It's a topic, perhaps eye-rolling in its frequency, that crops up nearly once a month; how do I keep my tracks from getting that grey 'rust' that wipes off on my cleaning cloth? How do I keep the tires on my rolling stock clean, or how do I clean them effectively if I see or suspect that they are dirty?
I have conducted one trial. It was five years ago, about a month prior to tearing down the layout on which almost all of my photos had been taken. I had nothing to lose, and had just read a thread on this topic where Gleaming and Wahl's Clipper Oil were touted as reliable and effective methods. I had long since taken to using Dexron Mercon III auto-tranmission fluid as my exterior lube of choice on my steamers without ill effects of any kind. I figured...what the heck? So, I coated my entire main line, including its 3.6% grades, liberally with ATF. I let a BLI steamer run through it and spread it everywhere. Then I hooked up my typical trailing 'tonnage' and watched. It was as if I had done nothing. A couple of weeks later, there was no discernible difference in performance.
What I didn't do was to evaluate tractive effort as our hosts routinely do when they test a new model. It should be relatively simple and quick for them to perform a series of trials with the two or three most highly acclaimed methods or materials, and to test actual tractive effort on the same stretches of rails. It's not as if they would suffer from a lack of cred; with an introduction to their methods and then a table showing the results, I think it would be both definitive and welcome.
But, it probably wouldn't preclude that month's thread.
-Crandell
Wouldn't a regular feature of "Myth Busting" in Model Railroader Magazine be great? The editors could do experiments with all kinds of gimmick to see what really works.
.
I would be interested in the long term effects of Automatic Transmission Fluid on railroad ties and ballast cement. I'll bet it is not good.
What a fantastic idea.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Thanks for contributing, Kevin. Some/most/all modern auto transmissions have sending units encased, or comprising, plastics of some kind. The kind of ATF I use, the quoted Dexron Mercon III, is plastics AND paints-safe. As for it's effects on ballast, I didn't observe any running down onto the webs of my rails, and thence onto the ties and ballast, but it may have happened. I suspect it would stain the ballast, but it shouldn't otherwise have a deleterious effect.
I've sean more then a few, many more, ways to clean track. How would you decide witch ones to test?
BTW I also use ATF, works way, way better then the 10$ bottle of stuff that said Track Cleaner on it.
CMX cleaning tank car, run one hour per day at train shows seems to work pretty well for my club. For wheel cleaning I have used a #11 blade in a x-acto knife to scrape grime paint from metal wheel treads. The woodland scenics wheel cleaning gimmick thing works okay for rolling stock, not so much for locomotives.
I agree it would be very nice if a carefully designed, scientific test were conducted by MR or a contributor. But that's a huge challenge. There are so many variables, including environment, cleaning methods themselves, approaches with a combination of cleaning methods, loco and rolling stock wheel cleaning methods, rolling stock wheel types, etc. Plus the issues of things like post cleaning lubricants, corrosion inhibitors, conductivity aids, etc.
So I suspect that any such article would be too likely easy to critique, not just because of biases (for example, polishing is the key) that we have from our own experiences, but also because of very likely many sound reasons to question the methodology.
These thoughts drove me to consider how many times this has been attempted. I googled this search, and see also for example the related MRH July 2014 article. (I hope I'm not violating a forum policy but I'm not previously familiar with MRH.) You can download the issue and read the article. I read it and have problems, basis my exerience and bias, with several points therein.
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome-psyapi2&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8&q=model%20railroad%20track%20cleaning%20methods%20tests&oq=model%20railroad%20track%20cleaning%20methods%20tests&aqs=chrome..69i57.24561j0j7
http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/magazine/mrh-2014-07-jul
My main point is that the prior attempts to compare may be helpful in what does not work so well but perhaps less so the "best" way to handle. And that there are doubtless several such prior attempts with attendant conclusions. I do wonder what the best executed existing study is.
So, don't get me wrong, it's a great suggestion. But it seems like a daunting task, which would need to address the many conventional conclusions and determine not just what is a scientific conclusion but also to credibly rank lower older theories that are less than best overstated. I'll be delighted if it occurs with a first class approach. But I'm not much interested in a general, not authoritative, article.
I've got my system (track prep, routine and non-routine track cleaning, and loco/rolling stock cleanint) that works satisfactorily for my DCC setup in my envioronment. It does not do as well as some claim on their system but I'm satisfied. I won't go into my specifics (though I'm grateful to the key suggestions from past forum threads) lest I contribute to this thread turning into another monthly suggestion on specific "best approach".
EDIT: An additional thought. Crandall's idea reminded me of what I considered a good, certainly helpful article on track roadbed that I found when I considered my track roadbed. The article was in one of the Kalmback track related booklets that I acquired around 2011. The author tried various materials and combinations of materials and assessed the results in a least a couple of variables. It was well done if not the ultimate. I guess I conclude that a track cleanliness thesis would more likely warrant a book article than a typical MR monthly magazine article. I would presume that the latter would be more of an overview than the in depth analysis we would enjoy seeing.
Just my thoughts.
Paul
Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent
I think there are too many different situations to be considered.
First, track is available in nickel silver, brass, and steel. Do the different metals need different solutions? These are all alloys, but is the same alloy mix used by all the manufacturers for each of these? Does it matter?
Second, what are the environmental conditions. Is humidity and/or temperature controlled. If so. at what level? If not, what are the extremes? Does it matter. What about things like dust levels, smoke chemicals, air freshners, etc.
Third, does scale make a difference?
Then there is the matter of what is clean? Bare metal? Coated with conductive film? Scratches acceptable? Mirror finish desired? etc.
Finally, there are many different methods and chemicals available, can they all be identified? who is going to test them all?
The environmental variances are a big factor in why there's no single best answer to a project like this. You'd simply find the best answer in one location, unless part of the research involved multiple locations that were fairly representative of the differing environmental circumstances.
Just my , but I've seen enough results that you should use any oil-type compound very sparingly and keep in mind unless the track was clean to begin with such applications tend to mobilize the gunk -- requiring you to clean the track anyway.
I use CRC 2-26 myself, very sparingly, and have good results here in the Midwest, albeit in a climate-controlled environment. I learned about it through a group of modelers from all over the world, who report generally good results with it. So it seems to work in a variety of environments and may be worth a try if you haven't yet, just be sure and apply it to generally clean track.
Also, keep in mind that cleaning track and treating it to better ensure conductivity while limiting dirt build-up tend to be two separate issues, when people are often looking for a single product that does both. My experience is that using an alcohol-based cleaner works well on track. I use acetone to get built-up grunge off wheels. And I then use CRC 2-26 to treat the track and limit dirt from building up.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
I have found running your trains regularly helps keep the track clean. About every 5 or 6 months I clean the track with 90% isopropyl with a soft cotton cloth is all I need.
Once I switched from brass to nickel-silver back in the 1970's, I never used any sort of liquid track cleaner to clean track. I dry wiped it right after I laid it, then relied on a home-made Allen track cleaner reefer to keep the dust off. Trains always ran just fine. Once I start building my last layout, I'll do the same thing again.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
Track cleaning has became a unnecessary obsession.Why all the hand wringing and worries?
A simple track cleaning car like John Allen made will do the job. Have a engine or two shove the car around the layout as needed. This method worked quite well on brass track and works better on nickel silver track.
MR would do well to run a article or video on making a John Allen track cleaning car.
BTW..I haven't clean my track since last November and I still have uninterrupted slow speed switching.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
I thought we couldn't be trusted to do such a test, because according to half of the threads you refer to, Model Railroader is in the pocket of Big Track-Cleaning Car. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go spend this quarter's payoff to buy a Snickers bar.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Well, this is Model Railroadeer, and not Consumer Reports. Ask Consumer Reports to do a study on track cleaning methods.
But really, the bottom line here is a few of us should get together, set standards for the tests, run the tests with the various products that we use and the send the results to MR for publication.
It is nice to aks Steve & Co to do all the work, but they are publishers not scientists. It is our hobby, and it is our work to make things happen.
Now for those who are members of NMRA (and the LION is not--I suspect that they will allow felids to join, but not felids with no money to pay the membership) could ask about and see what the NMRA recommends, and perhaps the NMRA will sponsor such tests, although some one of us will still have to do the work.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Do your own testing using several different methods on different sections of your layouts then report back.
Jim
I have the same thoughts as Larry, whats all the fuss? When I think there is a problem, I run two cars, one with alcohol, and one with a pad. A couple of times around, and it's done. I use NS track for main and siding, and switching and industrial area is old brass, because that's what I had when I built, and I occassionaly wipe the brass down with alcohol, as needed. No problems with slow switching.
Another point I agree on is location. Everybody has a different situation, and a different location, from spare rooms, basements, attics, garages, seperate buildings, some have a controlled climate, some don't. I think every model railroader knows when the track needs cleaning. And with so many methods, each to his own.
My layout is in a basement area, no direct heat vents on my side, but it works. My layout also sits all summer, most of fall and spring. Winter is my operating time, and from season to season, year to year, when I go down there, turn it on, it runs just as good as it did when I left it. The first trip around cleans out the cob webs that develop in my long hidden track area, it is funny to see the front of an SD45 or a C44-9W draped in cob webs.
Mike.
My You Tube
Running cars with cleaning pads is problematic on the route of the LION. They will surely foul with the third rail.
OUCH
Steven Otte I thought we couldn't be trusted to do such a test, because according to half of the threads you refer to, Model Railroader is in the pocket of Big Track-Cleaning Car. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go spend this quarter's payoff to buy a Snickers bar.
Steve, If I may? A lot of this hand wringing and obsession with track cleaning has been caused by a lot of MR's columns like "Working on the railroad" of years pass plus several articles over the years concerning keeping track clean..
I found these articles funny as all get out because even with brass track and brass wheels on locomotives nobody was overly concern about cleaning track and should we need to clean track a Walthers bright boy would work on the areas we could reach or a John Allen style track cleaning car would suffice for the areas we could not reach.
Now with Nickel Silver wheels and track theres this hand wringing and obsession with keeping track clean.
Track cleaning is one of those things that works till it dosn't. I have a small section inside a tunnel that keeps giving me problems no mater how many times I clean it (I even built an access hole in the wall just for this reason). It should not be electrical as it works fine once cleaned. It was installed like everything else and I have bright boyed it, CMXed it, Centerlined it and John allened it but it keeps coming back.
Whatever we do, please let's not say anything about how expensive it is to clean track or Steve will move the thread to someplace I can't find ...
I do agree that frequent operation of a layout sure seems to help.
But in response to Brakie's ironic point above, it is also true that we started to notice dirty track (and wheels) on a friend's layout primarily after he got his first locomotive with sound. The sound had nothing to do with the dirt per se. Rather, we had all become almost literally unconscious of how much stalling of trains there had been and how many little shoves we were giving the equipment until he got that sound equipped engine. The sudden cessation of sound made every head in the room turn towards the "offending" locomotive. (Similarly the layout owner had become too casual about some of his wiring and track laying issues until he got that locomotive.)
I would also say that these days we are trying to operate our trains, and in particular yard switchers, far slower than we used back in the day of brass rail and open frame motors. Sound and DCC CVs play a role in these slower speeds, and some layout owners who are really into prototype operating get testy if they don't see scale speeds being used. And slow speeds show dirty track way more quickly.
Or, stated another way, it was very rare for an Athearn Hustler to get stalled by dirty track because it was rare for them to run at less than 140 scale mph.
And it might even be that our smaller size rail is playing a role - maybe the larger surface area and greater electrical contact of Code 100 combined with wider wheel treads made it seem like dirty track was less of an issue back then. But frankly, there were plenty of articles on dirty track and wheels back in the 1950s and 60s too.
If it seems that people are obsessing more about dirty track and wheels now than they used to, I think it is because we put up with more marginal operation years ago and hardly noticed it or felt we needed to address it. We used to touch our trains more back then -- and we weren't knocking off $20 worth of fine details when we did it either. But that gets us dangerously close to a discussion about expenses ....
Dave Nelson
AHHHHHHH!!!
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
dknelsonI would also say that these days we are trying to operate our trains, and in particular yard switchers, far slower than we used back in the day of brass rail and open frame motors. Sound and DCC CVs play a role in these slower speeds, and some layout owners who are really into prototype operating get testy if they don't see scale speeds being used. And slow speeds show dirty track way more quickly.
Dave,If I may? Slow speed switching isn't anything new it just became more popular. Many of us young bucks back in the day enjoyed slow speed switching and we used brass track and some engines had brass wheels. We used MRC Golden Power packs usually set on pulse power.
The size of the rail has doing to do with how dirty the track gets no more then slow speed switching shows dirty track..I know better since slow speed switching is mandatory on a 12' ISL and I haven't clean my track since last November and my three sound equipped locomotives hasn't gave me any issues so far-maybe I should knock on wood?
I guess I been lucky because I seldom had to touch a engine to get it moving even back in the day when I was using brass track.IMHO its all in track laying-sloppy track work with improper rail joints causes issues.
I do recall during a home layout tour seeing a guy hip bump his 4x8' layout to get a stalled train moving. It was hard holding my laughter..Not because of the stalled train but,because of the miniature earthquake from the hip bump.
I still think there's far to much hand wringing over cleaning track.
BRAKIEI still think there's far to much hand wringing over cleaning track.
You have not seen hand wringing until you spend 3 days at a train show trying to keep a 42 x 72 U shaped layout running. Track has to be cleaned twice a day or you loose control of trains (intermittant loss of communication with command station, or loss of electrical power to the train entirely).
BMMECNYC BRAKIE I still think there's far to much hand wringing over cleaning track. You have not seen hand wringing until you spend 3 days at a train show trying to keep a 42 x 72 U shaped layout running. Track has to be cleaned twice a day or you loose control of trains (intermittant loss of communication with command station, or loss of electrical power to the train entirely).
BRAKIE I still think there's far to much hand wringing over cleaning track.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrain BMMECNYC BRAKIE I still think there's far to much hand wringing over cleaning track. You have not seen hand wringing until you spend 3 days at a train show trying to keep a 42 x 72 U shaped layout running. Track has to be cleaned twice a day or you loose control of trains (intermittant loss of communication with command station, or loss of electrical power to the train entirely). What do they use at the train show to clean track twice a day? Rich
What do they use at the train show to clean track twice a day?
We use CMX cars, when we remember to bring them......
It also depends on the contaminant on the track, I occasionally give my track work a good going over with Peco's track cleaning block before the show. It usually lasts about a half a day before problems start. Could also be due to people going out and buying locomotives and putting them on the track.
Steve, was your quoted reply above intended for me? If so, I deny it categorically. I have always been rather loyal and considerate of the tone and stances of your publication. I have never owned or made a rail cleaning product other than to use 600 grit paper and alcohol, and would not be able to argue ethically or persuasively that a commercial product was better than all others, or that you were in cahoots with one of them.
Steven Otte because according to half of the threads you refer to, Model Railroader is in the pocket of Big Track-Cleaning Car.
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
selectorI have conducted one trial. It was five years ago, about a month prior to tearing down the layout on which almost all of my photos had been taken. I had nothing to lose, and had just read a thread on this topic where Gleaming and Wahl's Clipper Oil were touted as reliable and effective methods. I had long since taken to using Dexron Mercon III auto-tranmission fluid as my exterior lube of choice on my steamers without ill effects of any kind. I figured...what the heck? So, I coated my entire main line, including its 3.6% grades, liberally with ATF. I let a BLI steamer run through it and spread it everywhere. Then I hooked up my typical trailing 'tonnage' and watched. It was as if I had done nothing. A couple of weeks later, there was no discernible difference in performance.
Crandell, good to see you post! When you said you saw no difference, did you mean pulling power or the rails staying clean?
Are still working on a new layout and post them in the layout section?
Sorry to hear your PCM Y6b decoder let the smoke out.
Your Friend Ken
I hate Rust
Wild guessing here but,maybe you need tougher standards? I been hearing that DCC/plastic wheels doesn't play well together but,I have no proof one way or the other.
While its good PR to let train show attendees test the engine they are interested in buying on the layout I would suggest building a 3-4' test track for such test.
As others have said, every layout is different. Some are in attics, some in basements, some in bedrooms, some in warehouses...there is no "one-size fits all" track cleaning method. For my club's layout, our biggest problem is dust because it's a 6300 sq. ft. room with blown air HVAC, 8 ceiling fans, two dehumidifiers, and a lot of people in and out every week who stir it up (and people cause dust, too; dander, pollen from outside, etc.). As such, an oil-based track cleaner like clipper oil would be disasterours for us as the dust would stick to the oil, causing a crud build up that's very hard to remove. OTOH, someone in a relatively dust-free environment would be fine with it.
For the best write-up I've seen online about track cleaning, look here and go to pages 5-7: https://tonystrains.com/download/CMX-man-generic.pdf It's a chemist's view of track cleaning. It is also an ad for the CMX Clean Machine, but the info is still valuable.
Brakie,I ran for 8 years on a layout built in 1953 that had all kinds of brass track, brass & sintered wheels. Cleaning track was a constant worry there, too. All new members were given a BriteBoy and told to start working. There was a lot of pushing engines around getting them to go (and using the Kadee wheel cleaner), and how we didn't like to run single engines because at least with two the other might give it a push to get it going. And on my old home layout (again with brass track), banging on the table to get the engine to move was pretty consistent. It had nothing to do with trackwork, and everything to go with dirt.
Hi, Ken! I have noticed you've posted a few times in recent days. It's very reassuring and heart-warming to know you are still kickin' and enjoying your train-time fun.
You have a good question there. I wasn't really performing a rigorous test of any kind, just a simple trial to see if my locos' motive power would change if I liberally covered the rail tops with ATF. I kept an ear for pauses, slippage, audio drop-out, and tagged my typical trailing car loads onto the locomotives to see what would happen. I didn't test locos with a before and after tractive effort test because I have no gauge as our hosts do.
I am about halfway through a build of a new layout. It's very slow going this time because of other demands on my time and because I no longer have the zip that I used to have.
What I propose is that our hosts pick two or three locomotives that are good and reliable performers known to them. They should first test their performance on dirty, untreated, rails, say on a stored layout of theirs that have some grades, or they could built a frame with a 3% grade and several parallel lengths of rail. They could pick the most common or popular methods for 'cleaning' the rails and test them again. Does their performance improve? Or, is it adversely affected?
Cover the apparatus (or leave part of it uncovered to test the effects of leaving rails in the open in their environment) for about a full year. Then, same locomotives, with no further treatment to the rails, test their tractive effort and reliable performance with DCC/sound. Any change to their performance?
Maybe there's a much simpler method. Perhaps, when thinking further, it just gets too complicated and unwieldy. I'm looking for discussion, for expressions of brilliance and creativity that are clearly not going to come from me.... But, it would really help to put much of this perennial topic to bed if we had a definitive article revealing a comparison between fuids (lacquer thinner, ATF, Wahl's, electrical contact cleaners, Mag Wheel cleaner), waxes, sand-paper, cleaning appliances, Magic Erasers, Brite-boys, wooden blocks, Scotch Brites, Gleaming,...
And I agree, most emphatically, with those just above who assert that the environment in which the layout sits is going to be a major factor. Does dust detract from the fluid films over time, or only the dry methods? Does high humidity increase the degradation after any one method is used?
What effect do the fluids have on traction tires? We know that they deteriorate while we look at them...they don't have to be covered in bad fluids. Wouldn't it be something if one or two of the fluids actually extend the lives of traction tires? Lacquer thinner, acetone, etc, if they get onto the tire surfaces, won't do any good. But ATF?