I've been impressed with how far N scale steam has come since the mid-80s in terms of how well they operate. Even so it seems they still do not operate as well as HO scale steamers.
Is this an inherent limitation due to their small size and weight or is it because N scale manufacturers have focused more on diesels and haven't bothered desiging improved steamers?
Do you see improvements in technology allowing N scale steam to operate just as well as well as HO does today, or do the laws of physics make that impractical?
MJ4562I've been impressed with how far N scale steam has come since the mid-80s in terms of how well they operate. Even so it seems they still do not operate as well as HO scale steamers. Is this an inherent limitation due to their small size and weight or is it because N scale manufacturers have focused more on diesels and haven't bothered desiging improved steamers? Do you see improvements in technology allowing N scale steam to operate just as well as well as HO does today, or do the laws of physics make that impractical?
I don't think it has anything to do with a focus on diesels.
I believe an N-scale steam locomotive could be made to run just as well as any HO on the market with technology available today. It is just a matter of how much one would be willing to pay for it. I am certain there are machine shops out there that can make the precision wheels, gears, bearings, etc needed to construct a fine running loco. But I don't think many would be willing to pay the $3,000 - $10,000 per loco I estimate they would cost. So in my opinion the operative word is economic practicality. Manufacturers will make steam locomotives to the highest quality that people are willing to pay for, for which they can make a profit on.
There are some quality running steam out there in N scale now, and have been for a few years in my opinion. I have a couple Bachmann spectrum 2-8-0 locomotives, A Proto Heritage Y3, and an Athearn Challenger. Which run just as good as my BLI or Bachmann Spectrum HO scale locos.
The N scale Challenger had problems untill I fixed it. But that could happen with any scale locomotive.
Texas zepher in my opinion has an over priced veiw of good quality N scale steam. The price range I see is more like $100 - $1000 some of these would include DCC and sound already installed. Unless you start talking brass. But then again most of the time brass engines sit in a display case not running on a layout. Hard to compare that.
The best thing to do is read reviews, do search's on the forums or ask the forum readers about any N scale loco you would be interested in to see how good they run compared to HO.
Truck
I have just recently changed to N scale - for reasons of space. I am amazed at the quality available today. My Kato D51 498 does not only look good with its abundance of detail, but is also an excellent performer. A 2010 release, it is a step-up improvement from the previous model and nicely demonstrates , what can be done nowadays.
I have a couple of Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0s in N scale and they run fine if all the rail joints are straight and smooth on a layout. The Kato 2-8-2 Mikado is a good runner, but I think it's been out of production for a few years now. As I mentioned in another thread, I'd like to have a couple decent 0-6-0 switchers and a 4-8-2 Mountain.
MJ4562 I've been impressed with how far N scale steam has come since the mid-80s in terms of how well they operate. Even so it seems they still do not operate as well as HO scale steamers. Is this an inherent limitation due to their small size and weight or is it because N scale manufacturers have focused more on diesels and haven't bothered desiging improved steamers? Do you see improvements in technology allowing N scale steam to operate just as well as well as HO does today, or do the laws of physics make that impractical?
Your perception is, to my way of thinking, correct: indeed N-Scale steam does not operate nearly as well as HO-Scale steam.
There is a guy named jdspoon over on the Atlas N-Scale forum who contends that the main problem with N-Scale steam is that the worm/wormgear/spur gear mechanism of the drive generates too much friction for the limited torque available from the small motors mounted in the boiler shell. A better system, he advocates, is spiral bevel gearing for steamers and hypoid gearing for diesels. If you are wondering what these turkeys are a spiral bevel gear is what is used in the differential of an automobile and a hypoid gear is what drives the differentials on the dual axles of a truck.
Spoon takes a considerable amount of flak for his views on N-Scale steam performance but he sticks to his guns and I'm not sure he's made any converts but I, myself, am inclined to agree with his advocacy; I am not, however, holding my breath awating this development from the manufacturers.
Why? pure unadulterated cost! worm/wormgear/spur gears are considerably cheaper than spiral bevel gears; you could probably expect an N-Scale steamer to be priced 25-35% higher with a spiral bevel gear drive than with a worm/wormgear/spur gear drive. You could expect a steam locomotive currently priced at USD300.00 to run closer to USD400.00 with a spiral bevel gear drive.
Would you pay that much for a steam locomotive? Would you pay that much for a steam locomotive that could pull the walls down. With the financial resources I definitely would! but with all the moaning and groaning and bellyaching about the price of N-Scale steam I don't for a microsecond imagine that we are likely to see these drives in the near future and most certainly not in my lifetime.
Spoon brought up what I consider to be a good point in a rather heated discussion with one of his many naysayers. If, he ask, worm/wormgear/spurgears are so efficient why didn/t Henry Ford put them in his Model Ts?
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
aloco I have a couple of Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0s in N scale and they run fine if all the rail joints are straight and smooth on a layout. The Kato 2-8-2 Mikado is a good runner, but I think it's been out of production for a few years now. As I mentioned in another thread, I'd like to have a couple decent 0-6-0 switchers and a 4-8-2 Mountain.
Wait a minute!
I thought that you were the anit-steam guy?????
Rich
Alton Junction
MJ4562 I've been impressed with how far N scale steam has come since the mid-80s in terms of how well they operate. Even so it seems they still do not operate as well as HO scale steamers.
I cannot speak for N scale, but as an owner of 14 HO scale steamers, I will say that if N scale steamers do not operate as well as HO steamers, then that is a real problem because I think that HO steamers present a lot of operating problems, namely derailments on turnouts and curves.
Let me throw something else out there--I have two reasons for asking the question: 1) is purely academic and scientific curiousity as to what the future might hold; 2) I am planning for a layout 10 years in the future.
I am curious as to whether improved technology will bring improved performance within reach so that manufacturers find it worthwhile to build them. I know cost is always going to be a factor, but it;s a matter of how close we are to closing that gap and what price points will be available?
I've read some contradictory statements in MRR, one by a guy that buillt a Southern Pacific coast route layout and stated in the article that N scale steam runs just as well as any other scale if you are willing to pay the price it takes to buy quality equipment and build reliable track. In MRR Planning, there was an article about building a C&O layout and the guy said there were no reliabile steam locos available in N scale for his prototype. Now the first guy used all brass locos and the second guy seemed to be referring to brass so it's not like they were talking about life-like products.
R.T. Poteet, that is an interesting point. I will need to do some research on that.
N scale steam can be just as reliable as HO steam. The guys that say N scale steam is not reliable don't know how to properly lay track and/or are trying to run long wheelbase steam around 9 3/4" R curves.
I intially joined the local N trak club just to prove that point to them. Some loco's need some fine tuning out of the box but most modern steamers run great as is. I have a kitbashed 2-10-2 (my avatar) that pulls 80 cars on our Ntrak layout (not the best place to run long wheelbase ridgid steam loco's) hours on end without problems.
The benchmark N scale steam locos:
Walthers Y-3 - (most recent release, now sold out) Available with sound, pulls great, runs smooth as butter. Last time I had mine at an N track show, it ran 4 hours straight pulling 40+ hoppers without a hitch. I felt confident enough in the loco that I left it running while manning our hobbyshop booth insight of the layout. I could hear the sound on the back side of the layout to know how it was doing.
Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0 - Some bad apples out there but when they are good, they are really good. I have a couple that will pull 60 cars plus with out breaking a sweat. Geared nice and slow for the job they are intended to do. Super smooth.
Bachmann Spectrum Heavy Mountain 4-8-2 - DCC equiped out of the box, strong puller, Bachmanns first N scale with a diecast metal boiler for more pulling power.
Bachmann Standard 4-6-0 - The new Ten Wheeler had some teething issues but the second batch seems to have all the problems cured and they run great. The first batch runs good just needed the pilot truck flipped over (installed upside down from the factory) and some minor adjustments. It happens to be the first production N scale loco with a coreless motor in it.
Kato Heavy Mikado 2-8-2 - Biggest issue with these is they are out of production and the traction tire updgrade needed to really get them to pull is also out of production if you find the loco.
There are many other N scale steamers that are out there that run very well but these are the best of the best. N scale steam does require a bit of tinkering here and there. If you are an acumulator, not a modeler, you may have troubles. A moderate amount of cleaning an maintainance skills are definitely helpful.
For the person that want's a good 0-6-0 in N, it's out there, you just have to do some minor tinkering to make it better....
That is a $50 Bachmann standard line 0-6-0 with details and paint added, along with an all wheels live tender to improve pickup. Total cost under $100.
N scale has come a long way and I find it as reliable as HO scale. It takes a little more care to lay the track properly and to keep it clean, but that´s all.
50 years of N scale steam loco development:
richhotrain Wait a minute! I thought that you were the anit-steam guy????? Rich
Rich, if you are addressing this to me . . . . . and I suspect that you are . . . . . you've got the wrong guy. My era preference is the transition era with steam running out its final hours on the high iron. I have always said that I am just a little bit more than dissatisfied with the running quality of N-Scale steam; disappointed is a far better word -- I am dissapointed that there are so many N-Scale steamers out there that have extreme difficulty lugging 20 cars up a 1% grade. The grade eastbound from where my Seaboard and Western Virginia Railway climbs away from where it crosses the Ohio River is a ruling 1.4%/1:72 with a maximm grade of 2.2%/1:45.
This is articulated territory although the area to the west of the Ohio River would be non-articulated territory. Covered wagons and GP7/GP9/RS3s are rapidly taking over through freight duties. I understand that Athearn's Challenger and Big Boys are excellent pullers -- 60+ units for the Challenger; 70+ units for the Big Boy -- and I could probably incorporate a Challenger into my steamer stable but a Big Boy is just a little to corporate specific and out of its geographical environment. My railroad is, essentially, a coal mover lugging hoppers westbound into the Lake Plains or eastbound to Tidewater. What I would like is an Allegheny. Unlike the C&O my Alleghenies are not going to waste their horsepower on 35mph coal drags but rather move fast freight westbound -- I know! it too is pretty corporate specific but it does belong in this specific georgraphical environment . My S&WVRwy needs a Yellowstone -- an M3/M4 preferred -- and/or a simple 2-8-8-2 to move heavy tonnage eastbound. Someone has an HO-Scale EM-1 being inttroduced this fall -- perhaps this presages the introduction of an N-Scale model at a later date. Again, however, if this is only going to pull 30 cars on my eastbound grade that is going to be a little disappointing. Kato's Mike? A very good runner I understand but in this waning days of steam operations it is a ping-pong freight engine; so also is Bachmann's heavy Mountain, again a loke with good reviews. If Walthers were to reintroduce Life-Like's Berk I would certainly acquire a frew as a westbound fast freight hauler although their pulling power did leave a little bit to be desired.
All this is conjectural; at this particular moment in time my motive power fleet is essentially configured around the early years of this 21st Century; I have about three UP SD90s sans wings sans flag. I am going to strip thise and paint them in my house road colors. Once I make the commitment to the purchase of ES44s or SD70ACes I'm going to pretty well be locked out of the steam locomotive era.
What are the biggest problems people see with N steam? Is it pulling power? Getting hung up on switches? Poor low speed operation? Something else? All of the above?
The biggest qualities I look for in good steam is pulling power and electical pickup.
If a loco can't pull a decent sized train for it's size, it is not much good to me. The LifeLike/Walthers Bershire is one that fails in the pulling category. It is an absolutely beautiful running loco that struggles to pull 10-15 cars on level.
The Bachmann 0-6-0 I pictured before is one that runs nicely out of the box but suffers from poor electrical pickup. Replacing the tender with one of the Bachmann Spectrum tenders with all wheel pickup makes it a much smoother and more reliable loco, especially over turnouts and at switching speeds.
I really don't worry about derailing in turnouts, that is usually a track issue, not a loco issue. I have a few long wheelbase loco's that are more finiky than others that I used to test and tune turnouts. One they work for those loco's, everthing else is a breeze.
Most everything modern has very good low speed operation. My loco's pull trains, I'm to worried about slow speed operation on mainline loco's as they don't do much switching. I have my 0-6-0 and Walthers 0-8-0 to handle switching duties and they both work very well at switching speeds.
richhotrain I thought that you were the antt-steam guy?????
I am not, nor have I ever been anti-steam. I just have no interest in having all-steam locomotive roster.
My N scale roster is mid-1950s era and mostly diesel, but there should be a few steamers kicking around because there were some still operating in that period.
R. T. POTEET richhotrain: Wait a minute! I thought that you were the anit-steam guy????? Rich Rich, if you are addressing this to me . . . . . and I suspect that you are . . . . . you've got the wrong guy.
richhotrain: Wait a minute! I thought that you were the anit-steam guy????? Rich
Rich, if you are addressing this to me . . . . . and I suspect that you are . . . . . you've got the wrong guy.
No, I was addressing aloco who, in a separate thread, expressed his disdain for steam engines but then indicated in this thread that he owns several steam engines.
aloco richhotrain: I thought that you were the antt-steam guy????? I am not, nor have I ever been anti-steam. I just have no interest in having all-steam locomotive roster. My N scale roster is mid-1950s era and mostly diesel, but there should be a few steamers kicking around because there were some still operating in that period.
richhotrain: I thought that you were the antt-steam guy?????
Well you sure wouldn't know that from the post you started called Why I'm Not Interested in Steam
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/t/194076.aspx
Now. Now. Lets not get all piculous on a Sunday morning here...
I think that other thread was more of a joking type of thread..something to set some burrs under some saddles..as it were..
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Texas Zepher I believe an N-scale steam locomotive could be made to run just as well as any HO on the market with technology available today. It is just a matter of how much one would be willing to pay for it. I am certain there are machine shops out there that can make the precision wheels, gears, bearings, etc needed to construct a fine running loco. But I don't think many would be willing to pay the $3,000 - $10,000 per loco I estimate they would cost. So in my opinion the operative word is economic practicality. Manufacturers will make steam locomotives to the highest quality that people are willing to pay for, for which they can make a profit on.
Based on all the responses so far it sounds like as long as I'm willing to spend the $$$ N scale runs just fine.
It's interesting that model railroaders will argue over how much locomotives and cars cost in N vs HO but never stop to think about the single largest cost of our hobby: space. Real estate costs big money to purchase and more every year for taxes, utilites and insurance. Since N scale requires roughly half the area of HO, an N scale layout enjoys a significant cost advantage over the larger scales. My statement is not meant to be combative or an affront to modelers in >N scale, but rather to point out that N scalers shouldn't bellyache over paying more for their locomotives than modelers in larger scales.
In a one for one representation, N scale takes up 1/4 the space of HO. A 4'x8' HO layout scaled down to N scale would take up 2'x4'
There aren't really many "budget" N scale steam locos out there. When you are talking about current production, there really are only four "train set" level N scale steamers made; (Bachmann - 4-4-0, 2-6-2/0-6-0, 4-8-4 and LifeLike 0-6-0T). There are no really horrible steam loco's out there. Some may need a little more work than others but for the most part, there are no junkers out there anymore. Just stay away from the older stuff with certain exceptions and you will be fine.
blownout cylinder Now. Now. Lets not get all piculous on a Sunday morning here...
Piculous???
I thought profanity was not allowed on this forum.
MJ4562 Texas Zepher: I believe an N-scale steam locomotive could be made to run just as well as any HO on the market with technology available today. It is just a matter of how much one would be willing to pay for it. I am certain there are machine shops out there that can make the precision wheels, gears, bearings, etc needed to construct a fine running loco. But I don't think many would be willing to pay the $3,000 - $10,000 per loco I estimate they would cost. So in my opinion the operative word is economic practicality. Manufacturers will make steam locomotives to the highest quality that people are willing to pay for, for which they can make a profit on. It's interesting that model railroaders will argue over how much locomotives and cars cost in N vs HO but never stop to think about the single largest cost of our hobby: space. Real estate costs big money to purchase and more every year for taxes, utilites and insurance. Since N scale requires roughly half the area of HO, an N scale layout enjoys a significant cost advantage over the larger scales. My statement is not meant to be combative or an affront to modelers in >N scale, but rather to point out that N scalers shouldn't bellyache over paying more for their locomotives than modelers in larger scales.
Texas Zepher: I believe an N-scale steam locomotive could be made to run just as well as any HO on the market with technology available today. It is just a matter of how much one would be willing to pay for it. I am certain there are machine shops out there that can make the precision wheels, gears, bearings, etc needed to construct a fine running loco. But I don't think many would be willing to pay the $3,000 - $10,000 per loco I estimate they would cost. So in my opinion the operative word is economic practicality. Manufacturers will make steam locomotives to the highest quality that people are willing to pay for, for which they can make a profit on.
This is based on my experience with small HO and HOn3 steam.
The typical shortcuts taken for model locomotives become bigger performance issues in N size steam. Things like rigid frames, lateral motion of drivers for sharper minimum radius, single piece side rods, lack of extra electrical pickups, and middling quality control all hamper quality running ability. To me, a good running steamer needs to creep along at 2-3 scale MPH without stalling, 1st time, every time. Top speed at 12 volts DC should be scale 60 MPH or less.
Modeler's prejudices against belt drives and tender drives also work against getting excellent performance in N scale. Look at the work being done with multiple reduction belt drives in Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. But would a mainstream model with such a drive system sell in the US?
Inexpensive plastic model technology is probably as good as it gets at the price point - I don't see any major performance improvements available off the shelf with the technology. Yes, lower RPM motors would help, but would definitely cost more. And higher gear reductions would require more precision machining and durable materials.
But I'm not sure plastic mass production is the ultimate answer. Weight is just too critical in N, and use of traction tires to substitute for weight definitely leads to performance issues both near and long term. But metal mass production would be quite expensive - $500+ per locomotive. Hand-made brass would have to sell for new HO brass - $800+.
just my thoughts
Fred W
Fred,
Lot's of good thoughts but unfortunately, most of them don't transfer well to N scale. Belts just wouldn't work in N, they are too stiff and would cause a lot of start up drag. As far as side rods go, ridgid side rods seem to help N, not hurt. They help keep all the drivers in time. If you have ever played with a ConCor Big Boy, you would understand why individual side rods just don't work that well. Between the slop in the gears and the slop in the side rods, there is too much slack action in the drivetrain that causes binding and kinks in the operation.
As far as the metal boilers go, Bachmann has that licked. The last 4 releases from them have had metal boilers. They have their casting process down to the point that their metal boilers are as sharp and detailed as plastic. The most recent announcement from them the 2-10-2 Light is another with a metal boiler.
I have one brass loco, a C&O H-8 (2-6-6-6). As much as I love the loco, I will put any number of plastic loco's up against it in both pulling power and smoothness of operation. Brass is generally not a better runner than plastic anymore.
richhotrain blownout cylinder: Now. Now. Lets not get all piculous on a Sunday morning here... Piculous??? I thought profanity was not allowed on this forum. Rich
blownout cylinder: Now. Now. Lets not get all piculous on a Sunday morning here...
skipgear Fred, Lot's of good thoughts but unfortunately, most of them don't transfer well to N scale. Belts just wouldn't work in N, they are too stiff and would cause a lot of start up drag. As far as side rods go, ridgid side rods seem to help N, not hurt. They help keep all the drivers in time. If you have ever played with a ConCor Big Boy, you would understand why individual side rods just don't work that well. Between the slop in the gears and the slop in the side rods, there is too much slack action in the drivetrain that causes binding and kinks in the operation. As far as the metal boilers go, Bachmann has that licked. The last 4 releases from them have had metal boilers. They have their casting process down to the point that their metal boilers are as sharp and detailed as plastic. The most recent announcement from them the 2-10-2 Light is another with a metal boiler. I have one brass loco, a C&O H-8 (2-6-6-6). As much as I love the loco, I will put any number of plastic loco's up against it in both pulling power and smoothness of operation. Brass is generally not a better runner than plastic anymore.
From my experience with 19th Century HOn3 - which is often smaller than large steam N - the means to better performance are known - but are not often used in mass production due to expense and/or difficulty in reproducing on a mass basis.
Of course, one needs to define good performance. My threshold of acceptability is:
I submit that until Blackstone came along, almost no HOn3 locomotives met these requirements out of the box. Although I haven't purchased N steamers, the reviews seem to indicate that most steam models would struggle to meet these requirements out of the box.
The simplified rigid frames used in mass production create issues right from the start. A rigid frame can't equalize over any vertical imperfections in the track, and automatically has pulling power reduced whenever all drive wheels are not in full contact with the rail head (said vertical imperfections in track guarantee this).
Equalization requires multi-piece side rods (as the prototype has), or there has to be excessive slop in the holes of the single side rod. Slop in the side rod holes is another cause of poor performance. if the side rods are not tight, the transmission of power from the geared axle to the other drivers will be uneven regardless of how perfect the quarter is.
I am not advocating elimination of all gears. But the use of belts where appropriate can make multi-stage RPM reduction more feasible while keeping the motor in the desired location. Today's belt drives do not have any more startup drag than multiple spur gear stages, and are much quieter than the spur gears. And they can transmit torque just as effectively. Take a look at the Bull Ant and British belt drives before you write them off.
Low RPM motors are more expensive to make in the very small sizes. So to make the price point, cheaper high RPM motors, rigid frames, one piece side rods, and coarse gears with inadequate reduction become the norm in the very small model locomotives. The resulting default high operating speeds can mask many a hitch in the git along. Whether the performance of such locomotives is adequate or good depends on your individual performance requirements. Using good PWM motor controls (DCC decoders) with a top speed limit can mask most or all of the performance issues. And non-switching operations are not as demanding of locomotive performance.
I agree - die cast boilers are superior for pulling power. But the tooling for such a boiler is more expensive than the tooling for the equivalent plastic boiler.
Whether a brass manufacturer uses the known techniques to produce jewel-like running qualities or not is generally the importer's call. In HOn3, until recently very few brass models were built for great performance. They would tout features like coreless motors or sprung drivers, but the execution was often poor. Springing drivers to achieve equalization works only if the springs are sized correctly for the weight they are carrying. Coreless motors have their benefits, but only if adequate torque is provided at a useful RPM.
again, just my thoughts