Kohs trains

I was contemplating truck conversion :-)

Brad

 

When it comes to brass locomotives and rolling stock there are a few generalizations that usually hold up.

 

1.  The higher the price the more detailed the item tends to be.

 

2.  The more detailed and the more expensive an item is the more likely it is to be purchased as a display piece.  Very few of the highest priced items are purchased to run at all, let alone regularly.

 

3.  The higher the price the more likely the item is to be a poor runner.  See No. 2 for explanation.

 

4.  Those who purchase very expensive brass locomotives or rolling stock for operation on a model railroad often do so expecting to need to re-work them to make them reliable runners.

 

Scale locomotives and cars from Atlas, Lionel and MTH tend to be far more reliable from an operations perspective than any brass trains.  When if comes to freight cars the big three also tend to have higher quality decoration than any of the brass builders.  And, when it comes to freight car detail, Atlas O Masterline models introduced post 1998, Lionel Standard O models introduced since 2002 and MTH models introduced since about 2004 have details as good as or better than most of the brass ever produced.  Compare box car ends and doors between brass and plastic models and you often see better detail from injection molded plastic than in stamped brass.  Plastic models also tend to have better gain detail on wood car sides or running boards.  Todays plastic cars have brass detail parts added to their bodies.  Add comparable or better detail to better paint and graphics and a fraction of the price and you have to be after an unusual prototype be looking for brass.

Ted All fair and reasonable points; as you know I have Lionel, atlas and MTH. However, I have found some really superb brass freight cars that none of the previous firms have made. If they have, many lack detail. My opinion is that they can run concurrently and provide operating intrigue and pleasure. I just got my first brass steamer so I will take some time to run it and form an early opinion. I have been pleased with Lionel's heisler and the atlas sw--- atlas really surprised on the upside with a great value re price.

this may have been true through the 1970's and even into the 80's, but the new generation of brass imports are made to be operational, most being DCC ready.  i have a beautiful PFM (Tenshodo) model of an SP&S Z6 from the 70's that still has its original brass gears and open frame motor and it runs horribly, but i also have a Division Point SP&S E1 from a few years ago that runs extremely smooth and nearly silent and will eventually get a full sound/lighting DCC system.

I have several Kohs engines and cabooses. Beautiful stuff and works fine for me. The couplers are scale and I've needed to change them to Kadee's. No shelf queens here. I would not hesitate to buy an item if it was something I wanted. I also own some Yoder, Overland, and PSC stuff. I have not had any problem with them, with one exception which is a model built in 1987, the PSC Class A. From what I hear, you may need to have some ability to be an 0 scaler. I think it is just a rumor. 

Assuming you are referring to rolling stock, switching trucks will demand very wide radius curves. Scale models like these will have extended frames, air lines, and brake rigging the oversize flanges will hit. Those items are eliminated or modified on a typical 3 rail model.

 

Pete

Ability to do what specifically, Chris?  I thought all you had to do was be able to suffer (and own an anvil),

I ABSOLUTELY adore Kohs Inc. models. 

 

They are amazing. I wish I could afford them. I almost bought one from George at the St Louis NNG Convention in 2010. He is so nice, it was a lot of fun talking with him.  

 

I still really want to get a PRR Gondola sometime. They are so beautiful. If I had one I would do a full review, but its another $650 my wife would KILL ME! 

 

Converting one to 3 rail would be difficult I would think. I would remove the trucks and replace them with campy poor detailed 3 rail sets. Save the fabulous 2 rail scale trucks in the event you want to go back to the Jedi side. 

 

The detail on his stuff is EXCEPTIONAL, one of the best in the world on par with the best, Fulgurex comes to mind and the authenticity is paramount; beyond belief. 

 

If a guy wants to lobster claw and pizza cutter his stuff to each his own or her own.. good luck. 

 

Hey Ted,

 

I pulled a few points (opinions) from your post that are not exactly true IMHO. 

 

Your "OPINIONS" - statements that brass as a general rule look pretty but run like well you know completely depends on the importer and the builder. I would agree with you about Ajin's OMI stuff from the 1980's.

 

Enter left stage todays Key Model Imports with ball bearing drives and Koh's models and you are completely WRONG.

 

As far as Atlas's dreaded "China-Drive" outperforming a ball bearing horizontal flywheel drive Pa-LEEZE do NOT get me started. in other words NO WAY, its a NO ISSUE.

 

Yes you may ask, where do I operate? Well I have about 6000' of mainline track and 2.8% grades. I absolutely detest the "China-Drive" No adhesion, electronics to make them run right, and on and on. A good example, Golden Gate's new E7's are ten fold better than any "China-Drive" I operate. I have many, and they all sit in the boxes.  Scott decided to drop the toy train and build a model on-par with HO reliability and detail for plastic price. HE DID! AMEN!

 

MTH drives, NO WEIGHT, NO NOTHING!, Oh but they make lots of noise. Hmmm. OK. Traction tires? HUH?  I use Tsunami and NCE.. I am not going to argue or try to make a point. 

 

Ted, you are entitled to your opinions; and I am not sure of your experince with brass. It could be as bad as you say depending on what your benchmark is, I am not saying you did not have bad luck. My experience has been VERY good in the exception for OMI Ajin products of the 1980's. They literally fall apart! YIKES! 

 

Just few modern pieces that qualify for "shelf queen" status:

 

1-PSC CB&Q M4A and Hudson both built by Boo-Rim (Shorts EVERYWHERE)

2-Car & Locomotive Shops products also Boo-Rim (Same- too detailed)

 

You may note the uniform use of a builder in this case Boo-Rim. I am not saying Boo-Rim builds a poor product but I am saying depending on the builder the running issues are at play.

 

Look I could go on for hours. Simply put a guy should phrase his post(s) as opinions based on his personal experience and not exactly that of others. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Erik,

 

I've got 4 dozen MTH diesels and they all run perfectly fine for me.  None of them have traction tires.  They are able to pull very well and much like the prototype they will do much better in a consist of 2 or more.  3 will walk away with 100+ car mixed freight.  I am waiting on a set of the new run OMI SD70ACe, I'm hoping they will set the bar high as far as running quality.  I don't have any Key to compare with but I remembered seeing the drive they had during a the national convention-nice and smooth.

 

 

 

On the other end of the spectrum we have a club member with a Kohs GG1, beautiful piece of work but it needed to be extensively reworked and needed a helper Mr Snow drive disguised in an R50b.  The brass side is a bit tricky, run to run there likely to be differences.  One run may work very well and another run may not.  I find brass is a mixed bag it may or may not run out of the box, or better than others but MTH is consistent in always running out of the box unless it is defective and you can get warranty repair.  Brass you may or may not be so luckily.  

Erik The PRr gondolas are what I plan to order--- gorgeous!!!! I do not think I will convert couplers on them or yoders cars (Mathieson and sp stock cars) rather I may rig a short flat to bridge from my 3 rd rail steamer Hokey?-- maybe but I maintain integrity of the cars and can operate my 3 rail loco's

I have a dozen or so brass O scale locomotives from 3rd rail and more on order.I have no operational problems whatsoever with them.They run as reliably as my MTH PS2 Premier and O Scale Lionel Locomotives.A few older new condition old stock locomotives seemed to be a bit "stiff" when first taken from the box but after careful lubrication and several hours of running the mechanisms with a small consist they break on in and run smooth as silk.

 

Ricky

Why not just forget the whole lobster claw coupler thing and up-grade EVERYTHING to Kadee couplers? That's what we 3RS folks do, and I even run some 2-Rail scale rolling stock WITH their original 2-Rail scale truck assemblies. I especially like the Athearn 2-Rail scale plain bearing trucks, which perform just fine on my Atlas O 3-Rail track & switches.

Opinion.

 

Well, I say if you want others to qualify their comments you should qualify yours too.

 

I have been lightly criticized for using "opinion" at the end of most of my posts, but it became clear about five years ago that readers do not always have the sophistication to know exactly what is fact and what is opinion.

 

My hobby budget excludes Key and Kohs, but I have friends who routinely buy the stuff and invest thousands of dollars to make it run right.  This part is fact.

 

I cannot imagine having four dozen MTH Diesels, but I can assure you that the early MTH transmissions are bulletproof, and serve museum needs (continuous day in day out running) better than anything else I have seen. For some reason the museum has found other mechanics, but while I was doing the mechanical repairs, i found the MTH 2-rail units to be an order of magnitude better than anything else subjected to the rigors of all day running.  This part is opinion, based on observation.  I do not spend my days running trains, so the observation happens at my workbench, and does not include verifying what folks tell me about how long these things run every day.

Hot water I will email you offline later-- going for a run! On vacation...

Don't think so. I don't give out my eMail address, sorry.

 ...    

Hot Water Then kindly clarify: are you using the new 745? I have no issue converting Lionel stk--- was concerned about coupler heights...

Since the Kadee 745 couplers, and the rest of the "700 series", have just come out within the last month or two, I have not yet installed any of the "new" ones. Everything I own is up-graded with Kadee #805 couplers. As a 3RS modeler, I do NOT have to be concerned with car-to-car/locomotive short circuits, as the 2-Rail modelers do.

 

Concerning coupler heights, you MUST get a Kadee O-Scale height gauge!!!!! I assure you, EVERY SINGLE car you mount Kadee couplers on will REQUIRE some small about of coupler box shimming in order to obtain the CORRECT height.

 

All this is covered in great length over on the 3RS Forum, at the top of the page, concerning mounting Kadee couplers, including lots of good photos.

 

By the way, Lionel freight cars are generally the hardest to up-grade to Kadees since they have NEVER, nor will they EVER, make provisions for Kadee coupler mounting, as do all the other manufactures of O SCALE rolling stock.

I second the coupler height and once you do convert Lionel Standard O make great scale cars.  

Hey Bob2- right on brother! After all this is what the forum is for, sharing our experiences and OPINIONS. Good discussion here. I simply can't stand by and allow a brass bash fest and NOT say anything.. 

 

Hey Michael I for one do not like the China-Drive. Its a HOT HOT topic and whenever possible I stay out of it by simply not buying them. My bud Rick Trinkle swears by them. He has points.. (And we always fester among each other about them... LOL) His points are the same.. tinker-tinker away to get them reliable on hand laid rail. Rigid trucks and open gears, all that fun causes me a lot of trouble on my layout. Maybe we have bad track or something, could be but everything else runs fine on it.. hmm OK. I can't get them to pull anything. Hey-- may I repeat myself.. too each his or her own and for me I will avoid the China-Drive.. it is NOT for me. 

 

Bob2 as always you make wonderful points.. indeed all of this is OPINION. There are no facts better than our own experience. If the China-Drive runs OK on your track than its GREAT! And yes cost is a BIG issue. Key Model Imports or Kohs models are also out of my range too.. I have a VERY few. But I would rather a few than a lot of middle of the road stuff.. OPINION.. 

 

BTW, my experience with Boo-Rim models is overall wonderful but my PSC CB&Q locomotives will not pull anything and they short everywhere. My HO Boo-Rim models are fantastic. Glacier Park models are wonderful, Jimmy Booth is a great guy, I admire him very much. I agree I think KMI has used Boo-Rim for building. And really it is the importers preference of motors and drives that makes the model. I think PSC added to much detail to my CB&Q units albeit beautiful. In a way making them shelf queens. Roger Clark a member and friend of our organization has managed to get his PSC CB&Q Hudson to run. Most all of the detail on the under-frame is removed. He also needed to make extensive modifications to get it to run without shorting, and the addition of Frog Snot yeah.. traction tires and they roll... LOL  So this backs up the original post by Ted, often brass needs a load of work to make a running model... but I reemphasize this is in my OPINION an isolated occurrence.

 

There you go BOB2.... OPINION! 

 

 

 

 

 

Martin,

I left that non specific intentionally. But there should be some certification or test for whatever that ability might be. We need a committee of some sort.

 

Brad,

I'm not sure you'll want to use the Kadee box at all. The Kohs piece will have a scale coupler on there and may not be set up for the Kadee box. I've just used the Kadee coupler and shank, cut off the back of the shank and drill a hole in the shank to replace the scale coupler.

Its so cool, the amazing "PROFOUND - PASSION" we all have for these little machines.. WOW

 

 

You know what its all GOOD! ALL OF IT!

 

I see......  More work for the focus group and review committee,

This merger of threads has turned into an interesting discussion indeed.  Despite the variety of environments in which we operate (2R, 3RS, conventional, command, flat land or mountain layouts) there is an amazing amount of commonality in our collective experience.  And there are also some differences.  Perhaps with a little more discussion we can get to the cause of those divergent results with similar equipment.

 

I have a 3RD rail Northern with at least one 3rd Rail Mike on the way.  I get to operate on layouts with a couple of dozen more 3rd rail, Weaver and Precision Scale locomotives.  They are all steam with the exception of several 3rd rail RDCs.  All are post 1990 and most are newer than 2000.  The collective experience fits with what has been expressed so far.  It seems that having to rebuild a brass locomotive or car to get it to run well is a common experience. 

 

We could all think of a few names of people well known for rebuilding brass locomotives for better operation.  They have work because poor operation is a common problem with brass models.  While I know of people who specialize in command control retrofits for diecast steam and plastic diesel locomotives I can't think of anyone who has found a market niche rebuilding them mechanically.  There isn't a market because the major builders of diecast steam and plastic locomotives consistently turn out good runners.      

 

Inconsistency seems to be one of the major challenges for brass importers.  Scott man has written about the challenges of turnover among builders.  John Smith of Pecos River also wrote about those challenges in his long running column in O Scale Trains.  Builders come and go.  Tooling often goes missing or is only built for a specific project.  It is hard to built consistent performance with inconsistent designs, tooling and builders. 

 

It is reassuring to hear that Key has come up with a good mechanism and is sticking with it.  Kohs seems to be hit and miss.  I am glad that your experience with Kohs has been good.  Like Michael, I know of others who have had to rebuild Kohs locomotives to get good performance.  I understand that Gary Schrader frequently blocks the sprung drivers when he reworks Kohs steamers.  It seems the springs are often not a good match to the weight of the model and are detrimental rather than a help to adhesion.

 

With similar wheel and rail materials adhesion comes down to weight.  And that is an area where the brass locomotives I have encountered usually come up short.  I have a 3rd Rail NP A-3 Northern.  It weights 6 lbs 13 oz.  The recent Lionel Milwaukee S-3 Northern weights 7 pounds 12 ounces.  The MTH GN S-2 Northern weighs in at 9 pounds 7 ounces.  They pull in relation to their weight and the MTH S-2 has the best rating (over 1200 scale tons) of the 4-8-4s on our 2.5% grades.  As Sir Topham Hat would say, it is "a very useful engine" and is well liked by both dispatchers and crews.  It won't stall on the hill, is good for switching if needed  and can work well with steam, electric or diesel helpers thanks to its consistent speed control.

 

Erik

 

Could you tell me more about your MTH locomotives with twin vertical motor drives that don't run well for you?  Are they Proto 2? What models?  How are you running conventionally?

 

I have a set of 3rd Rail E7s in front of me along with a Lionel E7 and MTH E6s and E8s.  The 3rd Rail E7A is the lightest at 3 pounds 14 ounces.   The Lionel and MTH E units weight in at 5 pounds each give or take an ounce.  The 3rd Rail units just can't pull like the Lionel or MTH locomotives, they are too light.  I hope the second run is weighted equal to the competition.  And I hope they get rid of the orange peel and use the correct GN colors next time.  I don't know what they used but it definitely isn't Omaha Orange or Pullman green.

 

I think we are all interested in brass models when they offer us an opportunity to have a car or locomotive that would otherwise be unobtainable short of scratch building.  But the variety and quality of plastic and diecast models today offers so many choices at high quality and excellent value for the dollar that the brass is much less important to building a roster than it was in the 70s or 80s.  When I look at the Atlas CZ I cant help but think that is a good thing. 

First I have heard that Gary blocks the drivers.  I have found that sprung drivers make absolutely no difference in pulling power.  Since I run ten-coupled steam in 17/64 with superelevation it helps to have my longer wheelbases sprung.

 

The traction issue has a lot to do with driver tire material.  A polished stainless tire will slip right now, and a carbon steel tire will do a whole lot better.  The absolute best are made from iron (not steel) pipe.  Some Sunset locomotives will start to pull lots better when the chrome plate is worn off the steel tire.

 

The PSC Hudson is a wild card.  A good friend sent one here to eliminate shorts - something I am ordinarily good at.  My estimate was fifteen hours per tender truck, but since I did not want to be committed shortly thereafter, I declined the job.

 

My friend found a guy in the midwest willing to tackle them at six bucks an hour, and I believe he was successful at around the forty dollar mark - per truck!  I have forgotten, but I believe there were over two hundred pieces in each truck.

 

Mostly opinion.

If you add weight to a brass engine it will pull more. For a direct comparison, my brass PSC A out pulls the MTH A and looks better doing it. Properly sprung drivers make for a smoother ride over track imperfections and through switches, but I'm not sure if it aids in traction. I haven't had any drive rebuilt on any brass engines, but the A from 1987 is a good candidate for it and one I knew about going in.

 

Unfortunately, I haven't found the die cast N&W steam era products from MTH or Lionel to be all that outstanding in appearance. The Atlas N&W fishbelly hoppers were a huge disappointment to me. The brass alternatives outshine each of them.

 

Dave's rosy outlook falls pretty flat here. I'm always looking forward with hope for better offerings from the "Big Three" in the future, though.

The arguments fall pretty flat on the three rail side of life too.

 

If I face east southeast towards Maryland, put down my prayer rug, and vow only to purchase MTH products, for my chosen date (1953) and railroad interests, I'd end up with the following motive power:

 

• Great Northern R-2 2-8-8-2
• Great Northern S-2 4-8-4
• Northern Pacific USRA 0-8-0 (Class G)
• A smattering of diseasels. 

Adding Lionel into the equation (their scale stuff only)

 

• Northern Pacific USRA 0-8-0 (Class G)
• Legacy GN GP7 (with the wrong orange, and incorrect sounds that require the user to apply the brakes to get a "labored" diesel engine sound)
• Newly announced GP9s (maybe they can get the GN paint right this time around)

 

But Oh, Happy Day, I can get a DM&IR Yellowstone with "Northern Pacific" slapped on the side of it, or a Lionel B&O EM-1 with either "Northern Pacific" or "Great Northern" slapped on the side of it, guess that has to suffice to satisfy my interests in order to get "good value for the dollar".   Thanks, but I'll pass.

 

All this, and two control systems that won't allow the user to MU DCS and TMCC/Legacy together. 

 

Regards,

GNNPNUT

 

Using NCE DCC in HO for 15 years, where everything can run together

 

Stuck with three rail in O, since I got nowhere to run two rail.

From my own experience, there is a significant enough variation in performance, even among products from a given manufacturer, that I can not predict ahead of time which will be good runners out of the box.  I define a "good runner" as a loco that will pull at least 10 passenger cars around my layout (2% grades on superelevated curves), run as slow as 2 scale mph, have no electrical pickup problems, and run quietly enough that I don't hear the mechanism.  

 

Here is my report card. And this is ONLY OUT OF THE BOX PERFORMANCE.  All run fine now, unless marked as departed:

 

Two MTH GG1 withConventional China Drive (one motor per truck), both excellent

 

Two MTH ES-44s: CCD both excellent

 

One MTH Aerotrain: Non Conventional China Drive(rear motor powers one axle).  Weak puller, otherwise excellent

 

Three MTH P5as:  Non Conventional China drive (one motor drives one axle, the other drives two axles), very quiet, smooth starts and runner, but poor pullers

 

Two MTH Decapods: Excellent. Even on super elevated curves.  My experience is sprung drivers are not needed to smoothly negotiate super-elevated curves.

 

One MTH Mikado: Excellent

 

MTH H-10: Excellent

 

Two departed Lionel GG1's (Conventional China Drive) pulled well and were quiet, but could not keep a constant speed

 

Two departed Atlas Erie Builts (Conventional China Drive)  Jerky starts, otherwise OK

 

One Weaver BP20 (Conventional China Drive). Smooth, (but slightly jerky in the starts) good puller, electrical pickups weak

 

One Atlas RS-1: (Conventional China Drive).  Jerky starts, otherwise OK

 

One Atlas RSD-7:   (Conventional China Drive).  Excellent on all accounts

 

Four Sunset GG1s. (two horizontal motors on each truck): noisy, had poor pickups. Adequate, but not very good pullers.

 

One Departed Overland P5a: (single motor) Smooth starts and runner, but not a great puller

 

One Departed Sunset P5a (single motor) Smooth starts and runner, but not a great puller

 

Sunset M1b:  Smooth, quiet, not a great puller (I have not added weight yet)

 

High Iron K4s:  Rotten runner to the core, but it runs great now

 

 

Generally all locos can be made into good pullers with the addition of weight, and electrical pickup can be readily enhanced. That is straightforward. When you have to start messing with the drivetrain, things get ugly

 

In terms of out of the box performance, the only conclusions I am unequivocally prepared to draw are:

 

1)  All Conventional China Drive locos by MTH run well enough for my purposes

 

2)  All single motored non steamers need weight to meet my pulling needs

 

3)  All China Drive set ups are not created equal. Some are engineered much better than others

The thing with third rail GG1s and that gorgeous FF2 is that only two axles on each truck are powered.  For some reason that limits pulling power no matter how you dstribute the weight.  Same with early MTH.

 

On the steamers, I had the Sunset CBQ Hudson here at the same time I had the NYC Mercury Hudson.  They were essentially the same weight, but the CBQ out-pulled by a factor of two.  The only difference was the driver tires - the ESE had plated tires.

 

I do have some Northerns that can make it on my superelevation without springs, but my mistake was about twice the superelevation that I really needed for realism.  I have a lot of freight cars that had to be reworked to make the twist.

 

And yes to that "not created equal" comment.  I am simply unable to rebuild the Atlas units with any real success, even though they have been very nice to me about supplying parts.  My favorite is the K-Line Train Master transmission.  That one is a brute.

Are these units six axle with all axles powered?  If so, check the wheelsets before you go loading them down with lead.  If thkey are bright and shiny like a car bumper they will slip with very few cars - NWSL has good carbon steel wheelsets.  Tell Mikey to use good grey iron for wheels.

 That's about the scariest thing I have ever read on this forum.  Please don't give any wannabe overseer/micromanagers any ideas.   I can see it now, blah certified hobby dealers only selling blah certified products. 

I guess you live and learn but I wish I'd read this before I bought my first detailed brass loco. Without a doubt it was the worst runner I've ever seen. I thought high end brass meant operation too .... NOT . That thing wollered itself around the layout and I know if I had run it at any speed at all it would have bounced itself into the floor. I now know that most high end brass means paper weight
and the cheaper engines tend to be better runners.

David

There will need to be a hazing process as well.

 

It is becoming difficult to distinguish which are 0 scale train problems and which are people problems.

 

Many generalizations here.

 

DPC,

Tell us what engine it is so none of us get stuck with it.

Turn smoke off and lower the volume they will run much better.

"And, when it comes to freight car detail, Atlas O Masterline models introduced post 1998, Lionel Standard O models introduced since 2002 and MTH models introduced since about 2004 have details as good as or better than most of the brass ever produced.  Compare box car ends and doors between brass and plastic models and you often see better detail from injection molded plastic than in stamped brass.  Plastic models also tend to have better gain detail on wood car sides or running boards.  Todays plastic cars have brass detail parts added to their bodies.  Add comparable or better detail to better paint and graphics and a fraction of the price and you have to be after an unusual prototype be looking for brass."

 

I'm sorry Ted but as a fleet owner of lots of Atlas/Lionel cars and lots and lots of brass cars I don't agree with you on this. 

 

NONE of the plastic freight cars mentioned are superior to the brass freight cars introduced since 1998.  Not even close.  The Atlas Master Line cars are a step DOWN from the Intermountain/IMWX kits that they are based upon.  The wood running boards are horribly thick and the etched ones are inaccurately too thin and the details made "fatter" to stand up to the 3r market.  

 

Now San Juan Car Company, their plastic cars (kits) are state of the art.  But they are much more akin to a resin car than an RTR car as Atlas/Lionel/MTH.

 

SOME of the Lionel Standard O cars , the 2 pocket open hopper, the H2/H43 three pocket open hoppers,  and the PS2 come to mind as being roughly equivalent to a PSC brass car, B+ in detail and a solid A in fidelity.  They are truly nice cars and great values.

 

None of the other plastic cars from any three of the manufacturers come even remotely close to the fidelity of a Pacific Limited, Rich Yoder, PRB or KMW brass car. 

 

Back to Kohs, there is really no comparison to the fidelity and detail of the Kohs cars (and cabooses/cabins) to ANYTHING.  But for the price paid one is to expect museum quality. 

Opinion?