I'm working on my first real layout in HO. I have access to a lot of Kadee sprung trucks with metal wheelsets for literally no cost. I know there is minimal effort in swapping trucks. Most of my cars are Athearn or similar kits. Are there any downsides to swapping out the trucks? Also, how can I tell when it is appropriate to use arch-bar trucks vs Bettendorf? I have several different models of Kadee trucks in packages need to find out which ones go with which type of car. Oh yes, I'm modelling mid-50s and no passenger service. Thanks. ps You were correct I meant Andrews rather than arch-bar.
Tim Fahey
Musconetcong Branch of the Lehigh Valley RR
Arch-bar trucks had been banned from interchange service for some years before 1950. Don't use them except perhaps on older maintenance-of-way cars.
I don't like the oversized springs used in the Kadee trucks, but that is personal taste.
Mark
There is no downside to swapping trucks. Lacking access to nice Kadee trucks, I merely paint the molded plastic Athearn trucks rust red. Arch bar trucks are an older style that were phased out in the 1930's. The iron bars of which they were constructed had a tendency to break, or the bolts holding the bars together would break. The cast steel bettendorf trucks were much stronger. Arch bar trucks were ruled illegal for interchange sometime in the late 1930's. You would still see them on work train cars which were never inerchanged well into the 1950's. But by 1950 all the cars in revenue service would have bettandorf trucks.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
You wouldn't likely to be using Arch Bar Trucks in the 1950s as the AAR banned their use in 1939 in interchange service.
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
Tim:
As far as sprung vs. 'solid' trucks, I have quite a few cars with Kadee sprung trucks and have had no problem with them whatsoever.
You might also want to check those "Archbar" trucks, to make sure they're not an "Andrews" truck, which has a somewhat similar profile, but if I remember correctly (and someone correct me if I'm wrong on this) was still in use during the 'forties and 'fifties. I have several Intermountain cars with Andrews trucks, and though they resemble 'Archbar" in profile, the construction is much sturdier.
But I've found that the Kadee sprung trucks--and Mark is right, those springs are pretty oversize for scale--are good rollers. And frankly, the better weighted your car, the better they seem to roll.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
The Andrews truck was a cast truck (like the Bettendorf), but with journal boxes bolted on (leftovers from discarded archbars).
Dave
Just be glad you don't have to press "2" for English.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ_ALEdDUB8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hqFS1GZL4s
http://s73.photobucket.com/user/steemtrayn/media/MovingcoalontheDCM.mp4.html?sort=3&o=27
Steemtrain:
Thanks for the information. The Andrews trucks I have are under some Intermountain PFE reefers that have early paint schemes (one 'experimental' the others with single logos on each side instead of the double SP/UP logos on each side), so I'd say that they're from the mid-thirties on. Any idea how long Andrews trucks lasted in interchange? I'd be interested. I'm modeling the mid to late 'forties.
I have converted all of my freight car fleet to sprung trucks. I find that they track better and in general operate smoother than the rigid trucks. Though not all Kadee by any means (I couldn't afford the $6.50 a pop for 90-odd cars) the Kadee trucks I have are excellent - definitely cream-of-the-crop.
I replace the Kadee wheelsets with the correct-length Reboxx "semi-scale" wheelsets, and weight the cars to NMRA Recommended Practice levels. Note the "correct-length" statement. The Intermountain wheelsets that have been recommended by several posters have axle lengths that are 'way too short at 1.004-1.008". I use lengths from 1.020" to 1.030", depending on the truck. The resulting truck/wheelset combinations will discover grades that you didn't know you had. And that's before you put them on a car!
As to archbar vs Bettendorf or Andrews: given your era, keep the archbar trucks on non-revenue/non-interchange equipment - MOW, cabooses, and the like. The Andrews trucks lasted into the late 1950s, and by the mid 1950s, there were even some roller-bearing trucks showing up on freight equipment.
Have fun!
---
Gary M. Collins gmcrailgNOSPAM@gmail.com
===================================
"Common Sense, Ain't!" -- G. M. Collins
http://fhn.site90.net
Here is a time line for freight cars http://www.macrodyn.com/ldsig/wiki/index.php?title=Timeline-Freight_cars it doesn't include everything but will get you started.
While archbar trucks were banned in interchange in 1940, a number of roads continued to use them in MOW and home road revenue service at least into the 50's. Any cars you have with archbar trucks should be lettered for your road and not sent off road.
Enjoy
Paul
Thanks for all of the feedback. I bought the HO contents of an estate awhile back and have over 100 pair of freight trucks, all by Kadee. I had read that sprung trucks were a little more tolerant of less than optimal track. I belong to a module group where that can sometimes be handy. I bookmarked the freight car timeline, that is very useful. Based on my original thought process and the feedback here, I think I'll go ahead and swap them out. I could sell them but won't. I don't know about the size of the springs but if I can get to a level of detail on this layout where people are noticing the springs on the trucks, then I'll be a happy man. Thanks again.
TwinZephyrDoes anybody remember Model Railroader publishing a study they did on sprung vs. metal trucks? IIRC their conclusion was sprung trucks typically offered no operational advantage in HO and smaller scales.
What month and year?
I would like to read that. My experiance in 40 years says just the opposite. It is not the springing, but the equalization, keeping all four wheels on the rail, with close to equal weight, all the time. Even on perfect track work, the laws of physics suggest that equalized trucks would be less likely to ride up over the rail or pick switchpoint/frogs.
I use Kadee trucks with Intermountain wheelsets on almost all my freight equipment. I would suggest the OP do a search of this forum and read the several topics where myself and others have discussed this at length.
Sheldon
gmcrail I replace the Kadee wheelsets with the correct-length Reboxx "semi-scale" wheelsets, and weight the cars to NMRA Recommended Practice levels. Note the "correct-length" statement. The Intermountain wheelsets that have been recommended by several posters have axle lengths that are 'way too short at 1.004-1.008". I use lengths from 1.020" to 1.030", depending on the truck. The resulting truck/wheelset combinations will discover grades that you didn't know you had. And that's before you put them on a car!
Intermountian wheelsets are 1.010" and I have yet to mic one less than 1.009". I have over 400 freight cars with the Intermountain/Kadee combination on them and they all work fine.
The factory Kadee wheelsets I have removed and measured all range between 1.008" and 1.016" with most being in the 1.013" to 1.015" range. Sam at Kadee won't say (I have spoken to him personally about all these issues), but it appears their axle length spec is 1.015", just like the Reboxx recommendation for most Kadee trucks. There is no mathmatical reason why longer axles are needed. I am not saying longer axles won't work, I personally have never tried axles longer than the 1.015" axles recommended by Reboxx. But my Kadee trucks with 1.010" Intermountain wheelset work great and out roll the same truck with Reboxx 1.015" axles.
I do not use Reboxx because they only come with semi scale wheels that drop into NMRA standard turnout frogs. Additionally, I feel semi scale wheels in the currently available side frames do not look right. They leave a big space between the wheel face and the sideframe that is not prototypical. In my view you are just trading one incorrect looking element for another. I would rather have the better, smoother perfromance.
Again, my formula is not the only formula, but I'm not the only one doing it and it does work, and works well.
Machined wheels on machined metal axles make the best sound. The plastic axles and die cast wheels from Kadee are a little too quiet for me. Still, I have bought them by the bushel and have plenty of cars with those wheels, due to their excellent performance otherwise.
I agree on the equalization issue, although I have not had problems with stiff bolster/side frame joints when running on good quality track. Equalization keeps all four wheels planted, no matter how uneven the track. The springs themselves don't seem to add much, in a freight car truck, but they do seem to help in six wheel passenger trucks, provided the equalization is free enough, and the car is heavy enough to partially depress the springs. A freight car truck that is equalized doesn't necessarily need (or have) springs, but most do. For a long while I had a locomotive that had lost its truck springs, so I blocked the bolster up with scale timber; the truck could flex to follow rail irregularities, but it didn't have springs. Worked fine.
I went to Mexico in 1983, and saw arch bar trucks on a row of M-O-W cars (ex-US freight equipment) that were still in use. Mexico is a great place to turn back the clock. We rode in a N de M c.1948 ex-NYC sleeper, and saw all kinds of US-born industrial relics that had found new life down there.
I think Andrews trucks lasted quite a while. As someone noted, I was told by a Soo Line engineer that the Andrews trucks were able to re-use some parts of the arch-bar trucks, so were popular as replacements. I suspect the Andrews trucks lasted as long as the cars did - that is, by the early twenties I think many new cars would have been built using T-section Bettendorfs or other non-arch-bar trucks, so cars that were converted to Andrews in say the late thirties probably would have been built in the teens or earlier, so would mostly be retired or close to it by the 1950's.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL. . . . . . . . . . It is not the springing, but the equalization, keeping all four wheels on the rail, with close to equal weight, all the time. Even on perfect track work, the laws of physics suggest that equalized trucks would be less likely to ride up over the rail or pick switchpoint/frogs . . . . . . . . . .
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe factory Kadee wheelsets I have removed and measured all range between 1.008" and 1.016" with most being in the 1.013" to 1.015" range. Sam at Kadee won't say (I have spoken to him personally about all these issues), but it appears their axle length spec is 1.015", just like the Reboxx recommendation for most Kadee trucks. There is no mathmatical reason why longer axles are needed. I am not saying longer axles won't work, I personally have never tried axles longer than the 1.015" axles recommended by Reboxx. But my Kadee trucks with 1.010" Intermountain wheelset work great and out roll the same truck with Reboxx 1.015" axles.
Interesting. While I don't have a micrometer, I do have a pretty accurate digital caliper, and my findings are as follows: Brand new Kadee 33" wheelsets removed from new trucks measure from 1.016" to 1.017". The Intermountain 33" wheelsets have a measured axle length of between 1.004" and 1.008" (I just re-measured them.). Used Kadee wheelsets vary from 1.002" to 1.016". The smooth-back used wheelsets tend to the uppper end of the scale, while the used rib-back wheelsets are at the lower end. The Reboxx 33" Applications Chart gives the recommended axle length for Kadee #509 Andrews trucks as 1.015". They chart the original axle length as 1.019"-1.021". I use 1.020" , which is right in the middle of the range for the original axles. The Kadee Bettendorf trucks (far the most common type on prototype freight cars of the 1940s and 50s) have a recommended axle length of 1.020" I use that most times, but depending on the amount of side play, I may go as high as 1.030" on the Reboxx wheels. Reboxx recommends testing various lengths until you have only about 0.005" of side-to-side play. That's what I go for. With the Kadee sideframes, I've never been disappointed in their performance.
The only time I have had a derailment due to wheel drop was through a #8 curved Shinohara turnout. A quick fix with a bit of styrene sheet in the flangeway took care of the issue. All of my Peco switches are trouble-free. That said, I agree with you wholeheartedly about the sideframes: 'way too wide. But, the shiny ,narrower wheelsets show up much better than the dark space between the wheel face and the sideframe. And the equalizing feature of a sprung truck makes up for any appearence lack in the better tracking performance.
I'm glad your formula works to your satisfaction. But, then again, it's entirely possible for only one member of a marching band to be in step, and the rest of the band to be out of step...
I use mostly self centering ASF ride control (Kadee #552). I still believe the Reboxx "axle length" measurement on their charts to be a measurement of the sideframes into the journals, not an axle length, but Reboxx will not confirm that just like Kadee will not confirm their axle length spec.
Except for your Intermountain wheel sets, our measurements are not that far off. Maybe you got some bad ones? How many do you have? I have about 1600 and admittedly have not measured them all but have measured a few from every bulk box and never had any problem with fit to make me suspect a problem with length.
This evening I did find a pair of long axle (they measured 1.027) Reboxx wheelsets and tested them again against the Intermountain wheelsets. In every down hill test of just the two trucks, it was either a tie or the Intermountain set went an inch or two further. I think the inportant thing is that they not be long enough to cause binding as the sideframes flex and obviously not too short as to fall out or cause shorting. Since I have never had any shorts or other failures, I must conclude they are not too short.
If Reboxx or Intermountain made a 1.015" or 1.020" axle with a .110 wheel tomorrow, I would give them a try, no question. But until then we all make compromises in this hobby - I am happy with mine.
I will admitt liking things to be consistant, that is also part of my resistance to semi scale wheelsets. Since I can't change everything (locos, etc), why change anything. As for the operational issues I never had any derailments in my tests of semi scale wheels, but did not like the car rocking action as they roll through my Atlas code 83 turnouts. That was enough for me to reject them.
I wll be the first to admit I march to my own drum, never been a joiner or a "go along to get along" kind of person. "Only a dead fish goes with the flow"
We ran into a problem with Kadee metal trucks and metal wheelsets mounted on metal-bottomed rolling stock (Roundhouse) shorting out. For some reason, a slight derailment on a siding wasn't enough to cause the DCC power booster to trip off, but heat buildup over a long period of time melted the plastic ties under the truck and the plastic car side before we discovered the problem. When I noticed it and picked the car up, the metal bottom was extremely hot.
I went around and removed Kadee metal trucks from all of my rolling stock that had them.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI think the inportant thing is that they not be long enough to cause binding as the sideframes flex and obviously not too short as to fall out or cause shorting. Since I have never had any shorts or other failures, I must conclude they are not too short.
I have been swapping out the trucks and wheelsets on my rolling stock for about 3-4 months now, and have had a lot of fun and challenges in the process. Many of the trucks have been picked up on eBay, and are of sometimes questionable ancestry. I have Varney, Athearn, Silver Streak, Ulrich, Central Valley, and of course, some Kadee. By far the best-rolling ones are the Kadee. While I like free-rolling trucks, I have not been terribly concerned about it, if they don't fly down the track with every breeze, since I have a 0% ruling grade, and short trains. Even so, my little MDC Harriman Connies can haul 25-30 cars without blinking, even with them all weighted to NMRA standards (that's around 7 pounds of cars).
Since I run DC, I haven't any knowledge of how everything would work on DCC. A number of my cars have metal underframes, but I've experienced no problems unless I get a truck swiveled around so that it shorts out through the car frame. Almost all the trucks have wheelsets with only one wheel insulated, which means that with metal truck frames, you have to be very careful to get both insulated wheels on the same side of the truck, or bad things happen!
One of my key concerns has been to reduce the side-to-side wheel slop in the trucks. It can be a very annoying problem when trying to line up the couplers while picking up or dropping off cars, or while switching in the yard. This means I have to experiment with almost every truck I convert. The Reboxx charts are helpful, but not the final word in all cases. Apparently the quality control wasn't always very uniform back in the day. (Funny, we used to think it was pretty good.)
As far as the drop is concerned, I have found that the equalizing of the sprung trucks reduces or eliminates a lot of the rocking when going through a switch frog. And the metal sprung trucks add about 0.7 oz to the weight of the car, which reduces the amount of extra weight I have to add.
ATLANTIC CENTRALI wll be the first to admit I march to my own drum, never been a joiner or a "go along to get along" kind of person. "Only a dead fish goes with the flow"
I hear that. I've been getting a lot more reactionary of late, as I approach the Big 7-0. My locos are almost all 1950s/1960s technology, I've been picking up old rolling stock like I had back in the mid 1950s - I scored an old Athearn metal 50-foot flat with a real wood deck recently - I converted most of my turnouts from electric to manual control (with resulting improvement in reliability), I've acquired old Suydam and Alexander structure kits, etc.. Kinda fun getting reaction from folks in my LHS. They think I'm some sort of super modeler (which is about as far from being the truth as you can get) because I buy all these weird little detail parts and sprung trucks, and so forth.
gmcrailOne of my key concerns has been to reduce the side-to-side wheel slop in the trucks. It can be a very annoying problem when trying to line up the couplers while picking up or dropping off cars, or while switching in the yard. This means I have to experiment with almost every truck I convert. The Reboxx charts are helpful, but not the final word in all cases. Apparently the quality control wasn't always very uniform back in the day. (Funny, we used to think it was pretty good.)
Gary, I understand this concern and did consider that part of the problem. Almost all of mine are Kadee sideframes. I have a few other brands from back in the day (I've been at this hobby since 1967), but if the perfromance isn't good, I retire them. I find that the Kadee/Intermountain trucks, even with the greater sideplay, center themselves quite well simply by gravity and their free rolling nature. I will admit I have broad curves, 36" radius and above, and large turnouts, #6 and above, all code 83 Atlas except fro a few special pieces hand layed.
I also use ONLY Kadee regular head couplers, NO semi scale couplers. My test of those little critters also lead me to reject them. First is the issue we are discussing - gathering range. Even with tighter trucks like you are going for, the possible side play built into the NMRA track standards in more than the gathering range of the semi scale couplers. Second, because they are desgined to be compatable with the standard head, and other brands, the knuckle, while smaller in width, is actually deeper longways and has more train slack action. This is important for me, my operating conditions are different from yours. I run long trains, 30-50 cars, and I have grades, but all are 2% or less - so the added slack action is not good. I also found semi scale couplers to not couple as smoothly with the regular ones. So this is another one of those issues - if you can't change them all, I would rather not change any.
I am very concerned with free rolling, that is what got me into replacing the Kadee wheel sets in the first place. Wanting to pull long trains, with steam, up 2% grades. Two Bachmann 2-8-0's can pull 40 of my hoppers up a 2% grade - pretty good realism factor. All my motive power saw a 30% increase in pulling ability. I also stopped weighting cars to NMRA RP. I found it not necessary with the combined improvement of the added weight down low and the free rolling. This also obviously helps in the pulling department, especially on grades.
Again, I understand about the frog drop, I am just more comfortable without it. And it is an issue that can change with any new piece of track you introduce to the layout, as you found.
One other philosophical thought about uniformity of product usage - having some semi scale wheels/couplers and some not, seems to just draw attention to shortcomings of those that are not, making them even more obvious. Consistancy in detail seems to make a better overall impression in my mind. I have always tried to look at the layout as a whole, as in "model railroad" as opposed to "model boxcar" or "model locomotive". But opinions vary.
I use DC, with Aristo Craft wireless radio throttles. I designed my own block controller selector circuit that allows cabs to be asigned to track sections and turnouts to be thrown from multiple locations during walk around operation. The number of "blocks" (I call them track sections since thay are different from the signal blocks)needing to be asigned is reduced by the use of X sections per Ed Ravenscroft and MZL control. I am bulding a complete working signal system with working interlocking signals. A large precentage of my locos are newer (last 20 years) but I don't like or use onboard sound, at least not in HO.
Yes there is that age we all reach (I'm only 52) where we realize that what others think is relatively unimportant in the big picture.
It has however been great to hear your thoughts on these issues. And let them keep thinking your are the "super modeler"! Because, if your building anything these days, your doing more modeling then lots of those with model trains.
PFE was by far the largest consumer of the T section Bettendorf, this particular Bettendorf design was banned by the ICC in 1942 due to cracks developing where the journel boxes joined the T- section, PFE obtained yearly waivers to continue usage until the fleet was finally upgraded by 1952.
Now THAT is a fact I didn't know. Thanks. I have a number of those in HO and never could figure out where they belonged!According to one of John Nehrich's books (with lots of info from Richard Hendrickson), arch bar trucks were finally banned from interchange in 1941. Fox trucks were never officially banned, possibly because they had all fallen apart by the 1940's. Andrews and Vulcan trucks both were delivered new, with new journal boxes. After the arch bar truck was banned, some of the salvaged journals could have been re-used in Vulcan or Andrews sideframes. The more common type of Andrews had horizontal braces to the bottom of the journal, and I believe Accurail has made those in one-piece plastic. The Kadee version is of pre-WWI design. According to Nehrich, nearly 9% of the US freight car fleet still had arch bar trucks in 1939; the ban took effect in 1941.
The elusive Dalman two-level freight car truck was distinguished by four coil springs on each side, not the usual pair. I have a few made from Eastern Car Works kits, which are styrene assemblies without equalization. Mine work OK, usually, as I shimmed and braced the bolsters.
Ah, freight car trivia.
Arch bars were considered obsolete among builders when wooden frame and truss rods were supercecded by steel in the mid teens , railroads retained them service to avoid the expense associated with new truck assemblies and the cost associated with modifying the frame (when possible).
The Fox truck yet still lives, the largest fleet resides under the remaining SP-now UP Rotary fleet, SP modified and overhauled all in the seventies to include roller bearings.