Metal Wheel Sets

[Mike Madonna]

Good evening all,

I realize this topic has been discussed MANY times over the years. I have searched this forum and read most of the previous posts regarding the topic. The Mrs. & I attended the N Scale Weekend (in Altoona) last month. It enabled me to reconnect, refocus and energize me to do a few ground level projects before moving to more serious ones (ie. DCC/Sound in a Key AC-5). Plus since the car hobby "driving season" is starting to shift, it was the perfect time. Now, moving on to the above subject.
I started to replace the plastic wheel sets in some of my rolling stock. I have a fair amount of the old IM SP 40' SD boxcar kits that I built years ago. As we know, they come with a non-operating knuckle coupler on, what looks like, a 50 ton freight car truck with lo-pro wheels. I also have the IM R-40-23 PFE Reefers and IM 50' DD Boxcars with the same coupler/truck/axle set up. I also have Precision Masters PFE Reefers with their freight truck and non-operating coupler. Lastly, a variety of MTL cars with their 1000 truck/coupler, some with "Pizza cutters", some with lo-pro wheels.
I have a couple of packs (100 ct) of the "Fox Valley FVM 3302-100 N 33" Wheels w/.553" Axle Fits IRC, ATL, CC100 axles" (as stated on the label). What I discovered is that the FVM .553 wheels are a very snug fit in the IM truck. In some cases, the car rolled better with the plastic IM wheels as opposed to the FVM wheels. In other cases, the 3302s in the IM truck did improve the rolling performance. I installed the same 3302 wheels in the Precision Masters trucks and they roll MUCH better in every instance. I then got out my digital caliper and measured a few wheel sets, Here's what I found:

FVM 3302            = .553"

Prec. Masters       = .551-.552

IMR                     = .534-.540"

MTL Pizza Cutters = .537

MTL Lo-Pro*         = .532

* = bottom of MTL truck says "Micro Trains"

In conclusion, based upon my findings/measurements, I could use the .540" Axle (standard MTL length) in the IMR truck and not introduce any friction (read higher rolling resistance) as with the FVM 3302 (.553"). I didn't have any FVM .540" wheels to prove this theory. My next move will probably be to purchase some ESM .540" axles and see how this pans out.
As always, input greatly appreciated!

[Jim Starbuck]

For your .540 axle length needs I would highly recommend ESM.

Jim

[Mark5]

MTL Lo-Pro*         = .532

There are at least two versions of the MTL lo-pro wheelsets. They should be the same length as all their other axles since they are used in the same truck frames.

Some info here: https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=51486.0

Mark

[samusi01]

For your .540 axle length needs I would highly recommend ESM.

This. Some vendors (N Scale Supply springs to mind, I'm sure there are others) offer bulk packs. Note that one can also get 0.553" from ESM.

[peteski]

Axle length related info is also presented in https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=51486.0

I usually measure the axles of the original wheels I replace before selecting replacement wheelsets.  Sometimes companies make slight changes in their truck and wheelset designs, so the older references provided by wheelset manufacturers are not always applicable. When FVM first started making metal wheelsets with wide range of axle lengths, I was frustrated that they did not have some sort chart with cross referenced for which of their axle lengths fit which trucks, so I contacted and asked FVM.  Matt told me that the reason that manufacturers sometimes modify their trucks design was why he did not create a cross reference chat.

Also, sometimes the axle lengths of FVM wheels can vary slightly from what is specified in the packaging.  It is good idea to always measure the axle length to make sure it is as expected.

[bbussey]

For your .540 axle length needs I would highly recommend ESM.

I highly recommend ESM for your .553” axle needs too! 

[bigdawgks]

Yea ESM wheels are great. But whatever you do, avoid the MTL 403 wheelsets. They are quite unsatisfactory for several reasons.

[nkalanaga]

Some of the later MTL 1008 (the original lo-pro wheels) had shorter axles than the early ones.  They narrowed the wheel treads, which looked better, but didn't lengthen the axle ends to compensate.  I got quite a few of those on FVM MILR horizontal-ribbed boxcars, which came with MTL trucks and truck-mounted couplers.  The wheelsets would fall out in shipping, and wouldn't stay in when running.

Those are probably the 0.532" wheels listed in the original post. 

The early 1008s, the shiny black ones, were fine.  I never had a problem with one of those.

[CRR Chase]

ESM are the best I think. Eastern Seaboard Models. They offer multiple axle lengths and they are just smooth as silk.

[Bill H]

Mike;
I moved about a hundred IM cars built from their kits over to IM metal wheels many years ago while also body mounting MT1015s. That older IM wheel did not have the best profile, but about the only metal wheel available then for their truck size and they run on all my ME code 40. IM has a better profile now. I have just finished moving the remaining 100+ kit cars over to ESM wheelsets and recommend them highly. I also use the ESM .540 for my MT cars as well. As others have remarked, N Scale Supply sells ESM in bulk.

I tried the first run of FVM wheels for MT cars, but had a number of issues with the tire not correctly set on the insulator and have not had that problem with ESM. I have not tried the newest run of FVM.

Kind regards,
Bill

[Cajonpassfan]

I think the newest run of FVM/Scale Trains are awesome. Have not had any quality control issues and the look and track well.
Otto K.

[nickelplate759]

Those old Intermountain 50-ton trucks with the dummy couplers often have slightly warped frames and thus have inconsistent journal-to-journal spacing. I've found it to be fairly common that the same wheelset will fit in one of those truck frames and fall out of a different one - or even fall out of the other end of the same truck.

[Loren Perry]

Many years ago I painstakingly and laboriously replaced all the wheels (and trucks) in my entire collection with Micro-Trains 1008 Low-Profile (Lo-Pro) wheelsets. The main reason was I was fascinated with the prototype's ability to stay on the rails with such a relatively tiny flange (about one inch) holding the car on the rails and I wanted to do the same in N-scale. It didn't take long for me to realize the benefits that came with this change.

1. I could more easily lower a car's ride height on its trucks for an improved look;

2. The cars' wheels looked much better, especially in close-up photos;

3. I was now able to pull a train about 25% longer with the same power due to decreased friction. It was as though a dragging brake problem was suddenly fixed;

4. Accidental derailments through turnouts and other frog-equipped tracks virtually disappeared.

At my old club (The Belmont Shore Lines in San Pedro, CA) I regularly ran a 108 car freight train pulled by a single Rivarossi/Con-Cor U.P. 4-8-8-4 Big Boy over the entire layout including up and over Tehachapi Loop unassisted. I also demonstrated regularly to the club's members the excellent tracking ability of the Lo-Pro 1008 wheelsets by backing up the entire 108 car train through a 180 degree half-loop on the club's staging yard with everything staying on the rails. Almost all the cars in the train used truck-mounted MT couplers. Less than a dozen had body mounts.

I've been a firm believer ever since. MT's more recent Lo-Pro wheelsets have a slightly deeper flange but not enough to be easily noticable compared to the 1008's. I use them only on my MT heavyweight passenger cars and they're excellent.

Some of the later MTL 1008 (the original lo-pro wheels) had shorter axles than the early ones.  They narrowed the wheel treads, which looked better, but didn't lengthen the axle ends to compensate.  I got quite a few of those on FVM MILR horizontal-ribbed boxcars, which came with MTL trucks and truck-mounted couplers.  The wheelsets would fall out in shipping, and wouldn't stay in when running.

Those are probably the 0.532" wheels listed in the original post. 

The early 1008s, the shiny black ones, were fine.  I never had a problem with one of those.

[Mike Madonna]

Good evening folks,
Thanks for ALL your timely replies, much appreciated.
George, I concur with what you said about the IM 50 Ton truck and the inconsistent truck journal spacing.... kind of frustrating. In this case, the .553" wheels would roll well in the "outer" journals and be tight in the "inner" journals. In some cases I've found that the IM plastic wheels (with the shorter axle) that came with the truck rolled better. I am testing (on an incline) each car before and after a wheel change and evaluating as I go.

[Mike Madonna]

Quick Update:

I picked up the ESM .540" (33" wheel) axles. With the IM trucks, it was mentioned how they, in some cases, had slightly "warped" frames which resulted in inconsistent journal-to-journal spacing. What I was able to do was use the .540 axle on the narrow side and the .553 axle on the wide  side. It produced much better results with that combo than just the .553 in both trucks. Where the spacing is better (read about the same), the .540 axle works better even though it is a wee bit loose in the truck. The .540 axle equipped trucks roll better than the .540/.553 combo. I tested this by  set up a small incline using Kato Unitrack to measure how far the car rolls. The IM cars (Reefers/Boxcars) are all weighted to NMRA specs, FWIW.