@Simon Winter posted:If you want to run stuff on 36" radius it's that or all smaller engines.
Simon
There's nothing wrong with smaller engines be they steam or diesel, or trolleys and traction.
@Simon Winter posted:If you want to run stuff on 36" radius it's that or all smaller engines.
Simon
Somewhat agree. First of all I want to be clear that I am not advocating for swinging pilots or blind drivers. It is my opinion that many mid-size steam engines could be built to run on 36"R curves without the need for blind drivers, or incorrect sized driving wheels (diameter wise). All 4 axle diesels can already make a 36"R without the need for swinging pilots. Obviously the larger engines can't do it without the 3 rail compromises and for that the user will have to go to larger radius but one can have a lot of fun with mid size steam locomotives and 4 axle diesels and not to mention it is cheaper. It is my opinion that this might bring some interest into O scale 2R and possibly some people. I believe model railroading as a hobby is doing fine, however O scale (3 and 2 rail) seem to be losing more people than it gains. Anything to create interest in our scale is a good thing to me.
@Rusty Traque posted:That is the requirement for most of the ideas in this thread. Someone has to supply the $$$.
Rusty
But even if someone had the $$$$ (and it would not be cheap) wouldn't that person want to know that they are at the very least going to break even? If it were me and I had the money for some of the things in this thread I would really study the market to try to gauge what the real interest is in these products. While I wouldn't mind a small loss I would not want to lose all the money I put into something just to have a lot of stock laying around that no one wants.
For instance Atlas sells their switches for almost $100 and we all know what the short comings of the Atlas switches are. If someone wanted to mass produce a fully detailed line of switches in O and P:48 in sizes from #4 to #20 in rail sizes from code 100 up to code 148 without the short comings that Atlas has what would the cost be to the enthusiast? $125 per switch $150 per switch? I have trouble affording the Atlas switches which is why I bought a jig from Fast Tracks. When the time comes I can roll my own switch for $30 for materials. That is a 70% savings over the Atlas switch and yes it won't be as detailed as Atlas or other switches but when you need 15 switches that savings is a large chunk of change.
This thread has been a fun read. Let's not forget that we are dreaming here, myself included, I hate to be negative but I don't see any of these things actually happening in the future. I would love to be wrong about that.
Last batch of turnouts I got from Signature Switch were right around $100 each by the time shipping/tax was added. Flawless is about the best description I can give. I tried making my own, some things are better left to the professionals.
I don't care if they are 2 or 3 rail but I would really like to have some ore jennies from PRR, PC, or Conrail.
Dave
About ten years ago, on an HO forum I was on, a few people were complaining about locomotives and rolling stock being manufactured in China. They thought someone (it’s always someone else) should start making HO locomotives in the the good old USA. After some mixed responses, yeah and nay, a model railroader who happened to own a US injection molding business, chimed in, and posted a spreadsheet showing what it would cost to manufacture in the US, and it worked out to be somewhere between $700-800 for a plastic locomotive, and that’s was with a meager profit margin, and the assumption that sales would be in the thousands. So that leaves dealing with China, and I’m thinking not many people would want to even bother given the limited 2-rail market, and with all the headaches in design and production, and with the current shipping mess due to the container shortage. I’m not even sure why people even bothered with those very limited brass runs of late. It doesn’t seam worthwhile for the quantity of locomotives being made, even at $1500 or whatever it is each. How much do those guys end up making an hour on that? I’m guessing its a labor of love, or a retirement job? Don’t get me wrong, I admire anyone that manufactures anything in 2rail and would support them if I could without paying for a divorce too. And, I actually don’t see a problem with the price, other than it obviously puts a lot of us out of the market, but nice things cost money. I think the only thing we can do is a create a market, where there is a financial incentive for Atlas, or Intermountain, or whomever, to make an effort in 2rail. Promoting this scale is the way to go about that. I’m a lifelong HO model railroader that switched (still work on a little HO too) to O scale 2r at 52. I don’t find it anymore expensive than HO, thanks to the Strasburg show, and occasionally eBay. Obviously, the lack of product which we are talking about here, is a bit frustrating, especially in the 1968-76 era I model. Club Shows, articles in MR and RMC, modular groups, blogs and YouTube, etc might get a lot more HO folks interested and create a demand?
Dear Jim and others,
Nicely detailed 1/48 1940 / 50's era residential coal delivery trucks/ Cement trucks/ Oil trucks.
Baldwin baby face cab units
Baldwin AS-16 / Rs-12 / AS-616 series road switchers
Great fun thread !!!!
John
04/17/2021 Strasburg Show
Don’t forget - part of this hobby is doing it yourself if you cannot buy it for reasonable.
My thought about track has nothing to do with swinging pilots and blind drivers. I merely point out that the center rail is not what enables sharp corners.
Commercial O Scale is market-driven. No market, no product. Sunset has an interesting plan - apparently enough reservations and they will import anything.
Getting really good models for cheap is a dream - nobody wants to subsidize the hobby of folks they do not know well.
Opinion. Of course.
John,
I am with you on all three wishes, esssspecially the Babyface.
@mwb posted:There's nothing wrong with smaller engines be they steam or diesel, or trolleys and traction.
Never said there was! I like it ALL! Just saying 36" radius restricts you to smaller stuff unless you don't mind it looking silly/having caveats. I wish there were more small and medium stuff!
Simon
Regarding 36” radii curves it seems to me the more expensive locomotives such as Glacier Park or Division Point will handle tighter radii than say locomotives from Third Rail. I have heard their SP 2-6-0 will barely handle 48” radius. Here’s a short video of a Glacier Park 2-8-0 negotiating an S curve of 36” radius without any transition between the curves.
Peter
@Peter E B posted:Regarding 36” radii curves it seems to me the more expensive locomotives such as Glacier Park or Division Point will handle tighter radii than say locomotives from Third Rail. I have heard their SP 2-6-0 will barely handle 48” radius. Here’s a short video of a Glacier Park 2-8-0 negotiating an S curve of 36” radius without any transition between the curves.
Peter
here's the video for easier viewing:
My three wishes
1) Mundane mid 50's four door Chevy Sedans. The kind regular working folks drove. Not Belairs. Not two tone. A 210 would be perfect. A 150 fine. Maybe even a station wagon (not a Nomad or Belair). Prefer 55 or 56, but will gladly take a year earlier or later. 1/43 scale is fine, but make them decent models.
2) Mundane mid 50's four door Plymouths. Same as above. Except models become Savoy, Belvedere.
3) Mundane mid 50s Pontiacs or Oldsmobile. (The "or" is only because I am allowed three wishes).
@mwb posted:There's nothing wrong with smaller engines be they steam or diesel, or trolleys and traction.
I have an O scale fifty foot box motor that will negotiate a twelve inch radius. I also have two passenger motors that will do the same coupled.
Thanks, Engineer Joe! I forget how you do that!?
Peter
1) Larger sectional track. I am NOT a do-it-your-self-er, and once I am ready to lay track, I am not about to lay individual ties and rail spikes. I know some really enjoy that, and I admire their work, but that just isn't me. I was really hoping Atlas would continue their sectional track a couple more notches. They already have 54-inch radius (I own several boxes), next step would be 58.5 and then 63-inch radius. At that point, having over 60-inch radius, you could run just about anything AND have just about anything look good. Then add two more rungs to the ladder, 67.5 and 72-inch radius, and I think you'd have a complete package. Those 72-inch sections would be about 28 inches long each, which is about the length of their zephyr boxes, so shipping is definitely doable.
2) Larger selection of ready made switches. I would LOVE for Atlas to do their double-slip in 2-rail, would open up SO many more design possibilities for those short on real estate. I have emailed one of the custom builders mentioned often here, but gotten no response.
3) Someone to redo F-7s so I have a chance to get an ARR F-7 #1500-1501.
Good thread. Ive been thinking about this as Ive read the answers pile up:
1. For all of the zero tooling required manufacturing outfits (laser cutters, 3D printers, etc...) to upscale the countless HO kits, bits and accessories out there to O. If your business involves loading material into a machine and pressing a button on a computer, there's no reason to not make it available at 181% its original size. I get the sense a lot of these shops are "on demand" anyways.
2. Continuation of something that can be bought new and ready to run. With MTH headed the way of the Dodo and Atlas doing.... whatever it is they're doing, the options are dwindling. I can tinker, but sometimes its nice to just open a box.
3. This last one.... its just me. I'd like some scale figures running/jogging. There's 1 artistta figure of a woman jogging and thats it.
@lionel1946 posted:1) Larger sectional track. I am NOT a do-it-your-self-er, and once I am ready to lay track, I am not about to lay individual ties and rail spikes. I know some really enjoy that, and I admire their work, but that just isn't me. I was really hoping Atlas would continue their sectional track a couple more notches. They already have 54-inch radius (I own several boxes), next step would be 58.5 and then 63-inch radius. At that point, having over 60-inch radius, you could run just about anything AND have just about anything look good. Then add two more rungs to the ladder, 67.5 and 72-inch radius, and I think you'd have a complete package. Those 72-inch sections would be about 28 inches long each, which is about the length of their zephyr boxes, so shipping is definitely doable.
2) Larger selection of ready made switches. I would LOVE for Atlas to do their double-slip in 2-rail, would open up SO many more design possibilities for those short on real estate. I have emailed one of the custom builders mentioned often here, but gotten no response.
3) Someone to redo F-7s so I have a chance to get an ARR F-7 #1500-1501.
Lenz (Germany) made an Atlas compatible and look-alike #5 double slip (I have two) and 3 way #5 (I have one) also some relatively smallradius curved turnouts I think I heard that Peco has bought the line from Lenz. I don't see anything on the Peco website yet other than the existing bullhead rail double slip, but nothing in flat bottom rail from the Lenz line.
@Jim Scorse posted:Lenz (Germany) made an Atlas compatible and look-alike #5 double slip (I have two) and 3 way #5 (I have one) also some relatively smallradius curved turnouts I think I heard that Peco has bought the line from Lenz. I don't see anything on the Peco website yet other than the existing bullhead rail double slip, but nothing in flat bottom rail from the Lenz line.
I believe Atlas O scale track is based upon Lenz track.
Just think, at one time Atlas made snap track in HO and N scales and lots of it.
Wonder how they managed to make so much in Hillside NJ in days gone by.
Anyway, IMHO track is the most important component in any scale. Build nice RTR track and locos and rolling stock will follow.
I agree with several others - we need "good" track / turnouts / rail joiners; with that the locos and freight / passenger cars will follow
Actually I heard the opposite of Jim's thoughts. Lenz has moved its track production from China to Peco in the UK. Track items will be on the Lenz O Scale website - made by Peco exclusively for Lenz. Also Lenz track was made after Atlas track came out and is very similar. I have the Lenz double slip and it works and looks great with my Atlas track although I still prefer the the Roco #6 turnouts over the current Atlas 2 rail turnouts.
@Jim Scorse posted:Lenz (Germany) made an Atlas compatible and look-alike #5 double slip (I have two) and 3 way #5 (I have one) also some relatively smallradius curved turnouts I think I heard that Peco has bought the line from Lenz. I don't see anything on the Peco website yet other than the existing bullhead rail double slip, but nothing in flat bottom rail from the Lenz line.
You just gave me a new eBay search! Thanks! Looking forward to finding a few.
@Jim Scorse posted:The Stanton drives are 'available' in OW5, P48, On3 and more with varying wheelbases.
Thanks for the heads up. That drive would work well with an unpowered Gas-Electric I have in my collection if I can figure out how to work the side frames.
As for my wish list:
- For someone to pick up the production on the MTH 2-rail trucks. They've worked out well in my conversions of MTH rolling stock and some others.
- See Engineer Joe's list regarding MTH scale-wheel production.
- More resurrected Weaver and K-Line scale tooling. I'd love to have an Amtrak SuperLiner set but not at $600/car.
My 3 Wants:-
1. A decent CF7, made in the style of the old Red Caboose GP9. Preferably available undecorated so those of us who freelance a Short Line can go nuts.
2. A decent GP38-2, as per Red Caboose style, but factory painted in Soo Line Red & White would suit me. 
3. Modern ARMN-type reefers, and/or updated versions of the Weaver 57ft mechanical reefer, with the external fridge motor.
As for 36" radius curves, and what can/can't go round them, and does/doesn't look ok doing so, I'll just leave this here.....
My Atlas SD40 taking the 36" curves at one end of my unfinished layout. First car in the train is an MTH Centrebeam Flat with Atlas roller-bearing trucks.
I grant it looks better viewed from inside the curve than outside, but an outside view is impossible in my location anyway!!!
Like this one SundayShunter? If you don’t mind a little soldering and extra bracing here and there the Pecos River Brass version is a good runner, having the guts of the PSC S series switchers!
Peter
Attachments
Images (1)
Nice... what an odd looking thing. 😁
Mark in Oregon
I wish a variety of good can motors ( Pittman etc. ) were readily available for reasonable prices. I'm tired of the oddball stuff typically found on Ebay.
Bob
@Strummer posted:Nice... what an odd looking thing. 😁
Mark in Oregon
First time I saw one, I told the CMO I thought you said we didn't have any GE's on the property. He told me what a CF-7 actually was and then commented I guess it does look kinda' like a GE from the road. They are even odder to look at from the inside of the electrical cabinet. As always, Tom Dempsey
@Peter E B posted:Like this one SundayShunter? If you don’t mind a little soldering and extra bracing here and there the Pecos River Brass version is a good runner, having the guts of the PSC S series switchers!
Peter
Yes, just like that one. The one teeny problem being that Pecos River CF7s are as rare as hen's teeth, and very expensive if they do turn up, especially to ship across The Puddle to the U.K. 
It does surprise me how few US railfans/modellers seem to know about them. There is great interest here in Britain, in American Short Lines. We have just nothing like them over here, despite once again having a Privatised rail network, after years of a national "British Rail". Short Lines are an answer to a modeller's prayer - especially modellers short of space, like most of us are in the UK!! As the CF7 cascaded fron Santa Fe to numerous Short Lines & Regionals, to me it's a natural choice for a versatile model engine.
@Peter E B posted:Like this one SundayShunter? If you don’t mind a little soldering and extra bracing here and there the Pecos River Brass version is a good runner, having the guts of the PSC S series switchers!
Peter
Not to sidetrack this thread, but can you elaborate a little bit on the "little soldering and extra bracing here and there"?
Boilermaker, Pecos River Brass has a reputation for lots of cold solder joints so they tend to "self destruct" with little use. My friend had sold this one and it was returned supposedly damaged (self destructed) in shipment. I offered to try to repair it for him. Once I got it, it was obvious it had been dropped as the coupler was flattened. As a result of this both pilots were detached and steps bent as well as other damage. I've fixed dropped engines before but never saw one come apart so completely. See below.
As I started repairs I noticed there was little to solder the pilots to and no angle bracing or anything. I ended up adding a lot of fairly thick brass to get a good solid joint at both ends, see below.
Last I had to re-solder most of the stanchions and straighten the handrails. A heavy weather job took care of the discolored paint from the soldering. That's about it. Thanks for listening.....
Peter
Oh, my friend sold the unit for a good price and the new owner is very happy with it.
Attachments
Images (15)
@SundayShunter posted:My 3 Wants:-
1. A decent CF7, made in the style of the old Red Caboose GP9. Preferably available undecorated so those of us who freelance a Short Line can go nuts.
2. A decent GP38-2, as per Red Caboose style, but factory painted in Soo Line Red & White would suit me.
3. Modern ARMN-type reefers, and/or updated versions of the Weaver 57ft mechanical reefer, with the external fridge motor.
As for 36" radius curves, and what can/can't go round them, and does/doesn't look ok doing so, I'll just leave this here.....
My Atlas SD40 taking the 36" curves at one end of my unfinished layout. First car in the train is an MTH Centrebeam Flat with Atlas roller-bearing trucks.
I grant it looks better viewed from inside the curve than outside, but an outside view is impossible in my location anyway!!!
Is that your video? If so, can you E-mail me a photo of the bottom of the converted center beam car. I've converted four of them and would prefer to just modify the MTH trucks with Intermountain wheels rather than fabricate new bolsters and use Weaver trucks. Thanks.
By the way, like your list. I occasionally see the UP/ARMN reefers (BNSF also has some) and at 82 feet, the the largest ones are huge.
In response to queries about the Stanton Drive. The DCC version comes prewired for rail pickup and motor control. NWSL include clear instructions on wiring and suggestions on how to install these drives taking into consideration nearly every locomotive could be different. There is a U shaped slot molded into each side of the casing holding the drive - this doesn't seem to show clearly in available advertising material. You can use this slot to make up an attachment to hold the truck sideframes. How you go about this will depend on the type of sideframes as it will be important to line up the center of the axle boxes with the axles of the drive.
I have successfully used two powered Stanton Drives to repower a Weaver RS3 (or RS2) and used the above slot to make an attachment for the sideframes. I had already reworked the Weaver drive along the lines of an article that appeared in OST and even though there was an improvement in operation I was not happy so decided repower using Stanton Drives. While the locomotive is a little noisy running light it runs a lot quieter when hauling a train. It does not have sound.
I'm now using two drives to repower a Custom Brass S1. Like the RS3 I tried to improve the original drive but it didn't work out very well. An advantage in this case is that after discarding the original motor and fittings I have plenty of room to install a sound decoder. I intend using the U shaped slot to hold an attachment to the sideframes but the Blunt trucks throw up a different set of problems which I will get to after installing the decoder.
I'm using two powered drives because I have a 2.5% grade on my short line.
Trust this helps with some of the queries.
Ian
@Peter E B posted:Boilermaker, Pecos River Brass has a reputation for lots of cold solder joints so they tend to "self destruct" with little use.
Peter
Peter, You might want to aim that comment at the builder, not the Importer. PRB imported MANY models of excellent quality, that did not fall apart. They used MANY different builders. Some were excellent and some as you illustrate, but it's simply not fair to imply everything they imported was poorly built.
Simon
@AGHRMatt posted:Is that your video? If so, can you E-mail me a photo of the bottom of the converted center beam car. I've converted four of them and would prefer to just modify the MTH trucks with Intermountain wheels rather than fabricate new bolsters and use Weaver trucks. Thanks.
By the way, like your list. I occasionally see the UP/ARMN reefers (BNSF also has some) and at 82 feet, the the largest ones are huge.
It is indeed my video, taken on my 17ft x 8ft layout.
There's not much to show on the underside of my MTH centerbeam, to be honest. It's a very rough'n'ready conversion - I chop off the MTH bolster, and open the mounting hole out, to 4mm dia. I think, then use a nut and bolt to fit the Atlas trucks, with a small washer to fill the Atlas mounting hole. As Atlas trucks have a tall center boss removing the car bolster keeps the ride height about right.
That brown one is the later version with trucks in the right location. The green one that brings up the rear in that video is an older one with the trucks right at the ends of the car. It still has MTH 2-rail trucks, but when I finally get round to relocating the trucks to the correct place I also intend to modify the underframe to remove the unprototypical big channel section MTH use.
I use Atlas trucks when I can as I like the rotating bearing caps.
@SundayShunter posted:It is indeed my video, taken on my 17ft x 8ft layout.
There's not much to show on the underside of my MTH centerbeam, to be honest. It's a very rough'n'ready conversion - I chop off the MTH bolster, and open the mounting hole out, to 4mm dia. I think, then use a nut and bolt to fit the Atlas trucks, with a small washer to fill the Atlas mounting hole. As Atlas trucks have a tall center boss removing the car bolster keeps the ride height about right.
That brown one is the later version with trucks in the right location. The green one that brings up the rear in that video is an older one with the trucks right at the ends of the car. It still has MTH 2-rail trucks, but when I finally get round to relocating the trucks to the correct place I also intend to modify the underframe to remove the unprototypical big channel section MTH use.
I use Atlas trucks when I can as I like the rotating bearing caps.
Thanks. I owe you one.
Simon, point well made. Their freight cars in brass ARE excellent models. The CF7 is notorious as are other diesels they imported. Not sure about the steam locomotives. As I don’t know who the builder is and they did import and sell them I’m afraid I might have painted with too wide a brush!
Peter
@Peter E B posted:Simon, point well made. Their freight cars in brass ARE excellent models. The CF7 is notorious as are other diesels they imported. Not sure about the steam locomotives. As I don’t know who the builder is and they did import and sell them I’m afraid I might have painted with too wide a brush!
Peter
Peter,
PRB had a bunch of different builders! John Smith, the owner, wrote a column titled "Crapola from the Cupola" in early issues of "O Scale Trains" and it gave a pretty decent picture of the Brass business in South Korea, and his experiences over there in general. I highly recommend it. The brass business started in Japan after WWII, and shifted to South Korea when the Japanese economy started to recover after the end of WWII. J.S. looks at not only the nuts and bolts of the business, but the human side of it.
Simon
@PRR Man posted:Jim; most vertical drive motors have 'double lead' worms on them. (which you probably know) Changing to a single lead worm effectively reduces the ratio by doubling it, Some time ago I bought that spec worm and worm gear set from NWSL to experiment with. It works! Toughest part was getting the OEM worm off the motor shaft!
Hi Chris,
Can you supply a link or part number to this NWSL worm gear set? This would be great if I could run my Atlas units back to parallel wiring and get good speed control. What do you believe makes it so tough to get off of the motor shaft, e.g. do you think they used some type of Loctite or is it just some crazy-tight interference press fit?
Thanks.
Scott
