Motors in new MTH locos vs Motors in older MTH locos

@BlueComet400 posted:

I've noticed a significant difference in performance

Maybe not that important John, but how much run time shown on the DCS remote for the 2004 Pacific and then on the newer ones ?

It’s not that either mfr. went cheap, …..well, sorta,……your older engine is Pittman equipped, that motor is pretty hard to beat. Very good low voltage performance, with lots of power even at the lower rpm/voltage ranges,……what happened was, Pittman’s parent company Ametek, pretty much ditched the hobby industry as a whole, by pricing themselves right out of our market, …..clearly they saw bigger fish to fry in aerospace, medical, and the ATM machine business…..they’re even pretty much out of the elevator door motor business from what I’ve been told,,……this happened like overnight, so it left our dynamic duo of mfr.s to find another source, …..Lionel went to Cannon, and at first, MTH was using a SPG motor from Korea, that was a really good knock off a Pittman, but for whatever reason, it was short lived, …..perhaps SPG was too pricey as well, and MTH just used them as a temporary fill in the blanks until a more permanent solution could be had,……they finally went to a Chinese motor, same size as a Pittman, but not as good as a Pittman IMO, ……but before you go cussing out the motor, try a good break in period to see if she’ll loosen up,……

Pat

I've got the last edition Premier Big Boy, 20-3808-1,  and I did notice it ran a bit jerky below 3-4 mph. I swapped out the stock no name Chinese motor for a ball bearing 9234 Pittman and it runs so much smoother. It'll crawl down to 1-2 mph without issue, and it's far from broken in yet.

Lionel's Canon motor isn't much better. I swapped the Canon in my Legacy 2031170 ATSF Northern for a 9433 Pittman and the low speed performance pulling a train was greatly improved.

My latest release reading & northern 425 is sure a  heck of a lot noisier than previous release.

@Dallas Joseph posted:

Maybe not that important John, but how much run time shown on the DCS remote for the 2004 Pacific and then on the newer ones ?

2004 Pacific: 5 hrs 12 min / 29.7 mi.

2023 Pacific: 5 hrs 19 min / 30.0 mi

There is a huge difference in the performance of these 2 locos, with the 2004 model being much better-performing.

@harmonyards posted:

It’s not that either mfr. went cheap, …..well, sorta,……your older engine is Pittman equipped, that motor is pretty hard to beat. Very good low voltage performance, with lots of power even at the lower rpm/voltage ranges,……what happened was, Pittman’s parent company Ametek, pretty much ditched the hobby industry as a whole, by pricing themselves right out of our market, …..clearly they saw bigger fish to fry in aerospace, medical, and the ATM machine business…..they’re even pretty much out of the elevator door motor business from what I’ve been told,,……this happened like overnight, so it left our dynamic duo of mfr.s to find another source, …..Lionel went to Cannon, and at first, MTH was using a SPG motor from Korea, that was a really good knock off a Pittman, but for whatever reason, it was short lived, …..perhaps SPG was too pricey as well, and MTH just used them as a temporary fill in the blanks until a more permanent solution could be had,……they finally went to a Chinese motor, same size as a Pittman, but not as good as a Pittman IMO, ……but before you go cussing out the motor, try a good break in period to see if she’ll loosen up,……

Pat

Thanks Pat......what is considered adequate break-in?

@BlueComet400 posted:

2004 Pacific: 5 hrs 12 min / 29.7 mi.

2023 Pacific: 5 hrs 19 min / 30.0 mi

There is a huge difference in the performance of these 2 locos, with the 2004 model being much better-performing.

We can certainly discuss a motor swap upgrade if you’d like ……I’m almost positive the P47 Pacifics will take the larger 60mm motor, which is a good thing, …supplies of the 55mm 9433 Pittmans are getting kinda tight until I find another source…Lou can verify the P47’s I believe ….I know the PS4 Pacifics won’t take a big motor at all, ….I think they’re relegated to a 9432 short Pittman ….

Pat

@BlueComet400 posted:

Thanks Pat......what is considered adequate break-in?

Clearly by your odometer readings, they should be broke in by now, …..IMO, …

Pat

@BlueComet400 posted:

2004 Pacific: 5 hrs 12 min / 29.7 mi.

2023 Pacific: 5 hrs 19 min / 30.0 mi

There is a huge difference in the performance of these 2 locos, with the 2004 model being much better-performing.

That's some low run time. Every time I turn on one of my locomotives I usually add around 100 miles. I don't think I have anything with less than 1000 scale miles 😄.

@harmonyards posted:

We can certainly discuss a motor swap upgrade if you’d like ……I’m almost positive the P47 Pacifics will take the larger 60mm motor, which is a good thing, …supplies of the 55mm 9433 Pittmans are getting kinda tight until I find another source…Lou can verify the P47’s I believe ….I know the PS4 Pacifics won’t take a big motor at all, ….I think they’re relegated to a 9432 short Pittman ….

Pat

The latest Pacifics are USRA and use a 9232/9432 size motor. There is no way a longer motor will fit.

I’ve swapped a bunch of Lionel’s from the crappy Cannons to Pittmans, always with better performance, …..all of my Legacy steam that WAS Cannon equipped are now Pittmanized,….( play on words there )  …..so I can say from the field that there’s an improvement in performance, …..I’ve set up a few motors for Lou, and he would have a better field report, as he’s swapped out those Chinese knock offs from a few of his MTH engines,…….so I’ll let @Lou1985 grade that performance…..

Pat

@Lou1985 posted:

That's some low run time. Every time I turn on one of my locomotives I usually add around 100 miles. I don't think I have anything with less than 1000 scale miles 😄.

I’d think they’d be loosened up after 5 hours though Lou, …….no??….not everyone runs a gazzillion miles like we do,….😁

Pat

@harmonyards posted:

I’ve swapped a bunch of Lionel’s from the crappy Cannons to Pittmans, always with better performance, …..all of my Legacy steam that WAS Cannon equipped are now Pittmanized,….( play on words there )  …..so I can say from the field that there’s an improvement in performance, …..I’ve set up a few motors for Lou, and he would have a better field report, as he’s swapped out those Chinese knock offs from a few of his MTH engines,…….so I’ll let @Lou1985 grade that performance…..

Pat

I've only got two Premier steam locomotives that came with the Chinese knock off motor, my SP AC6 Cab Forward and UP Big Boy. Both had issues running below 3-4 mph with the Chinese motor, but swapping in a 9234 Pittman resulted in smooth performance down to 1-2 mph. I'm pretty sure the improved low speed performance is due to the Pittman making more torque at low RPM than the factory motor.

Also as a FYI even though the motor in Premier steam locomotives are made in China the locomotives are still made in South Korea.

@harmonyards posted:

I’d think they’d be loosened up after 5 hours though Lou, …….no??….not everyone runs a gazzillion miles like we do,….😁

Pat

They should be after 5 hours, but 5 hours of run time with 30 miles is about an average of running 6 mph. I'd run it at 30 mph for an hour or so then see how it runs at low speed. Warm everything up and let it run in a bit.

I never really consider a locomotive really broken in till its got a couple hundred miles and 20+ hours of run time.

Thanks guys. I'll couple the 7-car heavyweight consist to each one and crank it up to 30 and let it run....with the smoke and sound turned off, and will see if there's a difference.

@BlueComet400 posted:

Thanks guys. I'll couple the 7-car heavyweight consist to each one and crank it up to 30 and let it run....with the smoke and sound turned off, and will see if there's a difference.

It couldn’t hurt to do that, …..that’s for sure,…..if it’s still wonky after that, then we’ll dive in for a closer look,….if this is indeed the smaller Pacific platform, I have a few of these here as parts models ( earlier runs ) we can look into what it takes for an upgrade,….kinda curious if others will chime in with the same kinda complaint as you have with your two,….

Pat

@BlueComet400 posted:

On the other hand, my new MTH Pacifics (20-3816-1 and 20-3813-1) show much different performance, especially at slow speeds. I have to advance the thumbwheel on the DCS remote to at least 3 or 4 mph before the loco moves, and then it lurches ahead, instead of gradually speeding up. Sometimes, the loco will start chuffing and puffing smoke before it starts to move, which seems odd to me, because I thought those features are triggered by flywheel rotation. Both of these locos exhibit the same poor performance at slow speeds.  I have perfect 10 for track signal all the way around, and all my older MTH locos run perfectly.

The only way I see them chuffing and puffing and not moving is the driveline is slipping somewhere.  Sounds like the flywheel is spinning but the wheels are not being driven.

It just sits on the track, chuffing and puffing smoke as if the drivers are turning.......except for one problem: the drivers aren't turning. Is this a relatively easy fix, or is it best left for warranty coverage?

@BlueComet400 posted:

It just sits on the track, chuffing and puffing smoke as if the drivers are turning.......except for one problem: the drivers aren't turning. Is this a relatively easy fix, or is it best left for warranty coverage?

It could be an easy fix, it depends on the specifics of the locomotive.  It could be as simple as a loose setscrew.  It could also be the gearbox, not so simple.

If he’s chuffing & puffing, that means the flywheel is turning on the motor, but it’s not turning the gear box, ……could be a lot of lost motion between worm shaft, and the worm wheel, could be a slipping worm wheel on the axle, ……do both new engines exhibit the same behavior?……you mention you have two new ones?….

Pat

Yes--both locos are doing the exact same thing.

First step is to look under the hood and see where the disconnect is.  Since they're chuffing and puffing, I suspect the flywheel is turning.  I'm wondering if they didn't space them correctly and they threw the dogbone, I've seen a few of those.

The only other scenario I see possible is if the dog bone coupler is slipping on the worm shaft. That would explain all his woes, …..kind of odd two would be doing it, but never say never in this industry,……might can use a flashlight and start the locomotive moving and see if the flywheel turns, but the drivelines doesn’t …….that surely would indicate lost motion…..that could definitely make the engines herky jerky at lower speeds,…..if this is the case, and you have two doing this, I’d suspect more complaints to be rolling in,……not a horrible fix if this is true, drill the dog bone coupler for a set screw, and never look back,….😉

Pat

FWIW, both of mine (new Heavy Pacifics) ,different road names and from different dealers, had LED light issues from some seriously bad QC.

And then it's now the middle of December, and they still haven't said a peep about the sound files.

I had not noticed loose driveshafts/flywheels, but I don't yet have a lot of runtime on them (both did run and pull cars at my local club).

@harmonyards posted:

The only other scenario I see possible is if the dog bone coupler is slipping on the worm shaft. That would explain all his woes, …..kind of odd two would be doing it, but never say never in this industry,……might can use a flashlight and start the locomotive moving and see if the flywheel turns, but the drivelines doesn’t …….that surely would indicate lost motion…..that could definitely make the engines herky jerky at lower speeds,…..if this is the case, and you have two doing this, I’d suspect more complaints to be rolling in,……not a horrible fix if this is true, drill the dog bone coupler for a set screw, and never look back,….😉

Pat

If it's chuffing in time with the set speed and not moving, the flywheel pretty much has to be spinning.

I have a brand new Pacific from this batch and watched another one run on Saturday also from this latest batch.  Neither locomotive is behaving as you describe above. I can run at 1 MPH no issue at all.

Must be an issue under the hood with yours.  Please let us know what you find out though in case it pops up in the future.

@Vernon Barry posted:

FWIW, both of mine (new Heavy Pacifics) ,different road names and from different dealers, had LED light issues from some seriously bad QC.

And then it's now the middle of December, and they still haven't said a peep about the sound files.

I had not noticed loose driveshafts/flywheels, but I don't yet have a lot of runtime on them (both did run and pull cars at my local club).

Your lighting issue has not been reported by others so I suspect it not to be "seriously bad QC" as you describe.  Not sure why you insist on painting with such a broad brush when YOU experience an issue.

@MichRR714 posted:

Your lighting issue has not been reported by others so I suspect it not to be "seriously bad QC" as you describe.  Not sure why you insist on painting with such a broad brush when YOU experience an issue.

Thanks for adding your 2 cents.

I haven't seen you post in a while, was worried about you.

@Vernon Barry posted:

Thanks for adding your 2 cents.

I haven't seen you post in a while, was worried about you.

That darn job thing keeps me busy. LOL

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

If it's chuffing in time with the set speed and not moving, the flywheel pretty much has to be spinning.

Agreed, …..I’m talking about the other end, on the worm shaft itself,….if that coupler is spinning on the shaft, that would give him the grief he’s describing,…..no doubt the flywheel must be turning, and seeing the tach stripe ….

Pat

Here's a short video that shows exactly what it is doing. In this video, it sits still, but chuffs and puffs smoke as if it's rolling. It starts out at 1 mph, and then I gradually increase it to 2, 3, 4, and it finally lurches into reverse at 5 mph. If you look closely at the video, you'll see that the flywheel is not turning while it is smoking and chuffing while sitting still. It does the same thing in forward; I just happened to get a good video capture of it in reverse.

I took the advice here and ran it for an hour, varying the speed between 30 and 35 mph. I did this for an hour in forward, and again in reverse. This video was taken after those 2 "break-in" runs, so there is clearly something else going on here.

Oh god that’s gross,….🤢

Pat

I can not explain the chuffs while it’s sitting still, but the lurch to me looks like a mechanical bind somewhere that the locomotive can overcome with enough voltage ……that’s just my observation from a far,……it must just be enough of a bind that it can overcome, and stay out of it as long as it’s in motion…..does this happen every time you stop it and do a restart from zero?….

Pat

tom21pa, yours sounds like something is rubbing the flywheel, ….like either the tach sensor is too close, or some other part is rubbing it ……the frequency sounds like a flywheel clearance issue ….

Pat

"does this happen every time you stop it and do a restart from zero?"

Yes, every time. I'm now doing the "break-in" run of the B&M Pacific. This one runs better than the MEC, but it's still not nearly as smooth as the older MTH locos.

Blue, you really need to pull the shell and see whats going on. Its only three screws.

Pete

@harmonyards posted:

tom21pa, yours sounds like something is rubbing the flywheel, ….like either the tach sensor is too close, or some other part is rubbing it ……the frequency sounds like a flywheel clearance issue ….

Pat

Yea, it went to MTH and came back the same, funny thing is it's silent in reverse.

@harmonyards posted:

It’s not that either mfr. went cheap, …..well, sorta,……your older engine is Pittman equipped, that motor is pretty hard to beat. Very good low voltage performance, with lots of power even at the lower rpm/voltage ranges,……what happened was, Pittman’s parent company Ametek, pretty much ditched the hobby industry as a whole, by pricing themselves right out of our market, …..clearly they saw bigger fish to fry in aerospace, medical, and the ATM machine business…..they’re even pretty much out of the elevator door motor business from what I’ve been told,,……this happened like overnight, so it left our dynamic duo of mfr.s to find another source, …..Lionel went to Cannon, and at first, MTH was using a SPG motor from Korea, that was a really good knock off a Pittman, but for whatever reason, it was short lived, …..perhaps SPG was too pricey as well, and MTH just used them as a temporary fill in the blanks until a more permanent solution could be had,……they finally went to a Chinese motor, same size as a Pittman, but not as good as a Pittman IMO, ……but before you go cussing out the motor, try a good break in period to see if she’ll loosen up,……

Pat

I had wondered about that. I remember hearing that Pittman motors that we use for our locomotives aren't even for model locomotives. My understanding is they're designed for industrial equipment, printers, etc., but happen to be the right size for O scale steam locomotives. I pulled a motor out of a broken printer years ago and wondered it it could be used for a model, but never tried it out.