Traction Tire Frustrations

I refuse to pay $1 each for something that costs $1  to produce hundreds of.  The markup on traction tires must be almost astounding.

I use 4/1 heat shrink tubing, cut it on a paper cutter, stretch it on, heat it and shrink it down.  It already has adhesive.  The cut doesn't need to be perfect, just close to parallel, and not hang over.  So being a little undercut is better than too wide.

I usually only have tire trouble, with OEM tires, when I try to run a locomotive that has been advertised to run 31 curves but doesn't really like them.  Or sometimes same scenario, also pulling lots of cars.

@Former Member posted:

I refuse to pay $1 each for something that costs $1  to produce hundreds of.  The markup on traction tires must be almost astounding.

I use 4/1 heat shrink tubing, cut it on a paper cutter, stretch it on, heat it and shrink it down.  It already has adhesive.  The cut doesn't need to be perfect, just close to parallel, and not hang over.  So being a little undercut is better than too wide.

I usually only have tire trouble, with OEM tires, when I try to run a locomotive that has been advertised to run 31 curves but doesn't really like them.  Or sometimes same scenario, also pulling lots of cars.

This is really quite a good approach. Heat-shrink tubing is plasticized PVC and has the hardness properties I mentioned in my earlier post. I had tried heat-shrinkable PVC before, but I couldn't get anything resembling good cuts with scissors, razor blades, x-acto knives, etc. but I never thought of a paper cutter. I'm going to try it! I have a few questions, though:

1. Does the tubing shrink uniformly over the circumference of the wheel?

2. What temperature do you run the heat gun for the 4/1 shrink ratio tubing?

3. If removal is needed, is the hot melt a bear to get out of the wheel groove?

4. Is the 4/1 you can get on ebay good enough or do I need a particular brand?

And that markup on "replacement" tires IS astounding and you still have the same "frustrations!"

Thanks!

I built my present 16' by 20' layout in 2015. I have changed 2 tires since then on 10 engines. It is all O60 and O72 Fastrack. The previous two layouts were O36, and it seemed like I was changing tires all the time. Very unscientific, but works for me.

Funny this topic comes up again as it happens to be one of the few days I've had to change out a traction tire. I have an 88 square foot layout with all 036 curves up and running for almost 11 years. In all of that time, I've had to change out a traction tire maybe 4 or 5 times and today was one of those times.

Fortunately, it was on my newer Lionel Legacy GP30, where the truck sides come off easily and the change-out took about a minute. I too, have found that MTH traction tires work better and last and last. They fit tighter than Lionel's designated for the same locomotive.

The second photo below shows the Lionel tire on the left and the MTH one on the right. MTH's seems slightly smaller, so you have to stretch it a little more for a better fit. Lionel's seem too loose and come off. Today I had to replace the Lionel tire with the MTH and it just fits better.

@John H posted:

I built my present 16' by 20' layout in 2015. I have changed 2 tires since then on 10 engines. It is all O60 and O72 Fastrack. The previous two layouts were O36, and it seemed like I was changing tires all the time. Very unscientific, but works for me.

Another thing to consider is that switches, due to gaps in the rails, cause faster wear of traction tires than running on simple curves or straight track. I find that MTH tires last much longer than Lionel tires, and the softer Lionel tires seem to leave more residue on the rails and require more frequent track cleaning.

As to the effect of curve radius on traction tire wear, the smaller the radius, the more the slippage at the wheels, and more slippage increases traction tire wear.

MELGAR

@John H posted:

I built my present 16' by 20' layout in 2015. I have changed 2 tires since then on 10 engines. It is all O60 and O72 Fastrack. The previous two layouts were O36, and it seemed like I was changing tires all the time. Very unscientific, but works for me.

Your observation really does have a scientific explanation. If we have two 1-inch diameter wheels on an axle where they can turn independently, the outside wheel will turn 2 3/4 turns more than the inside one for one trip around a circle of O-gauge track, regardless of its diameter. Therefore, the difference in rotation speed between the two wheels is greater the tighter the curve. For example, the difference in rotation speed between the wheels around an 036 curve is twice that with an 072 curve at the same "axle" speed. Now, let's assume we have a loco with 2 sets of 1" diameter driven wheels on fixed axles with a traction tire on each driven wheel. Now, the wheels on the driven axles can't turn independently, so one, or both, of them needs to do some slipping when the loco goes around a curve.  I think, most of the time, the inside wheels do the slipping when both wheels on a driven axle have tires, so let's assume that. What we end up with, then, is that the "slip speed" of the inside traction tire against the inside rail is faster the tighter the curve because it has to "slip away" the 2 3/4 "extra" turns the inside wheel is being forced to make by the outside wheel over the shorter distance of a smaller circle. For example, the "slip speed" of the inside traction tire around an 036 curve is twice that of an 072 curve. Therefore, the wear on the inside traction tires is greater around 036 curves than 072 curves because they are slipping faster around the 036. Greater "slip speed" of traction tire-equipped wheels on the same axle also results in greater rolling resistance and, hence, load on the motor which is why traction tire equipped locos slow more around tighter curves. The softer and "stickier" the traction tires the worse this situation becomes. I'm trying to find a fairly hard and "slippery" tire to use on one side of my traction tire locos to act as a "differential" because my layout is all 036 curves.

@Bill Swatos

Interesting scientific explanation from the physics perspective, which makes sense. But as stated above, I’ve changed traction tires only about 5 times over the past 11 years on 4 engines, which isn’t too bad. And they’ve all run on 036 Fastrack curves.

I think the quality of the traction tire rubber and the snugness of its fit around the wheel has a lot to do with it as well.

Funny... There is a traction tire thread on another popular train forum right now.  One of the members was trying to convince another that a train would just not run without traction tires and that he needed them to operate.

That prompted me to try this.

@Bill Swatos posted:

This is really quite a good approach. Heat-shrink tubing is plasticized PVC and has the hardness properties I mentioned in my earlier post. I had tried heat-shrinkable PVC before, but I couldn't get anything resembling good cuts with scissors, razor blades, x-acto knives, etc. but I never thought of a paper cutter. I'm going to try it! I have a few questions, though:

1. Does the tubing shrink uniformly over the circumference of the wheel?

2. What temperature do you run the heat gun for the 4/1 shrink ratio tubing?

3. If removal is needed, is the hot melt a bear to get out of the wheel groove?

4. Is the 4/1 you can get on ebay good enough or do I need a particular brand?

And that markup on "replacement" tires IS astounding and you still have the same "frustrations!"

Thanks!

Run the locomotive upside down slowly, and then yes, it does shrink evenly.

Heat a piece of scrap tubing before trying it on a locomotive.  Then you can see what it takes to shrink it with your heat source.

I've only removed one set, and it cleaned up OK.

My 4/1 is from ebay. But be sure to get 4/1.  Most common heat shrink is 2/1

Still looking at 3D printing a universal tire strip from flex resin.

The strip would be applied to the wheel like  tape; cut to length with an xacto knife and then securing the ends with a laser pen.

I have the resin just need the time.

@Former Member posted:

Run the locomotive upside down slowly, and then yes, it does shrink evenly.

Heat a piece of scrap tubing before trying it on a locomotive.  Then you can see what it takes to shrink it with your heat source.

I've only removed one set, and it cleaned up OK.

My 4/1 is from ebay. But be sure to get 4/1.  Most common heat shrink is 2/1

Thanks! One other question: What ratio should the "unshrunk" tubing diameter to the "groove" wheel diameter be? I know it should be somewhat less than 4/1 to ensure a snug fit, but how much less?

Thanks,

@AlanRail posted:

Still looking at 3D printing a universal tire strip from flex resin.

The strip would be applied to the wheel like  tape; cut to length with an xacto knife and then securing the ends with a laser pen.

I have the resin just need the time.

Do you know what material the "flex resin" is?

@Yellowstone Special posted:

@Bill Swatos

Interesting scientific explanation from the physics perspective, which makes sense. But as stated above, I’ve changed traction tires only about 5 times over the past 11 years on 4 engines, which isn’t too bad. And they’ve all run on 036 Fastrack curves.

I think the quality of the traction tire rubber and the snugness of its fit around the wheel has a lot to do with it as well.

Agreed, and I will follow your MTH recommendation including finding their replacement guide. I still wish a manufacturer would produce a natural (latex) rubber or EPDM rubber-based traction tire with the traction and abrasion resistance properties of vehicle tires. I'd pay a premium for the blasted things!

@Bill Swatos posted:

Agreed, and I will follow your MTH recommendation including finding their replacement guide. I still wish a manufacturer would produce a natural (latex) rubber or EPDM rubber-based traction tire with the traction and abrasion resistance properties of vehicle tires. I'd pay a premium for the blasted things!

If some manufacturer made those, I think I would as well.

@Bill Swatos posted:

Thanks! One other question: What ratio should the "unshrunk" tubing diameter to the "groove" wheel diameter be? I know it should be somewhat less than 4/1 to ensure a snug fit, but how much less?

Thanks,

Ideally, the unshrunk tubing would be a snug fit, but not have to be over stretched to get it on.  I've found that "loose" fit makes it difficult to get the tubing to stop wandering around when I'm trying to heat it.

I hadn't intended to get so detailed when I first posted on this topic, but your question requires some detail.  At first I also used scissors or an exacto and got less than ideal results.  The paper cutter works and gives me consistent results.  However, here is the technique I use.  Even the paper cutter is inconsistent if I don't flatten out the heat shrink first.  So here's what I do;

Flatten out a 4" piece of heat shrink in the bench vise to make it take a flatter shape.  Just enough pressure to accomplish that.

Use the wife's iron on low setting and just enough time to make the heat shrink adhesive tack to itself.  NOT enough to shrink it or permanently set the glue.  Very little heat is needed.

So now you have a nice piece of flat heat shrink tubing that won't squirm around on you when you put it in the paper cutter.

after cutting just pry the adhesive apart and you're ready to install.

Life it too short and my time is too valuable for use elsewhere to make traction tires.  Truthfully, I spend far more money and time keeping smoke running on the steam fleet than for traction tires, but I'm not giving that up, so it'll just have to be a "problem".

I use MTH tires for the most part, I've had one too many thick Lionel tire bind on the imitation brake shoes.  The MTH tires are thinner and also seem to last longer.