No doubt, N scale modelers will welcome Kato’s second batch of Mikes. Your mention of the few dimensional discrepancies is no doubt warranted, but these are not of major consequence for this beautifully-done model.
There is one point though, that I wish manufacturers of model locomotives would address, and this is the somewhat inflated appearance of wagon top and tapered boilers. Certainly, the Kato Mike has a scale boiler, but because we usually view our models from a slightly overhead position, to me, the humps and tapers of the boiler look over done. When looking at a full size locomotive, we don’t get this appearance because we are standing below the center line of the locomotive.
How to address this problem is a double-edged sword, for sure. Do you stay with the scale boiler, and live with this appearance, or do you tone down the hump and taper for a better looking, albeit slightly out of scale, boiler? Just a thought, but I would like to hear some other opinions.
Incidentally, I am not into N scale, but like to scratch build in S gauge.
John Bell
Largo, FL
My fourth graders had the answer when they squatted down and got eye-level with the trains. I tried it, and it works! For as much as we can teach children about how to enjoy trains, they can show us a lot about how to enjoy toys. —Ed.
I would be remiss if I did not take the time to tell you how much our club enjoys your publication. It is read from cover to cover as it is passed around from one club member to another. It is a source document for information on many great products.
Ray Wyatt
Sun City West, AZ
Continued good luck and success with MRN.
Don Manlic , MMR
DM Custom Decals
Keep up the good work.
Frank Gaik
via the internet
Garfield Spetz
Chamcook, NB
We try to balance coverage in every issue, with rolling stock, locomotives and structures in each of the major scales, plus books, videos and other all-scale products. Some months, we have a lot of product in a given scale and other months, hardly any. Stay with us and, after a year, let us know how we did! —Ed.
I just picked the J Class 4-8-4 by Bachmann and am wondering if the one tested by Model Railroad News was shipped with the drawbar between the engine and the tender being connected or not? The one I have had it disconnected with the part that goes to the tender having the pins broken off and just the wires between the cab and tender connected. This seems like poor quality control to me. I’ve notified Bachmann, and they are sending the replacement part. Hopefully nothing else is/was damaged from those wires being the only thing connected like that. Thanks for anything you can tell me.
Dick Schweiss
via the internet
The April issue of MRN arrived in the mail today, and as usual, I spent most of the afternoon reading it instead of doing the chores that I had planned. Since I model primarily in N Scale, I was immediately drawn to the Kato Mike review.
I was disappointed, however, that the review lacked any mention of the difficulty of converting this locomotive to DCC operation. Having just spent an unbelievable amount of time doing a DCC conversion on one of the original Kato Mikes, I would have been interested in a discussion of whether or not Kato had taken any steps in this run to make a conversion easier. I suspect that they have not, because doing so probably would have involved some extensive changes in the tooling. For the record, the first run Mikes are fussy to disassemble, are easily damaged in doing so, have absolutely no room to run wires within the boiler, especially for the headlight, and electrically isolating the motor is difficult. And the tender, although appearing roomy from the outside, is in fact lacking in interior space to mount a sound system speaker and decoder without major surgery.
Kato continues to produce some spectacular N scale locomotives, and has done a wonderful job of making their recent N scale diesel models DCC friendly, especially the E8s and PAs. I hope that in the future they do the same for their steam models. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have a tender design that could easily house a Soundtrax sound unit and speakers, and a wiring harness provided between the loco and tender for easy connection to a decoder? This is becoming fairly standard in HO and larger scales; it’s time to do the same in N.
Thanks again for your great publication, and thanks to Kato for continuing to raise the bar with their smooth running and beautifully detailed locomotives
John W. Heitmann
Big Flats, NY
Having just received the May issue of Model Railroad News, I was pleasantly surprised at the quality of the paper. Now the paper looks as good as the quality of the articles in your newspaper. Keep it up!
The reason for this letter is the fact that many of the fine products that are written about in Model Railroad News are not available in the hobby shops. As I live in an area where there are “Train Only” stores and many complete hobby stores, it is very frustrating not being able to find the products listed. I realize that some have yet to be released, but many are out. While it is difficult to keep up with all the new products, as far as ordering, it is even more frustrating not to find them when there are thirty some full fine train and hobby shops within an hour and a half drive of where I reside. Recently I was trying to find the new Walthers 53' well car set. Nobody had it, except one store and he was out of stock. I then ordered direct from Walthers. I prefer to support the local stores, but until the local hobby and train stores wake up, merchandise will be ordered at the mall. It seems that they are complaining of poor sales secondary to the mail order firms, but until they wake up and start carrying new products, they will be losing sales.
Another gripe about the train and hobby stores is that some feel that if you are not a prototypical modeler, you should be. Recently at a full line hobby store, the owner received a call from a potential customer. This person told the potential customer that you should not make a box type layout and add foam for elevation, and that if the potential customer would come into the store he would show him how to make a proper layout, or he would design and build it for him, at a cost to this person. The inflection in his voice was enough to make this potential customer not even come into his store.
My current layout is a box framework covered with one half-inch plywood and then Homasote board. Foam is being used to make the elevations as needed. As I live in an apartment, with limited storage area, several Craftsman roll away tool cabinets are used for storage of my rolling stock. These fit nicely under my layout.
Retailers need to treat everyone the same, whether prototypical or free lance, with heavily weathered or pristine rolling stock, cab control or DCC. Once the customer is HOOKED, efforts can be made to show them how to improve their layouts.
Currently I am helping a friend with three boys (six and under) make a flat HO layout, with the boys helping. Buildings are made of cardboard and heavy paper stock. Obviously with three very active boys, you do not want to make a super detailed layout. However, they cannot wait for the next time I come over. Working with these future train enthusiasts, and seeing their eyes light up when I come over, is well worth the time spent. Working with our youth will secure the future of the Model Train Industry for generations to come.
As many train and hobby stores carry your fine newspaper, maybe they will take the time and read this letter, and then take a long hard look at their attitude towards customers, and ordering practices.
Frustrated, No Name
Somewhere in the U. S
I feel a bit like Ann Landers, dealing with anonymous letters, but here goes. I’m sure some other readers share your dissatisfaction. The issue is immensely complicated, getting into the intricacies of inventory control, turn rate, jobbers, and a thousand other details. Retail can be a very difficult business with periods of time where it’s hard to make the payroll and keep the doors open. While mail order can offer one kind of service, they may not always stock items on which they can’t offer deep discounts. Everyone is searching for some way of helping you spend your money. Beyond that, generalizations begin to fail. —Ed.
Re: MRN May, 2002, p. 6, 7. Good idea establishing standards for testing tractive effort of model locomotives. Bob Higgins did pretty much the same in the NMRA Bulletin some 20 years ago. Your diagram looks like the classic physics book illustration of how horsepower is measured, but what happened to O scale, the largest size in which a huge choice of full scale models are available? According to an MR survey, there are more modelers in O gauge than in that hodge-podge of scales for G gauge. A good O gauge test track would be MTH RealTrax, as 2 or 3 rail rolling stock can be operated as the outside rails are not connected.
Until MTH brings out their exact 1/32 scale trains to fit the track gauge, and others follow suit, this melange of scales will remain toys in the eyes of serious modelers. Even the RDC car reviewed in this issue is too short, and suffers from concessions related to too tight radii and oversize flanges established by LGB some 20 years ago. If most G gauge layouts are outside, why are there limits on radii?
These are the same problems O gauge is cursed with from Lionel’s refusal to abandon tubular track and 1949’s standards. Don’t use selective compression, use shorter prototypes! A full scale 0-6-0, ore hoppers, and caboose are happy on MTH 0-31 track. Compare a full-scale Pennsy S-2 Turbine or GG- I with Lionel’s caricatures; the full-scale versions are awesome!
I’m glad I’m on the mailing lists for K Line, MTH, Sunset, Williams, and Weaver so I can be kept informed of what is available in O scale. If it’s not available in 2 rail, I can convert it, (steamers are too difficult), then add details. Atlas does not subscribe to the one-shot, only 30-50 available, business philosophy, and their re-introduction of 2 rail track is promising. Offerings from Central Locomotive Works are usually of locos newer than the 1950s transition period that I model. Overland is ridiculously over-priced. By the time I read about an item in O Scale News, it’s too late to order.
Keep up the good work, and don’t forget O and S scales.
R. Lamar Scheuerman
Spring Valley, CA
Be sure to read Roy Hoffman’s “S-Curves” column. You are right; our testing methods are not new, nor did we want them to be. Our desire was to use something solid and reliable. New would be the digital devices we use. Our biggest problem with doing O and S is that they have both AC and DC powered versions. We started with N, HO, and LS simply because we already have layouts, track, power packs and all that stuff. I created the dual voltage and amperage digital meters to test that kind of voltage. In order to test 2-rail DC in O and S, we will need to get the necessary track, power packs and such, plus allocate space for those additional facilities. The complications of performing such tests on AC-powered trains will probably obviate those measurements far into the future. O and S are not only divided by AC and DC, this division also defines the difference between scale and tinplate. Our questions within the industry seem to indicate that Tinplate collectors would not care much about pull testing, but Scale modelers might.
As to the issue of track radius in Large Scale, please refer to my Larger View column this issue. My backyard layout is about 20 x 40 feet, and r=5 foot curves are my standard. The next standard size would be r=10' or 20 foot diameter, and there just isn’t space for that. Remember that 24 inch radius for HO’s 1:87.1 translates into 72 inch — 6 foot — radius at 1:29. It would be hard go there in my back yard or on the property of a lot of other people. The industry recognizes the problem and, as you’ve noticed, resorts to compromises. 1:32 (#1) scale will match up 24" radius curves with a radius over 65 inches, almost an 11 foot diameter, not much improvement. The nice thing about our hobby is the variety of scales in which to operate. —Ed.
Test Methods: I use several different instruments to measure linear force with excellent repeatability and very little variation between them. Although I do have a digital laboratory scale accurate to a tenth of a gram, it’s not very portable and too fragile to take to shows. What does work amazingly well is my handy little GHP Tractometer (now a rare collector’s item). I don’t remember the company, or if it’s patented or not but the principle could be incorporated into a similar device which could be constructed by anyone. As you can see in the picture (TestC) it consists of a circular plastic box with an axle resting on two supports (TestB). The diameter of the drum and the amount of weight placed in the bottom of the drum will determine the range of measurement. A homemade version will have to be calibrated using accurate weights suspended on the line and the dial card marked with the corresponding value, increased incrementally to the maximum limit of 90 degrees of rotation. The advantage of this mechanical setup is that it only needs to be calibrated once, and it doesn’t require any power to operate.
For our permanently coupled multi-unit locos, which are capable of pulling beyond the range of the Tractometer, I use an Ametek 0-1000 gram linear force gauge for measurements of up to two pounds. See (TestD/TestF). For high-resolution measurements up to 5 ounces I use the small 150-gram force gauge shown in (TestE). Current and voltage readings are monitored the same as your setup using a digital voltmeter and a Weston multi range analog ammeter.
Test Results: Since we use the test rig only for demonstration purposes, I haven’t been keeping test data on specific locos. However, with your new testing format, it will be interesting to start comparing my test results with your “By The Numbers” specs for the same test item.
In respect to wheel types and materials, we’ve done quite a bit of research on what produces the best power transfer to the rail. Interestingly, there seems to be a misconception that nickel-plated wheels will offer better performance. While they do require less maintenance to keep clean and free of oxidation, this is only an advantage if the locomotive is seldom run. The traction of nickel-plated wheels will improve as they “scuff-in” but are a distant third in tractive effort behind brass and the impressive grip of the old Athearn sintered iron wheels. For continuous or daily operation, brass is hard to beat in the pulling department. Although all Hobbytown kits now include nickel-plated wheelsets, we do offer special order brass sets for the performance minded. For the real drag-freight nuts I’ve even made up custom sets using Athearn iron wheels on our geared axles.
Best regards,
Howard Mosley
Hobbytown of Boston/Bear
Locomotive Co, Inc.
Very cool, Howard! For readers who would like to view the entire series of pictures, point your browser to http://www.cybercomm.net/~bearbon/TestA.jpg. After viewing that picture, change the “A” on “TestA” to “B” and so on through “G”. That looks like an 8mm film can being used as the center of the weight scale. Given the mighty pulling power of your locomotives, I’m sure this topic is of great interest to you. —Ed.
Also read “Nothing runs like a Deere” with great interest. I too hope they come out with HO scale farm implements. I would welcome a manure spreader as well as the two you mentioned. I don’t know if you answer e-mail but would appreciate a reply on the scale. Thanks much. Needless to say, enjoy your paper every month.
Bill Zastrow
Clare, MI
I hadn’t thought of putting a manure spreader on my wish list, but as an editor, it might occasionally come in handy! (That’s just a little joke.)
The weight scale is literally a no-name product I picked up at my local Target store for about $30. Most stores have them in their cookware department. Just be careful that you get one that will weigh down to tenths of an ounce. This one handles a maximum weight of 4.8 pounds, enough to measure pull on all but the most powerful Large Scale locomotives, though it won’t weight them. For that, I have a balance scale. —Ed.
Just got your May issue and found the review of Athearn’s John Deere B. The review was pretty good, perhaps too kind in my opinion for the front wheels on the model look glaringly wrong to anyone with 40s and 50s tractor experience. The history of the B was good, however, the front wheels were also slanted so that rocks picked up between the tires would fall out as they rotated. And the fact that the steering rod was left unpainted and that the flywheel cover was incorrect was not mentioned. The early styled years saw the introduction of a three speed transmission with an “overdrive” or High-Low lever, which gave the six forward speeds.
It is correct in saying there was a long clutch lever on the right hand side of the operator’s platform, but the John Deere tractors of that period never had a hand brake lever — the brakes were two foot pedals, one on either side of the operator’s platform floor, with each pedal applying a brake to the adjacent rear wheel only. They were used to aid in steering on soft ground or snow — you could spin these tractors around on a dime — and also for parking. The lever which supported the pedal had a series of notches in it. You pushed down on the brake pedal with your foot, and flipped over a hinged metal bar which locked in one of the notches to hold the brake on. Also, the review states a hydraulic 3-point hitch was available; the Bs had an optional geared lifting mechanism which would lift a plow, but not the hydraulic 3-point hitch which was developed by Ford/Ferguson. Mention should have been made too of the excellent printing on the model.
All in all, not a bad review, but it could have been a bit better. I’ve attached a copy of a photo of my modified Bs; some day I’ll get a digital camera so I can get closer shots. Keep up the excellent work. Your publication is the best for keeping us all up to date on what’s new.
Rich Cobb
via the internet
It’s been 44 years since I’ve driven a Model B, so I forgot about the brakes. Now that you mention it, I caught the dickens from the foreman for getting too squirrelly with them. He reminded me that steering should be done with the steering wheel. The lettering detail was very good, wasn’t it? I hoped the photos would convey that. As I predicted, the modeler can correct the toe-in situation. You did a very nice job of it as shown in the photo from your layout. —Ed.
e-mail us a letter at: letters@modelrailroadnews.com
or Send them to:
LETTERS c/o Model Railroad News
P.O. Box 1080 • Merlin, OR 97532-1080
Fax: 541-955-0346
