[SlateCreek]

David,

I was following your explanation, and really enjoying it, but had a question ....

The review on the Durango Dan site references this: http://www.google.com/books?id=TKV-AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#PPA103,M1 which made a really good read on Walshert's Valve gear .... and its explanation of "outside" and "inside" admission is exactly backwards from yours. (Page 102 and 103) ... so I confess myself a bit confused.

Also, both the model in the review and in the bachmann Movie that Stan mentions have three cranks one way and one the other .... and he says they may ALL be like this. Is there an example of a prototype locomotive set up this way that you've heard of? If so, what was the reason?

Matthew (OV)

 

[David Fletcher]

Matt,
I cant open what ever that is you're referring to, but YES Sorry I got it all backwards as soon as you raised it! Mixed up in my head between the two systems - Piston valve addmission is centre, slide valve is side. swap what I just said, bottom line, both systems are opposite, so the eccentrics will be opposite if the radius rods are to set the same way on both chassis'.

I could easily concieve how an engine like this could have 3 eccentrics facing one way, and only one facing the other, it would entirely depend on which way the cams pivoted relative to the lifting rods...dono why you would, but yes can be done. Its possible....and I'm guessing here, but the actuator for the valve gear is under the engineer's side tank, just in front of the cab. It pushes and pulls the reversing rod down one side of the loco to the lifting rods via some pivoting 'L' shaped cams...you can see them there on the model...when all the cams rock in the same direction with the valve change, then the eccentrics will always face the same way relative to main rod (on an all piston valve loco), but as seen in the photos, when one set of cams rocks down (lowering the radius rod), while the rear set rocks upward , raising the radius rod, then in order for both engine units to run in the same direction, the eccentric on both engine units will be opposite. Now on this crazy 3 matching, 1 different thing, maybe only one side has the cams rocking in opposite directions due to some space constraint where the actualtor takes up space where the cam would otherwise rock...this would mean the radius rod on one side of the loco lowers, while on the opposite side of the same chassis its lifted to the exact same amount, and the eccentric on that both sides would need to face in opposite directions. I cant believe someone would engineer that, but I dont know modern locos that well, who knows...check the photos I guess to see if the radius rods on both side of the loco lowered or lifted the same on all sides or not.

The one way to really know what should happen with this model, is to look at the connection of the lifting rods to the radius rods on the real engine, and see how that lifting rod is connected to that pivoting 'L' shaped cam. If you can see that the cams can pivot in the exact same way on both chassis, on both sides of the loco, then all the eccentrics should face the same way (forward of the main rod crank). If the cam look like they would pivot in opposite directions on the two chassis relative to each other when the Johnsonbar is moved forward etc, then reverse the eccentrics on one chassis - have the forward chassis with eccentrics facing forward, and the rear chassis eccentrics facing aft, which seems to be visible on several of those WA Mallets I can see. If you can check some photos of the real locos in motion (ie with radius rod out of neutral), you will see the radius rod on the front chassis down, and the radius rod on the rear chassis up...if you could see both sides of the loco from the same period in motion, see if the same condition is on both sides of the loco, then you'll know whether a 3-1 thing was done.

I'd just set the eccentrics to make sense with the lifting rods on this model and you'll be logical.

David.

 

[David Fletcher]

Chaps, check the video of the preseved 110 at the Black Hiills (on the 20.3 site), all radius rods on both sides facing down in forward and up in reverse. All eccentrics on both sides of the loco lead the main rod crank (eccentrics face forward in all cases). Go with that on your model. Historical photos do indicate locos of this type do have eccentics on the rear chassis facing aft, and radius rods opposing. Here is a photo example:
http://loggingmallets.railfan.net/list/bd9/rayon9meh.jpg
Note how the radius rod on the rear chassis is at top of reverse link, while forward chassis has the radius rod bottom of reverse link. The only way this engine will run in one direction is for the rear chassis eccentric to face aft and the forward chassis eccentric facing forward, which is exactly the case on this loco. The web site has the same loco photographed the year before from the other side, and its identical in its set up. No 3 -1 thing:
http://loggingmallets.railfan.net/list/bd9/wing-rayon9.jpg


Since this model is based on 110 to some amount, I think the 3 eccentrics facing one way and only 1 in the other on the Bachmann model is a mistake, like the K-27s not being consistant in this regard. It shouldn't damage the valve gear out of the box, so long as the eccentric travel of the aft facing eccentric doesn't move a circle of wider travel than the other 3 eccentrics, causing the reverse link to rock too far back and both and cause that bind in TOC's photo.
Set up your eccentrics on the 3rd axle on both chassis like this photo:
http://loggingmallets.railfan.net/list/wt110a/weyer110ameh.jpg
With the all eccentrics facing forward when the cranks are at bottom, thats how the 110 is preserved today.
David.

 

[SlateCreek]

Thanks, David. That's what I thought!

BTW, try this:

http://www.google.com/books?id=TKV-AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover#PPA103 should work better.

Matthew (OV)

 

[TonyWalsham]

Perhaps having movement of the eccentrics correct doesn't matter at all. At all.


Just like correct gear ratios don't matter.

At least it seems the Mallet has a decently low gear ratio.

 

[vsmith]

Posted By TonyWalsham on 01/13/2009 6:51 AM


Perhaps having movement of the eccentrics correct doesn't matter at all. At all.


Just like correct gear ratios don't matter.

At least it seems the Mallet has a decently low gear ratio.



..or you could just go the Piko route and cast the valve gear all as one peice, no movement, no problem ...

 

[Steve Stockham]

I'm sorry but before I will even consider buying one of these (and they are pretty lokies!) I want to know what Bachmann is going to do about this eccentric problem as well as the other things listed in the review on 1:20.me! Since I'm r/c, the "Supersocket Version 4.0" or whatever... will just get ripped out to make room for batteries so that's not an issue for me. In case anybody gets the wrong idea, I like Bachmann products!!! I want to see Bachmann succeed and this is NOT the way to do it! One can't make a problem go away by saying that the problem doesn't exist!! Nobody has reviewed the engine the way it needs to be done until 1:20.me! Why is that? Is Bachmann addressing this problem? So far.........

 

[TonyWalsham]

There has been no mention on the Bachmann forum of 2-6-6-2 review on the 1:20.3me blog.
Let alone any comment about the eccentrics.

I wonder why that is?

 

[c nelson]

Posted By TonyWalsham on 01/14/2009 6:57 PM
There has been no mention on the Bachmann forum of 2-6-6-2 review on the 1:20.3me blog.
Let alone any comment about the eccentrics.

I wonder why that is?




could it be that Children aren't privy to posting?
(mis-quote & double post corrected, SteveC mod.)[/i]
tongue & Cheek

Like Steve, I too want the Bman to succede....but if they keep turning out problem loco's they will lose their customer base. I'd still love to hear why some are built by more skilled workers?

 

[SlateCreek]

A mark of a good review is that it presents the reader with enough information about the subject being reviewed that the reader can draw his own conclusions about what is being reviewed. That, in a nutshell, is the difference between:

"To me they appear to be working properly"

and

“As delivered, three eccentrics pointed one direction, one pointed the other. Experimentation has shown that as delivered the front engine eccentrics need to be mounted forward of the axle, with rods down. If not, it is easy to have one reverse link “knee over” and lock the valve gear. The results could be disastrous. One set of valve gear on the locomotive reviewed was discovered locked in this manner when it was removed from the box. The rear engine eccentrics needs to be mounted aft of the axle (with rods down), to keep the reverse link from hitting the stops. The valve gear is NOT adjustable, the valve rod does not move in and out of the valve body.”

One of those statements containes useful, factual, information, that might help me come up with a way to make a $600.00 locomotive out of a $600.00 mistake. If it does, the folks in Philadelphia will have the advisor to the 1:20.me review to thank for the fact that I'm not leading the torch and pitchfork crowd when it comes to Spectrum locomotives.

As a community, when the facts point in a less than fantastic direction, we need to stop blaming the messenger, and recognize the difference between product review, and product promotion. And for those who feel compelled to "defend" the company or its various personalities, a critical review that recognizes problems is NOT negative. As pointed out above, at least with an identified problem, I can work on a solution, and maybe make something good of it, whereas if the problem is denied or quashed, and questions go deflected, unanswered, spun, or ridiculed, I am dead in the water with no way to fix the problem (which, for all of the shouting, will still exist.)

Matthew (OV)

 

[TonyWalsham]

Hey Cale.

I never said "could it be that Children aren't privy to posting? "

 

[SlateCreek]

Cale said that. It's the quote problem again... Cale didn't go down far enough to separate the first line of his post from the next, which was double spaced and did make it out of the box. Probably why he tried twice.

(and no, I'm not being critical of anyone at Mylargescale by explaining this ... I'm trying to offer a solution to a problem. See the diffrence?)

 

[SteveC]

If you want to assure that your text in a quoted reply isn't included within the quote box.

Then after the editor screen displays...
[*] Left-click anywhere within the editor content area.
[*] Next use the keyboard key combination {Ctrl+End} which will place the insertion point cursor at the bottom and outside the quote.
[*] Then start typing your reply text.
[/list]

 

[TonyWalsham]

I know Cale would never say that deliberately.

Is there some way that computer illiterates like me could "see" where the "quote" box ended so we could type outside of it.
OR:
Please tell us where we can read up on how to do what SteveC says without having to ask all the time.

 

[SteveC]

"Is there some way that computer illiterates like me could "see" where the "quote" box ended so we could type outside of it."

The answer is no.

"Please tell us where we can read up on how to do what SteveC says without having to ask all the time."

Directly following this statement...
[*]After taking any one of the actions in the forum software that causes the Rich-text editor to display. [*]After the editor screen displays, the content area is the place where you've always typed in the text you want to include in your reply. [*]On most computers that support pointing devices, the convention is that these devices are called a mouse, additionally on these pointing devices there are usually two buttons toward the end pointing away from the individual using it. there is one button on the left and another one on the right. So when the term 'left-click' is used, that means that the user is being asked to press and release the mouse button the on the left side. [*]On the keyboard there is a key labeled Ctrl, additionally there is another key labeled End, so when the user is instructed to use the keyboard key combination {Ctrl+End}. What the user is being asked to do is... [*]Depress and hold down the key labeled Ctrl. [*]Then while still holding the key labeled Ctrl down, additionally depress and release the key labeled End. [*]Next release the key labeled Ctrl. [/list] [*]Next the user can start typing the text that they wish to include in their reply. [/list]

 

[TonyWalsham]

Thank you for the explanation.
Even I can understand that and have managed to remember it from the first time you told us how to do it in another thread a week or so back.

What I meant was, where in the site can someone easily find that information?

Is it at the top of the forum lists in big bold type so you cannot miss it?

 

[SteveC]

"What I meant was, where in the site can someone easily find that information?"

The answer is, there isn't.

"Is it at the top of the forum lists in big bold type so you cannot miss it?"

Obviously not, since you've had to ask the question, and I doubt that there ever will be.

Since the functionality of which you speak, is not unique to this or any other web site. It is unique to the respective hardware and/or software utilized by any given individual accessing any given website.

This of course can encompass the whole range of the various main-frame computer hardware and software and the various terminal types connected to them. To the various brands and models within the brands of personal computers and the types and versions of software being used on them. Then there's the various keyboard layouts used for the many different languages found around the world, not to mention more than one hardware keyboard layout (e.g. 'QWERTY' & 'Dvorak' to mention but two.).

So to attempt to answer that type of question would be very inefficient and very likely confusing to many individuals. In the previous case you mentioned, I took a chance and answered Scot's query regarding the current subject at hand, because I was fairly sure of the computer hardware & software that he uses. Then again here in this topic when the same query was raised again, I again took a chance and provided the same answer hoping that it would prove useful. However, if the individual say uses a Mac type computer I don't have the faintest idea if that system has any keys labeled as I described. In your case, again I took the chance and lucked out it seems.

As an allegory, most all motor vehicles have windshield/screen wipers, but the manner that any given manufacturer chooses to implement turning them On & Off, or adjusting there speed varies from brand to brand, not to mention from model to model within a certain brand. Yet you don't find road signs placed along the highways and byways, informing individuals driving specific types of motor vehicles how to turn the wipers on or off, or the fine points of adjusting the speed at which they oscillate back and forth. Why? Because it's expected that it is incumbent on any and every individual that chooses to operate a motor vehicle. To learn the manner in which each of the devices they will need to safely operate the vehicle are controlled in that specific brand/model of vehicle.

As a possible solution for you and or anyone else happening to read this topic and finds that the information to be of help. Then I would suggest that all would create a shortcut/bookmark/Favorites link to this topic in you local browser and label it however you find best to remind yourself what it's for.

Since you chose to describe yourself as a "computer illiterates like me", then maybe a more efficient and less technologically based solution would be to take an appropriately sized piece of paper, copy the above instructions, (which you stated you found easy to follow and understand) to the piece of paper and tape them to the edge of your monitor where they'll be a ready reference for you by simply glancing at the note when needed.

 

[c nelson]

Thanks Tony and Steve!

 

[Pete Thornton]

I'm sorry but before I will even consider buying one of these (and they are pretty lokies!) I want to know what Bachmann is going to do about this eccentric problem as well as the other things listed in the review on 1:20.me!


To get back to the topic... I've read several folk's posts on various websites about the loco, and none mentioned a problem with the eccentrics, or anything else for that matter. The reviewer unfortunately didn't finish the job, by ascertaining whether this was a universal problem affecting all engines shipped, or just a glitch on this one engine.

The readers, like Steve, are left with a bad impression of the manufacturer. I think that's bad for the hobby and bad for all of us - at some point Bachmann will stop trying to build us fabulous new locos [not sure where a mythical 2-6-6-2 fits in there,] or will put up their prices to cover the cost of extra QA.

If that's the only problem stopping you buy one, then inspect the loco in the store before you buy it.

 

[vsmith]

..and check every screw with the loc-tite bottle handy.

I sometimes wonder if the problem isnt bad design, because these products clearly are thought out very well, but the result of a couple just completely clueless workers on the assembly line, add in clueless QA inspectors who wouldnt know the heap of a difference between an eccentric rod and a Johnson lever! Someone familiar with trains would immediatly recognize a wrongly placed eccentric lever, but a barely literate assembly line worker making $5 a day who 3 months prior was pulling onions out of a field in central Mongolia, would have absolutely zero idea what they were assembling or why things should go a certain way, same for the QA people: if it looks like its assembled right, runs back and forth on the test rollers OK, then it must be OK, right? Box it and ship it. We dont find out that our onion picker screwed the pooch until it reaches your doostep.