N Scale C415 - Who Wants One?

[peteski]

We will consider it, but I can't see why you would want to mill down the entire length of the chassis and risk something going wrong. Plus you get the more modern, smooth-running atlas features.

-David

I have no interest in this loco but as a general comment I much prefer the older larger open-frame motors to the new flattened-can miniature motors.  The old motors are much easier to service (clean and lube) and they have very robust replaceable brushes.  Plus the older larger motors have more torque.

New motors are pretty much disposable items (assuming that a replacement motors are even available for sale when a replacement is needed).  To me that would be a good reason to prefer the older type chassis.

[sdodge]

This is what I am after.
www.rrpicturearchives.net/locopicture.aspx?id=125794

I would spring for one of these also! Might be too non-mainstream to see one though.

[dcutting]

I would spring for one of these also! Might be too non-mainstream to see one though.

We will model all versions, after all SP had 10, Rock Island had 10, SP&S had 2. That only leaves six others.

-David

I have no interest in this loco but as a general comment I much prefer the older larger open-frame motors to the new flattened-can miniature motors.  The old motors are much easier to service (clean and lube) and they have very robust replaceable brushes.  Plus the older larger motors have more torque.

New motors are pretty much disposable items (assuming that a replacement motors are even available for sale when a replacement is needed).  To me that would be a good reason to prefer the older type chassis.

I would love to put an old motor in here, but quit honestly unless there is a locomotive in current production that can be had from any main online retailer, the MP15 is the way to go. I can do a second set of instructions for the FA-1 if needed, but I would prefer to have one standard model so that I can focus on making other models that don't exist. I think it all comes down to a supply and work required issue.

-David

--
David Cutting
CEO, Cutting Edge Scale Models
www.cescalemodels.com
store.cescalemodels.com

-David

[peteski]

We will model all versions, after all SP had 10, Rock Island had 10, SP&S had 2. That only leaves six others.

-David

I would love to put an old motor in here, but quit honestly unless there is a locomotive in current production that can be had from any main online retailer, the MP15 is the way to go. . . I think it all comes down to a supply and work required issue.

I can't disagree with that logic.

[PROPULDUDE]

Some of us wont need an instruction sheet..If I can fit a chassis under one of Superturbines fabulous creations, a Diesel is a welcome project as to difficulty...And FA 1's are still easy to find.

[dcutting]

Okay, I guess... but we will be focusing on the MP15DC based version. Oh... something else. To hold the shell on I plan to do it HO-style... have the shell, couplers, and frame held together by two screws. I think it will make it easier and more sturdy.

-David

--
David Cutting
CEO, Cutting Edge Scale Models
cescalemodels.com

[Jesse6669]

I'm game; I'd like to make one of these and have an old LL FA chassis:


http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/9/4/9/6949.1243648158.jpg

[sirenwerks]

I hope you will make the body and trucks available separately.

+1 on this, or maybe manufacture an ALco C430 so I won't need the trucks, as part of an attempted kitbash.  The C628/630 have the same bolster-to-bolster measurement.

[dcutting]

I'm game; I'd like to make one of these and have an old LL FA chassis:

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/9/4/9/6949.1243648158.jpg

Man! Why all of these FA chassis supporters? What's so good about them besides the more powerful motor?

+1 on this, or maybe manufacture an ALco C430 so I won't need the trucks, as part of an attempted kitbash.  The C628/630 have the same bolster-to-bolster measurement.

I don't think they are the same length. The B23-7 is close.

-David

--
CEO, Cutting Edge Scale Models
cescalemodels.com

[Philip H]

David,
Of all the original LL n scale locos, the FA was the best interma of durability. There are Ntrak guys who still use them for show day running because they just won't die.

[dcutting]

David,
Of all the original LL n scale locos, the FA was the best interma of durability. There are Ntrak guys who still use them for show day running because they just won't die.

Just looked, the Diesel Shop says the wheelbase is a foot too short... that's 1.905 mm or 0.075 in.

Oh, and I forgot to mention: if you want to make it like the prototype, make sure not to make it too reliable. 

But in all seriousness, I will be making a mechanism for the MP15DC parts, if it isn't so popular here it could REALLY help for other N Scale switcher models if I am successful in making it parametric so I can change variables and spit out a new mechanism.

-David

--
David Cutting
CEO, Cutting Edge Scale Models
cescalemodels.com

[mandealco]

Hi David
You are quite correct, the FA-1 chassis is 10" shorter, my mind has blurred the various truck centre measurements over the years.  However, at 10", I can live with it, and I will stick with what I have on hand,  Baldwin RF-16s were closer to 28'.

As for keeping it prototypical, it'll also have to randomly spew out rusty water from the roof mounted expansion tank, so window wipers will need to be operational.

Good luck with your project and keep us posted.
Cheers
Steve
NZ

[dcutting]

I just thought of something, shapeways would be a better option because of a nasty thing called shrinkage. That would curse the project from day 1. Because shapeways steel is laser-sintered, there is no problem with it. The brass would shrink and cause alignment issues. Glad I thought about that now!  Shapeways, here I come!

BTW, James' Train Parts has done something with this for the C-855... images below. The steel finish isn't that bad, and if needed I can get it polished.



-David

[peteski]

I just thought of something, shapeways would be a better option because of a nasty thing called shrinkage. That would curse the project from day 1. Because shapeways steel is laser-sintered, there is no problem with it. The brass would shrink and cause alignment issues. Glad I thought about that now!  Shapeways, here I come!

BTW, James' Train Parts has done something with this for the C-855... images below. The steel finish isn't that bad, and if needed I can get it polished.

You just thought of it? 

Nice to see you warm up to that idea (which was mentioned to you early on the 1st page of this thread).  Quoting: James is printing a frame extension in Shapeways' stainless steel process. The plus is not having to re-engineer the entire frame, especially the fiddly bits around the gear towers. That choice makes lots of sense.  Bryan B. is also doing this for his custom-made loco using Kato GG1 drive train parts.

[dcutting]

You just thought of it? 

Nice to see you warm up to that idea (which was mentioned to you early on the 1st page of this thread).  Quoting: James is printing a frame extension in Shapeways' stainless steel process. The plus is not having to re-engineer the entire frame, especially the fiddly bits around the gear towers. That choice makes lots of sense.  Bryan B. is also doing this for his custom-made loco using Kato GG1 drive train parts.

Well, now I remember that. I was actually cross-posting from nscale.net because someone hade a few questions that got me thinkin'... anyhow I saw the GG1 thing, pretty impressive.

Thanks!

-David

--
David Cutting
CEO, Cutting Edge Scale Models
cescalemodels.com