State of the Art switching in N scale?

[ednadolski]

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.

Interesting, but couldn't one to basically the same thing with a bit of grinding on the tip on a jeweler's screwdriver?

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.

With present-era equipment, I could have two (or possibly even three) CC diesels to do the switching, so some additional drag and/or car weight should not be too concerning (I would think).  Inherently light cars like say unloaded centerbeams could be more of a problem tho.

... 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.

Precisely my reason for asking the question. N-scale has a lot to offer and I don't want to leave any opportunity on the table.

HO scale Sergent couplers look great when they are well-tuned, but getting them there is no lack of work.  In O scale the amount of work goes up exponentially because there is so little available OTS, and even the Protocraft couplers have a centering spring that can induce a slinky/pogo under the right conditions. (And don't forget the O-scale Kadee 805 couplers, you really have to slam those together to overcome the stiff springs.)

Ed

[jdcolombo]

Interesting, but couldn't one to basically the same thing with a bit of grinding on the tip on a jeweler's screwdriver?

Ed

Yes, but I needed 8 of them for my layout.  Cheaper to use brass rod for that quantity.  If all you need is one, a jeweler’s screwdriver would be fine.

John C.

[CRL]

Doesn’t Rix still make their uncoupling pick?

https://rixproducts.com/product/rix-pick-uncoupling-tool-n-scale/

[jdcolombo]

I tried the Rix.  Didn’t like the feel of the plastic - too light.  And the arrowhead is thicker than what I can do with brass. The thinner the arrowhead is, the easier it is to slip between coupler faces.  There are plenty of possible solutions for a pick.  I experimented until I got one I liked.

John C.

[wazzou]

I've always just put a long sharp point on a 1/8th inch wooden dowel.

[jdcolombo]

@ednadolski

FWIW, I just tried to recreate my video using just one retarding spring on one side of one axle.

Didn't work as well.  Coupling up went just as well, but when I pulled the car away, I got a bit of slinky-ness.  You really need two springs to get a completely smooth pull-away, at least with my 50' box and its MT trucks/wheels. 

I'll do a "how many cars" stress test tomorrow. 

John C.

[Cajonpassfan]

I’m kind of partial to these, flatten the tip with a file. Hang them off little threaded brass loops placed around the layout fascia, so they each have its own place to hang out. Helps to make things neat and better organized. And, they are also handy as Dirty Martini Olive sticks in a pinch...
Otto

[ednadolski]

Yes, but I needed 8 of them for my layout.  Cheaper to use brass rod for that quantity.  If all you need is one, a jeweler’s screwdriver would be fine.

https://www.pocketscrewdrivers.com/product_p/fms-0587.htm

If enough folks would want some, we could even have something made up with a TRW slogan printed on it.... 

Ed

[johnb]

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

my Atlas VO-1000 pulled a 30 car train yesterday...

[Bill H]

@ednadolski

FWIW, I just tried to recreate my video using just one retarding spring on one side of one axle.

Didn't work as well.  Coupling up went just as well, but when I pulled the car away, I got a bit of slinky-ness.  You really need two springs to get a completely smooth pull-away, at least with my 50' box and its MT trucks/wheels. 

I'll do a "how many cars" stress test tomorrow. 

John C.

John:
I have to admit with one spring only, I occasionally get some "slinky-ness", but i thought it a reasonable compromise to still have some longer trains. Admittedly, I have never been too "engineeringly" comfortable with the idea that one spring forces the wheel slightly to one side, and thus in a small way tracks different than the other wheel in the same truck. I assume when putting two springs on the same wheelset that will no longer be an issue. Is that your experience with two springs?

Kind regards,
Bill

[Bill H]

True Bill, but at the price NWSL charged for their wheels I have never considered them as a viable source for bulk wheel replacement.  Intermountain?  Well, yes, but as you said, they don't look that great.  I actually used to buy metal wheels from Con-Cor in the late '80s - those actually looked pretty decent.

Pete:
I think we are also forgetting Atlas metal wheelsets. I cannot remember when they first came out, but it has been a while. I decided not to use them due to the steel axles that were a pain when passing over uncoupling magnets that were in a friend's layout that I often brought some trains over to run on. I know that MT recently released some metal wheels, but frankly, I did not like them.

I understand that IM has released a better looking metal wheelset called "High Detail", but i have not seen them myself and they only come in twelve packs - but are available for MT trucks. As it seems the FVM wheels are not going to be marketed separately for sometime, or at least it seems that way, I am always looking for options. Has anyone tried the "High Detail" wheelsets?

Kind regards,
Bill


Kind regards,
Bill

[garethashenden]

Spot on.  I'd add that you need to make sure the body-mounts are correctly placed on the center-line of the car; off-center won't cut it. 

As for switch engines that can reliably run at 1 smph (or less), I've found it possible with the ESU-equipped Atlas S-2 and my own ESU install on an Atlas VO-1000 and Walthers/LL SW9.  I don't use DC, so I can't comment about that, but on the DCC front, ESU and Zimo decoders are capable of incredible slow-speed performance as long as the base mechanism doesn't have any binding or mechanical problems and you're willing to put in some time to fine-tune the BEMF parameters.  All of my diesels (nearly all of them Atlas, with a couple of Walthers/LL SW's and a Kato NW2 thrown in) can run at less than 1 smph.   Actually, all of my steam locos are capable of this, too - a mix of Walthers/LL Berkshires, Kato and BLI Mikados, and two Bachmann Consolidations.  Engines that cannot perform at this level don't make it to my layout.  I had 3 Bachmann Berkshires that I retired, because I just couldn't get them to run at <1 smph.  But nearly all diesels produced in the last decade can do it.  Steam might take a bit more tweaking.

John C.

How do you go about adjusting the BEMF? Is it just experimentation or is there some theory or formula to apply? I understand what it is, but I've never tried to change the settings.

[jdcolombo]

How do you go about adjusting the BEMF? Is it just experimentation or is there some theory or formula to apply? I understand what it is, but I've never tried to change the settings.

The ESU decoders have an auto-adjustment routine.  I start with that.  Then I set CV53 (the reference voltage) to 130 if the auto-tune routine changed it.  If I'm happy with the slow speed performance, I stop there.  Usually, however, I do some more fiddling with CV's 51 and 52, which control slow-speed response (and sometimes 54 and 55, which are more overall adjustments).  This is trial and error.  I'll put the engine on the track, crack the throttle open to speed step 1/128, and then use programming on the main to increase/decrease the values in CV51 and 52.  I start with large swings (e.g., adding/subtracting 25) to see the effect I get, and then narrow the range down via iteration.  The ESU LokSound 5 manual has some suggestions for various motors, and over the 100 locos that I've added ESU decoders to, I've figured out some likely values for the various manufacturers I run into (primarily Atlas & Kato).  Once I hit on a combination that works for a specific engine, I save those values via my LokProgrammer and JMRI software for future reference.  I find that those values usually work in similar engines.

John C.

[jdcolombo]

https://www.pocketscrewdrivers.com/product_p/fms-0587.htm

If enough folks would want some, we could even have something made up with a TRW slogan printed on it.... 

Ed

The problem with this one for me would be the thick barrel you hold on to.  I've found that having a relatively thin pick works better as you twist it between your thumb and first two fingers.  But again, this is just personal preference.  Probably anything would be fine once you get used to it.

John C.

[peteski]

Pete:
I think we are also forgetting Atlas metal wheelsets. I cannot remember when they first came out, but it has been a while. I decided not to use them due to the steel axles that were a pain when passing over uncoupling magnets that were in a friend's layout that I often brought some trains over to run on. I know that MT recently released some metal wheels, but frankly, I did not like them.

I also chose to forget those.  I believe they had plastic centers and many were wobbly (wheel not perpendicular to the axle).  Plus they didnt' look very good.