How to shorten KATO passengers axles ???

[eja]

Why should those who are able to afford these beautiful models have to deal with problems like this?

  Send them back to the seller and demand satisfaction !!

[peteski]

Kato passenger wheelset are constructed like the Diesel loco wheelsets.  There was a lengthy discussion about how to reduce the total axle length. Same should apply to the passenger wheelsets.

See https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=33107.msg379288#msg379288 and other posts following that one.

[learmoia]

Do larger flanges interfere with details on the car?

And on the next episode of Rapido reads mean tweets:

Why should those who are able to afford these beautiful models have to deal with problems like this?

  Send them back to the seller and demand satisfaction !!

 

[trainforfun]

Do larger flanges interfere with details on the car?

And on the next episode of Rapido reads mean tweets:
 

I will try to move the wheels on the axle again ...

I am 99% sure the bigger KATO flange will not interfere with anything under the cars .

And yes we should not have to do all that to a set like that ....

[trainforfun]

Grant Eastman of SAR, swapped his out with BLMA wheels. However doing so you'll need to ensure the insulators are on the same side and such.

/>

Thanks , I already did the grinding for the couplers and axles but still not satisfied with the tracking , I think changing to a bit bigger flange wheels would solve the problems .
I did that with the BLMA spine cars and I don't have any problem anymore 

[jjb62556]

Is it more of a track problem than a wheel problem? Mine seem to run just fine.

[mmagliaro]

Is it more of a track problem than a wheel problem? Mine seem to run just fine.

It's a matter of degree, I suppose.  In the ongoing battle and debate of track vs rolling stock, we try to make each as good as we can.  I generally fall in the "make the track as bullet proof as possible so anything will run on it" camp.   But if you have only one piece of rolling stock causing a problem and you spend a lot of hours trying to make the track more forgiving without success, I can see pulling the plug and just putting different wheels in there, especially if you plan to run the car on other layouts that may be even less forgiving than your own.

[Angus Shops]

As has been discussed elsewhere, we know there is not really enough room for the existing smaller flanges. Adding even lager flanges may lead to having to fix a bunch more problems…

[thomasjmdavis]

I have found that brands of track make a difference.  On my last layout, some areas had Atlas code 55 and others had ME code 55.  Many of the cars and locos that "chattered" on Atlas ran silently on ME.  I think this had to do with the thickness of the spike head casting.

Another "fix" (and I am surprised it worked)..... I had an original issue Kato F-3 (1987) that would run silently over the Atlas section, but "revised" versions (mid 90s) made noise.  When I measured, discovered the measurement back to back of the wheels was .005 wider on the older unit.  I re-gauged the revised units and the chatter went away.  Most (all?) model railroad wheels are slightly ... angled?..tapered?...conical?...what word am I looking for here?, and ride a little lower if they are too tight in gauge, and obviously if the gauge is too wide, they will tend to ride up on one or both rails.

Since then, anytime I have problems related to wheels and track, unless it is something obvious (like lots of derailments at a particular place), I start with wheel gauge before swapping out wheelsets or getting out machine tools. 

 And I guess we are all hoping/assuming you aren't trying to run these through 9" radius curves.

[trainforfun]

It's a matter of degree, I suppose.  In the ongoing battle and debate of track vs rolling stock, we try to make each as good as we can.  I generally fall in the "make the track as bullet proof as possible so anything will run on it" camp.   But if you have only one piece of rolling stock causing a problem and you spend a lot of hours trying to make the track more forgiving without success, I can see pulling the plug and just putting different wheels in there, especially if you plan to run the car on other layouts that may be even less forgiving than your own.

Like you said everything run fine ( on my 16'x16' layout ) until these pieces arrived home .
I corrected what I could on the car and I know there is a few spot that are more critical . One place that bugs me the most is taking a siding thru a 19" curve left turnout and followed by a 19" radius right hand curve track to come parallel to the main : it derail .....
The minimum radius on my mainline is 19" .

[trainforfun]

Is it more of a track problem than a wheel problem? Mine seem to run just fine.

A couple of spots are probably in fault , wheels with a bit bigger flange will solve these trouble .
Not easy to correct the track at these spots and like I said in another post taking a siding with an S curve right hand curve turnout  followed by a left hand curve track to become parallel to the main equal a derailment .... that to me is not acceptable specially the these curves are 19" radius .

[thomasjmdavis]

Like you said everything run fine ( on my 16'x16' layout ) until these pieces arrived home .
I corrected what I could on the car and I know there is a few spot that are more critical . One place that bugs me the most is taking a siding thru a 19" curve left turnout and followed by a 19" radius right hand curve track to come parallel to the main : it derail .....
The minimum radius on my mainline is 19" .

Well, I admit I don't understand how Kato figures things, but are you referring to the Kato Unitrak "#4, 19" Radius" turnout 20-203?  A #4 is a tight turnout to negotiate with an 85' passenger car- especially in an S curve situation.  A #6 or #8 (or larger) would give better performance.  Kato's own cars will no doubt negotiate it with little problem (I don't have anything that tracks nearly as well as my Kato stuff).  But it would not surprise me that other passenger cars would have an issue going through a #4 turnout.  A real passenger car seldom has to negotiate anything smaller than a #8, and then in a yard at 10 or 15 mph.

[trainforfun]

Well, I admit I don't understand how Kato figures things, but are you referring to the Kato Unitrak "#4, 19" Radius" turnout 20-203?  A #4 is a tight turnout to negotiate with an 85' passenger car- especially in an S curve situation.  A #6 or #8 (or larger) would give better performance.  Kato's own cars will no doubt negotiate it with little problem (I don't have anything that tracks nearly as well as my Kato stuff).  But it would not surprise me that other passenger cars would have an issue going through a #4 turnout.  A real passenger car seldom has to negotiate anything smaller than a #8, and then in a yard at 10 or 15 mph.

That turnout is not a KATO , I own many but that particular one is an ATLAS of 19" followed by a reverse curve of also 19" .
No others cars or locomotives derail there even an SD9043 witch are very finicky

[peteski]

I reread the entire thread and other than "cars being finicky", there is no mentions what the actual problem is.  That is nowhere enough info to attempt to understand and solve the problem.

What is the specific problem, and where does the problem occur?  Tangent track, left or right curve (radius?), S-curve, straight or diverging turnout route, crossing?  Is it always the same cars, or different every time?   Always at the same location, or problem occurs in multiple spots?

I believe that these cars have body mounted couplers. Are they permanently mounted to the floor, or are they kinematic type of swinging mount couplers?

I know you only asked how to modify Kato wheels, but with all the brain power on this forum, maybe we can help resolving this problem without the Kato wheels retrofit.

[trainforfun]

I reread the entire thread and other than "cars being finicky", there is no mentions what the actual problem is.  That is nowhere enough info to attempt to understand and solve the problem.

What is the specific problem, and where does the problem occur?  Tangent track, left or right curve (radius?), S-curve, straight or diverging turnout route, crossing?  Is it always the same cars, or different every time?   Always at the same location, or problem occurs in multiple spots?

I believe that these cars have body mounted couplers. Are they permanently mounted to the floor, or are they kinematic type of swinging mount couplers?

I know you only asked how to modify Kato wheels, but with all the brain power on this forum, maybe we can help resolving this problem without the Kato wheels retrofit.

First the car are fitted with MT 1015 body mounted couplers and the cars are very close to each others , they say as is they are good for 13" radius or something like but I am nowhere near that ! I am more like 19" radius on the main .
The cars not all 10 but at least half derailed easily in curve so I changed all couplers to MT 1016 ( longer shank ) I think the couplers were pushing the following or preceding cars outside the curve , that's why I changed the couplers .
It solved a lot of derailment but there was still some at some point and not everytime , and not always the same car while the train was passing at the same place .
I have a couple of S curves I admit , I could try to do a correction , but it's a difficult access of course ....
The axles were rubbing on the center sill and I corrected that by grinding the center sill over the axles .

There is another thing I could do  is removing a stopper that prevent the trucks to swing more than a certain point before I go thru the wheel/axle modifications.