State of the Art switching in N scale?

[NtheBasement]

Find a way to minimize the curves, as the loco pushes the first car off the track.

I think this hits the nail on the head regarding truck mounted vs body mounted couplers.  I use MT trucks with short shank couplers added at the factory, and wouldn't use anything else.  Only issues I've ever had is between the body-mounted loco and the adjacent truck-mounted car.  Short shank on the loco is better for coupling; long shanks can swing so far to the outside of the curve that they miss the car's truck-mounted coupler, which stays a lot closer to the center of the track.  OTOH if a curve is sharp enough a short shank on the loco might not have enough swing, and end up pulling (or pushing) the car off the rail to the outside of the curve.  Still, I regularly back long trains thru points with no issues.

[jdcolombo]

@ednadolski

Here's a short video of one of my RS-3's coupling on to a 50' boxcar (I think this is an Atlas boxcar, but I can't remember).  Both the boxcar and RS-3 have MT1015 couplers; body-mounted on the boxcar.  The boxcar has MT trucks and lo-profile wheels with retarding springs on one side of each of two axles. The car has been weighted to 1 oz.  See if this is good enough for you on the switching front.

John C.

[milw12]

John, that video looks (and sounds) great!

What is the consensus on implementing drag springs? A MT coupler spring sliced in half? I recall a somewhat recent discussion about this but I couldn't find anything after a quick search.

Lucas

[jdcolombo]

John, that video looks (and sounds) great!

What is the consensus on implementing drag springs? A MT coupler spring sliced in half? I recall a somewhat recent discussion about this but I couldn't find anything after a quick search.

Lucas

It's actually a separate spring - very small and very light, with only a couple of turns, widely spaced.  MT used to include these when you bought packs of 1015 unassembled couplers.  I haven't bought any in a while, but still have a ton of these from past purchases.

https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&search=spring&description=true&product_id=342

John C.

[ednadolski]

@ednadolski

Here's a short video of one of my RS-3's coupling on to a 50' boxcar (I think this is an Atlas boxcar, but I can't remember).  Both the boxcar and RS-3 have MT1015 couplers; body-mounted on the boxcar.  The boxcar has MT trucks and lo-profile wheels with retarding springs on one side of each of two axles. The car has been weighted to 1 oz.  See if this is good enough for you on the switching front.

John C.

@jdcolombo thanks for sharing!   That's spot-on the kind of performance I was hoping for - particularly the low-speed loco performance, as well as the hook-on and pull-away parts.   I'm imagining how that will look (and sound) with a cut of 10-12 cars or so

This flick:

 

/>
shows a switching video which has the problems of the pogo plus the abrupt starts/stops  (even tho the loco itself runs pretty smooth).   I'm willing to wager that the steps such as installing the 905s, consistent weighting, and the retaining springs will go a long way to achieving the kind of performance that you've shown to be achievable in N scale.

Ed

[ednadolski]

Also @jdcolombo what do you use to uncouple those cars?

Ed

[randgust]

Here's a tip on those retainer springs - I dip one end of them in Vaseline before applying so the little buggers stay put on the end of the axle end while you are reinserting them into the truck.

I use them very sparingly because of my train lengths and grades, but all my cabooses have them.   It doesn't negate the slinky but it does reduce it.  I've got a 2% downhill grade with 35-car trains so if you're not paying attention and cut the throttle hard on a downhill you can really slack-in the train something ugly, and the slinky makes it worse.   There's enough slack and enough hill that train handling skill is required even if the MT slinky was conquered, and having RIDDEN in cabooses with slack run-in it's sure one reason that they got taken out due to injuries.

I only have a few VERY short uncoupling magnets on the two main lines - just enough to break the knuckles in strategic locations.  At the point of my main yard I have an old Kadee N electromagnet that would pull teeth out if you had steel fillings and will delay-set just about anything - but I also have what I call 'knuckle poppers' on each of the  classification tracks.   It's equipped with a rather odd SPDT slide switch I found that is a momentary on one side and locks down solid on the other so you can use it just to pop couplers and delay-set or leave it on.

Each magnet on the layout has a wooden stained tie laying next to it so that you can precisely align the uncouple.   I paint and weather them and some of them are darn hard to spot.

I'd rather accelerate mildly over these to keep the cars tight when yard switching than add a whole lot more drag springs.   

But still, the single biggest thing I hit to make MT's work as originally intended was making sure that every last coupler was either RDA or trimmed to be RDA, so that the trip pin height is precise and doesn't ever snag.   Until then it was pretty darn frustrating between the snags and the vertical pull-aparts.   Jim Fitzgerald (RIP) beat this years ago for NTRAK and it was such a good fix MT changed their molds.

[sd45elect2000]

There are two throttle setting for switching, idle and notch 8!

[Ed Kapuscinski]

The Proto Throttle is a good start, btw, but even without one, it's possible to get some similar behavior out of regular throttles.

One of the layouts I operate on did this before they came along.

Essentially you program a ***** load of momentum into your decoders and then use the brake functionality. It's not exact, but it definitely made for a fun and engaging experience.

[jdcolombo]

Also @jdcolombo what do you use to uncouple those cars?

Ed

I use my own picks for uncoupling, made from 1/8" brass rod.  Each pick is 4" long overall, with about the last 3/16" fashioned into a crude arrowhead.  Here are two photos.  The first is the overall view of the pick; the second shows how thin the arrowhead is:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

You slip the arrowhead of the pick between the coupler faces and give a slight twist, and you are uncoupled.  You need a bit of slack to do this properly, but I've found that just adds to the realism - prototype needs slack to uncouple, too.  I've never used magnets - not because of reliability issues (Randgust notes how to fix any such issues) but because I LIKE doing my own uncoupling.  I'm the switchman on the crew - again, for me, this adds to the experience.

Note that I don't set up all my cars with two retarding springs.  If I did that, I'd never be able to get my Berks to pull the 30-car trains that I have on the mainline.  My video was designed to show what is possible for a switching-only layout where train length is not an issue.  You should be able to switch 12 cars set up this way with a single RS-3 without any problems.  Not sure if something like a Kato NW2 or LL SW9 would do it, though.  Might be too much drag.

Slow-speed operation of the engine is critical to achieving this.  The key is absolutely smooth operation at this speed; the engine in the video is going < 1/2 smph (.3 smph, to be exact).   I've only been able to achieve this level of slow-speed performance using ESU or Zimo decoders, and then fine-tuning the BEMF parameters to achieve the absolute best slow-speed performance possible.  As Peteski notes, it's probably easier to get this level of performance in HO scale, but it is possible to have it all: the space saving of N and the performance level of HO.  It annoys me when someone says "Oh, you can't do THAT in N scale."  Wrong.  You can, but admittedly it takes more work.

John C.

[Bill H]

Hi John:
I use one retarding spring on each car, MT 1015 body mounts, all cars weighted to NMRA specs, all using metal wheels and find that 10 40' cars is about the limit of my LL SW-1200 on level surfaces. The SW-1200 uses NWSL line replacement wheel sets. And I only use code 40 which has slightly less surface than code 55. Nonetheless I think ten cars is a reasonable expectation for a small switch engine.

Kind regards,
Bill

[jdcolombo]

I'm going to try this same test with one retarding spring, and then see how many two-spring cars my RS-3 will handle on flat switching.

Will report back.

John C.

[Brian M]

This has been a very informative and interesting thread to read.  I have a question regarding metal wheels.  It seems like the Fox Valley wheels are highly favored by most.  There are now a handful of choices when it comes to metal wheels in N scale, and at least when I look at pictures of them online, they all seem to have similar characteristics.  Is there a reason the Fox Valley wheels are favored over some of these others?  Or is it just a function that some of them haven't been around long enough to make a fair comparison?  I'm thinking of the wheels offered by Rapido, ESM, InterMountain....

Thanks,
Brian.

[Philip H]

@Brian M,

I don't htink there's much difference.  I have used FVM, IM and others without real issues.  I haven't gotten a hold of any Rapido or ESM yet but I suspect they will be of very high quality.

I think the differences re really in tread width and flange depth.  Getting stuff that is similar is probably the best thing but beyond that I think you can mix and match.

Now if I could find someone with an endless supply of 905s . . . .

[wazzou]

For me anyway, the FVM wheels look like what modeled wheels should look like.  The prototype.