Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just bought one of these (metronet pathfinder), inserted a dcc decoder and put on the layout:

Great looking model. Smooth running with moderate noise level. Bi-directional lighting is really nice. Weathering needed on this model in my opinion.

Areas of potential improvement:

The model is too light. This means traction is not great and an imperfect layout can cause the loco to stall relatively easily. Electrical pick up will also eventually suffer from lack of weight.

Electrical pickup: only 4 axles out of the 6 are used for electrical pickup: very silly as adding the other two would be very easy and provide improvement for power pickup. The lack of weight will not help. I wish they would add lead to the boggies.

Wheels: slightly shallow. My loco cannot go through one of the peco points on my layout as the point is right at the end of a curve and the front wheel of the rear truck is 'climbing' on the needle of the point as it enters (the needles are cut downward at the tip so that the very end of the tip is about 1.5mm or so below the rail level). Having a slightly deeper wheel flange (like on my Kato locos for eg) would prevent that happening.

Great model overall but please add weight and put the extra pickups as this would then produce a truly great and reliable runner. Deeper wheel flanges would provide extra reliability on the track particularly as these long 6 wheel boggies are always struggling to cope with tight curves and imperfect layouts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Swisstrain is right, the problem is with the tip of the blade not the frog.

Also my point is not about how to modify the peco points but how to ensure that locos can cope with the most commonly used tracks/points without having the modeler or the kid to spend hours making sure everything is perfect, soldering rail joints, filling points, or else. That said, thanks richard for the detailed response. Althoug my pb is with the blade not the frog, I did nevertheless try narrowing the back to back on the 66 to see if that would help but it did not cure the problem in this case.

I wanted to attach a picture of the blade tip to explain where the issue arose with this particular dapol model and why I believe that a very slightly deeper flange would help but it looks like its going to take some time before i find out how to attach an image here...sorry.

Alastair. good point too which i did check for as well.

Short of modifying points and making perfect layouts, it seems to me that more weight and/or a deeper flange would prevent derailment. Agree that deeper flanges do not look good but you don't need to make them that big either. My kato locos have just slightly deeper ones and go without pb on this particular point and they don't look that bad. Also, i guess it depends if dapol wants to only sell to experienced modelers or to a wider audience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Thks David for the tip. Here is the photo showing the tip of the peco blade:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3076/264205...1d87411.jpg?v=0

As the wheel comes at an angle (coming out of a curve) the shallow flange on the Dapol 66 gets onto the indicated slope and climbs it causing derailment. Slightly deeper flanges on kato stock goes fine through it.

I'll try Alastair's suggestion of narrowing the centre axle B2B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
QUOTE (Richard Johnson @ 7 Jul 2008, 05:50) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>having dropped the tip of the blade so far lets it ride ON the blade end and derail - however its already done so try filing the top edge to a knife sharpness from the BACK of the blade not the face and then gently twisting the blade a tiny bit over the last 15mm or so so it lies very snugly against the stock rail...

You could also add a check rail on the track very close to that particular point so it holds the wheels over more to stop it "picking" the end of the blade - the prototype does this on any similar situation. Make the check rail from any offcut of rail....

Richard
DCCconcepts

That's an excellent suggestion Richard. I'll try that right on. Thanks for your always valuable advice. I'll try and let you know if that solved the pb but i can't see why it would not, unless i do a poor job of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
QUOTE (Edwin @ 7 Jul 2008, 09:01) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Any idea of the length of train and gradient that the 66 can haul? My Farish 66s do fine with 28 4-wheel wagons on 1:40ish but struggle with 12 of the new Freightliner hoppers, which seem much heavier and have more rolling resistance. The Farish chassis casting fills most of the body, but I think I'm right in saying the Dapol has more air inside and therefore possibly scope to add lead.

Edwin: No room at all in the Dapol to add lead (any apparent gap is in fact filled in the shell by the excellent light cluster. Have not tried long trains as my layout does not permit but the Dapol will not haul my CMX cleaning machine (arguably a pretty heavy cleaner to haul). The Farish 66 has all wheel drive i understand and is a little bit heavier so will probably haul more than the Dapol
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top