Scale Wheels - Drawing Needed

The axel would need trimming at the ends, or I guess you could leave it protruding. I have thought of doing this my self, as you say they're not cheap as a replacement set. It makes sense to just replace the wheels. So the axels are by my measurement 4.8mm, expected them to be 5mm being manufactured in China. The other alternative is to buy say NWSL wheels and have them board out for an interference fit on the axels. The dimensions are fairly simple, the flange would be 1mm square, the tapper on the wheel 2-3 degree's, the width as I remember for a 172 wheel is 4.5mm for standard NMRA wheel. I expect he wants full auto cad drawings?    cTr...( Choose the Right )

The MTH wheels are Code 172 as I recall. As I recall, the axles are the same length because the hi-rail wheels' wider tread places the flanges farther inboard to compensate for the sharper curves.

Why not buy a .145 wheelset and measure it?  I bet I could find six such wheelsets under a crane that really needs .172 to fit my track.

Matt is correct, the axles are the same length.  Again the only difference between the MTH Hi Rail axle wheel set and the Scale Wheel Axle wheel sets are the wheels themselves.  Yes, MTH scale wheels are the old standard code 172, if we are going to do this, why not make it the new code 145 standard.  Code 172 can be done if someone prefers, again just need a drawing.  I have a Code 145 wheel set, measuring it is not really an option, there are way too many variables and dimensions to be had especially around the flanges and wheel cups.  The measurements above are the very basics, there is much more to it, just wondering if someone had a drawing or would be interested in making one.   CAD is not required.  He can model it using the right full set of plans.

My first though was to bore out a NWSL wheel, here is the response I got from them after I sent them a few emails about the project, I have not heard from them in several weeks despite sending a few follow up emails, prompting a different plan:

Re-drilling isn't really an option once they come off the lathe and so what we're really talking here is a custom wheel, especially if you need 60. I'm copying Holly, the owner, on this since she decides on all that and not me. I can tell you that if you get a green light they'd definitely want to see a sample of the desired wheel, especially since MTH is out of business now and can't provide any more. If memory serves MTH uses a 3/16" axle so tweaking our wheels would not be enough; it'd require a new profile to make sure the centers look good.

NWSL Support

That letter gives me hope.  I had thought NWSL was kind of drifting out.

Wheels can be accurately bored, but it requires a collet lathe. Mine stops at 3/4”, so I can’t help with 40 or 42” wheels.  I successfully bore axle gears - I had a number of 3/16” axle NWSL gearboxes that now power Lobaugh 1/4” axles.

I need to ask them about 42” .172 wheelsets, and whether they returned to the glass-filled plastic for gearbox and coupling castings.

NWSL is a great idea, but the market is really thin - I wonder if there are many more than 100 of us who build locomotives from the ground up?  I am not in contact with any others.

We could have dozens of posts discussing O scale wheel profiles that deal with topics like wheel faces front and back, tread taper and width, and flange thickness and depth.  The updated NMRA standard is a compromise profile that I've found works very well with reasonably done trackwork.  The one plug I would like to mention is the advantage of having a curved fillet between the tread and the flange.  Tinplate and older 2 rail O scale wheels typically did not have  fillets.  In an attempt to reduce crud buildup on wheels and rail heads many years ago I launched an upgrade program to replace the plastic wheels on dozens of Athearn Delrin trucks with steel wheels from NWSL.  At that time NWSL wheel treads lacked fillets.  The metal wheels did helped mitigate crud buildup - but had the unintended consequence of occasional derailments at turnouts that previously were very reliable.  Over time the pattern became clear - the fillet-less wheel sets would pick at turnouts while similarly gauged  wheels with tread fillets had no issues.   A senior member of our group (a NWSL dealer) discussed the issue  with the gentleman who ran NWSL at the time and he agreed to incorporate  tread fillets in later production.  Like with plastic wheels, I've  banished fillet-less wheels from the layout (with a few exception for drivers on favorite old steam locomotives).

Recommendation:  If you are going to commission someone to machine new wheels inquire if he can do them with fillets.   

Might want to check with Jay Criswell At Right-o-Way.  If he thinks there is a market he might either make them himself or have them made.

I second that.

@Keystoned Ed posted:

. . .  The one plug I would like to mention is the advantage of having a curved fillet between the tread and the flange. . . .  Like with plastic wheels, I've  banished fillet-less wheels from the layout (with a few exception for drivers on favorite old steam locomotives).

Recommendation:  If you are going to commission someone to machine new wheels inquire if he can do them with fillets.   

That's brilliant and makes a lot of sense. Also explains why I'd get some derailments on turnouts at the club with some older cars (Ross #4 and #5 turnouts work surprisingly well with scale wheels with Code 172 treads). Time to do some wheel inspections.

Not sure, but I think All Nation started the fillets.  The real thing has them.

The real thing:

Oh good grief, lots of people can easily stick a NWSL wheel in their lathe, drill and ream it to any size axle. It is not rocket science.

There is some good info here guys, and I appreciate it.  Still looking for a drawing that one may have or be willing to make for a new wheel source that would be very cost friendly.  I do not have time due to the job and family to create one myself at the moment.

It is not trivial to bore a wheel on a lathe.  My lathe is an 11" Sheldon - relatively large for a home shop - and the largest collet I have is 3/4".  You cannot use a three jaw because they are never perfectly accurate, and a four jaw would take forever to set up.

But for a 36" wheel, you are correct - trivial in my shop.  Don't try it on a Sherline.

Opinion.

I would just slap it into my Taiwan 6 jaw, indicate the existing hole, and spin the wheel a jaw at a time till it was as good as it gets, run a drill through it, run a reamer through it, and call it a day.  Close enough for anything we need.  But if you REALLY wanted to be dead on accurate, get one of these...

https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod...00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

buy a collet the size you need, and stick it in a 4 jaw and indicate it in.

Simply boring the wheel isn't the only consideration.  I just finished boring a couple of hundred NWSL 42" wheels for the Center Cab Project.  I do this because the NWSL insulator is not adequate for holding a driven wheel.  Fine for rolling stock.  I have my own insulators.  This requires boring the wheel centers to something slightly under .1865".  Why do I mention this?  If you look at the face of the current NWSL wheel you can see there's not much material there.  Remove any more than the 3/16" and the center hub, if you will, starts getting really thin fast.  Thinner it creates less surface area where the wheel is pressed onto it's axle.  Less material is not a good thing for numerous reasons.

For what's it's worth, I use a 5C collet and a miniature boring bar.  Gives me far more accuracy than simply drilling and reaming.

Jay

5C, huh?  You must have a 13” lathe.  Great to hear that NWSL is still delivering - I need 42” wheelsets.  Those look like .145 in the photo.

I suppose you could also just take the wheels off and turn down the axles on both ends to fit the holes in the wheels too maybe. 

@oscaletrains posted:

Oh good grief, lots of people can easily stick a NWSL wheel in their lathe, drill and ream it to any size axle. It is not rocket science.

And of course everyone happens to have an appropriate machine lathe lying around.

@rdunniii posted:

And of course everyone happens to have an appropriate machine lathe lying around.

Truth is, if you have the reamer sizes to do it, you could just clamp the wheel in a vise, use a variable speed hand drill, and keep reaming out the bore till it was the size you wanted and it'd probably work fine.  They used to have plans to build whole brass engines without a lathe in the old days in MR.

That sounds chancy.  Reams are not designed to enlarge holes.

My problem has always been the pressing.  You really do need a fixture, with parallel matching wheel cups.  With drivers, there is a big shoulder, but a freight car wheel will wobble unless held dead straight during pressing.

Bob,

Kind of reminds me of the old saying, just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

By the way, I do have some Overland 42" that look like 172 tread (I'll have to measure them).  They are blackened NS plated.  I don't like plated wheels, almost as bad as plastic but they're available to you.

The 5C collet and a fixture in the tail stock makes pressing on the wheels fairly easy.

Jay

Thanks Jay.  I may take you up on that - these are display models.  I too disdain anything but carbon steel wheels for operation.  The plated wheels quickly lose the plating; then the brass picks up dirt almost as fast as die cast.

Me too - I mount the wheelset between headstock and tailstock to press.

Ours is a one-sided relationship.  I owe you greatly!  I think of you every time I install handrail posts or give away couplers or install new Lobaugh trucks on an old freight car.  Not to mention that gorgeous Shasta Water car . . .

@Jay C posted:

Bob,

Kind of reminds me of the old saying, just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Jay

I love it!!!  👍

Mark in Oregon