About Bill’s Old F7
I was interested to read Bill Cawthon’s reminiscences over his seventeen-year-old locomotive during his review of BL1’s F7s.
My RTR Athearn F7s look a lot better with diaphragm and close-coupling adaptor kit supplied by American Limited Models and I would be pleased to hear of any commercial upgrade kit that would include improvements to the headlight and cab interior.
Jed Felgate
Auckland, New Zealand
Hi, Jed. For lighting, my own personal preference would be one of the Richmond Controls products. This is not to say another product might not be just as good, but I have been impressed by the Richmond products since they came on the market. Headlights, Mars lights, Gyralights, and ditch lights are all available in easy-to-use modules. Their web site is at: www.richmondcontrols.com
As far as an interior goes, I was quite happy with the glass I got in my Walthers dress-up kit, but there are also more products out now than there were then. Other interior fitments I would be tempted to scratchbuild from Evergreen Styrene. I did add an engineer and conductor to another Athearn F7 that I custom-decorated for a commercial display, but that was a simple matter of fashioning some seats and attaching them to the interior sides of the body. I then positioned a couple of figures in the seats to look reasonably realistic and epoxied everything in place. It might be worth some time browsing through the superdetailing parts listed in the Walthers catalog. You can also access the category using Walthers’ online catalog at: www.walthers.com
— Bill
Background on the BLI F7 Set
I enjoyed Bill Cawthon’s review of the BLI F7 units and would like to add a few tidbits. First, any researching of Santa Fe F7s is like trying to track down a particular strand in a bowl of spaghetti, and Bill really had to do his homework on this piece. Santa Fe kept upgrading the appearance of their F units in addition to the internal parts so it was seldom clear what kind of engine you are looking at in a photo or at trackside. Earlier Fs with high fans were changed to low ones, and F3s ended up with most of the spotting features of F7s. Engine 327 appears to have come in the “325” group in 1952 if my information is correct, and if so would account for the “new” style porthole window in the rear door instead of the older type square window shared by the similar engines that came slightly earlier. (I had heard this before from various sources so I only checked one this time.):
www.ndrr.com/rmr_faq/Models/Prototype/Santa%20Fe%20Warbonnets%2010.htm
Author: John Bruce — e-mail: j.bruce@gte.net
The plating of the model is well worth noticing and shows up nicely in the photos — and that is not easy to represent in a photo. That plating can be a nightmare for manufacturers because it can be done in several types of finishes. One of the very first uses of the plating in correct areas of a Santa Fe Warbonnet unit (if not the first) goes back to the S-Helper Showcase Line Fs of several years back. I had a slight involvement in this because the designer is a close friend. The plating can be done cheaply by flash plating the whole model, or in a more expensive process using more than one layer to get a very permanent mirror-like job. In addition, the plating can be chosen in ranges from dark to light and in various reflectances (how shiny it is — how defined a reflection is produced from diffused or shadow-like to fully spectral reflectance which is like a mirror). Don Thompson, the designer spent weeks with his samples under all kinds of lighting conditions at his offices, and on various model train layouts agonizing over which one looked best. He consulted modelers everywhere he was able to reach for their opinions. This sort of finish is now considered pretty much necessary for any company that wants to make a really first class model of a Santa Fe Warbonnet engine, and I am sure that BLI did their own share of picking over plating samples. But I recall getting phone calls at 4:30 A.M. asking if I thought, “sample #2 was kind of on the blue side,” before Don finally picked the one that everyone seems to like.
Victor Roseman
Brooklyn, NY
Thanks for widening the knowledge pool on this topic, Vic. The first time I picked up a “plated” Santa Fe F unit and pulled off the shell, I saw immediately how it was done. The entire shell had been plated in much the same fashion as a plastic cowboy pistol. Then the unplated areas on the outside of the shell were painted and plated areas seem to have been buffed down and given an overcoat. The result was a very nice visual effect, though the inside of the shell looked like my old cap gun. — John
Wants More Info on Digitrax Zephyr
Nice job with the article “Is DCC Right For You?” in the February issue of Model Railroad News. Even though you have written about it many times, it is still good to read more about DCC. For those of us who have switched, it is necessary to remind ourselves just why we did and what we expect from DCC. And then I just enjoy reading all of your columns on DCC. Good information in a timely fashion.
I am currently using a Digitrax Zephyr system and have enjoyed learning about it and using it. I have purchased two throttles to hook up to the Zephyr via Loconet to a couple of places on my layout. I have a UT4 and a DT400. I am still learning a lot about the DT400, but right now I seem to always reach for the UT4. Not sure why but I just seem to be more at ease with it than the DT400. But I am always looking for ways to learn more. I recently purchased a tutorial from Loy’s Toys which explains using the Zephyr system. This is a very good booklet and well worth the money. Now I just need time to really get into it!
One thing I would like to see you cover in your DCC columns is how to expand from the basic Zephyr system. I now believe that is what I want to do, but I’m not sure how to do it. I think all I would have to do is replace the DCS50, but I’m not sure of that. I have not yet been able to get the programming down using the DT400 so I still use the DCS50 to do that. Well, guess I should go back and check some of the back issues of Model Railroad News to find some answers.
Jerry Linn
Thedford, NE
Hi Jerry, drop into:
www.digitrax.com
and go to the “boosters” section. Two items offer themselves up: the DB150 and the DCS100. Both will give you 5 amps of track power, which is the maximum for HO in any event. If you need more than that, you really need to break your layout into power districts with more than one booster of five amps each. The 8-amp version is really best reserved for Garden railroad and O-gauge trains. You will need a separate power supply for these boosters; Digitrax also sells them. The PS515 would do the job, but you can contact Loy’s Toys or Tony’s Train Xchange for other alternatives.
As to programming with the DT400, I had the same problem until I sat down with the manual that comes with it and programmed a couple locos, using both the program track and on-the-main. The process is very systematic and methodical, and I think a half hour to an hour will get you going. Once you use the DT400 programming, you’ll undoubtedly come to prefer it over the DCS50. — John
John’s Frequency Goof
In the February issue, your answer to Ted Uren’s “DCC Question” contains an error which, I suspect, you probably recognized about 100 ms after the issue went to the printer.
You said, in part, “...AC frequency such as a wall power socket which changes direction 60 times each second (emphasis mine).” Of course, 60 Hz power “changes direction” twice a cycle, or 120 times each second. (But you knew that.)
David R. Phelps
Moneta, VA
Thanks for keeping me honest, Dave. You’re right on the money. And you’re right; I knew that! — John
Questions about DC/DCC Decoder Operations
I must start my letter the same way many other writers do by telling you what a terrific and indispensable publication Model Railroad News is. Your reviews are outstanding. When you rave about a product and it’s available in the scale I model, chances are I’ll place an order almost immediately. If you don’t like a product, I’m not buying.
I haven’t converted to DCC yet, but plan to. I have three questions that are affecting the timing of my switch over, I hope you can help me with them:
1 — Why are DCC power boosters so extremely sensitive as they seem to be from what I read? It sounds as though an extremely brief short, as may happen at a track switch not designed for DCC use, shuts them down, whereas a DC system wouldn’t produce any notable effects. I’m worried that I might have trouble with switches that are embedded in scenery and difficult-to-modify places. Can DCC systems be made more fault tolerant? If they can, perhaps one should wait until they’re available.
2 — I’ve recently bought locomotives that have dual and automatic DC/DCC compatibility—several from Precision Craft and a couple from Broadway Limited. They both seem like superb products, but on DC, while they rev up with impressive (and unexpected) light and sound shows, they fail to move because, as I discovered, my DC powerpack (a good one) only gets the DC voltage up to about 19v. When I hooked up to the fixed 21v DC terminals of my powerpack, the engines started up and took off beautifully, but I had no speed control, of course. This seems to suggest that while these products aren’t incompatible with DC, they really aren’t set up to operate with standard DC configurations. Am I seeing this right?
3 — How about doing an updated comparison of DCC systems that includes Loksound’s ECoS product? While I’m impressed with the capabilities of what have become today’s mainstream systems, I know that my family and friends who are put off by excessive complications of devices whether TV/DVD/Audio remotes or automobile navigation systems will not appreciate all the buttons so many systems have. What’s with the idea of “functions” such as horns, bells, lights, and so on not being called “horn or bell or…”? F1? Fine for a programmer. (I used to be one, but just as I don’t want to have the button for my TV labeled F1, the button for my DVD player labeled F2, and so on, I want kids to be able to press a button labeled horn, bells, brakes, etc. without having to teach them an encoding system.)
It appears the ECoS is moving in the right direction with programmable labels so operators don’t need to know function (or variable) numbers. And they have two throttles on the command station which I think adds tremendous fun. But it seems to be tethered down with lots of cables despite its appearance as a handheld device. I’d really like your assessment of the product and a comparison to other choices I might make.
Michael Allen
Bloomington, MN
Thanks for the kind words, Michael. Let’s see what we can do to get you in the pink, so we’ll take ‘em as you ask ‘em:
1 — That sensitive short circuit protection found in all good DCC systems is actually a very cheap insurance policy — the kind of insurance that keeps you from getting in a wreck in the first place! The best part of DCC is also the most dangerous. Because the rails always have around 15 volts AC on them at all times the power is on, and because most DCC systems offer 5 amps of power, we have enough juice to ruin any command station or locomotive in just seconds. There are ways to more or less defeat this protection, but I consider that to be a very foolish thing to do. It is better to run a short-free layout, even if that does require a little extra effort on your part. Eliminating shorts is Trackwork 101. See our “Thinking of DCC” column this month.
2 — Under no circumstances should you ever exceed 16 volts on the rails of any HO layout! If you burn out those locos at higher voltages, you also burn out your warranty right along with them. The manuals specifically warn against this.
I suspect the problem you have is that your power supply leaks AC power into the DC throttle. They might call it “Pulse Power” or something like that. This confuses the decoder, sometimes causing it to not work at all or provoking odd behavior because the AC sort of looks like DCC to the decoder. A good, clean DC power supply should work much better. Ask your local hobby dealer if he has one he can demonstrate, and bring one of your locos to try out. If the higher power hasn’t already ruined it, it should probably operate just fine. Be aware that you’ll get to seven or eight volts before the sound comes on and around ten volts before it moves, but you can then take it up to 16 volts, which is about the same as DCC voltage.
3 — An up-to-date comparison of DCC systems is virtually impossible, since all of them are in a state of almost constant change. I have never seen an ECoS, though I’ve heard nice things about this Loksound system. Phil Scandura actually has one in hand as I write this, so keep an eye out for his evaluation in the near future.
At the bottom of it all, however, is an endemic problem with DCC. While NMRA maintains a list of a few CVs that should be present in every mobile decoder and should work in certain ways, even the most basic of these may be nonstandard or absent on some makers’ decoders. Then additional features not regulated by NMRA may be located on all sorts of CVs such that there is no consistency at all. Any “slick” interface will also have to have access to a very accurate database of actual decoders and their specific oddities. This would involve a late-model computer and the Internet, something that many modelers would not embrace. It’s very much of a no-win situation so long as the basic CVs are ignored and there is no consistency to the options.
All of the current DCC systems will support multiple throttles, if you care to set them up that way. Most of the throttles are tethered cable types; radio control DCC is a fairly expensive option. I actually prefer the cables, since that leads to bullet proof communication between cab and command station. You can also follow the cord to wherever you set down the throttle! — John
As the late comedian Bert Lahr frequently said, “Zowee!” …my reaction to the Athearn ad for “Ready to Roll” Model A Fords on the inside front cover of this month’s (February 2007) MRN. Page 43 provided a double treat with the presentation of ADP’s American trucks for the Transition Era.
Some months ago MRN published a letter of mine concerning the lack of built up early-era vehicles, and I thought perhaps no one was listening. Well, I guess someone was. I believe there is an untouched market for RTR ordinary work-a-day vehicles for the 1915–1940 Era. Many of those great HO-scale locomotives on the market today were manufactured during that period, so let’s get some more era-matching, built-up motor vehicles to compliment them.
The Athearn Fords are a great deal price-wise. They retail for only about twice the price of the long-time-selling plastic unassembled, unpainted kits of similar vehicles. I will put my money where my mouth is and buy several each of the models offered. Go, Athearn, go! The ADP trucks look very good and ditto for them.
Maybe Busch will figure things out and take their 1931 Model AA panel truck and make some body variations. Hey! Wouldn’t it be great if we could get Woodland Scenics to assemble and paint their Diamond T truck line and add it to their “Auto Scenes.” A sure HO-scale bus model winner would be the 1930 AB Interstate Mack coach painted for Greyhound and local lines around the country. I tell you this market is open for grabs.
Lastly, let’s get some of those great O- and G-scale individual period figures reduced to HO scale and sell them in small groups of say, three to a package. Now, to get the one figure that I want, I need to buy a dozen. Hopefully, some of the figure manufacturers will start to produce more North American vintage folk as well as the wedding, funeral, street, and sportsmen models now available.
Joe Bux
Bayside, NY
Variations on the Busch 1931 Ford AA Panel Delivery would be nice, but they would involve so much new tooling, they would almost be entirely new models. Plus, you need to remember the Busch model is based on the German Ford truck produced in Cologne.
Preiser already has a wide selection of individually packaged single models. Check with your favorite hobby supplier for a complete list of the available figures. As the selection of vehicle replicas from the 1930s and 1940s grows, I feel pretty sure companies like Preiser and Woodland Scenics will see the opportunity for new figure sets to go with them. — Bill
Just thought I’d pass along a photo from The Chessie System Cumberland Action book, by Thomas A Biery, page 19 (not shown here for copyright reasons). Shows VWs being hauled from Port of Baltimore. I’ve done several of these with the Accurail tri-levels using the Malibu International VW Kafer models. Top and bottom row slide in, on the six cars that I put in the mid-rack I take a Dremel tool with a #115 bit and mill the tops down to clear, then repaint the bare metal. They look good once slid into the autorack car.
Although not an “American” load, they do work well, and are affordable! Also I’ve seen VW vans on bi-levels and have modeled them too. Thank you for your “At the Grade Crossing” column, always informative and interesting to read.
Sincerely,
Kelly Countryman
Bellaire, MI
It’s worth noting Volkswagen played a large part in the development of the auto rack. In the 1950s, VW was producing more cars than the available fleet of truck-trailer auto transporters could handle, so Volkswagen engineers worked with the German railroad to develop a new type of railcar, which was the inspiration for the American auto rack.
Opel is another car a lot of people forget about. It was second only to VW in the import sales segment and was sold through Buick dealerships. There aren’t any two-buck models of the Opels, but Wiking has nice replicas of the Opel Manta A and Opel GT. Two-thirds of all Opel GTs ever made were sold in the U.S. — Bill
Really enjoy your articles in MRN. Just a note about the open AutoRack cars. When adding autos to them keep in mind that these cars were loaded at an assembly plant. All the cars would be from the same manufacturer. All Fords or all Chevys and the like. With the profusion of quality HO-scale cars out there it is easy to fill the Autoracks. The weight factor should be considered. The metal cars could be on the bottom level with lighter plastic cars above. This would keep the Autorack from being top heavy and a great way to disguise the weight.
Cliff West
Rainier, OR
The upcoming Atlas Fairmonts will make another good load. In fact, the assortment of body styles and colors will make the Fairmonts one of the best candidates out there. You will be able to load an entire auto rack with just a few repetitions and the car was so popular that a string of Fairmont-laden auto racks won’t look out of place. In addition, these plastic models will weigh less. The half-pound per car of additional weight for a full load of diecast cars could add up fairly quickly in a five or ten car string.
Other good choices would be the Busch 1977 Dodge and Plymouth sedan models and any number of Mustangs. But don’t forget the point of my column was to determine which of the inexpensive discount store diecasts were both period correct and able to fit in the Accurail car without major disassembly.
As lines like the Fresh Cherries and Reel Rides grow, we’ll have even more choices for low-cost auto rack loads. The Reel Rides GTO fits the Accurail car very nicely. In addition, we’ll have new moderately priced cars from Model Power and others. The good news just keeps getting better. — Bill
e-mail us at: letters
or send us a letter to:
LETTERS c/o Model Railroad News
P.O. Box 1080 • Merlin, OR 97532-1080
Fax: 541-955-0346