Did the cars come with extended draft gear taped to the bottom of the plastic "cradle" in the box? Most of the newer cars shipped have the longer draft gear that you have to replace the short ones with.
These are supposed to extend the couplers enough to help with tight curves. 18" radius is kind of pushing the limits for Walthers cars.
They look like this:
https://www.walthers.com/long-shank-extended-drawbar-20-pack
Good Luck, Ed
Do you have the catalog number for the cars? It would help. Walthers has LOTS of passenger cars.
Ed
this it around a curve and a end of a car
car no 910-3036 185' Budd Obs CN
For the most part, you cannot successfully operate 85' passenger cars on 18" radius curves.
Rich
Alton Junction
what about 22"
Technically the car will operate on 18" curves if everything is perfect (track, wheels, trucks, couplers, etc.). But perfection is nigh-impossible to get.
You're going to be much better off if you can get at least a 24" curve or start using 72' cars or start using passenger cars with truck mounted couplers (or all of the above).
Passenger train modeling is not really suited for 18" radius curves unless you're modeling the 1800's-early 1900's with 60' or less cars. Really, 18" curves are more like trolley curves. It's a really right radius.
The above image alone shows that R18" curves are NOT going to work and I would suspect that R22" would only be marginally better. I have full-length MTH passenger cars that barely stay on the rails at R22".
I think you're going to have to resign yourself to the fact you're going to need an absolute minimum of R24" curves for your Walthers cars...and it's still not going to look pretty doing it. Go as large of a radisu as you can go.
Tom
P.S. countsrr, please take the following as a request and not a criticism. If it's possible at all could you add a little more punctuation to your posts? I find it challenging to differentiate the things you are trying to express because one thought or sentence blurs into another. Again, it's not a criticism but would help me and perhaps others better know how to help you.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
My experience is at least 30" radius is needed for 85' passenger cars.
GARRY
HEARTLAND DIVISION, CB&Q RR
EVERYWHERE LOST; WE HUSTLE OUR CABOOSE FOR YOU
Yikes!
The pics show it all.
When my layout was up and running, 22" radii was real tight with 89' autoracks, so it will be real tight with 85' passenger cars as well.
18" is just too tight, the pic shows it all.
Even the extended swing couplers would be real tight.
22" radii would be bare minimum, if possible, I would go larger.
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
countsrr what about 22"
Yep, I know the ad says 18"r., but I had to alter (more like butcher) the chassis of some of the Walthers 85' cars to do a 22"r.
I have no problems with Rapido or Bachmann. I have since refrained from buying Walthers 85' cars.
Mike
My You Tube
It should be noted that Walthers Mainline Budd 85' passengers cars are designed to be able to navigate 18" curves. They specify this, and were shown in a video when they first came out handling a figure 8 layout. That said, I do not have any personal experience with them since I've been in N scale in recent years, so I can't vouch for how well they do 18" curves, or how good they look doing it.
Bubbytrains
I had a Walthers 36' wood caboose that couldn't navigate R22" curves without the trucks binding on the inside corner of the side steps - on either end. I had to use a #11 X-acto blade to bevel the backside of the steps but it didn't completely eliminate the issue. For that reason I only own two pieces of Walthers rolling stock and don't run either one of them.
mbinsewiYep, I know the ad says 18"r.,
Yeb Bubby, I mentioned "noted" that, just saying my experience.
tstage....a Walthers 36' wood caboose that couldn't navigate R22" curves without the trucks binding on the inside corner of the side steps - on either end. I had to use a #11 X-acto blade to bevel the backside of the steps but it didn't completely eliminate the issue.....
Tom, I never owned that caboose, but a friend did and asked if I could fix it.
It's been some time since I did it, so I may have some of the details wrong, but the solution was to remove the frame and cut it (you'll need to make the exact measurements, but I could also borrow the car to refresh my memory, if you, and anyone else would like a more complete how-to.
Basically, you make a cut in the centresill just inboard of the coupler pocket, and another similar cut in the centresill inboard of the body bolster on which the truck is mounted. That second cut is made further away from the inboard side of the bolster than is the cut made between the bolster and the coupler pocket. The cut-out bolster segment is then rotated 180º, and cemented back in place, as is the coupler pocket. This places the bolster, and hence the truck, further inboard from the steps. Once you do the other end, too, the problem is solved, with no visible damage to the steps (well, yours already has it, but you know what I mean ).
Since I don't have my friend's caboose here, I'll illustrate the concept with this photo of a number of Train Miniature underframes which I modified to add brakegear that would be somewhat more visible, when on the layout, than the standard TM version...
Note the position of the mounting bolsters for the trucks, relative to the coupler pockets (screwed-in-place Kadees).
This is the underframe of a Train Miniature X-29 boxcar - it was exactly the same as the ones shown above....
Since the stock coupler pockets (originally part of the underframe casting) had already been cut-off and replaced with Kadees, it was a simple matter to cut the underfame just inboard of the truck-mounting bolster, then turn the bolster 180º in order to re-locate the trucks closer to the car's ends, as would have been typical of the real cars.
Here's the original TM truck position...
...and the revised version...
Wayne
you will have to look at the wideswing coupler mounts if installed for the widest swing possible. Replacing the couplers with a longer shank may help. If you have to get a file and look for ways to get the swing to go wider that would be key without butchering details, etc. I have the Walthers Hiawatha cars and I had to goof around all of the to handle 24 inch reliably. I have the walthers C&NW push pull cars they needed tweaking on 24 inch radius, my KATO Rock Island push pull cars have ZERO problems. This is on 24 inch radius. Rivarossi guaranteed their equipment would run on 18 inch radius, even the big boy. The passenger cars had truck mounted couplers, fine for pulling, pushing mashes them together and derailing common, remember this is in the horn hook coupler days. Remember this hobby is a hands on hobby and solving things like this is a part of it. Consider me modding a Jawn Henry to handle 24 inch radius...I did it, took a lot of patient work. 8-D
First: when a manufacturer says an item will navigate X minimum radius curves, that probably mans it will do so at 5 scale mph. 30mph or more and you hit the floor.
Second: please use punctuation. Does not have to be grammatically correct, just write like people talk. Pauses… maybe some stops. Get it? I fired a client because he refused to use punctuation. In the real world “let’s eat, Grandma” and ”let’s eat Grandma” can cost a lot of money.
Hang on a minute, Countsrr!
countsrrand Culper extenders mentioned above
I mentioned the extended draft gear with the assumption you were using Walthers Proto passenger cars, probably their most popular line in HO.
The model number, which I finally figured out as 910-30361 (the number you provided, 910-3036, came up as a grain elevator) is actually a Walthers Mainline series which probably already has extended couplers since Walthers claims the 18" radius for.
https://www.walthers.com/85-budd-observation-ready-to-run-canadian-national-silver-black-noodle-logo
So, my point is, the longer draft gear (coupler boxes) may not fit a Mainline car (Or, more likely, they are already used on that car). I am only familiar with their Proto line. I only provided that link to show you what they looked like. Sorry if I messed you up.
Regards, Ed
When I began to use the Walthers Heavyweight passengers cars with diaphragms, the accompanying literature said they'd work on 24" minimum. That was optimistic. On perfect curves, trailed behind a locomotive, with the cars and trucks and their couplers all perfectly assembled, that was indeed the case...they'd work slowly on 24" curves. Then, I tried to back them....
Long story short, I found through trial and error that the longer Walthers cars do a lot better with more 'generous' radii. I found that 28", the way I was prepared to lay them, worked both trailing and shoving the Heavyweights. That's about 17% broader a curve than Walthers claimed. Nothing to sneeze at, especially after going to all the trouble to lay nice 24" curves. And then finding out that Walthers' #7.5 curved Shinohara turnouts in HO, in Code 83, were considerably undercut in their stated two radii.
I will agree with those who suggest that you'll have much greater success on 23-24" curves. If you can find the room, shoehorn another two inches on top of that.
Actually, the nickel silver track with the grey road bed is better than the steel alloy track, with the black road bed.
Mike.
Drumguy First: when a manufacturer says an item will navigate X minimum radius curves, that probably mans it will do so at 5 scale mph. 30mph or more and you hit the floor.
Drumguy makes a good point. I see some (many?) people feel they have to run their trains at warp speed. Model trains will operate much better at slower, "scale" speeds, especially when you are running close to tolerance limits (as is the case here). They look better as well, less toy-like. Easement curves might help in your case. Certainly wouldn't hurt.
You didn't mention any details about how they were derailing, or how fast you were going, or if it was any car or just a certain one, so it could be one or a combination of several causes. Another poster mentioned it's a hands-on hobby, and you often have to do some fiddling to get things right. I find that's quite true, and to a certain extent part of the fun of the hobby.
gmpullmanSo, my point is, the longer draft gear (coupler boxes) may not fit a Mainline car (Or, more likely, they are already used on that car). I am only familiar with their Proto line. I only provided that link to show you what they looked like. Sorry if I messed you up. Regards, Ed
The Walther Mainline 85ft. cars are the same cars as the Walthers Proto. The Proto series comes with grabs installed, lighting installed, Metal trucks with extended body mount couplers, which are Protomax, a very good copy of a Kadee, looks exactly like it. The Mainline has plastic trucks with couplers attached to them. Light compared to the Proto. They have a kit that comes with Metal trucks/wheels in the light kit, along with the extended coupler arrangement. Also sell a kit with the body mounted couplers and grabs to install on the Mainlines. No drilling or filing nesscessary, because like I said...the cars are the same/ under body and holes are already there.
I have ten of the Mainlines and converted all of them so they are just like the Protos....but I use 1/4 shank Kadee couplers for a closer fit for the diaphragms which both the Mainline/Proto come with. Money wise.....I saved about ten $$ adding all the items myself....but also improved some of their engineering especially any light bleed through on the body and how the light pick-up works.
I run broad curves though..not a problem. Looking at the OP's board....He's asking the impossible........He could add longer shank couplers into the talgo style trucks that come with them....but would really look weird. Big dreams in little space, don't work with long passenger cars.
Take Care!
Frank
I have to say after reading the Walthers description that it is very misleading for Walthers to state on its website that these cars will operate on 18" radius curves.
I've had two sets of the Walthers passenger cars for some time. Even with my minimum radius of 26 inches (with easements), I had some trouble with about 1/4 of the cars. As I recall, coupler/diaghram/truck interference were the basic problems.
The first thing I did was replace the couplers with long shank KDs, and that solved most of the problems. Then I had to do some careful trimming of the under carraige of a couple cars, and unjam a couple of non flexible diaghrams.
These are great cars, but they need work (oil axles) right out of the box. Sometimes I really missed my old Athearn cars, which were flawless in operation.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
mobilman44 Sometimes I really missed my old Athearn cars, which were flawless in operation.
Sometimes I really missed my old Athearn cars, which were flawless in operation.