The drivers under the tender are not powered. It seems that because they are not powered, there is a slight drag in their rolling so that they go in and out of synch with the drivers under the locomotive. Since the sound system provides articulated chuff sometimes the set of the tender drivers matches the sound of the chuff - when in synch with the front drivers there are four beats per revolution and when out of synch there are more. This would be correct since the prototype only operated in compound fashion with one of the middle cylinders exhausting to the front cylinders and one to the rear. Thus the cylinders under the locomotive exhaust at 4 beats for each revolution of the front drivers and the cylinders under the tender exhaust at 4 beats for each revolution of the tender drivers. It's very nice to watch.
mdtell wrote: The drivers under the tender are not powered. It seems that because they are not powered, there is a slight drag in their rolling so that the go in and out of synch with the drivers under the locomotive. Since the sound system provides articulated chuff sometimes the set of the tender drivers matches the sound of the chuff - when in synch with the front drivers there are four beats per revolution and when out of synch there are more. This would be correct since the prototype only operated in compound fashion with one of the middle cylinders exhausting to the front cylinders and one to the rear. Thus the cylinders under the locomotive exhaust at 4 beats for each revolution of the front drivers and the cylinders under the tender exhaust at 4 beats for each revolution of the tender drivers. It's very nice to watch.
The drivers under the tender are not powered. It seems that because they are not powered, there is a slight drag in their rolling so that the go in and out of synch with the drivers under the locomotive. Since the sound system provides articulated chuff sometimes the set of the tender drivers matches the sound of the chuff - when in synch with the front drivers there are four beats per revolution and when out of synch there are more. This would be correct since the prototype only operated in compound fashion with one of the middle cylinders exhausting to the front cylinders and one to the rear. Thus the cylinders under the locomotive exhaust at 4 beats for each revolution of the front drivers and the cylinders under the tender exhaust at 4 beats for each revolution of the tender drivers. It's very nice to watch.
mdtell
Thanks for the reply about the rear engine under the tender. I had read that someplace but when the question came up again and I was not sure. The Triplex is a very interesting model for sure but it is not in the era that I model. It does sound like it would be great to watch and the smoke is great also when you use it.
Cazephyr
Well, there's never exactly been an overage of strategic thinkers in the model train business...
Why would MTH-HO, with a whole TWO products, decide it's going to buck the entire industry. I guess for all of us that have been planning a railroad with a K4 and an Erie Triplex...
Bachmann, who seems to have been exhibiting better than average instincts, released another Nickel Plate Berkshire. I read of the new release the day UPS brought my Proto version- a generally better and more expensive model- and one for which I paid $40 less than the Bachmann's eventual price. The Proto 2000 ver. has been around a long time... long enough that it can be found in fire sales a-plenty for cheap.
Then there's the HOn3 K27 contest... When servicing such a tiny niche as HOn3, were I either The Precision Guy or the Blackstone Guy(-and probably the latter, as the MMI K27s were announced with The Armistace-), would it not have been, hell- pick a word... prudent? smart? just plain reasonable? -to contact the other and work something out? 'You take the K27s, I'll take the -28s...', etc? Rather than chopping the market in two? They ended up both being beautiful, but so what?
Anyway... I'd love one of these 2-8-8-8-8-8-8-2s... But then what? If I re-wired it- Nah... Mike'd sue me...
Jim Snyder
Monterey
joegideon wrote:Why would MTH-HO, with a whole TWO products, decide it's going to buck the entire industry. I guess for all of us that have been planning a railroad with a K4 and an Erie Triplex...Jim Snyder Monterey
I wouldn't call it bucking the system. MTH is just putting themselves in a small niche category much like Marklin. As some have indicated, I doubt many modelers will buy into DCS just to access features in one or two locomotives. I doubt they will spend moocho bucks converting just so they can adjust things like whistle quill or smoke output from their remote. Additionally, DCS is a proprietory system which puts a lot of limitations on things when you combine products from different manufacturers. The reason for DCC's popularity is it is open technology. The components are made in huge numbers making it affordable to just about anyone. To sum it up, manufacturers do not control the market. Manufacturers are controlled by the market. It's "my way or the highway" so to speak.
So- once again- Who buys these two models?
Let's say I'm DCC with sound, etc. And I want a Triplex. Doesn't this translate into a big pain in the ***?
joegideon wrote:Bachmann, who seems to have been exhibiting better than average instincts, released another Nickel Plate Berkshire. I read of the new release the day UPS brought my Proto version- a generally better and more expensive model- and one for which I paid $40 less than the Bachmann's eventual price. The Proto 2000 ver. has been around a long time... long enough that it can be found in fire sales a-plenty for cheap.
You can get a new-in-box Bachman Berk on ebay for $95. Where did you get a P2k Berk for $55?
joegideon wrote: So- once again- Who buys these two models? Let's say I'm DCC with sound, etc. And I want a Triplex. Doesn't this translate into a big pain in the ***?
To get the Triplex and the DCS to play with it is going to be expensive indeed.
Ok so the driving wheels under the tender is dummie. How does it pull? Everyone seems excited about the features but I wonder how many coal cars can you pull with this thing?
Falls Valley RR wrote: joegideon wrote: So- once again- Who buys these two models? Let's say I'm DCC with sound, etc. And I want a Triplex. Doesn't this translate into a big pain in the ***? To get the Triplex and the DCS to play with it is going to be expensive indeed.Ok so the driving wheels under the tender is dummie. How does it pull? Everyone seems excited about the features but I wonder how many coal cars can you pull with this thing?
I have not read any review on the pulling power, but it probably will pull about the same as most BLI articulated even with the dummy rear engine.
The Baldwin book said the Prototypes were built to pull very long trains, but the most speed they could muster turned out to be boiler size and steam generation limited. At about 10 MPH, they would run of steam if they tried to go any faster with a big train and were used only in helper service after the first tests.
The steaming problem or lack of steam is the reason the Virginian prototype boiler was so much larger. The Virginian had a much larger boiler size and 63" drivers with a completely different tender supported by a four wheel tender truck at the rear. The Virginian was a 2-8-8-8-4. Now that is a Yellowstone and a half if there ever was one! It was called a Triplex also.
I was surprised when MTH decided to label this model as a Virginian in addtion to the Erie, but marketing will always try to sell anything they can. It is like building a NKP Bershire and labeling it as an L&N M1. Just not correct.
CZ, I have been testing my Triplex at the local club I belong to so I can give you a little un-scientific review on it. There are a couple of pretty steep grades on the layout but the minimum radius is a little under 60 in. and I regularly run 100 car trains with 6 Atlas diesels on the front and no helpers with no problems.
The Triplex, by itself and without traction tires, pulled 9 cars on the grades. These cars were a mixed bag of coal hoppers each weighing 4.5 oz, all with metal wheels. With the traction tire installed, it pulled 45 cars. I suspect that the tender produces the drag of an additional 2 or possibly 3 cars but that is my guess.
On straight and level track, it pulled 45 cars without the traction tires. With traction tires it pulled 95 cars (all I had!!!).
I run straight DC so I cannot say much about the sound. As far as I can tell no whistle or bell etc. on straight DC, just chuffing.
The tender sits about 18 scale inches too far from the engine. I assume this was done to allow the engine to negotiate tight curves. The design of the drawbar makes this a tricky fix, but one which I feel will improve the appearance of the engine. I am also considering powering the tender (at the expence of the electronics and sound).
Overall, I am happy with the engine. The only real complaint I have is that all of the wheels but two were out of gauge. The axle on the tender trailing truck was out nearly a 16th of an inch and would derail anytine the engine ran through a turnout. An easy fix, but on a 500 dollar engine, I really feel it is inexcusable. Especially considering how difficult it is to pull all of the drivers out and guage them. Also, the molded plastic detail parts are slightly translucent but a little weathering can fix that.
One last thing I will say is this engine runs smooth. If I turn the sound off, the only noise I hear is metal wheels rolling along the rails. The mechanisim is silent.
bandoman wrote: The Triplex, by itself and without traction tires, pulled 9 cars on the grades. These cars were a mixed bag of coal hoppers each weighing 4.5 oz, all with metal wheels. With the traction tire installed, it pulled 45 cars. I suspect that the tender produces the drag of an additional 2 or possibly 3 cars but that is my guess.On straight and level track, it pulled 45 cars without the traction tires. With traction tires it pulled 95 cars (all I had!!!).
Surely it must be able to pull more then that? Was 9 cars all it managed up the grade without traction tires? What grades are these? My PCM Big Boys as a reference will pull 72 hoppers(The most I've tried) up a 2% grade without even flinching. So surely this beast must be able to do at least 50! Otherwise I would be disappointed.
Magnus
Lillen, the grades are steep. I do not know the exact number but the steepest is probably in the neighborhood of 4% and the curve is just under a 60 inch radius. I should have been more clear in my post. This may not be a totally fair test (as I said, un-scientific). With the traction tires installed, it took 45 cars up this particular grade (about the same as three Atlas SD-35's on this grade). A huge improvement. I can't say how many cars it will pull on a 2% grade without traction tires, but my gut feeling is not 72. I think that dragging the un-powered tender around really hurts pulling power on grades. The tender is all metal and quite heavy!
The upshot of all of this is, with all of those drivers you would think it would pull more. But you have to remember that they are not all powered. I takes some getting used to.
bandoman wrote: Lillen, the grades are steep. I do not know the exact number but the steepest is probably in the neighborhood of 4% and the curve is just under a 60 inch radius. I should have been more clear in my post. This may not be a totally fair test (as I said, un-scientific). With the traction tires installed, it took 45 cars up this particular grade (about the same as three Atlas SD-35's on this grade). A huge improvement. I can't say how many cars it will pull on a 2% grade without traction tires, but my gut feeling is not 72. I think that dragging the un-powered tender around really hurts pulling power on grades. The tender is all metal and quite heavy!The upshot of all of this is, with all of those drivers you would think it would pull more. But you have to remember that they are not all powered. I takes some getting used to.
Actually, upgrade without help (the traction tires in this case) sounds protypical. I gotta sk, how come you can't just raise the sound sytem and drop the motor in under it?
-Morgan
Flashwave, the on/off switch and the sound volume dial are soldered directly to the top of the electronics board which in turn is mounted directly to the underframe of the tender. The switch and dial are then flush up against the top of the tender under the dummy coal load which is only around a quarter of an inch thick. And, of course, the speaker is mixed in as well. Also, the bottom of the tender sits above the rear drivers: alot higher than a standard tender which sits on trucks. This makes the clearance inside the tender body tight even without the electronics.
Last but not least, the underframe will take some serious machining for a gear tower to fit. I can do this (I own a small milling machine) but it will take some serious thought first. Also, I contacted MTH about purchasing the extra motor and gear tower and I was informed that they only have those parts for warranty repairs so I will probably have to re-power the whole engine if I decide to do it at all. That is a shame, because the MTH driveline is so smooth.
bandoman wrote: Flashwave, the on/off switch and the sound volume dial are soldered directly to the top of the electronics board which in turn is mounted directly to the underframe of the tender. The switch and dial are then flush up against the top of the tender under the dummy coal load which is only around a quarter of an inch thick. And, of course, the speaker is mixed in as well. Also, the bottom of the tender sits above the rear drivers: alot higher than a standard tender which sits on trucks. This makes the clearance inside the tender body tight even without the electronics. Last but not least, the underframe will take some serious machining for a gear tower to fit. I can do this (I own a small milling machine) but it will take some serious thought first. Also, I contacted MTH about purchasing the extra motor and gear tower and I was informed that they only have those parts for warranty repairs so I will probably have to re-power the whole engine if I decide to do it at all. That is a shame, because the MTH driveline is so smooth.
Ah. Huh? Makes some sence I guess. I'll have to wait and see if/when I can save for one.
***.
I guess we will have to buy TWO triplexes, break one open, sell the two extra driving wheel sets, towers for those to install into thier tenders. And install the extra into the one triplex.
I thought about that earlier thinking they must have a whole warehouse full of these spares and be happy to sell a drive wheel set and gear tower.
Im happy to hear that tender is all metal. But it is nothing more than a ball and chain crippling what should otherwise be a excellent engine.
The more I learn about this, the more Im glad I didnt preorder one of these.
Maybe BLI or someone else will build thier version of the Triplex and do it right.
How many Triplex was produced for the Erie?
Lillen wrote: How many Triplex was produced for the Erie? Magnus
OK, I found it my self. Only three! That and the above reference to Big Boys gives me a devilish plan........
Lillen wrote:OK, I found it my self. Only three! That and the above reference to Big Boys gives me a devilish plan........ Magnus
Careful Magnus, they will be relegated to switching duty. The firebox was so poorly designed that could only manage 10MPH before it ran out of steam.
Hence forth why triplexes didn't take off.
Let me guess, you really like BIIIIIG steam?
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
DigitalGriffin wrote: Lillen wrote:OK, I found it my self. Only three! That and the above reference to Big Boys gives me a devilish plan........ MagnusCareful Magnus, they will be relegated to switching duty. The firebox was so poorly designed that could only manage 10MPH before it ran out of steam.Hence forth why triplexes didn't take off.Let me guess, you really like BIIIIIG steam?
Aaah, it's OK I guess!
Who am I kidding! I love it. But then who doesn't.
But I will have to se about the Triplex. I haven't decided if I like or not yet. But if I do get one I will get three. No point doing things in half. All in.
Lillen wrote: DigitalGriffin wrote: Lillen wrote:OK, I found it my self. Only three! That and the above reference to Big Boys gives me a devilish plan........ MagnusCareful Magnus, they will be relegated to switching duty. The firebox was so poorly designed that could only manage 10MPH before it ran out of steam.Hence forth why triplexes didn't take off.Let me guess, you really like BIIIIIG steam? Aaah, it's OK I guess! Who am I kidding! I love it. But then who doesn't. But I will have to se about the Triplex. I haven't decided if I like or not yet. But if I do get one I will get three. No point doing things in half. All in. Magnus
or thirds.
Flashwave wrote: or thirds.
My thought exactly! Now where is that credit card and upset wife!
Lillen wrote: Flashwave wrote: or thirds. My thought exactly! Now where is that credit card and upset wife!Magnus
back pocket and holding the largest skillet in the region. I'm havign so much fun picturing this. A big boy goes flying up Sherman hill. then another. we wait 10 minutes, and a Triplex goes panting past. "Huff, huff. Wait for me!"