Bowser T1 4-4-4-4 review

[Darth Santa Fe]

This review is on Bowser's most recent version of their Pennsylvania T1 4-4-4-4 kit.

This model of the T1 is a massive improvement over the old lead T1s by Penn Line. The major parts are very high quality diecast zinc alloy, which look just about as good as any plastic models available now. The only imperfections are a couple fine seams and some tiny pits. This kit is currently only available as a Deluxe kit, with all the brass super-detail parts and a headlight bulb included. The boiler, cylinders, and tender are all pre-drilled for the brass detail parts, which knocked about 10 hours off of assembly time. The instructions are very easy to follow and include step-by-step drawings showing how everything goes together. Two choices of front pilot coupler parts are included; one is a dummy in the lowered position (which I used) and the other is a simple piece that makes it Kadee coupler ready. The valve gear is simple and doesn't take much effort at all to assemble, but the crosshead and valve gear hangers were a pain to work with. The only other hard parts were opening the holes in the siderods enough to not bind, and working with the wiring. After that, it was a fairly easy kit to build (easy for a metal steam engine, anyway). The boiler doesn't have any piping, hatches, or grab irons cast on, so just about all the detail is separate. The tender is the same way, and also has a coal bunker instead of a cast coal load, so it's up to the owner to add one (I used finely ground coal). The tender is the high-side version used with some T1s. I think Bowser had a sheet brass low-side tender available for a long time, but I can't find it on their website anymore. The cab has a full interior which looks very nice, but a crew isn't included anymore. Bowser still uses Penn Line's old method of mounting the boiler on top of two hinged mechanisms, which works very well on curves, but it's not prototypical, and there are always two screws on the top of the boiler. All the striping, lettering, and PRR shields are included as fine decals and look very nice, but it's nearly impossible to get all the bubbles out from under them, and they're very fragile. If you're not an expert with decals, you may want to have a professional install them (I accidentily destroyed one of the PRR shields and have yet to get a new one). This is one of the few Bowser steam engines that comes standard with a light bulb, and this is certainly an engine that looks better with one.

The T1 was a pretty rough runner at first, but smoothed out quite a bit after some run time. I found that it works best with the motors connected, but not using the flexible drive tubing. I switched the tubing with a Hobbytown drive shaft, and nearly 0.15 amps was knocked off of the current draw while running free. That should be even better with a high quality NWSL shaft. The T1 reached a maximum speed of 100 scale MPH at 12 volts, while drawing about 0.51 amps on a straight track and 0.6 on a curve (again, that should be even better with a high quality driveshaft). With the dual DC-71 motors, the stall current should be around 4 amps, but if you build it right, stalling will never, ever, EVER happen! The minimum speed I could maintain was about 6 scale MPH, but not steadily. That should improve as it gets more broken in. The engine and tender together weigh three pounds, and there should be enough traction to pull around 100 cars. There's plenty of room in the engine for more weight. The tender rolls freely, even with all its weight. Bowser has modified the boiler and drawbar to make it so this engine can go around 18" radius curves without any trouble. All the wheels have RP-25 flanges, and electrical pickup is from six wheels on the right side of the engine (the front truck wheels are plastic) and eight wheels on the left side of the tender. The front engine had a problem with derailing going onto a curve, which I found was due to the front truck spring having too much tension. After weakening the tension just a little, the problem was fixed. Two other problems that needed to be fixed were the left rear truck wheels contacting the frame and shorting, and the gears binding with the slots in the bottom plates. I glued some flexible plastic to the part of the frame where the rear truck wheels were shorting, and filed the bottom plate gear slots into squares, and the problems were fixed! The motors are isolated for easier DCC installation, but unless you get the Helix Humper repowering kit, you may want a very heavy-duty decoder incase it ever does stall. There's plenty of room in the tender for a large sound system, and even enough room in the engine for a decent one.

Bowser's current T1s are definately excellent models of this engine, approaching brass and even BLI in detail quality. They're also fun to build, and with some work can be some of the finer operating steam engines available today.

[selector]

Kewl, Darth.  I enjoyed your review.  I may tackle one of these sometime.

Is this slinky beast growing on you?  I am very fond of my BLI version; it looks so fast and powerful at the head of a string of heavyweights.

BTW, would you be able to post lighter images?  Those ones are dark, to me, and I can't see a lot of the detail.  Maybe you have some software to just lighten them a bit.

-Crandell

[Darth Santa Fe]

selector

BTW, would you be able to post lighter images?  Those ones are dark, to me, and I can't see a lot of the detail.  Maybe you have some software to just lighten them a bit.

Here are a few that I took a while ago, before my accident with the shield decal, and before I added coal. I don't know why I never got around to posting them before.

And then here's one from before it was painted.

Thanks for letting me know you enjoyed the review.

[NeO6874]

So, have you hooked this monster up to some 1:1 heavyweights yet? I mean, with two motors on this thing, you could probably tear up a street with it.

 

Beautiful work as always Darth.  I hope to be getting a USRA light Mike sometime after the first of the year, when Bowser re-runs them (already placed the order, just waiting on the run to be started)   

[locoi1sa]

  Thanks Darth

 Looks great!!! I love my I1sa from bowser. This is what MODEL  Railroading is about. Anyone can buy  and place on the track. But to build and run is modeling.

  Keep up the great work.

      Pete
 

[Anonymous]

I acklowledge you did a great job on that kit engine. I owned one of the BLI duplexes for a time and it never did give me good curve performance because the model is so rigid in construction.

Im half tempted to buy one of these Bowsers and build it myself only I will need to upgrade my tooling to do so.

Here is the BLI Model for comparison.

 http://img532.imageshack.us/my.php?image=duplexkato6switchjb9.flv

Those curves are the Kato 34" radius on the switch. Any smaller those wheels click on and off at tangents.

[fwright]

Darth

A really sweet locomotive, and excellent craftsmanship by you.

Now a dumb question on my part:

Is there a reason to connect the two motors/engines together with the universal?  I've never built a dual-motored engine myself, but all the O gauge examples I own let the motors run independently.  Just curious.

Fred W 

[Darth Santa Fe]

Is there a reason to connect the two motors/engines together with the universal?  I've never built a dual-motored engine myself, but all the O gauge examples I own let the motors run independently.  Just curious.

It's there to keep the motors running at the same speed. I tried it without the coupling at one point, and one motor was always a little faster than the other. I guess it isn't really necessary to have it there, though. The real ones had the drivers spinning out of sync, right? I could try it again later and tell how it runs with the motors separate.

[fwright]

It's there to keep the motors running at the same speed. I tried it without the coupling at one point, and one motor was always a little faster than the other. I guess it isn't really necessary to have it there, though. The real ones had the drivers spinning out of sync, right? I could try it again later and tell how it runs with the motors separate.

Thanks very much for the response.  Will be very interested to see how the experiment comes out.

always trying to learn from others, I don't have enough life left to learn everything the hard way!

Fred W

[SteamFreak]

Another nice review, Darth. How long before you've built the whole Bowser roster?

Like Fred I'm wondering why the loco runs better with the two motors joined by a universal. Does it smooth out the low speeds? One of the really cool possibilities with two motors is the potential for independent driver slip (not that it ever would with all of that weight). 

[Darth Santa Fe]

Well, I tested it without the shaft today. The current draw was very slightly lower, but that's the only positive I could find. The shaft between the motors also acts as a spacer, keeping the engines from drifting together. The speed of the two motors is slightly different, so one set of drivers is always spinning faster than the other, which seems to cause odd running characteristics. Another problem is if one motor starts faster than the other, a driver can lift and derail. It would also short out running on straight track, for some reason.

In conclusion, I recommend the shaft be left in.

I put the shaft back in, but I must have done something wrong, because now it's running tighter and making a lot of noise. Man, I hate it when these things happen!

[SteamFreak]

, I guess I should have kept my mouth shut. How are the engines attached? I'm surprised that there's that much front-to-back travel. The universal shouldn't be necessary to keep them separated.

The speed may equalize once the brushes are completely seated. 

[steemtrayn]

I acklowledge you did a great job on that kit engine. I owned one of the BLI duplexes for a time and it never did give me good curve performance because the model is so rigid in construction.

Im half tempted to buy one of these Bowsers and build it myself only I will need to upgrade my tooling to do so.

Here is the BLI Model for comparison.

 http://img532.imageshack.us/my.php?image=duplexkato6switchjb9.flv

Those curves are the Kato 34" radius on the switch. Any smaller those wheels click on and off at tangents.

I noticed that the drivers don't go out of sync, but they sound like they do.

[fwright]

In conclusion, I recommend the shaft be left in.

I put the shaft back in, but I must have done something wrong, because now it's running tighter and making a lot of noise. Man, I hate it when these things happen!

Thank you for the experiment on our behalf.  I certainly did not want to cause you these problems, though.  I hope you are able to resolve the problem quickly.  In any case, thank you very much for sharing your fine work and efforts with the rest of us.

Fred W 

[Autobus Prime]

Well, I tested it without the shaft today. The current draw was very slightly lower, but that's the only positive I could find. The shaft between the motors also acts as a spacer, keeping the engines from drifting together. The speed of the two motors is slightly different, so one set of drivers is always spinning faster than the other, which seems to cause odd running characteristics. Another problem is if one motor starts faster than the other, a driver can lift and derail. It would also short out running on straight track, for some reason.

In conclusion, I recommend the shaft be left in.

I put the shaft back in, but I must have done something wrong, because now it's running tighter and making a lot of noise. Man, I hate it when these things happen!

DSF:

[tallulah]?

Anyway, going in and out of sync = prototypical.  Also, slipping of one T1 engine = unfortunately prototypical.  Derailing, not so much.

These are pivoted pretty high up.  Seems to me that the early-starting engine would rock, lifting the leading driver, right?  With the motors connected, the tubing or U-joint would take the tension, adding friction and current draw, but avoiding derailment. This could also bring an insulated tread in contact with the metal shell.  Zap! short circuit.

I think this could be cured by adding a link to the bottom of the chassis, with the same spacing as the existing motor mounts.  Two problems would be track clearance (the big drivers would help here) and axle gear clearance, if the pivot point is above the gear slot.  If this is the case, you could make 2 gear covers and attach the link to that, with the added benefit of keepin' the cookie crumbs out.

Illustration:

You won't need to be that precise with the strut.  Just measure with your 6" scale and make a couple of pinpricks in the brass bar, then drill.  Brass is nice stuff to work with.  You could make one screw hole in each cover slotted for adjustment, then drill the other hole after it's all in place and going around curves fine.  You might even make the strut in halves and solder them together, but this isn't a side rod; as close as you can get it will probably work fine.

I do show two different cover styles on the drawing.  I'm not sure where the pivot is in relation to the axle center. 

If you don't add the link, you might find another way to prevent rocking at the pivots, perhaps replacing the pivots with thicker blocks, or adding some sort of bearing block to the frame.  I think the strut would be the easiest way, and you'd get gear covers, too.