounds basic and it is, but I hadn't been that thorough in those early days and after going back and reworking some of my first kadee conversions I was delighted to find them operating so nicely as a result.

Placing the brass spring in either on top or beneath the coupler can also have an effect. I have not used the graphite "grease 'em" but I hear it helps. I haven't had that many problems so I never purchased any but mebbe I'll get some next time I see any. I DO have problems with runaway rolling stock when I try to couple anything with a plastic coupler (McHenry, etc. take your pick). Two Kadees of similar size, no problem. The 'scale' knuckle couplers from Kadee seem troublesome as well so I've avoided them although I hear from folks who have converted their entire fleet that they work fine with each other.

Galen

[FiatFan]

I've occasionally had to chase a car to the end of the siding but that was mostly due to mis-aligned couplers. The new 148's seem to stay centered much better. Bringing the cars up to NMRA recommended weights should help also.

Tom

[Fluesheet]

doctorwayne makes some good points. I've read the same thing about John Allen that ocalicreek mentioned. If I recall, he wanted his cars to stay put on grades up to 2%. That sounds to stiff to me, but depending on your operating environment, it might make sense.

As far as batting cars down a siding, I've had the problem - mostly due to trying to couple with misaligned couplers (off center, on a curve, etc.), though some coupling issues - upon reflection - were due to a light cars w/free rolling trucks. Stickier wheels would help counter the problem, as would properly weighted cars to increase inertia (this fits the same scenario as the cut of cars that doctorwayne mentioned). Most of mine are too light.

Good conversation. I'm not operating yet, so haven't seen the batting issue often. I'll have to keep an eye on it and equip my cars appropriately. FWIW, Kadee trucks were generally the slowest trucks in my test, so may fit the operating scenario best.

Matt

[doctorwayne]

I've read the same thing about John Allen that ocalicreek mentioned. If I recall, he wanted his cars to stay put on grades up to 2%. That sounds to stiff to me, but depending on your operating environment, it might make sense.

Matt

I have a few head-end cars, like the one picture below, made from old Athearn Pullmans. They have their original metal trucks, with plastic wheels on steel axles. I just now set one on the 2.8% grade to the lower level of the layout, and it surprised me by rolling downgrade. However, after travelling about 8', it slowed as it got into the 34" radius curve at the end of the peninsula, and eventually stopped.


Most of my rolling stock exceeds NMRA weight recommendations, although I've lightened many from what they were previously. I had some passenger cars at 15 ounces, but reduced that due to concern about wearing through the journals. They did roll with some authority, though.

Wayne