mlehman The finger-wagging over using 24" curves is warranted...
The finger-wagging over using 24" curves is warranted...
Nope. No it isn't. If a newcomer pays the price for those otherwise nice cars, and then learns he's been fibbed to, it's a great opportunity to learn something. But no finger wagging until he/she has failed to seize that opportunity to learn.
If there's any finger wagging to be done, point it at Walthers.
selectorNope. No it isn't. If a newcomer pays the price for those otherwise nice cars, and then learns he's been fibbed to, it's a great opportunity to learn something.
Barring a bitter experience by plunging ahead without doing some due diligence, they could read this thread or the many others and realize a fundamental fact of the hobby. Minimum radius is no guarnatee of actual performance, just what might be possible on a good day with the wind at your back.
The trick is to limit the hands on and fail portion of the festivities so that it doesn't discourage a much needed adjustment to a second version of the trackplan to more realistically suit your desires for prototype traffic.
I'm not going to diss Walthers, They're simply stating things in the way they've traditionally been, which is not as an absolute guarantee of performance. Every layout is different is just the start of the difficulty in defining that value (min R), but one should expect some difficulties that may need to be addressed when pushing at the defined limit. I'm pretty sure all my Walthers cars can handle 24" R side tracks, after some adjusting in many cases, but generally living up to the expectations they set for me.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
richhotrain Trainman440 I dont like long shank couplers as that creates a gap between the diaphragms. Yep, that can be a problem. We need Sheldon to chime in here. He is a big advocate of flexible diaphragms, the brand name of which I do not recall. He claims that these flexible diaphragms look totally prototypical and that the cars don't snag on each other. Hmmm. Rich
Trainman440 I dont like long shank couplers as that creates a gap between the diaphragms.
I dont like long shank couplers as that creates a gap between the diaphragms.
Yep, that can be a problem. We need Sheldon to chime in here. He is a big advocate of flexible diaphragms, the brand name of which I do not recall. He claims that these flexible diaphragms look totally prototypical and that the cars don't snag on each other. Hmmm.
Rich
OK, I avoided this thread just based on the topic, because my knee jerk reaction in like Paul3, only worse.
Dave, I think the world of you, but 85' passengers just don't belong on 24" radius curves..........
I use American Limited diaphragms.
http://www.americanlimitedmodels.com/ho-passenger-car-diaphragms/
Here they are on some ConCor 72' cars:
Not sure I have much to offer here, my 72' passenger cars will not even run on 24" radius curves after I body mount the couplers, close couple them, and install the diaphragms.
When I body mount the couplers, I do use long shank Kadee's, set way back to close couple the cars.
I have only tested them down to about 28" radius, and Atlas #4 (4.5) Custom Line turnouts.
I run them on 36" rdaius with easements and #6 and #8 turnouts.
I do have some 80' heavyweights, Bachmann and Branchline, that are set up the same way as my 72' Athearn and ConCor stuff. They run fine on my 36" radius and larger curves, never really tested them any sharper.
I don't own any 85' streamlined cars, I don't own any Walthers passenger cars except for one 60' RPO, actually made by Rivarossi for them 15 years ago or more.
I run mostly the Athearn and ConCor 72' cars because of appearance on curves, and because for me, the always touching, working diaphragms are very important appearance wise.
We selectively compress all sorts of things, I have no problem with selectively compressed long equipment to go with our selectively compressed curves.
And yes, even 36" radius is pretty "selectively compressed" for a class I mainline.
The Americam Limited diaphragms work just like the diaphragms on the Proto2000 diesels. You have to build them, but it is really not that hard. They make various versions for different brands of equipment.
But on my Athearn and CoCor passenger cars I actually slice off the molded on "door frame/dummy diaphragm" and mount the diaphragm prototypically which allows closer coupling, very close to scale distances.
Any of you familiar with the ConCor cars will be able to look at the photo above and see where I removed the molded on dummy diaphragm.
Here is an Athearn Heavyweight:
If it was me, and I was stuck with 24" radius, I would be running what I run, but with the stock talgo trucks - Athearn and ConCor 72' cars.
Sorry I don't have any photos of my coupler setup or closeups of the diaphragms.
One final thought before Paul3 scolds me again for my "toy like" passengers cars (of course I think big gaps between the cars make them all look toy like), not every car on the prototype was 80' or 85' long.
I won't list them all, but you might be surprised at some of the cars that were not 80' long - like SP Daylights, some early ATSF streamliners, Harriman cars, many coaches and combines on many roads, a number of office cars, just to name a few.
Sorry I'm not more help.
Sheldon
Good info, Sheldon.
Alton Junction
I have considerd using AL diaphragms for my older passenger cars at some point, I might get a few to make my old ones up-to date.
Whatever the modeler chooses to do, he has to solve the snagging issue where the diaphragm on the end of one car catches on the diaphragm on the end of another car.
richhotrain Whatever the modeler chooses to do, he has to solve the snagging issue where the diaphragm on the end of one car catches on the diaphragm on the end of another car. Rich
If the diaphragm faces are touching, and they stay in contact with each other without becoming totally misaligned, then they will not snag.
This is where EASEMENTS are very important, they limit the "offset" of the two car ends going in and out of the curves.
This is also why I use the same diaphragm and coupler setup on all brands of cars, consistant relationships between the cars are important for trouble free operation.
As is adequate size curves.........
The late great Paul Mallery of model railroad fame back in the day (multiple books on trackwork, electrical wiring, etc) suggested that 48" radius should be the minimum in HO for a modeling Class I railroads.......
Interesting that the modular layout standard is 48" radius - wish I had that kind of space......
Actually, with 36" as my minimum mainline, and having a double track/multi track design, most of my curves are more in the 40" range........
I will try to post some more pictures tonight.
Lastspikemike Run without diaphragms.
Run without diaphragms.
So do we lock the passengers in their one car or let them jump across?
ATLANTIC CENTRAL If the diaphragm faces are touching, and they stay in contact with each other without becoming totally misaligned, then they will not snag. This is where EASEMENTS are very important, they limit the "offset" of the two car ends going in and out of the curves. This is also why I use the same diaphragm and coupler setup on all brands of cars, consistant relationships between the cars are important for trouble free operation. As is adequate size curves.........
BurlingtonNorthern2264If I were to run without diaphragms, how would I remove them from the Walthers cars?
Not sure why you would want to remove (imo) perfectly good walthers diaphragms, but if you're talking about the kind thats a one piece shiny black plastic, if you open the car up you'll see the diaphragms are snaped into place from the inside. Use a screwdriver of sorts to gently undo the snaps from the inside of the car to remove.
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling the PRR & NYC in HO
Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/@trainman440
Instagram (where I share projects!): https://www.instagram.com/trainman440
Hi,
I've got 19 of the Walthers cars (10 ATSF, 9 IC), all bought when they first came out. My "soon to be no more" layout has 27 inch curves with one exception, that being 26 inches. So I oiled the axles, and gave each car one long shank KD coupler, with a regular #5 on the other end. As I didn't switch cars around, this proved to work out quite well.
However, even though all the curves have easements, I had trouble with 3 of the cars on the 26 inch curve. It turns out the trucks on one end was catching on the underpinings. So each required a bit of surgery underneath, thankfully out of sight, and they stayed on the tracks for many years afterwards.
While I do like these cars a lot, I would avoid them if my layout had less than 26 inch curves. Instead, I would get the Athearn streamline/standard cars (blue box kits) and use them. Before I got the Walthers, I had 3 trainsets of them on the previous layout. They were all fixed up with KDs, Intermountain wheels, American diaphrams (spell?), decals, and they were flawless in operation. And, IMO, they looked pretty darn good.
For what its worth..........
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
BurlingtonNorthern2264Interesting. If worst comes to worst, that's probably what I will do but if I get smooth operation with the long shank couplers I won't remove them.
mobilman44 diaphrams (spell?)
diaphrams (spell?)
Trainman440I've had good success by trimming/removing the center frame of the trucks. These allow me to run them on my 22" radius.
Hi Trainman440,
Thanks for the close up pictures and the explanation. Obviously your answer solves the problem.
Hi Ed,
I'm going to order some of the Long Shank Extended Drawbars. Thanks for the suggestion.
To those who suggested that larger radii is the only true option, I don't have that luxury. I could get 30" radii but that totally messes up my layout plan, so I have to work with 24 3/4" on one curve. If I can't get my Walthers 'Canadian' to run on that then it will be spending a lot of time at the station! Rapido's 'Canadian' is another option provided that I don't choke on the price. They are pretty rare these days. Maybe Rapido will release them again.
Thanks everyone for your input!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
mlehman22" hidden curves!?! That's indeed tweaking the dragon's nose with anything long.
Yes, but I need to deal with the space that I can get for my layout, and how to fit in everything that I want.
I have run everything through an obstacle course that includes a 22" radius S curve with no tangent, and hope for the best.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Selector,There was no "finger wagging" on my part. Pointing out reality to people isn't wagging a finger at them. Simply put, long cars and short curves do not mix. Anyone who has been in the hobby long enough to buy a long car and lay down track learns that very quickly. To avoid problems, don't buy long cars, build your layout with bigger curves, or perform drastic surgery. I knew a guy that ran his Walthers passenger cars on very tight curves. His solution was to chop down the underframe around the trucks with a Dremel and replace all his couplers with home-made brass drawbars and brass posts screwed into the floor of each car. It worked; his cars ran flawlessly. But the cars were very ugly underneath. It looked like the Texas Chainsaw Massacre under there.
Sheldon, Have you seen these diaphrams from Hi-Tech Details? They're better looking than the American Limited ones, but I don't know if they operate as well when touching (I have used them as non-operating diaphragms on a friend's brass train). They use real rubber "springs" top and bottom with stainless steel striker plates.https://www.hitechdetails.com/Catalog/cfm/catalog-htd.cfmEDIT: New Link: https://www.hitechdetails.com/Hi-Tech-P_Car_Diaphragms.html
Your view is that having touching diaphragms is more important than the length of the car. I am of the opposite view. Your shorter cars look more realistic on curves when viewed from the side of the car. My longer cars look more realistic when viewed from all other angles; my cars have the correct number of seats, bedrooms, etc. and all the porportions are right. But then I'm modeling a specific railroad and not doing a freelance. It's very important for me to model real passenger cars, so I accept small gaps between my diaphragms as my compromise. You have chosen to compromise on car length; such is life. Likewise, if I was also stuck with 24" radius curves and I had to run passenger trains, I would stick with 72' cars. But I would also consider going freight-only, or backdating the layout into the wood car era when passenger cars were much shorter.I don't think I've ever called your passenger cars "toy like". Unrealistic, perhaps, but not toy like. However, if you put silhouettes on those fogged out windows then they would be toy like.
As for shorter prototype cars, sure, not all passenger cars in the USA were longer than 72'. However, I'm not modeling those cars. Here's a link to the NH's passenger car roster from 1956:
http://www.alphabetroute.com/nynhh/equipmentlists/NH%209-1956%20PASS%20CAR%20DESC.pdf
Not counting MU & head-end cars, find the 72' long cars; you won't. The NH was the #3 US railroad in passengers carried and had a large fleet of cars, yet they didn't have any of these shorter loco-hauled, passenger-carrying cars you talk about.
Paul3Have you seen these diaphrams from Hi-Tech Details? They're better looking than the American Limited ones, but I don't know if they operate as well when touching
The great genius idea is to do what Sheldon did: model the two diaphragms together, perhaps with magnets holding the assembly on both sides, and then make the diaphragm very flexible and stretchable (as it needs little structural strength of its own). If it gets over stressed it just pops off and might either have to 'self-recenter' or get a little GHA. Its accommodation might not be truly 'prototypical' in cases where the mating faces of 'two' diaphragms might shift relative to each other. But I'll bet a hat it would look at least as good as any passively-aligning separates that don't accurately model the action of real ones...
Overmod,Thanks for the notice. I edited my post and put in a direct link to the Hi Tech Details diaphragms.One thing that I didn't bring up about touching diaphragms is the difficulty with uncoupling. I have touching diaphragms on my P2K FA-1/FB-1 sets, and they are a bear to uncouple. Even over a magnet, there's so much tension in the diaphragms that the knuckles won't disengage at times.I know for many modelers passenger trains are just unit trains that might as well be welded together, but not on my old railroad. I switched all my passenger trains, and I plan to in the future at my club (once we have heat again...long story). On the NH, passenger cars were re-used, sometimes more than twice in a single day. The coaches from one westbound train would be used on another eastbound train, and then back west again that night. Sometimes a sleeper would be picked up on the way by, or maybe a grill car instead. At New Haven, Conn., the Springfield section would be added or split off. Newsprint cars would be added or set off enroute and so on. And the trains varied in consist every day of the week, sometimes doubling in size from one day to the next.I replicate that with my passenger operations and having tight diaphragms would be an issue if one can't easily uncouple the cars.
Paul3 Overmod,Thanks for the notice. I edited my post and put in a direct link to the Hi Tech Details diaphragms.One thing that I didn't bring up about touching diaphragms is the difficulty with uncoupling.
Overmod,Thanks for the notice. I edited my post and put in a direct link to the Hi Tech Details diaphragms.One thing that I didn't bring up about touching diaphragms is the difficulty with uncoupling.
Yes, I have seen the HiTech diaphragms. While they are better detailed, it looks as if that might limit their flexibility, not sure?
In any case I too invested in what I have, they work well and the look is more than acceptable.
Sometimes the enemy of "good" is "better".
Paul, no I don't think you ever called my passenger cars "toy like", but that is exactly my reaction to 80' cars with big gaps between the cars or the diaphragms, squeeking around 24" curves. Kind of like LIONEL......
I have explained before, I am a big picture modeler. The image of the 12 car passenger train gently winding its way through the country side is more important than the fine details of every car.
I don't just freelance, but my modeling of the B&O, C&O, and WESTERN MARYLAND could be called "casual". Yes, I can tell you everything about my modeling of those roads that is not accurate. If you come see the layout can you tell me what is not accurate?
The hobby is full of compromise, we all make our own choices.
richhotrain Paul3 Overmod,Thanks for the notice. I edited my post and put in a direct link to the Hi Tech Details diaphragms.One thing that I didn't bring up about touching diaphragms is the difficulty with uncoupling. I am less concerned about uncoupling cars with custom diaphragms than I am with the diaphragms causing derailments. I am curious about the effect of custom diaphragms pulling cars off the rails since the passenger cars are physically attached to one another. Is this an issue? Rich
I am less concerned about uncoupling cars with custom diaphragms than I am with the diaphragms causing derailments. I am curious about the effect of custom diaphragms pulling cars off the rails since the passenger cars are physically attached to one another. Is this an issue?
Not sure I understand? My diaphragms touch and are slightly compressed (very slightly), but the faces slide sideways on each other as required. But they never go completely past each other.
Yesterday was busy beyond belief, maybe tonight I can get some stuff out and take some pictures.
Uncoupling is not bad, a little hook will reach in/under and get the Kadee trip pin.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL richhotrain Paul3 Overmod,Thanks for the notice. I edited my post and put in a direct link to the Hi Tech Details diaphragms.One thing that I didn't bring up about touching diaphragms is the difficulty with uncoupling. I am less concerned about uncoupling cars with custom diaphragms than I am with the diaphragms causing derailments. I am curious about the effect of custom diaphragms pulling cars off the rails since the passenger cars are physically attached to one another. Is this an issue? Rich Not sure I understand? My diaphragms touch and are slightly compressed (very slightly), but the faces slide sideways on each other as required. But they never go completely past each other. Yesterday was busy beyond belief, maybe tonight I can get some stuff out and take some pictures. Uncoupling is not bad, a little hook will reach in/under and get the Kadee trip pin. Sheldon
richhotrainonce the diaphragm physically connects two adjoining cars, it seems to me that there is even more pull on each following car, potentially giving rise to derailments if the trucks on the following cars are pulled off the rails.
The earlier 'issue' with uncoupling was that the tension imposed by a pair of diaphragms (or one long 'diaphragm'-equivalent) on a pair of couplers would tend to keep them locked. This would affect that particular coupling only, and would have no cumulative effect in the train (other than to stretch it very slightly). Ditto any effect on drawbars when two cars are in a curve and compressing/stretching/sliding their diaphragms short of binding or physically pushing the car ends sideways hard enough to induce derailment. But the latter would almost certainly be a 'push' to the outer radius, not a 'pull'.
LastspikemikeReduced flexing of one "joint" could cause greater coupler swing at the next coupler join?
No doubt that exceeding 'maximum swing' for any pair of coupled drawbars will be a derailment cause. As the actual "derailing forces" act at a substantial angle to the 'tension' force induced in drawbars and between couplers by diaphragm compression I don't know how much that tension adds to 'derailment propensity' at high but not maximum angles of swing.
richhotrain ATLANTIC CENTRAL richhotrain Paul3 Overmod,Thanks for the notice. I edited my post and put in a direct link to the Hi Tech Details diaphragms.One thing that I didn't bring up about touching diaphragms is the difficulty with uncoupling. I am less concerned about uncoupling cars with custom diaphragms than I am with the diaphragms causing derailments. I am curious about the effect of custom diaphragms pulling cars off the rails since the passenger cars are physically attached to one another. Is this an issue? Rich Not sure I understand? My diaphragms touch and are slightly compressed (very slightly), but the faces slide sideways on each other as required. But they never go completely past each other. Yesterday was busy beyond belief, maybe tonight I can get some stuff out and take some pictures. Uncoupling is not bad, a little hook will reach in/under and get the Kadee trip pin. Sheldon What I meant, Sheldon, is that not only is each car "pulling" all of the cars behind it by means of a coupler, but once the diaphragm physically connects two adjoining cars, it seems to me that there is even more pull on each following car, potentially giving rise to derailments if the trucks on the following cars are pulled off the rails. Dunno, maybe that is not an issue. But to me, it is as if you have one long snaking passenger train, if you know what I mean. Rich
What I meant, Sheldon, is that not only is each car "pulling" all of the cars behind it by means of a coupler, but once the diaphragm physically connects two adjoining cars, it seems to me that there is even more pull on each following car, potentially giving rise to derailments if the trucks on the following cars are pulled off the rails. Dunno, maybe that is not an issue. But to me, it is as if you have one long snaking passenger train, if you know what I mean.
OK, with the American Limited diaphragms the springyness of the diaphragm itself is amazingly light, unlike old Walthers paper diaphragms, or many of the plastic diaphragms I have observed on newer Walthers or similar passenger cars.
The diaphragms present no noticable resistance when coupling, they easily compress as needed to allow the couplers to uncouple, or to allow the couplers to work correctly when backing up.
The trick is getting the coupler position perfect, so that the diaphragm has the slightest compression with the train in tension, but still leaving most of the compressive travel of the diaphragm available for going around curves.
This is why trying to mix brands or types does not work.
The diaphragm is functionally two pieces. One piece is tabed into the other in the middle of the top and bottom. So the outer piece pivots allowing one side to move away from the car as the other side moves toward the car.
Additionally, the outer piece compresses straight in. The outer piece is sprung top and bottom by torsion bars, similar to the springs and rods on real diaphragms.
Using the long shank coupler set back on the car, minimizes the shrinking of the distance between the cars in curves, this gives the diaphragms more room to work.
Hope that makes sense, pictures may be the only way to really explain. Do you have any Proto2000 hood units, E8, PA, FA? Look closely at how those diaphragms work.
hon30critterRapido's 'Canadian' is another option provided that I don't choke on the price. They are pretty rare these days. Maybe Rapido will release them again.
Hi, Dave.
I wouldn't expect any better running from the Rapido cars as they are even less "flexible" on curves since there is no pivoting draft gear on them:
CPR_Park1 by Edmund, on Flickr
At least with the Walthers design you can get some relief with the side-to-side motion of the draft gear pivot. Not to mention all the additional piping and closer tolerances on the Rapido cars.
Jason is a self-confessed underframe detail junkie
Good Luck, Ed
Overmod richhotrain once the diaphragm physically connects two adjoining cars, it seems to me that there is even more pull on each following car, potentially giving rise to derailments if the trucks on the following cars are pulled off the rails. Can you be a bit more specific on this concern?
richhotrain once the diaphragm physically connects two adjoining cars, it seems to me that there is even more pull on each following car, potentially giving rise to derailments if the trucks on the following cars are pulled off the rails.
Can you be a bit more specific on this concern?
I can tell you what I experinced when experimenting with what diaphragms would work on full 85 foot Rivaorossi heavyweight passenger cars on Kato Unitrack 22 inch radius curves.
This is all based on actual experimentation, not theories, something I read, or something I just made up.
Simply adding touching diaphragms to passenger cars, even though they never reached a point of interference, would make derailments more likely, and increase the drag on the locomotive. An SW-7 would pull four HW cars with no problem, but after diaphragms were added it would only pull 3 through the curve. When the curves were tweaked with slight openings in the joints the cars would derail sometimes with touching diaphragms, but non-equipped cars would be OK.
I tried rubber bands pulling the cars together to contact American Limited diaphragms hoping these would stretch on the tight curves, but nothing I tried worked satisfactorily. I read a few articles about English Railways where modelers used rubber bands to keep buffers in contact, but nothing I tried would work. I think the added length of the HW cars was a big part of the problem.
I found a source of "stretchy" rubber diaphragms that looked promising. However, they were loose, sagged, and did not look very good.
The best solution was to just use one stretchy rubber diaphragm between the cars instead of one on each car. I magentized the diaphragm to the trailing car. I run wires for the lighting boards between the cars, and this is working pretty well.
The stretched out diaphragms put a little bit of "negative pressure" on the couplers, but this did not seem adverse. When I tried drawbars instead of couplers, it worked even better.
The stretchy diaphragms do not look as good as American Limited diaphragms, but sacrifices must be made so equipment runs reliably.
Since none of these passenger cars are painted yet, and I did all this before I was on this forum, I do not have any pictures.