With colder weather keeping me off the golf course more and more, I am turning my attention once again to my layout. This past week, I wanted to further test some new track work that I had put in place late last winter and early spring before I ballast it.
The best test for me is to run my 2-10-2 and 2-10-4 locomotives. My double main line has minimum radius of 32 inch outer tracks and 30 inch inner tracks. This curvature is adequate to handle these locomotives without derailment, even at the highest speeds.
But, problems occur when I try to run these locomotives through single turnouts, crossovers, and double crossovers. The locomotives can handle the straight through routes, but the divergent routes cause the problems.
Like most of my steam locomotives, the pilot wheel trucks and the trailing wheel trucks can be finicky but added weight on the axles usually solves those issues. The real problem with 2-10-2 and 2-10-4 locomotives occurs with the driver wheels. These fixed wheel configurations are just too long to negotiate the curved rails on the #6 turnouts that I use on my layout. I suppose that #8 turnouts would be more forgiving, but I don't have a single #8 turnout on my layout. What happens to cause derailments is that the driver wheel sets shift laterally off the rails and then derail at the frogs and guard rails - - not always, but often.
What do others do to ensure derailment-free operation of 2-10-2 and 2-10-4 locomotives on their layouts?
Rich
Alton Junction
i feel your pain. my biggest offenders were older brass 2-10-2's. later 10 coupled engines like the spectrums seem to have more lateral play in the drivers and do not bind up in switches so badly.
my worst problem was with a code 100 large radius curved switch used on the main line. (shinohara brand) the fix?? i got out my dental scrapers, files, and burnishing tools and went to work on the frog and guard rails. using an nmra gauge to check the progress, i finally got enough material removed to give the long wheelbase engines some room.
it took a lot of scraping, filing and polishing but i stuck it out untill it was done.
i had to tinker with a couple of number 6 switches but for the most part the curved one was my big headache. the layout is all code 100 with number 6's and 36" min radius. all curves have easements.
grizlump
How many #6s are you running on your layout? If there are routes that the 10 wheelers don't go, and if there aren't too many to replace, you could consider replacing them with #8s.
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
One thing I learned to do with all turnouts is to get a small bubble level, preferably one with two vials that can check both sideways and lengthwise dips and rises at the same time, and slowly push it through, watching for problems with the track, frog, etc. not being absolutely level.
I found such a level in the tool department at Lowe's that is a small, triangular shape and made of plastic, so you can check the turnout even with power applied and not cause a short circuit.
Richotrain,
I heartily agree with Medina - replace those troublesome #6s with #8s!
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
A N. American type #6 turnout should take just about any steamer out there.
I have a BLI Pennsy J1 that our hosts proved could actually run on 22" curves, even though the specs say 24" is recommended. Granted, it isn't a brass locomotive, Are we talking about brass locomotives? Even then, the points rail radius for NMRA-compliant #6's should be at least 40", and the NMRA specifies 43". My two large-drivered Northern types also take #6 turnouts, as do my Walthers Heavyweights.
Crandell
What I've done with my brass 10-coupleds is to make sure that the weight is balanced out in the boiler from the 3rd set of drivers forward. I had a couple that had the boiler weight balanced back toward the cab and firebox, which was causing the first set of drivers to lift on curves. A little adjusting, and that problem was cured. And, like most brass locos--lead and trailing trucks work better if a little lead weight is added to them.
I have 34" minimum radius, and not too much of that--mostly 36", and #6 main turnouts, one a crossover. I use Code 100 on the main and 83 in the yards. My yard is Peco and Sinohara #5, and two large-radius Sinohara curved on the main. I did have to do some frog adustments on one of the curved turnouts, but oddly enough, not for a 2-10-2, it was a rather recalcitrant 4-8-2 whose lead truck didn't like the frog, LOL!
But so far, adjusting the boiler weight in the 2-10-2's seems to make them track extremely well, even through the #5 lead to the engine terminal.
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!
selector A N. American type #6 turnout should take just about any steamer out there. I have a BLI Pennsy J1 that our hosts proved could actually run on 22" curves, even though the specs say 24" is recommended. Granted, it isn't a brass locomotive, Are we talking about brass locomotives? Even then, the points rail radius for NMRA-compliant #6's should be at least 40", and the NMRA specifies 43". My two large-drivered Northern types also take #6 turnouts, as do my Walthers Heavyweights. Crandell
Crandell, I agree with you. Most of my steamers handle the divergent tracks on #6 turnout quite nicely. Just the 2-10-2 and 2-10-4 locos cause problems. I think that it is the fixed driver wheel configuration, not the turnouts, that is the problem. They are poorly designed and poorly built, if you ask me.
I am talking about plastic engines, not brass, from BLI and Bachmann Spectrum.
Okay, Rich, thanks for making that clear to me. In that case, there must be something going on that I am not aware of. I don't have my J1 in front of me, and have not run it in over a year, but it seems to me it came with a blind middle driver. If yours is the T-1/J1 variants, it may have a flanged driver, and it may be just enough to cause you grief. Take a look? Mine had the flangless driver installed at the factory, and I have never bothered to swap it out.
Is it all turnouts of that type, or just one? If just one or two, suspect roadbed problems supporting the turnouts such that the rail tops throughout are on the same plane. My Challenger gave me fits with the longer #5 EZ-Track turnouts on my first layout. I found that I had been sloppy, as a neophyte, in ensureing the area nearest the frog and closure rails were properly supported so that the weight of the engine didn't make it sag there or torsion twist.
My process, learned the hard way, was to get lots of light fore and aft, and use an Optivisor. On the slowest setting, I advanced the engine until I could see a lift that shouldn't have happened. I then had to figure out if the lift was local or being generated by torque elsewhere on the frame due to something happening rearward toward the cab. In the case of the Challenger, the front engine's's first driver would begin to lift out of the rails, but I realized later that the rear engine was weighting down the rails it was on and causing the whole frame further up to roll. That changed the weight distribution.
BTW, My Hybrid UP 2-10-2's tender was what caused me to actually rip up a whole length of nicely ballasted flex, but not the engine, and not due to turnouts. The steamer was quite happy with my turnouts of all kinds.
This reminds me when I first got an MTH Challenger. Bot that sucker was picky about track. I was fixing/replacing track all over the place.
Rich, did this just start happening, how long have you had the locos?
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
Already some real good points made here. Since all drivers are "flanged" on the rigid frame, have you checked the guage of the wheels themselves? Even though all wheels may be within the gauge if any of the center drivers are anywhere close (wider) to max of guage the leading driver will be forced into the point of the frog. It may not be that easy, but if the gauge is narrowed to the absolute min of the center drivers this may stop the picking of the frog. Other than that, filing away @ the frog and working on the guard rails may be the only solution short of going to #8s.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
Motley Rich, did this just start happening, how long have you had the locos?
The two locos in question, a BLI 2-10-2 and a BLI 2-10-4, are both around 6 years old. Derailments have always been a problem with them. Once a year, at the beginning of the model railroading "season" for me, I torment myself by testing these two locos to see if they will run without derailing. They always derail and at various points on the layout. Then I put them in the round house and grumble about them till the next season and I start all over again.
The problem on each of them is the middle set of driver wheels. They are factory equipped as flangeless. There is too much lateral movement and the wheels tend to slide off the rails. Each came with a set of flanged driver wheels in the box. I would love to swap the flangeless driver wheels for the flanged driver wheels to see if they would stay on the track that way. My minimum curves are 30 inches and the mininum turnout is a #6, so you would think that the flanged driver wheels could handle it.
One difficulty in swapping the driver wheels is the lack of the proper tools to remove the wheel sets. Do I need micro wrenches to take off the linkage to replace the wheels?
What do you think about swapping the flangeless for the flanged driver wheels?
Rich, you ought to have been provided a small screwdriver type wrench to swap out that driver. It was part of the deal. I have tighter curves than you in my yard. Some are around 24", but my steamers all handle them with ease.
I think we might want to take a closer look at the seating of the bearing block for that one driver axle. Tom Stage had problems of that nature with his Mohawk a couple of years back. He had to shim or insert that brass block better. The blind drivers have a beveled edge, and are meant to not get hung up as they are dragged back across the rail heads during curve changes. Mine have no such problems, and that yours do suggests a problem with all the axles being fully seated. In fact, now that I think about this, I wonder if that axle is sprung. Maybe you need to locate and either seat the spring properly, or actually shorten it a tiny bit to weaken it.....not sure since I don't have any experience with this. Others reading certainly will.
We ARE going to get this solved.
Interesting. I have to disagree with the proponents of changing to #8 turnouts. I say if a loco can regularly navigate a 30" radius curve it should easily be able to go through a #6 turnout.
I am wondering if it is a certain brand of turnout causing the problem. Do you have mixed brands Peco, Shinohara, Altas, Microengineering, etc. and if so are the derailments occurring on a given brand? I've only got one BLI 2-10-2 but do not recall having issues with it.
I would just take them to your local hobby shop, since you don't have the tools required to work on them. I'm sure they can fix it.
I with Crandell, I think it's something with the locomotives, not the track.
You didn't say what gauge track or brand of turnouts your using. I read somewhere on another forum that the Atlas turnouts bowed up near the frog because they were taken out of the molds too soon. I also use these and had the same problem,if you push down on the frog and the turnout goes down thats the problem and an extra track spike near the frog solves the problem. Just my cure for a somewhat troublesome turnout, also the N gauge and Ho have the same problem, Jim.
selector Rich, you ought to have been provided a small screwdriver type wrench to swap out that driver. It was part of the deal. I have tighter curves than you in my yard. Some are around 24", but my steamers all handle them with ease. I think we might want to take a closer look at the seating of the bearing block for that one driver axle. Tom Stage had problems of that nature with his Mohawk a couple of years back. He had to shim or insert that brass block better. The blind drivers have a beveled edge, and are meant to not get hung up as they are dragged back across the rail heads during curve changes. Mine have no such problems, and that yours do suggests a problem with all the axles being fully seated. In fact, now that I think about this, I wonder if that axle is sprung. Maybe you need to locate and either seat the spring properly, or actually shorten it a tiny bit to weaken it.....not sure since I don't have any experience with this. Others reading certainly will. We ARE going to get this solved. Crandell
Wow, this has turned into an even more helpful thread than I first could have hoped for.
Crandell, your assurance that we can solve this problem is most encouraging, and I appreciate it.
Later this morning, I will check the boxes to see if I have that tool to remove the linkage nuts. I will be very interested to see if the flanged driver wheel sets alleviate the problem by holding the wheels in place on the rails.
I realize that the flangeless driver wheel sets are factory installed for the opposite reason; that is, to permit lateral movement to ride on top of the curvatures in the rails. But, with the two locomotives in question, a BLI 2-10-2 and a BLI 2-10-4, that lateral movement seems too great.
Yesterday, when I turned one of the locomotive over and examined the wheels and the wheel bearings, there is an awful lot of movement. While the square bearings don't fall out of position entirely, they really seem to move in and out. That seems like excessive lateral movement to me.
Motley I would just take them to your local hobby shop, since you don't have the tools required to work on them. I'm sure they can fix it. I with Crandell, I think it's something with the locomotives, not the track.
LOL
What's a local hobby shop?
Sadly, all three of my local hobby shops closed within a few months of each us about three years ago. The saddest part of those closures was that each of those three shops had at least one "technician" who could address this type of problem. One recourse would be to send these units into BLI for repair, but I have already done that once before with one of these two engines and the flat rate of repair was $45 if I recall correctly. At this point, I would rather sell the local on eBay for $45 and be done with it.
Curiously, in addition to these two ATSF locomotives, I also have a C&O 2-10-4 locomotive from BLI that I bought about a year after purchasing the two ATSF locomotives. The C&O locomotive is much bulkier and heavier than its ATSF 2-10-4 counterpart, and the C&O locomotive performs flawlessly. It never derails. It seems to be that BLI changed its design and/or production methods somewhere during that time period. When you stand back and look at the two 2-10-4 locos side by side, they look completely different in terms of size and bulk. One is a beast (C&O), the other is a wimp (ATSF).
gondola1988 You didn't say what gauge track or brand of turnouts your using. I read somewhere on another forum that the Atlas turnouts bowed up near the frog because they were taken out of the molds too soon. I also use these and had the same problem,if you push down on the frog and the turnout goes down thats the problem and an extra track spike near the frog solves the problem. Just my cure for a somewhat troublesome turnout, also the N gauge and Ho have the same problem, Jim.
All of the turnouts on my layout are Atlas Custom Line #6 turnouts. All of my diesels and most of my steamers operate flawlessly over these turnouts, so I don't think that the turnouts are at fault. Over the past few years, I have spent a lot of time ensuring that my track work is as near to perfect as I can get it.
Replacing #6 turnouts with #8 turnouts simply would not be practical at this time. For one thing, the increased length of the #8 turnouts would require a complete rework of my entire track plan. A lot of my turnouts on my double main line layout are set up as crossovers and entries into yards on a third parallel track. I don't feel that #6 turnouts are too restrictive in terms of the curvature of the divergent routes.
No question, the biggest problem with the 2-10-2 and the 2-10-4 is in negotiating the divergent routes of the turnouts. But, even on the straight through portion of the turnouts, there can be derailment problems with these two locos as they pass over point rails, guard rails and frogs. It happens at different times and on different turnouts. It is random and fairly constant. Even on the curved track portions of my layout, these two locos can derail as the middle flangeless driver wheels laterally shift and move off the top of the rails. That's why I am anxious to experiment by swapping out the flangeless driver wheel sets for the flanged driver wheel sets. I do not have these problems with any of my other steamers. I am convinced that it is these two locos that are at fault, not the track or the track work.
Medina1128 How many #6s are you running on your layout? If there are routes that the 10 wheelers don't go, and if there aren't too many to replace, you could consider replacing them with #8s.
On my double main line layout, a 25' x 42' setup, there are 7 crossovers (comprised of pairs of #6 turnouts) between the inner and outer tracks, 2 double crossovers between the inner and outer tracks, 4 #6 single turnouts off the inner track to yard tracks and 2 #8 curved turnouts leading off the outer tracks to my passenger station.
So there are a lot of turnouts that the trains have to negotiate even if only running straight through the turnouts. Only the 2-10-2 and the 2-10-4 experience problems.
The main line tracks have minimum radius curves of 32" and 30".
Rich,
I actually had a very similar problem with a C&O 2-10-4 and my J1 2-10-4. I originally thought it was the driver play too. When I really sat down and watched them (this took about 2 hours really due to the randomness of the occurence) at speed, I found that the issue was that the lead trucks would "lift" on my Atlas #6 turnouts as they went through the frog.
It turned out the spring was flexing too much and allowing the lead truck to derail which seemed to pull the locomotive out of line with the track. I fixed that problem by swapping out the spring on the lead truck mechanism for a less "springy" one. Just a thought before getting into the flanged driver fix or the lateral motion on the middle driver.
Hi!
I have the same two BLI locos in question, and in fact used them as test locos when putting down my track on an 11x15 two level HO layout. I use Atlas code 100 trackage, and found that these locos performed flawlessly on the #8s (which are the only ones on the main lines). However, this was not the case with the Atlas # 6s. On some of the # 6s, and not all the time, the 10 drivered locos would derail.
I fully agree that these locos SHOULD be able to navigate a # 6 at speed, but it doesn't work out that way on my layout. The good news is that there is no reason for these locos to do so (they are heavy freight mainline locos, not switchers), so I am OK with the situation.
By the way, E & F units and various switchers and smaller steam locos work just fine thru the # 6s - even the BLI 4-8-4 (my favorite loco).
For what its worth, it seems that 10 drivered locos have had a rough time on layouts since I got into HO - about 49 years ago.
Rich.
I have 2 of the J1 beasts. They have no problems even on #5 turnouts. I got to looking at your situation and comparing the 2 of mine. The center blind driver also has the gear. Swapping it with the flanged one is a waste of time and may just compound the issues of derailments. It is also the only axle that is not sprung. The other axles have small springs above the brasses to hold the weight of the locos. On mine the center wheels hardly touch the rail. I can slip a piece of paper under the wheels when standing still. The 1,2,4,and 5 axles have springs. Also to note is the brasses are not drilled to accept the springs as they are on brass locos. If you look at the brasses very carefully you will see that the axle hole is not centered. The side with the most bronze goes against the spring. I suspect that your locos have the brasses turned to the wrong side. This would allow too much weight to be placed on the center driver. When it leaves the rail head it drops down instead of staying above the rails.
I acquired a brass 2-10-0 earlier this year. It came with flanged drivers on the first and last axle. The center 3 axles would do as yours did. Derail on turnouts and curves sharper then 48 inches. I added flanged drivers to the 2 and 4 axles and it is one of the best running locos I have now.
Pete
I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!
I started with nothing and still have most of it left!
Rich:
Okay, NOW I get it--for some strange reason, I thought your problems were with brass 2-10-2's, not ones from BLI (talk about coming 'late to the party', LOL! ). Actually, I did have one of those Santa Fe 2-10-2's for a while (sold off most of my dual-mode BLI's, mainly because I'm strictly DC and they had too high a starting voltage to work comfortably with my other locos) and while I didn't have derailment issues with it on turnouts, it was a rough-riding little beastie, because of too MUCH lateral motion and not very good springing. It also was not much of a hauler despite its wheel arrangement.
However, it did come with the hex-nut tool in the box for replacing the flangeless driver (which I did, and it's not too difficult), so you might want to check the box again. I remember both the ATSF 2-10-2 and 4-8-4 locos having this little tool in the packaging along with the spare drivers.
That 2-10-4 you have is probably the model of a one-of-a-kind ATSF prototype, where a 4-wheel trailing truck was added to a 'stock' Baldwin 2-10-2. I know the later Santa Fe Baldwin 2-10-4's were absolute monsters with 74" driving wheels--close enough to the Pennsy J-1's that Pennsy even borrowed them late in the steam era for coal trains in the midwest when Santa Fe was phasing out steam.
Hi Rich,
Sorry to here of your problem with the tens.. But if your interested, there is a very repretable LHS in Burbank IL. called The Golden Spike Train Shop. That specialize in HO. His name is Bud our age.He used to repair all types of locos. I don't know if he still does. You can find His add in the MR mag in the directory..
Good Luck!!! FRANK
richhotrain ... The C&O locomotive is much bulkier and heavier than its ATSF 2-10-4 counterpart, and the C&O locomotive performs flawlessly. It never derails. It seems to be that BLI changed its design and/or production methods somewhere during that time period. When you stand back and look at the two 2-10-4 locos side by side, they look completely different in terms of size and bulk. One is a beast (C&O), the other is a wimp (ATSF). Rich
... The C&O locomotive is much bulkier and heavier than its ATSF 2-10-4 counterpart, and the C&O locomotive performs flawlessly. It never derails. It seems to be that BLI changed its design and/or production methods somewhere during that time period. When you stand back and look at the two 2-10-4 locos side by side, they look completely different in terms of size and bulk. One is a beast (C&O), the other is a wimp (ATSF).
Hmm...that is odd, Rich. One of he ATSF 5100 series had the highest recorded piston thrust of any modern steam locmotive on record...219K lbs. They were also high-drivered for speed, so they were at least as powerful in terms of tractive effort as the C&O twins of the T-1 and the Penny's version of it, the J1. And when you look in youtube for the Sandusky shared work between those two engines, (the Pennsy leased about 10 of the 5000's from ATSF), they are about the same size and mass. So, yes, I'd say something weird has happened if your BLI version is noticeably smaller than the T-1/J1.
zstripe Hi Rich, Sorry to here of your problem with the tens.. But if your interested, there is a very repretable LHS in Burbank IL. called The Golden Spike Train Shop. That specialize in HO. His name is Bud our age.He used to repair all types of locos. I don't know if he still does. You can find His add in the MR mag in the directory.. Good Luck!!! FRANK
Frank,
Good to hear from you. I am familiar with The Golden Spike Train Shop. I may give Bud a call.
Here is an update on my situation.
I started out the morning by running my "good" 2-10-4, the BLI C&O, which incidentally seems to have been engineered differently than the BLI ATSF 2-10-4. The C&O is a lot bulkier and heavier. Anyhow, I ran it at 20 speed steps on my DCC throttle. It ran around the entire layout flawlessly, maybe 20 times. Then I ran my BLI 4-8-4 at 20 speed steps. Again, it ran flawlessly. So I am satisfied that my track work is not the problem.
Next, I ran the BLI ATSF 2-10-4. Before doing so, however, I added weight to the pilot truck and the trailing truck. It ran flawlessly around the layout. I should note on that loco that the driver wheels used to laterally shift off the rails and I sent it back to BLI for repairs. After two attempts to fix it, BLI succeeded, so the loco is not a problem except for being finicky going through divergent routes on turnouts.
Lastly, I turned my attention to the real problem loco, the BLI ATSF 2-10-2. It derailed at every turnout. So, I bit the bullet and disassembled the driver wheel assembly, not a job for the faint of heart. I was going to swap out the flangeless center driver wheel set and install the flanged wheel set which came with the loco. But the flanged driver wheel set does not come equipped with a gear, so that was a no go. Incidentally, on that loco, there are springs under the square brass bearings for the center driver wheel set. I made sure that all of the square bearings were seated correctly and reassembled the loco. It still continually derailed.
I was surprised that the flanged wheel set in the box was gearless. What is the purpose of that extra wheel set?
I am at wits end with this loco. I may have to break down and send it in to BLI to see if they can do anything with it.
Any more suggestions? You have all been very helpful. I appreciate all of the input.
selector richhotrain: ... The C&O locomotive is much bulkier and heavier than its ATSF 2-10-4 counterpart, and the C&O locomotive performs flawlessly. It never derails. It seems to be that BLI changed its design and/or production methods somewhere during that time period. When you stand back and look at the two 2-10-4 locos side by side, they look completely different in terms of size and bulk. One is a beast (C&O), the other is a wimp (ATSF). Rich Hmm...that is odd, Rich. One of he ATSF 5100 series had the highest recorded piston thrust of any modern steam locmotive on record...219K lbs. They were also high-drivered for speed, so they were at least as powerful in terms of tractive effort as the C&O twins of the T-1 and the Penny's version of it, the J1. And when you look in youtube for the Sandusky shared work between those two engines, (the Pennsy leased about 10 of the 5000's from ATSF), they are about the same size and mass. So, yes, I'd say something weird has happened if your BLI version is noticeably smaller than the T-1/J1. Crandell
richhotrain: ... The C&O locomotive is much bulkier and heavier than its ATSF 2-10-4 counterpart, and the C&O locomotive performs flawlessly. It never derails. It seems to be that BLI changed its design and/or production methods somewhere during that time period. When you stand back and look at the two 2-10-4 locos side by side, they look completely different in terms of size and bulk. One is a beast (C&O), the other is a wimp (ATSF). Rich
Crandell,
I should weigh the two locos and photograph them side by side. My impression is that the C&O is heavier and bulkier thab the ATSF. Maybe I will go down and do that this afternoon.
Here are the two 2-10-4 locos from BLI. The C&O is in the back and the ATSF is in the front.
The C&O loco and tender weigh 2 pounds, 5 ounces.
The ATSF loco weighs 1 pound 11 ounces. The BLI ATSF 2-10-2 (not pictured also weighs 1 pound 11 ounces.
The C&O is 9 inches long, 15 inches if you include the tender.
The two ATSF locos are each 8 inches long, 13 inches if you include the tender.
The boiler, the driver wheels, everything, is bigger on the C&O. The C&O drive train also appears different than the ATSF.