My 2R HiRail (2RHR) adventure begins

Neat stuff Jonathan. The track weathering looks good.. So this is Gargraves 2 rail high rail track ? I'm guessing Ross makes the same. This is foreign to me, so you can run MTH 3/2 engines on this track? And other smaller scale 2 rail engines. Are you planning on smaller curves? Is this a larger code rail? I had No idea that Gargraves made this track.

Could you run larger scale non MTH steam or would you need huge curves to accomplish that? Anyways nice work!

Seacoast posted:

Neat stuff Jonathan. The track weathering looks good.. So this is Gargraves 2 rail high rail track ? I'm guessing Ross makes the same. This is foreign to me, so you can run MTH 3/2 engines on this track? And other smaller scale 2 rail engines. Are you planning on smaller curves? Is this a larger code rail? I had No idea that Gargraves made this track.

Could you run larger scale non MTH steam or would you need huge curves to accomplish that? Anyways nice work!

Ross makes sectional curves up to 64" radius (O-128) and I'm pretty sure they'll make up the track minus the center rail. Gargraves also makes sectional curved track up to 69" radius (O-138) but they don't have a 2-rail configuration listed on their site.

Seacoast posted:

Neat stuff Jonathan. The track weathering looks good.. So this is Gargraves 2 rail high rail track ? I'm guessing Ross makes the same. This is foreign to me, so you can run MTH 3/2 engines on this track? And other smaller scale 2 rail engines. Are you planning on smaller curves? Is this a larger code rail? I had No idea that Gargraves made this track.

Could you run larger scale non MTH steam or would you need huge curves to accomplish that? Anyways nice work!

Hi George. You have touched on the primary reason for attempting 2R HiRail in the first place. MTH HiRail steam engines are typically run on 3 rail track. You can remove the center rollers and flip a switch and they will also run on 2 rails. So that means you can run them on 2 rail track with the exact same curves that they run on in 3 rail mode. Example: An MTH Big Boy will run on 36"r (O-72) with HiRail wheels but the scale wheel version requires 72"r (or O-144 equivalent).

The only catch (where MTH messed up IMHO) is that the HiRail wheels aren't gauged to NMRA standards and they have flanges that are too deep. That means they won't work on normal 2 rail scale turnouts like Atlas code 148. They will work on Ross and Gargraves turnouts though because they are essentially 3R engines that can pull power from 2 rails with the flip of a switch.

The funny thing is this is nothing new. MTH has had this feature since 2004 I believe. But now with PS3 they added DCC capability along with auto polarity sensing so they can go through 2 rail reverse loops now where PS2 couldn't. I hope that explains it well enough. I think I should start a FAQ on my Facebook page

jonnyspeed posted:

Seacoast posted:

Neat stuff Jonathan. The track weathering looks good.. So this is Gargraves 2 rail high rail track ? I'm guessing Ross makes the same. This is foreign to me, so you can run MTH 3/2 engines on this track? And other smaller scale 2 rail engines. Are you planning on smaller curves? Is this a larger code rail? I had No idea that Gargraves made this track.

Could you run larger scale non MTH steam or would you need huge curves to accomplish that? Anyways nice work!

Hi George. You have touched on the primary reason for attempting 2R HiRail in the first place. MTH HiRail steam engines are typically run on 3 rail track. You can remove the center rollers and flip a switch and they will also run on 2 rails. So that means you can run them on 2 rail track with the exact same curves that they run on in 3 rail mode. Example: An MTH Big Boy will run on 36"r (O-72) with HiRail wheels but the scale wheel version requires 72"r (or O-144 equivalent).

The only catch (where MTH messed up IMHO) is that the HiRail wheels aren't gauged to NMRA standards and they have flanges that are too deep. That means they won't work on normal 2 rail scale turnouts like Atlas code 148. They will work on Ross and Gargraves turnouts though because they are essentially 3R engines that can pull power from 2 rails with the flip of a switch.

The funny thing is this is nothing new. MTH has had this feature since 2004 I believe. But now with PS3 they added DCC capability along with auto polarity sensing so they can go through 2 rail reverse loops now where PS2 couldn't. I hope that explains it well enough. I think I should start a FAQ on my Facebook page

I agree Jonathan, put it on your Facebook page! 

jonnyspeed posted:

Hi George. You have touched on the primary reason for attempting 2R HiRail in the first place. MTH HiRail steam engines are typically run on 3 rail track. You can remove the center rollers and flip a switch and they will also run on 2 rails. So that means you can run them on 2 rail track with the exact same curves that they run on in 3 rail mode. Example: An MTH Big Boy will run on 36"r (O-72) with HiRail wheels but the scale wheel version requires 72"r (or O-144 equivalent).

Actually, the scale-wheeled Big Boy can make it through 36" radius due to the short wheelbase of the drivers and the fact it's essentially a 3-rail locomotive with a full set of scale wheels (no tail beam, notched cylinders, more side play in the tender's axles). It despises uneven track, though as shown in the video I did.

The only catch (where MTH messed up IMHO) is that the HiRail wheels aren't gauged to NMRA standards and they have flanges that are too deep. That means they won't work on normal 2 rail scale turnouts like Atlas code 148. They will work on Ross and Gargraves turnouts though because they are essentially 3R engines that can pull power from 2 rails with the flip of a switch.

Absolutely. I think that also applies to hi-rail wheelsets in general. They modernized the wheels, but kept that narrow backside spacing and flanges that are larger than they need to be.

The funny thing is this is nothing new. MTH has had this feature since 2004 I believe. But now with PS3 they added DCC capability along with auto polarity sensing so they can go through 2 rail reverse loops now where PS2 couldn't. I hope that explains it well enough. I think I should start a FAQ on my Facebook page

Yep. Fixing the polarity issue was the BIG sticking point. I'm even looking at putting Proto-3 upgrades in my scale-wheeled Proto-2 engines.

Jonathan, do you have any plans to convert any engines to BPRC, like BenH, myself, and a couple of others have done?  For those who haven't seen it, looked at Ben's conversion:

https://ogrforum.com/t...s-sw-battery-powered

That solves the problems with powering the rails and shorting out the wheels.

After looking at the weathering job you put on your rails I feel the need to redo mine, good stuff

Jonathan,

Smart move and congratulations!  I miss you in S scale, but I'm really happy that you finally made a decision on what route to take.  I know you've been considering this for some time and I think your plans are a really good compromise.  That's one of the pluses of this hobby - there are so many choices.

I think you are set to have a lot of fun!  I'm looking forward to hearing more about your plans and following the progress of your layout build.  Please keep the posts and photos flowing!

Thanks, Mike A.

Mikeaa posted:

Jonathan,

Smart move and congratulations!  I miss you in S scale, but I'm really happy that you finally made a decision on what route to take.  I know you've been considering this for some time and I think your plans are a really good compromise.  That's one of the pluses of this hobby - there are so many choices.

I think you are set to have a lot of fun!  I'm looking forward to hearing more about your plans and following the progress of your layout build.  Please keep the posts and photos flowing!

Thanks, Mike A.

Hi Mike,

Thanks. I have definitely put a lot of thought into my choice of what to do next. Honestly, I really would prefer the size of S over O, but the things I like don't align well with S and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Sometimes I suffer from analysis paralysis so it feels really good to actually be moving forward on something. I've literally been thinking of this 2 rail HiRail concept for over 10 years.

I'll let you know when I have something up and running and you can come check it out

Jonathan

 Some interesting reading here. You are running your 3 rail trains with all the bells and whistles on 2 rails. You have the capability of running tighter curves and getting more RR in a given space. As far as the track. The rails are high. The ties are big. Together with the rails weathered and ballast applied it looks pretty tempting. Seeing MTH has this capability. I wonder why they didn't offer Scaletrax in both 3 and 2 rail. Thinking back it may have been catalogued at one time. Would have had a few of us who lack the space to run steamers in a true scale environment thinking of going this route.

Bob Delbridge posted:

Jonathan, do you have any plans to convert any engines to BPRC, like BenH, myself, and a couple of others have done?  For those who haven't seen it, looked at Ben's conversion:

https://ogrforum.com/t...s-sw-battery-powered

That solves the problems with powering the rails and shorting out the wheels.

After looking at the weathering job you put on your rails I feel the need to redo mine, good stuff

Hi Bob, I've considered it. Since I will mostly be using MTH engines going forward I will probably stick with track power. If we see another jump in battery technology I may consider it in the future though. Thanks.

I just ordered my 2-rail track from Ross and GarGraves.  I can't wait!!!   

Awesome Bob. Please post photos when you can.  I'm still working on track plans before I place my order with Ross.

Not sure why the video didn't post. Here goes again... Testing an MTH HiRail H10 steam engine on 2 rail HiRail track.

Very nice....that engine is quite a smoker!

Mark in Oregon

jonnyspeed posted:

Awesome Bob. Please post photos when you can.  I'm still working on track plans before I place my order with Ross.

 

Will do!  Right now I ordered enough track to make a long siding.  After testing, then I'll make a track plan.  

And great video Jonathon! I use NCE for my HO trains.  They make a booster unit that runs well with the Power Cab. 

That is a well done integrated smoke system with the sound. How is it done? Does it have an electrically operated clapper to give the bursts of smoke in tune with the chuff or is it operated off the wheel rotation?

regards

 BobC

Bob, The DCS system is the command control system, inside the engine is either ProtoSound 2 (PS2) or PS3.  Both use a tach tape mounted to the flywheel with a tach reader that synchronizes the sound,smoke, movement .  Ps2/3 also controls the lights and other sounds.  You can download sound sets to a loco from the MTH website to make an engine sound like just about any real engine you want.

The smoke unit has a tiny motor/fan that blows the smoke in sync with the movement of the engine.

Believe it or not I gutted my steamers of PS2 and installed BPRC, cause running battery power RC was what I've always wanted to do.  I do miss the steam chuff and whistle (Locosounds just doesn't cut it for US steam )

jonnyspeed posted:

I love the ESU as well. TCS and ESU have different strengths. I'm happy with both for different reasons.

Hi.

What do you feel are the different strengths of the TCS and ESU decoders?

Thanks, Matt 

Matt01 posted:

jonnyspeed posted:

I love the ESU as well. TCS and ESU have different strengths. I'm happy with both for different reasons.

Hi.

What do you feel are the different strengths of the TCS and ESU decoders?

Thanks, Matt 

Hi Matt,

Good question. The ESU decoders have a wider variety of Diesel sounds where TCS has a wider variety of Steam whistles and bells. They both have larger higher amp boards now that are suitable for O scale. ESU has a drop in board that literally plugs right in to the new Atlas U-23B. You can expect that more in the future from Atlas from what I understand. TCS WowSound has the Audio assist feature where you don't have to do CV programming, just follow the voice prompts to make your settings. I love that feature. TCS also has a "prototype mode" where the engine will auto-notch when it senses load increasing or decreasing. Very cool. ESU has a new feature that is similar, but requires a bit of manual intervention to get the same effect. Both have really great sound quality and motor control. ESU is programmable and you can upload sounds to the decoder where the TCS is locked in to what you get.

Hope that helps.

So a bit of potential bad news for the whole 2RHR concept after some more test runs. It seems that at faster speeds (moderate really) the MTH H-10 will stutter pretty badly going over the unpowered frog. My guess is it is hopping or bouncing and causing one of the few pickup wheels to lose contact. MTH decided not to put any capacitance in the motor circuitry for some reason. That means that if it loses power momentarily it bucks pretty hard. Considering the whole concept of 2RHR is to use MTH Hi-rail steam we now have a pretty big issue. The potential solutions are not very appealing to me. I could remove the MTH DCS components and replace them with DCC electronics with capacitors. Or I could build my own metal frog for the turnouts and power them. Lastly I could take the engine apart and add more power pickups.

I think I will probably wind up scrapping 2RHR unfortunately. Good old Atlas code 148 turnouts with metal powered frogs and Tam Valley Frog juicers are a more reliable way to go it seems. Of course that means Scale wheels. Well, it has been fun playing around with the idea, but I don't think I can live with the hesitation over every frog. I'll try to get down and shoot another video so you can see what I mean.

Hi Jonathan.

It's not the frog that's the problem; it's the closure rails as they're insulated from the points. The simple way is to put a jumper between the points and the closure rails, but you rely on the points' contact with the stock rails to carry the current. The other way is using a Tortoise machine and it's relay contacts to energize the closure rails. We had a similar problem on a #8 curved turnout at the club and using the Tortoise contacts we eliminated the problem.

jonnyspeed posted:

So a bit of potential bad news for the whole 2RHR concept after some more test runs. It seems that at faster speeds (moderate really) the MTH H-10 will stutter pretty badly going over the unpowered frog. My guess is it is hopping or bouncing and causing one of the few pickup wheels to lose contact. MTH decided not to put any capacitance in the motor circuitry for some reason. That means that if it loses power momentarily it bucks pretty hard. Considering the whole concept of 2RHR is to use MTH Hi-rail steam we now have a pretty big issue. The potential solutions are not very appealing to me. I could remove the MTH DCS components and replace them with DCC electronics with capacitors. Or I could build my own metal frog for the turnouts and power them. Lastly I could take the engine apart and add more power pickups.

I think I will probably wind up scrapping 2RHR unfortunately. Good old Atlas code 148 turnouts with metal powered frogs and Tam Valley Frog juicers are a more reliable way to go it seems. Of course that means Scale wheels. Well, it has been fun playing around with the idea, but I don't think I can live with the hesitation over every frog. I'll try to get down and shoot another video so you can see what I mean.

the tender trucks are the problem. measure the distance of the frog, then measure the distance between the two tender trucks. my weaver pocono does the same thing going through a dead frog, I had the 2.0 board replaced with a 3.0 board and did not correct the issue. my 3.0 SD70Ace and F3 ABA have no problems with going through dead frogs because of the distance between the trucks. the only way to correct this stopping issue is to use a tortoise switch and power the frog, or use frog juicers on every switch for running steam engines.

DL&W Pete posted:

jonnyspeed posted:

So a bit of potential bad news for the whole 2RHR concept after some more test runs. It seems that at faster speeds (moderate really) the MTH H-10 will stutter pretty badly going over the unpowered frog. My guess is it is hopping or bouncing and causing one of the few pickup wheels to lose contact. MTH decided not to put any capacitance in the motor circuitry for some reason. That means that if it loses power momentarily it bucks pretty hard. Considering the whole concept of 2RHR is to use MTH Hi-rail steam we now have a pretty big issue. The potential solutions are not very appealing to me. I could remove the MTH DCS components and replace them with DCC electronics with capacitors. Or I could build my own metal frog for the turnouts and power them. Lastly I could take the engine apart and add more power pickups.

I think I will probably wind up scrapping 2RHR unfortunately. Good old Atlas code 148 turnouts with metal powered frogs and Tam Valley Frog juicers are a more reliable way to go it seems. Of course that means Scale wheels. Well, it has been fun playing around with the idea, but I don't think I can live with the hesitation over every frog. I'll try to get down and shoot another video so you can see what I mean.

the tender trucks are the problem. measure the distance of the frog, then measure the distance between the two tender trucks. my weaver pocono does the same thing going through a dead frog, I had the 2.0 board replaced with a 3.0 board and did not correct the issue. my 3.0 SD70Ace and F3 ABA have no problems with going through dead frogs because of the distance between the trucks. the only way to correct this stopping issue is to use a tortoise switch and power the frog, or use frog juicers on every switch for running steam engines.

Exactly Pete. The problem occurs when the lead tender truck hits the frog. Every time like clockwork. Ironically it doesn't happen at slow speeds. I will test the closure rails as Matt suggests, but if that isn't the issue I'm not sure what I should do with this H-10. I think that a larger engine may not have the problem as you mention Pete. There really is no way to power the frog on this GG turnout as it is made of plastic. 

I haven't given up quite yet, but considering I want to run smaller steam I'm wondering if it's worth the trouble or not? Maybe I should add pickups to the opposite sides of the tender axles and see if that helps? That will be next.