New Beta Engines available from Menards

@Jim R. posted:

Packaging shortcomings also caused similar damage on the first version a couple of years ago. Worth mentioning when you provide feedback to Menards.

So I think it might be wise to ask Menards to provide adequate instructions in future releases.

I really hope those that are purchasing these "beta" engines are providing feedback to Menards.  It would be a shame if folks just buy them for the novelty without following through.

Do they list a particular place to send the feedback like an email address?  How do they get the critiques and suggestions back to home base?

Beta 4.5 full page link here: https://www.menards.com/Beta_4.5_SantaFe

@Mark Boyce posted:

I received mine today.  Once I had removed the engine from the package, I found one of the horns had broken off.  I can glue it back on.  I may have done it myself, but I wasn’t aware of it.  There is a tiny paint scrape on the top of the engine and an odd mark on the remote front decal under the right hand crew member.  Those aren’t a big deal since it is far less than folks reported on the early betas.

Since I have Versions 1 , 2.0, (had 3.0 which burned out right away and was replaced with version 3.5), and 3.5, and now 4.5,  I can compare them all and post here.

Preliminary observations based upon all posted previous reviews and complaints I am aware of:

1.  Nylon gears - not changed

2.  Weird sounding horn - not changed since Version 2 (Warbling rapid repeat sound) (See #4)

3.  Bell much louder than both announcements and horn - not changed

4.  Remote Control - Cosmetic change in appearance (nice) otherwise not changed since Version 1.  Version 1 only allowed a single honk for the horn and after that remote control was electronically modified to produce a singe honk rapidly repeated to sort of sound like a continuous horn (but not really).  That has remained ever since.  NOTE:  If you use any remote newer than Version 1 you will get that (semi) continuous sound.  Or if you own Version 1 and Menards would sell a newer remote you will get continuous sound.  The change needs to be made on the engine circuit board, not the remote.

NOTE TO MENARDS:  Since you have now produced no less than FOUR remotes that will allow those who bought Version 1 to have a continuous horn instead of a single sick goose honk make any one of them them available for the 200 people who bought Version 1.   Call them "Betas" if you must

5.  CORRECTION: Momentum was NOT changed with this version making engine coast further than before when you slow it down.   I was wrong.

-----I made a mark on the track  for a power cutoff point.

-----I applied 10V to the track and slowed the Beta 4.5 engine down until just before the headlight goes out.  Then I let it coast at that speed until it reached the mark.  When it reached the mark I cut the throttle to zero on the remote and let it coast until it stopped.  I did it three times and it stopped in the same place.  I made a second mark at the stopping point.

----- The I put versions 2.0 and 3.5 on the track and did the same test.  They stopped in the same place.  Three tests each of versions 2.0, 3.5, and 4.5 engines with Versions 2.0, 3.5, and 4.5 remotes.  All stopped in approximately the same place.

So, Version 1 had abrupt starts and stops (improved by wiring motors in series) and also lowering the track voltage.  Versions 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.5 were an improvement from Version 1, but Menards never made any further changes after version 2.0 despite three new Betas.  There STILL needs to be better engine control and they don't seem to be addressing it.

6.  Spare Traction tires:  New with this version

7.  Load pulling ability.  Seems identical with all versions.  Not bad.

8.  Announcements have a slightly tinnier sound than all previous versions.  Not as clear, but not terrible.

9.  The case of the fluctuating horn height.  Versions 1, 2.0, and 3.5 have raised horns.  Versions 3.0 and 4.5 have horns flush with the roof surface.  Probably same horns but they sunk them in further at the factory.

10.  You can only run one at a time.  Since every remote runs every version only one engine responds to any given remote and if you turn two remotes on still only one engine will respond.

------------------------------------------------

I still plan on opening up this version and Version 3.5 to do an internal comparison and posting back.

--------------------------------------------------

UPDATE:  I opened a 3.5 and the new 4.5 and did a side by side comparison.  They are identical in every way I can see including the PCBs.  If someone wants me to post photos I'll take some.

Conclusion:  Menards has released identical betas since version 2.0

Time to release the production model Menards if you aren't going to make any changes or tell us any new information.

John

Received a partial delivery yesterday evening - the 4.5 beta engine and caboose. Got an update on the missing hopper cars (2) which are to be delivered today but not UPS but USPS. I had to be careful unpacking to make sure I did no damage and was successful. The second package of hopper cars (2) arrived this morning

In appearance the engine seems closer to a couple of the slightly undersized RMT stuff I brought in the past. Everything works in terms of the remote controller - bell, whistle, voice. I agree with others that I would have preferred the engine wheel casings be dulled metal and not bright chrome which makes it appear more  toy like.  The beta is underpowered, just like the 2 RMT engine units I bought in the past but it pulled 5 large Santa Fe passenger cars around my 12' by 9' layout at an adequate speed. I also noticed, just like the RMT engines, when they went forward, the forward light in the engine went on, but in reverse, the rear light went on. I wonder where Menard's got the tooling from?

I now have 3 versions of Santa Fe engines - an old Lionel A/B  that has to be 20 plus years old, an 8 year old Williams ABA which is quite impressive and powerful, and the Menard's which is more RMT like. I will take a picture of the 3 lined up when I can and upload.

Is the Menard's purchase worth the money? I guess so when you consider the price that Lionel charges and the fact that the remote control works perfectly fine is a plus

@John F posted:

Is the Menard's purchase worth the money? I guess so when you consider the price that Lionel charges and the fact that the remote control works perfectly fine is a plus

Well, you're not out a lot of money if it croaks.  OTOH, if the remote croaks, you're SOL, you can't run it any other way.

Not complaining. Saw a pic of the drive trucks. Plastic or nylon gears. Not good, Lionel did that and many have stripped. Menards add a few bucks to the cost for metal gears.

What do you expect for $150.00, plus it's a beta unit.

Everyone wants low cost, but higher end features

Interesting to note the current level of interest in the details of the Menard's engines. There are close to twenty currently available loco operating systems. Hard to keep up with it.

@Craftech John, great comparisons between the different versions!  Thanks for sharing you observations.

After further testing I have determined that there is not a reduction in momentum for this version.  See revised notes above:

John

@NYC 428 posted:

What do you expect for $150.00, plus it's a beta unit.

Everyone wants low cost, but higher end features

Higher end??

I can't speak for everyone else, but I am happy to test these.  I obviously have no complaints about buying them to test, since I have purchased four and tested five.

So what do I expect?

I expect there to be Beta testers feedback addressed in newer "Betas" and I can tell you after testing five to date that Menards only did that after Version 1.  I also expect them to indicate what they improved with each release to get more meaningful feedback especially from people like myself who keep buying Betas to test only to find out that they haven't made any significant changes or haven't made any at all.  After testing this may "Betas" I suspect the reason they don't indicate the changes with each Beta is because there aren't any worth mentioning.  Beta 4.5 has a nicer decal on the remote.  Change noted.  Now I don't have to label the back of each one.

For the life of me I don't understand why they just don't release a production version if they aren't going to make any changes in their so-called "Betas".

But I will wait until I look at the circuit boards for this Version and Version 3.5.  Maybe they will be different.  One can only hope.

John

What's that old saying about........doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result ....

I admire your willingness to test the beta versions, however, aren't beta tests normally conducted with a small group of people given the product at no charge, along with a list of modifications from the previous version.  With the following release reflecting improvements made from feedback?

Granted a $150.00 isn't a  lot of money but times five and you have yourself a nice Lionel or MTH top of the line locomotive.

@NYC 428 posted:

What's that old saying about........doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result ....

I admire your willingness to test the beta versions, however, aren't beta tests normally conducted with a small group of people given the product at no charge, along with a list of modifications from the previous version.  With the following release reflecting improvements made from feedback?

Granted a $150.00 isn't a  lot of money but times five and you have yourself a nice Lionel or MTH top of the line locomotive.

That's the point, I didn't expect the same result.  I expected a new release to be a new release to be tested and I didn't mind spending the money because I thought they were serious about producing a low cost engine and listening to feedback.   There is definitely a market for it and I wanted to be a part of the endeavor.

But, like I said, if you aren't going to make any changes based upon the feedback release the production engine already.  Makes no sense to me what they are doing.  From all this testing I have done I am convinced they could have released a final version after version 2.0

Unless I totally miss the point about what Beta means?  Maybe someone can clarify if I am misunderstanding what Beta testing is.

Every time a new Beta is released the posts come mostly from people who are reacting to that single release which is fine, but the reactions each time are the same.  Why?  Because the releases are the same.  So I finally thought I would comment on the entire project since I have tested all but the Blue ones.

John

I sent my thoughts into Ray and he sent me a nice reply. So at least they are reading the comments.  Mine is running fine pulling five post war 2500 series Lionel passenger cars.

@Craftech John, thank you for the offer for the horn.  I was able to glue mine back on, so it is good.

@Craftech posted:

That's the point, I didn't expect the same result.  I expected a new release to be a new release to be tested and I didn't mind spending the money because I thought they were serious about producing a low cost engine and listening to feedback.   There is definitely a market for it and I wanted to be a part of the endeavor.

But, like I said, if you aren't going to make any changes based upon the feedback release the production engine already.  Makes no sense to me what they are doing.  From all this testing I have done I am convinced they could have released a final version after version 2.0

Unless I totally miss the point about what Beta means?  Maybe someone can clarify if I am misunderstanding what Beta testing is.

Every time a new Beta is released the posts come mostly from people who are reacting to that single release which is fine, but the reactions each time are the same.  Why?  Because the releases are the same.  So I finally thought I would comment on the entire project since I have tested all but the Blue ones.

John

I tend to think the term Beta is being used to describe "dipping their toes in the water" and that they do not want to get burned with a bunch of expensive locos they cannot sell. It seems to have been successful from the speed which all the releases "sell out". Does anyone know what the numbers are for these "Beta" releases? Hundreds or thousands?

@iguanaman3 posted:

I tend to think the term Beta is being used to describe "dipping their toes in the water" and that they do not want to get burned with a bunch of expensive locos they cannot sell. It seems to have been successful from the speed which all the releases "sell out". Does anyone know what the numbers are for these "Beta" releases? Hundreds or thousands?

Estimates are around 200 sold per batch.

FYI, a Blue Bonnet Beta 4.5 version went on sale around 1:00PM today (about an hour ago) and as of now about 141 have already sold.

https://ogrforum.com/...blu-bonnet#lastReply

I ran mine some more yesterday.  It ran fine uphill and downhill.  No real troubles.  The couplers are a little stiff.  I had to hold the first car and run the engine a little faster than I normally would to get it to couple, but no big deal.  I opened it up and took a few photographs just for fun.

I did have a problem when I tried to put the shell back on.  It wouldn't fit!  Here is what it looked like on both sides.  The shell didn't want to slide over the sides of the frame and fuel tanks.  Instead, the shell slid down inside the side lip of the shell.

I see that the shell sides are not straight, but bowed concave.  I measured 2-5/16" from side to side at the rear end of the shell, but only 2-1/16" in the middle.  You can see the bow when compared to the straight ruler.

The shell is really stiff, I can bend the middle out, but can't do it by hand when trying to slip it into position over the frame.  I left it sitting there overnight, while I try to think of a tool to help, probably a knife maybe one on both sides.  Watch out or I'll have it slipping onto the floor.   

I'm going to run it some more before I send in my review.

A thin piece of wood on each side, like a popsicle stick, should help you slide the shell back on relatively easily.

It's the same technique used to remove and re-install some passenger car bodies that aren't screwed in, but a press fit.

@Mark Boyce posted:

I ran mine some more yesterday.  It ran fine uphill and downhill.  No real troubles.  The couplers are a little stiff.  I had to hold the first car and run the engine a little faster than I normally would to get it to couple, but no big deal.  I opened it up and took a few photographs just for fun.

I did have a problem when I tried to put the shell back on.  It wouldn't fit!  Here is what it looked like on both sides.  The shell didn't want to slide over the sides of the frame and fuel tanks.  Instead, the shell slid down inside the side lip of the shell.

I see that the shell sides are not straight, but bowed concave.  I measured 2-5/16" from side to side at the rear end of the shell, but only 2-1/16" in the middle.  You can see the bow when compared to the straight ruler.

The shell is really stiff, I can bend the middle out, but can't do it by hand when trying to slip it into position over the frame.  I left it sitting there overnight, while I try to think of a tool to help, probably a knife maybe one on both sides.  Watch out or I'll have it slipping onto the floor.   

I'm going to run it some more before I send in my review.

Mark I just had mine apart and the shell did not have that issue???

At about 40 minutes of run time I kept hearing a strange noise coming from the engine. I turned off the sounds and sure as heck I was hearing something on and off as it went around the track. I decided to remove the shell and put it on the bench. When I bench tested it started to squeal from the front drive truck as soon as I ran it up some. I removed the motor from the truck and applied some Mobil 1 full synthetic grease to the pinion and matching gear. Put it back together and it was better but started again. I then removed the motor once more and greased the rest of the gears that I could access from the top of the truck. I also oiled all axle points and the motor top and base with Mobil 1 Full synthetic oil. I had already greased the side gears on both front and rear trucks as soon as I got the unit. I then removed the rear motor and did the same. This corrected the squeal. I posted this in another thread.

@SteveH posted:

Estimates are around 200 sold per batch.

FYI, a Blue Bonnet Beta 4.5 version went on sale around 1:00PM today (about an hour ago) and as of now about 141 have already sold.

https://ogrforum.com/...blu-bonnet#lastReply

Looking at what they said they sold and what is still to be had looks like 523 of these. Must be running out the shells?

@Mark Boyce You know a few light taps with a brass hammer will take care of the problem with the shell not fitting.  You can glue the pieces back together in the proper shape afterwards. 

I've never pulled the trigger on the Menards beta engines. Although their new blue SF looks interesting. 

Layout and all your work is looking good.

@Mark Boyce posted

I did have a problem when I tried to put the shell back on.  It wouldn't fit!  Here is what it looked like on both sides.  The shell didn't want to slide over the sides of the frame and fuel tanks.  Instead, the shell slid down inside the side lip of the shell.

I see that the shell sides are not straight, but bowed concave.  I measured 2-5/16" from side to side at the rear end of the shell, but only 2-1/16" in the middle.  You can see the bow when compared to the straight ruler.

The shell is really stiff, I can bend the middle out, but can't do it by hand when trying to slip it into position over the frame.  I left it sitting there overnight, while I try to think of a tool to help, probably a knife maybe one on both sides.  Watch out or I'll have it slipping onto the floor.   

I'm going to run it some more before I send in my review.

Mark,

Put a strip of thin plastic film or thin cardboard on each side 90 degrees to the base and push down the shell.   Then pull out the strips

John

Thank you for the ideas, Richie, Jeff, John!  Jeff, I actually thought about the end results of your idea, but mine would shatter .  😉

I did get it back on.  Before looking for something to keep it pried open, I thought I would try putting the shell over the back of the frame and let the frame slide it open.  It got caught on the curve that goes over the fuel tank.  I got it over that with only pinching one finger slightly.  Next time, if there is a next time, I’ll use one of your suggestions.

Jeff, I wasn’t in the buying mode, famous last words.  I wish I had known there were going to be blue ones, I would rather have had that.

Mark, Why don't you send it back for being defective. Exchange for a blue shell. Dave

@Mark Boyce posted:

I see that the shell sides are not straight, but bowed concave.  I measured 2-5/16" from side to side at the rear end of the shell, but only 2-1/16" in the middle.  You can see the bow when compared to the straight ruler.

Prop it open with some wood cut to size, then use a hair dryer and heat up both sides.  Leave the wood in place until it totally cools and see if most of the warp is gone.

@Dave Nichols posted:

Mark, Why don't you send it back for being defective. Exchange for a blue shell. Dave

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Prop it open with some wood cut to size, then use a hair dryer and heat up both sides.  Leave the wood in place until it totally cools and see if most of the warp is gone.

I like Dave’s idea better, but John’s is the most practical.  I don’t know if I can claim defective unless I run the wheels off and it falls apart!  😄😄

From the photos it's obvious that these don't have flywheels.  What I would like to know is, are the gears back-drivable?  After a little break-in time, try turning the driving wheels with your thumb.  Don't force it!  See if you can feel the motor turning.

Alternately, if someone takes a motor out, I might be able to tell by looking at the worm wheel in the truck block, and especially the worm gear on the motor shaft.  Back-drivable gears tend to have a steep thread to the worm.  A "tight" thread  with successive threads close together tends to be self-locking.

Another very simple test would be to get it running at medium speed, and then cut power to the track.  How far does it coast?  There are a couple of big caps in there, they might have a role in remote control operation.  But total loss of track power is the toughest test.

A battery powered Menard's engine would be a most interesting project.

Well mine started squeaking and screeching!    I lubed the axels and gears with Labelle 2 as suggested.  I had run it 3 times I believe for roughly 10 minutes each time, and it was fine.  Then I noticed some screeching, so I turned the sound off.  That was last evening.  I have run it about a half hour today pulling cars and by itself.  It pulls fine up and down my grade, but oh the noise!!!  It is starting to remind me of scaping fingernails on the black board back in school days!    I have not sent in a review yet since I wanted to give it a good break-in.  It is doing the same thing I have watched on several online videos, so a few others are doing the same thing.  Not good!  So sad.

@Mark Boyce posted:

It is doing the same thing I have watched on several online videos, so a few others are doing the same thing.  Not good!  So sad.

That's why they're still beta engines.   I can't shake the feeling that Menards isn't really addressing the problems of the previous beta versions, but just cranking out new batches of "beta" product.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

That's why they're still beta engines.   I can't shake the feeling that Menards isn't really addressing the problems of the previous beta versions, but just cranking out new batches of "beta" product.

I’m starting to think the same, John.  I hadn’t paid any attention to the Menards beta engines since the first one.  I had assumed problems were being addressed.  “Assumed”. That was my fault.  Once I had this one on order, I started reading where folks weren’t seeing this happen.  🤷‍♂️

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

That's why they're still beta engines.   I can't shake the feeling that Menards isn't really addressing the problems of the previous beta versions, but just cranking out new batches of "beta" product.

It’s much more likely a quality control problem, in this case, a known and growing problem with Chinese production in recent years. It sounds to me that bearings were left completely unlubricated.

The screeching sound is not something you get from unlubricated axles and gears. As the dry bearing heats up, the metal expands, creating a tighter space inside the bearing. Eventually, the bearing will seize up.

This problem wasn’t one of the ones identified in earlier beta versions, so let’s not represent this issue in that light.

However, it is something Menards should address, both with taking units back for repair or replacement and with their Chinese manufacturing partner who failed to prep the mechanism properly.

Jim, a newer problem!  Yes that does sound like quality control.  I’ll be reporting what I have experienced and make no judgment call.  I’ll let them decide what to do; other than I do expect repair, replacement, or refund.  😄

These engines couldn’t be any simpler. Two motor/trucks and a board. If all the components are brand new it’s hard to believe the motor bearings are dry. Is there any chance the squeak could be electronic board generated? I remember TAS boards would generate a squeal from the motor. Just asking? I am not an electronic guy or own any Menards engines.

Rod, I’m going to run it on rollers or even with alligator clips upside down in a cradle and also take the shell off again and listen closely to see if I can tell where the noise is coming from.

@romiller49 posted:

These engines couldn’t be any simpler. Two motor/trucks and a board. If all the components are brand new it’s hard to believe the motor bearings are dry. Is there any chance the squeak could be electronic board generated? I remember TAS boards would generate a squeal from the motor. Just asking? I am not an electronic guy or own any Menards engines.

If the bearings aren’t lubed at the factory, it doesn’t matter if they are new. I have had to lube the bearings on a brand new locomotive, which screeched out of the box after a few minutes. Problem solved.

@Jim R. posted:

If the bearings aren’t lubed at the factory, it doesn’t matter if they are new. I have had to lube the bearings on a brand new locomotive, which screeched out of the box after a few minutes. Problem solved.

Most new can motors have Oilite bearings and shouldn't need lubrication for 1,000 hours or more.