NeO6874 ATLANTIC CENTRAL...Reboxx recommends 1.015" but only offers .88" wheel treads which I do not want.. I doubt any of us want .88" wheel treads... I think that would put us somewhere up about at G scale
ATLANTIC CENTRAL...Reboxx recommends 1.015" but only offers .88" wheel treads which I do not want..
I doubt any of us want .88" wheel treads... I think that would put us somewhere up about at G scale
That's what happens when I try to type fast - opps is right.
Sheldon
tstagemaxmanOh, and how the heck did this thread go from "Kadee Trucks and Intermountain Wheels" to "Weathering Locos and Rolling Stock"?With Jerry (Neutrino)'s first post on pg. 1. All replies after that have referenced that post (or referenced a reference) have retained that title.Tom
maxmanOh, and how the heck did this thread go from "Kadee Trucks and Intermountain Wheels" to "Weathering Locos and Rolling Stock"?
With Jerry (Neutrino)'s first post on pg. 1. All replies after that have referenced that post (or referenced a reference) have retained that title.
Tom
That happened when I updated to FireFox 3.5. I have an auto-fill (Last Pass) option that was turned on inadvertently and the previous post that I had made was to "Weathering Locos and Rolling Stock". I didn't really notice until recently. I had to change settings. It still writes into the same general post heading "Kadee trucks and Intermountain wheelsets however.
Now if everyone posts a reply from this post it will get back on track. (no pun intended.)
Thanks for all the other opinions.
anyway, quite the interesting discussion you two have been having... I only have 2 cars with the Kadee trucks (kadee wheels, too). they're the most free-rolling trucks I have (most everything else is junk tyco sideframes, with either P2K or Intermountain wheels... a grand total of 2 retail packs or some such).
I love the KD sideframes and I think I'll be picking up a lot more of them as time goes on....
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
NeutrinoHe didn't tell me the mfg tolerances and it really doesn't matter because the top edge of the axle point rides on the top surface of the 60 degree cone. <=-+====+=>, it's there where the wear occurs and thus the drag.
Seems to me I did bring this up in the begining, and in all fairness should have qualified the statement to sprung metal trucks.
The advantage of the Intermountain (or Reboxx) wheelset is the reduced axle diameter outside the wheel which makes the axle end cone less likely to bind in the journal cone as the trucks flex/equalize. Additionally, it is impossible to expect the two sideframes to stay paralel so again, the smaller, NMRA RP, axle tip reduces binding and friction.
dima I have over 200 cars equipped with KD trucks with Intermountain wheels. They run fine, I have no shorts or arching.Thesetup is very free-rolling and being truly sprung and equalized (like the prototypes) my cars are very forgiving to track imperfections and never derail.
I have over 200 cars equipped with KD trucks with Intermountain wheels. They run fine, I have no shorts or arching.Thesetup is very free-rolling and being truly sprung and equalized (like the prototypes) my cars are very forgiving to track imperfections and never derail.
Jerry,
Didn't you see this post back at the beginning of the thread? "dima" responded to a thread a few weeks ago when I talked about this and said he too has been doing the Kadee/Intermountain thing for years and thought he was the only one until he found me.
He has over 200 cars, I have about 400, but apparently they don't work.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
maxmanSorry, but until the Reboxx folks so state I think you are assuming how they made their measurements as well as what the axle length range measurement actually is. In addition, while it may be correct that the recommended axle for the Kadee RB truck is less than the value shown for the axle length range, if you look at many of the other numbers on the chart you can see that in some cases the recommended length is in the middle of the range measurement and in other cases actually longer than the range measurement.
I understand, and actually don't disagree, but you will notice that in most if not all cases where Reboxx recommends an axle longer than their published "axle length range", it is for a truck with a plastic rigid sideframe. Their intent is to load the axle under side preassure so it must spin on the point of the axle cone not ride on the top of the axle cone. This is a good engineering approach for rigid plastic sideframes - it won't work on a sprung truck.
All of their recommendations for sprung/sprung metal trucks are smaller or within the published "axle length range", which seems to acknowledge the fact that sprung trucks are different and require sideplay to allow them to equalize - which is the whole point of sprung trucks in the first place.
Kadee does not publish the length of their factory axles, but they do sell them seperately and there is no information to suggest they make different lengths. Again, my measurements put the Kadee axles in the a range from 1.008" to 1.015" with most measuring 1.012". I replace mine with 1.010' Intermountain wheelsets and get great rolling performance and have no problems, Reboxx recommends 1.015" but only offers .088" wheel treads which I do not want.
My test results, measurements, and hundreds of freight cars are proof enough for me that it simply does not make a big difference - except for the improvement in free rolling. My results are better than those published by Reboxx with their recommended wheel set.
Sprung trucks and rigid trucks are two completely different animals. What reboxx recommends for a plastic rigid truck and what they recommend for a metal srung truck is like compairing apples to oranges. The Reboxx charts support the idea that sprung trunks need play, rigid plastic ones don't. Back to one of my orginal statements, the question is how much play is too much play? - opinions vary.
Sam mentioned that it's difficult measuring any of his axles that have been mounted into trucks. He said the only true measurement would be on axles that had never been installed because of the nature of the axle material. You can easily shorten one by removing it incorrectly, giving you variable readings. He didn't tell me the mfg tolerances and it really doesn't matter because the top edge of the axle point rides on the top surface of the 60 degree cone. <=-+====+=>, it's there where the wear occurs and thus the drag.
Is anyone getting any satisfaction out of this besides Sheldon?
I hope people at least take into consideration that this discussion hasn't started a flame war...
Oh, and how the heck did this thread go from "Kadee Trucks and Intermountain Wheels" to "Weathering Locos and Rolling Stock"?
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe chart says "axle length range". All of the recommended axles are then smaller than that range. So it would appear that Reboxx measured the inside journal to journal length with a small pointed inside mic to provide them on info as to which size axle to recommend.
Sorry, but until the Reboxx folks so state I think you are assuming how they made their measurements as well as what the axle length range measurement actually is. In addition, while it may be correct that the recommended axle for the Kadee RB truck is less than the value shown for the axle length range, if you look at many of the other numbers on the chart you can see that in some cases the recommended length is in the middle of the range measurement and in other cases actually longer than the range measurement.
maxman ATLANTIC CENTRALThis statement is misleading and incorrect since the 1.018 to 1.021 number is a measurement of the journal width, not an axle length. I'm trying to follow the discussion between you two guys. But how exactly did you arrive at this conclusion while the application chart pretty definitely says axle length?
ATLANTIC CENTRALThis statement is misleading and incorrect since the 1.018 to 1.021 number is a measurement of the journal width, not an axle length.
I'm trying to follow the discussion between you two guys. But how exactly did you arrive at this conclusion while the application chart pretty definitely says axle length?
The chart says "axle length range". All of the recommended axles are then smaller than that range. So it would appear that Reboxx measured the inside journal to journal length with a small pointed inside mic to provide them on info as to which size axle to recommend. Being sprung trucks, Kadee trucks have lots of play and variable tollerences since the side frames/bolster are three interconnected moving parts.
They do not provide specs on what size axle the truck manufacturer provided in the first place. Only their measurment of the truck and their recommended axle.
When I spoke to Sam at Kadee about this years ago, it did not tell me it would not/should not work. AND, he did not tell me how long his axles are. But I have posted my measurements of a dozen or more Kadee wheelsets. They are well within a range to suggest 1.010" axles will work fine in their sideframes - and they do.
Yes, that's the chart - It calls for a Reboxx part #33-2-1.015, that is a 33" wheel, double insulated, with a 1.015" axle length - exactly what I said. Reboxx recommends a 1.015" axle length for Kadee ASF 50T & Barber 70T RB trucks.
Looking at the chart above, there are lots of large variations between measured axle length of Kadee side frames and the recommended Reboxx axle length. Maybe Reboxx needs even more sizes? And some .110 wheels.
Kadee's own wheel sets seem to have wide production tolerence but are generally smaller than that. Ranging from 1.008 to 1.015 with an 1.012 being the most common in the batch I measured.
If a Kadee wheel set that is 1.008" works why would an Intermountain not work?
NeutrinoThese "standard replacement axles are approximately 1.010 wide, Kadee's on the other hand are 1.018 to 1.021 on the 70 Barber RB truck, hence they are wider and fit better. All that slop in the trucks can make the car run missaligned through turnouts and definetly through 18" radius curves. Reboxx is the only replacement axle that will fit correctly. http://www.reboxx.com/wheelsets.htm Download the .pdf files for the correct axle lengths for any truck made. Don't forget that these are also .088 tread width or semi-scale, and may not work as well as standard plastic trucks with .110 tread widths on your trackwork.
This statement is misleading and incorrect since the 1.018 to 1.021 number is a measurement of the journal width, not an axle length.
The Reboxx recommended axle for this truck is 1.015, only .005" longer than the Intermountain.
All my measurements of Kadee wheelsets have been at or shorter than 1.015, most have been shorter with 1.012 appearing to be the target length at Kadee.
I've contacted both Reboxx and Kadee. Reboxx's email was sent after business hours, so I don't expect a reply tonight. Sam from Kadee gave me a very nicely worded explanation why correct axle widths (and where points of metal axles ride in a conical journal should ride to be correct. He mentioned that he had read the discussion. He didn't give me permission to post his reply, so I won't. I did ask Reboxx to drop in and leave his opinion and we shall see how he responds.
Thick skin? Come on Sheldon...
NeutrinoI think that I've been willing to consider everything you said and yes, maybe Reboxx is wrong, but until someone comes up with a better reference, it's beats an old wives tale.
OK, I thought this was the case all along - see ya,
Sheldon asks.
Aside from your customers, what do you use on your layout?
I operate on a large club layout but most of my testing is done on a small module using Shinohara, Fast-Tracks and a crossover using two two #6 Atlas Custom line turnouts.
I do not think you are attacking me, but I find it interesting that you will not consider the idea that Reboxx might not have all the answers for every truck out there, and that maybe they are wrong in their view/recommendations for Kadee trucks.
I think that I've been willing to consider everything you said and yes, maybe Reboxx is wrong, but until someone comes up with a better reference, it's beats an old wives tale.
I know several people who are users/fans of Reboxx and I agree for many/most, maybe even all plastic rigid trucks they are the hot lick if you want semi scale wheels - no arguement from me
Again, I wasn't arguing and again I'll repeat that I stated semi-scale is not for everyone.
BUT, every time I present facts, numbers, data, you just ignor it and try to shift the focus of the conversation. I have asked a half dozen questions, if Reboxx has all the answers, why have they not responded or told us those answers?
What six questions have I missed? I stated that if what ever wheel/truck combination works for you is fine and good. What you fail to realize is that not everyone will have the same results as you claim given their different circumstances.
Why don't you call or email Reboxx and ask them why they haven't responded? Maybe they don't read this forum? I don't represent them, but I bet they stand behind their research.
That's fine, I have a thick skin and know that my modeling views fall outside of "politically correct".
Model Railroading is fun, that's always politically correct.
And I don't reconize Reboxx as the worlds foremost authority on this topic just be cause they have a business and post some info on the web.
I'm sure they won't get a lick of sleep tonight knowing that.
Jerry
And remember. Never forward email, just cut and paste...
I know several people who are users/fans of Reboxx and I agree for many/most, maybe even all plastic rigid trucks they are the hot lick if you want semi scale wheels - no arguement from me.
Sheldon,
I've already told you that the way you or any other modeler runs, builds, glues, staples or paints his stuff is okay with me, why do you continue to think that I'm attacking you?
Semi-scale anything, is only for those who appreciate it's intended purpose, not because it's "correct".
I (and I'm repeating myself again) merely pointed out that there are different axle widths available for a reason. It doesn't matter that they're attached to a narrow or wide tread wheel, again that's a personal issue for the user.
I included a shot of the CFSX hopper to show that I indeed do cars with wide wheels. If more of my customers requested them I would have no problem using them. Most of the customers that use me to weather their cars have no problems with narrow treads and only a small percentage request the wider type. That's my experience and has nothing to do with truck rolling qualities or pulling performance. If a car doesn't roll well after I work on it, I won't ship until it does.
Good luck Keith.
One other simple fact has gotten lost in this discussion - Performance
Using Reboxx's own data, they say a stock Kadee ASF truck is a "13" and with the longer axles they recommend it goes up to a "17".
But my results with the Intermoutain wheel sets consistantly test better than a stock Athean Ready to Roll metal wheel truck which Reboxx says is a "25", near the top of any of their test results. And my results put the Kadee/Intermountain up with all their "27, 28, 29" performing trucks.
I am willing to concede for discussion sake that my Kadee/Intermountain combo only rolls as well as the new Athearn Ready to Roll truck, but even at that, my results with Kadee trucks with the shorter axles are far better than those of Reboxx with the longer axles.
Could it be that they are more concerned with justifing the use of semi scale wheels then improving performance? So because of side play issues, coupler gathering range issues and the like, are unwilling to admit that alxes of their design but the same length as Kadee's work and actually exceed their own recommendation in performance? To admit that would be an endorsment of the NMRA standards they are challenging with their .88" tread width wheels.
In my tests, the Kadee/Intermountain combo out performed or equaled EVERY rigid sideframe truck I tested, using stock wheelsets, Reboxx recommended wheelsets or Intermountain wheelsets. That includes truck/wheel combos that Reboxx tested as "28" or "29"?
My testing was done differently than Rebox. I don't test trucks off the car. For a sprung/equalized truck, off the car tests are not valid in my opinion. I used identical cars and built a 40' long test ramp/run. I tested all the trucks on both light cars (Athearn 34' hoppers with only the factory weight - 2.5 oz) and heavy cars (Athearn 50' flats with 2 vans - 4.3 oz). All metal axle to metal sideframe combos did include light oiling as described previously.
Proportional results where recorded with both weights of cars. Kadee/Intermountain equalled or exceeded all the other players. And the proof is in the pulling power improvement of my steam locos - 30% and more.
Jerry, you are obviously an experianced and talented modeler as your photos atest, and I understand your view on this. It is however impossible for me to ignor my own carefully conducted testing in favor of the view of a product manufacturer.
Your models show great artistic talent, while many have complimented me on my paint and decal work (I freelance so I paint and decal a lot of stuff), when it comes to weathering I have not reached your level of detail or skill. My strongest areas are technical. I am a draftsman by orginal training, a retired electrical designer/electrician, I currently am self employed as Residential Desginer, Historic Restoration Consultant, Historic Restoration Carpenter. I design new homes in Traditional styles and restore old houses.
It has been interesting to discuss this with you and I hope Keith finds the answers he needs, no mater what they are.
I agree that there is a need/time/place for different length axles. I'm just not convinced that Kadee trucks benifit from axles longer than those provided by Kadee. I have explained in great detail why I believe this to be so. I cannot explain why your expriances are so different.
Here is my question - why doesn't Reboxx sell both wheel widths??????????
Maybe they are one of those groups who think their way is the only way?
Or maybe they are right and they know their own market.?
Either way they don't get my money. I have read their data, tried their product, found it of no beifit and explained why its not needed or wanted in my case. I'm sure for others it works great.
Your work is very nice. As explained, I was once very "driven" for modeling "perfection" but found I was not having fun. Now I don't worry about perfectly copying the real world, and I am having fun.
Not to beat a dead horse too long...
I knew that I had a package of Reboxx's test axles and while looking for something else, I found them.
Now why would a company (Reboxx) got to the expense of making not only these axle widths, but intermediate sizes too? Because maybe there are lots of different sized trucks out there.
The 12 axle set with color code.
One more thing.
From narrow to wide and how to tell, etc, etc...
I wasn't trying to tell you how to model. I wasn't telling anyone how to model. I was just pointing out the facts as stated by different mfrs and my opinion. I offered examples and links. I understand your need to do things they way that they suit you, as should everyone!
I have been modeling since I was 10, so that gives me about 52 years of experience, which counts, "por nada", zip. I know hoggers older than I, (If that's possible. ) who look down their nose at anything not done their way and usually their advise goes in one ear and out the other, sometimes a good idea comes through, who knows.
About 90% of my work is prototype based fantasy weathering and painting. By fantasy, I mean that the weathering is based on actual weathering patterns, not specific copies of specific cars. Some of my customers want wide wheels (Below) and #5 couplers, some don't. What ever they want is fine with me as long as I'm not cutting holes in stock cars to poke Giraffe heads through, I'll most likely try to accommodate. I always check the cars to standard gauges, coupler heights and rolling quality. I've had no complaints, so far.
That said, I'm always willing to learn and to help when and where I can.
NeutrinoIf you look at the end shot of the my Kadee PS-1, you can't help but notice how far up in the trucks those IM wheels sit. They did bind against the frame and front of the unloading chutes so they had to be replaced with the originals. They were/are 33" dia, so that wasn't a factor. This missmatch also effects coupler performance drasticaly too. The couplers on the car, came on the car, nothing was added but weathering. If I would have shimmed the cars trucks to make the couplers the correct height,it wouldn't have looked correct. (I tried two gray Kadee washers (which are dificult to center on the self centering trucks that I love on these cars.) and it was still a bit low for a semi-scale coupler and I didn't want to make the car that high off the bolsters.
Yes I did notice that on your photo. Not sure why we are getting such different results. I just measured the bolster height of two Kadee trucks, both #552 self centering ASF 50 ton. One has the orginal Kadee wheel sets, one has Intermountain wheel sets. Both measured exactly .3125" (5/16") from the rail head - per NMRA RP23. I do not have any of those hopper cars, but all my Kadee box cars have Intermountain wheelsets with no effect on coupler height. The 552 is my truck of choice most of the time.
You are welcome to your opinion about the NMRA standards and RP's, I don't agree. It is obvious from you photos and statements that you have an interest in fine scale modeling. I did too at one time. I also understand if Atlas Custom Line code 83 turnouts are not up to your appearance or fine scale operational standards - but for me they are fine. Fact is, with RP25 wheels they work very well, are inexpensive, and are easy to wire (Oh no, another whole topic could start here).
I have no pizza cutter wheels on old locos or cheap RTR talgo trucks from the 60's, but needing to build completely scale track is not on my radar, and even less so is the idea of only get half way to completely scale track from where I am now. I have some where in the range of 400 freight cars equiped with the Kadee/Intermountain combo and standard head Kadee couplers.
I don't know how old you are or how long you have been modeling, as I have indicated I have been at this about 40 years, since I was 12. I have worked in hobby shops and been involved with well known clubs and modelers. I try very hard to respect every aspect of this hobby. For me personally rivet counting and fine scale modeling became too tedious and no fun.
My goals now are about building a fairly large operational freelanced layout, building scenery and running trains. While I can appreciate models like the one you posted, I have no need for every piece of rolling stock on my layout to be at that level.
I have read all the Reboxx stuff, I have watched all the Fasttracks videos, I was hand laying track at age 14 taught by the masters at the Severna Park Model Railroad Club. My first layout was all hand layed on TrueScale milled roadbed with TrueScale switch kits. I have no interest in replacing, revamping, redesigning, or re-engineering all the stuff I have accumulated in 40 years, or for that matter, even what I have purchased in the last 10-20 years.
A related issue is this coupler thing, with semi scale track, tighter tolerences everywhere, semi scale couplers are fine, But with the possible side play we are discussing in these trucks, NMRA track/wheelset standards, the semi scale couplers have inadiquite gathering range for good, reliable operation. Remember I said operation FIRST, appearance second. Also, I have found that the intermixing of semi scale and regular couplers, even if they are all Kadee, is a less than ideal match as well. But my biggest gripe with semi scale couplers is that they actually have more train slack action in the knuckle than the regular head coupler - I run long trains, 30-50 cars.
I currently have no photo hosting nor the time/interest to setup such, but if your ever in the Baltimore area, look me up.
Sheldon, to answer your previous question about my measurement. They weren't mine, I took them from the .pdf files.
I know Sam sometimes checks this forum, I hope he will chime in and set us straight. (I have been known to be wrong and will admit when I am.
If you look at the end shot of the my Kadee PS-1, you can't help but notice how far up in the trucks those IM wheels sit. They did bind against the frame and front of the unloading chutes so they had to be replaced with the originals. They were/are 33" dia, so that wasn't a factor. This missmatch also effects coupler performance drasticaly too. The couplers on the car, came on the car, nothing was added but weathering. If I would have shimmed the cars trucks to make the couplers the correct height,it wouldn't have looked correct. (I tried two gray Kadee washers (which are dificult to center on the self centering trucks that I love on these cars.) and it was still a bit low for a semi-scale coupler and I didn't want to make the car that high off the bolsters.
I know this is getting tedious, but as long as we're being civil...
Did you read the Reboxx .pdf files? that's what I used for refrence.
The NMRA standards for track work are antiquated and aimed at increasingly sloppy tolerances such as Tyco and Riverossi type flanges and operating quality. Todays higher quality rolling stock demands better track work than the wide frogs and compromises like the so-called molded on detail of Atlas track. Please post a picture of what you consider good looking painted, ballasted and weathered Atlas track, I'd like to see some.
About NMRA standards; Tim Warris has a great video explaining a few facts.
Scroll down to the bottom of the first video section.
Link: http://www.handlaidtrack.com/videos.php
Neutrino The figures that I gave for the Kadee 70 ton R/B came from the Reboxx spec sheet for axle widths. Almost all Kadee and for that matter most all mfrs have slightly different axle widths. The "standard" replacement wheels sets from IM, Branchline, fit 80% of the plastic trucks.
I guess 80% depends a lot on whos rolling stock you buy. I buy (or have bought over 40 years) lots of Athearn. Intermountain wheelsets are WAY too sloppy in Athearn side frames (although lots of people use them with no problem), in fact so are Kadee wheelsets. Athearn wheel sets have always been in the 1.020" to 1.025" range.
I measured almost every Kadee wheelset I could find, about a dozen or so (I recycle them by selling them on ebay after removing them from brand new trucks). The production tolerance is pretty wide, I found some as small as 1.008" and some as large as 1.015" with most being between 1.010" and 1.014".
I measured Intermountain wheelsets from three different bulk boxes on my workbench, all where spot on at 1.010". My queestion stands, how could a 1.010" wheelset not a be a suitable replacement in a Kadee truck?
With wheel tread width and gage being constant, overall length and axle projection should all be within working tolerance.
Side note: The reduced axle diameter (.063") of the Intermountain and Reboxx wheelsets actually comes from the NMRA in RP24.3.
In all the measurements I have taken, The axle outside the wheel is at least .025" longer than the depth of the journal, this provides more than enough clearance.
Keith, I am very sure you have some bad product - check it out.
Jerry, a note about trackwork - These days I use Atlas code83 track and turnouts almost exclusively. The high quality and low price can't be beat. Over the years I have hand layed track and turnouts, used TrueScale products, etc., but these days that is reserved for special trackwork only. Many have complimented me on the precision of my trackwork, I am rather detail focused. I do prefer to stay with NMRA standards rather than trying to reinvent the wheel. I have built a number of layouts and the current one is very operation focused, so operational reliablity and performance takes precedence over appearance, although I must say, painted, balasted and weathered Atlas track products look just fine in my opinion. These factors are why I have rejected semi scale wheels and couplers.
The figures that I gave for the Kadee 70 ton R/B came from the Reboxx spec sheet for axle widths. Almost all Kadee and for that matter most all mfrs have slightly different axle widths. The "standard" replacement wheels sets from IM, Branchline, fit 80% of the plastic trucks.
By Truck Manufacturer: Right click on the link. and select "Save As" and save to your desktop.
By axle length:
http://www.reboxx.com/Documents/Wheelsets/33%20Application%20Chart%20by%20length.pdf
Keith,
Your Intermountain wheelsets only measured 1.0028"? There is the problem you got a bad batch - call them up and send them back. Get some more and check the length again, they should be 1.010".
No wonder the wheels are hitting the sideframes, there is not enough axle outside the wheel to keep them off the sideframe. When the wheel set is bottomed in the journal the wheels should still be a good ways from the side frame, I will take a measurement.