Bye bye slinky

[crrcoal]

The dreaded slinky effect! Has anyone tried this technique to get rid of it? 

/>

[freedj]

That’s funny,  I watched that this afternoon and was wondering the same thing. It seems like it should work to me.

[mmagliaro]

Why is this a new idea?  Microtrains has sold "truck retaining springs" for just this purpose for  decades.
https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=342

[EJN]

Why is this a new idea?  Microtrains has sold "truck retaining springs" for just this purpose for  decades.
https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=342

I was going to say the same thing.

I consider that a "band-aid" fix. A true fix would be a better design.

[freedj]

My two takeaways from the video is the use of specific MT couplers with the springs  between the post and the knuckle so that when the train is in tension the springs are out of play, then he is using springs cut down to a much reduced tension from the truck retaining springs sold by MT.  These should be just strong enough to keep the car in place on your gradient so that in forward operation going downhill the cars are still being pulled.

[robert3985]

Wellllll....I thought the video was informative.  The logic behind not using the MTL truck springs is (1) you can see them (2) they're a bit too strong...too much resistance.

As far is it being a "band-aid" fix, it is, but at least it fixes the problem.  If I were going to use this method, I would be more happy with the way trains run than NOT using this "band-aid" and watching my trains slinky along while waiting for MTL to develop a "better" coupler.

What I got out of it for my own use, is to install these on my trains...one per car...maybe with a bit more force (cutting the spring longer) to create resistance for my modified MTL True Scale long-shank couplers to couple up better.  The design of the True-Scale coupler eliminates slinkying and my trains are a maximum length of 35 40' cars and a caboose or two....that works out to a little over 10' long with a Big Boy at the front, and since I have very short grades on my layout, my present motive power should be okay pulling this length train with resistance springs on every car.

We'll see.  No need to put 'em on if they don't give the cars enough resistance to be easily coupled, so I'll do half a dozen to see what the coupling results are first.

Sounds like an interesting Saturday evening project!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[crrcoal]

It's a new idea to me and more than likely some other folks too. I've never heard of the technique before. Nor did I know that MTL offers these springs. I too thought the video was interesting and informative.

[signalmaintainer]

Why is this a new idea?  Microtrains has sold "truck retaining springs" for just this purpose for  decades.
https://www.micro-trains.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=342

It's not a new idea, and Grant never claimed it was. Although the technique might be new to some modelers.

He's simply modified the idea of using springs on the axle of each car by 1) using a coupler spring rather than MT's retaining spring and 2) reducing the tension by about one-third.

The results, for anyone who watched to the end of video, are self-evident.

[ednadolski]

Like everything else, it is about the tradeoffs.   The other thread about wheels made a point about how free-rolling the ESM and FVM wheels are, yet the point of this technique is to deliberately defeat that in order to mask the slinky.

I have added axle springs for cars on my (level) switching shelf, to help them couple up without bouncing away.  In some manner, one could think of this as roughly equivalent to running the prototype cars with brakes (partly) applied.  Adding axle resistance will of course also reduce the effective pulling power of locos, esp. on grades, and also increase the chances of stringlining thru sharp curves.


Ed

[draskouasshat]

Like everything else, it is about the tradeoffs.   The other thread about wheels made a point about how free-rolling the ESM and FVM wheels are, yet the point of this technique is to deliberately defeat that in order to mask the slinky.

Ed

I think its all in the balance of what you model. For instance, if youre modeling steam or transition era, the lack of pulling power of some of the smaller models make this a moot point but some of my larger brass models wouldnt have a problem. Sadly, youll basically need to build certain trains for certain locomotives to take care of the slinky. i prefer the free rolling wheels though so my train lengths are closer to prototypical length.

Drasko

[PiperguyUMD]

I second the True Scale Couplers. I know they have some draw backs from an operational standpoint, but they check a lot of boxes. There are 26 two bay hoppers in this train some. Some have a 3d printed box that looks a bit more prototypical, but many have the stock box.

[mark.hinds]

The dreaded slinky effect! Has anyone tried this technique to get rid of it?

I've been using variations of this since the 80s, both to prevent equipment from rolling down my 2% maximum grade during switching, and to cut down on the slinky effect.  I have been using the special springs MT sells for the purpose. 

Originally, I was just adding 2 springs to each caboose (50s era), but I also experimented with one spring on each car.  The latter significantly impacts pulling power however, and requires adjustments to re-center the couplers. 

My experience is that unfortunately this solution needs to be tuned to a particular layout's trackwork.  Since my on-hold layout is currently in the midst of a complete change of trackwork, I fear I will have to re-tune everything when this change is completed. 

EDIT:  The idea of cutting springs to fine-tune them is something I hadn't thought of however.

[Scottl]

I was fortunate to operate on Grant Eastman's layout last fall and was tasked with switching a paper mill.  I can't say I noticed any unusual resistance to the cars during switching and all the coupling was smooth.  Everything worked flawlessly for our short train.  He does operate several very long trains (60+ cars) and they climb the grades and operate smoothly (and no slinky).

[mark.hinds]

I was fortunate to operate on Grant Eastman's layout last fall and was tasked with switching a paper mill.  I can't say I noticed any unusual resistance to the cars during switching and all the coupling was smooth.  Everything worked flawlessly for our short train.  He does operate several very long trains (60+ cars) and they climb the grades and operate smoothly (and no slinky).

That's good to hear.  In my case, I was using an Atlas Alco S2 switcher (2 axles) for my limited experiment with springs on all cars.  WRT adjusting coupler centering, because I use the MT automatic coupling/uncoupling feature, all couplers need to be carefully adjusted anyway, springs or no springs.  It's just that adding a spring to the end of one axle on the truck does displace the coupler slightly to one side.