Sprung drivers for K Line scale steam locomotives.

You need to do it yourself.  It is not difficult, but you may want to look in to an all brass frame.

You can have it done professionally - if you are lucky a grand might do it, but you would be better off with a USH for $800 or so, and sell the K-Line.  I would probably charge twice that, but I like to keep my hobby separate from my work.

Now this is opinion, based on the fact that I have scratch built 36 steam models in brass.  Two thirds of them are slotted for springs on the driving boxes, but about half of those have cork pads instead of springs.  The other third are simpler, and just have U shaped journal boxes in the frame, with the axle held with a pedestal binder and an adjustable screw.  I can see no operational advantage to going fully sprung until I hit five or more axles, and then it helps only because I have way too much superelevation.

You will soon find that most wildly disagree, and that they agree with you on the smoothness.

I have a Weaver brass 4-6-0 chassis (with MTH die-cast boiler on top) with sprung drivers and I don't see any advantage.  Not sure if my Williams brass 2-8-2 has them or not.  IMO not worth the cost or effort of getting it done, if it already comes that way, fine.

I took the Weaver chassis apart, didn't know it was sprung until I did so.  I thought I'd have an impossible time getting things back together, but it was not a big deal.

I really appreciate the response guys. Perhaps it is my imagination, but the sprung locos seem to be somewhat smoother at scale speeds of 40 to 60 mph straight through the #6 scaletrax switches on my layout. It might just be a matter of weight distribution between the lead trucks, drivers and trailing trucks. I have the means to accurately measure these weights and will do so. I can experiment with different spring sizes to gain or lose weight at the axels due to the slop in the K line driver boxes.

The other thing is to experiment with self centering action for the lead and trailing trucks with thin piano wire. I won't spend a ton of money on the K lines and will replace them eventually with brass. Thanks again.

If you were in 2- rail some of this might be important.  We routinely use the engine truck to lead the drivers into a curve, and the best way seems to be the venerable All-Nation/Varney method.

Your flanges and rail are different - designed to keep things on the track for kids.  If you are having problems with derailments, it is time to look at how you anchor your track.  

My guess is you are just flirting with realism - you want something that is a bit more like the real thing.  Before you mess with what are really valuable 3- rail models, consider selling them and buying some 2- rail locomotives with the features you desire.

Pay particular attention to the FEF- you can purchase a CLW Northern with working leaf springs and equalized drivers for around $300.  If you really have the budget to sink a couple grand into a K-Line Berk, the one you want is KTM-USA UP FEF.  This is simply the definitive O Scale model, fully equalized from engine truck to trailing truck, just like the real thing.  They tell me it runs like a ten thousand dollar Swiss watch.

And for freight cars - if you are looking to make your freight car springs compress under car weights, you are way, way ahead of most of us.  For poor trackwork, I recommend equalized trucks - only available in scale trucks of the non- sprung variety.

Bob, I appreciate your comments, however you have reached the wrong conclusions. My track work is excellent and derailments are seldom. My K line locos are scale and being super detailed and are the match of some brass locomotives of which I have several. I am now converting a rare brass Santa Fe Mikado to 3 rail for the sound and smoke. I run 72 to 80 inch radius curves, so all of my railroad can support high prototype speeds. The rub is the inherent roughness of passing through Scaletrax switches. I am reaching for very smooth operating steam locomotives. I know something about suspensions being a race car driver, albeit retired. Maybe I am flirting with realism, but how many two railers have complete couplings between loco and tender all in place during operation. Few die cast locos can match the look of brass, the rivet detail is too large, but they look pretty darn good at 5 feet. I run scale wheels where they can really be discerned, such as the lead trucks. My opinion is that a truly well detailed operating layout doesn't have to live or die based on the number of rails. I like the simplicity of the 3 rail wiring and TMCC and I like Smoke.

I wonder if that may be some of your issue. My layout is all Atlas O, plus the modular layout group I belong to is all Gargraves & Ross, and I have very few issues with any of my MTH die cast steam locomotive models as well as any of my Sunset/3rd Rail models. To be honest, I think that the spring drivers in any and all of my 3rd Rail steam locomotive models are pretty stiff, so there really is very little "spring deflection" anyway.

I'm being picky. I am referring to the shake the locos make going through a switch. Watch the Black Diamond videos and as great as the layout is the steam locos squirm as they pass through the switches.

This just may be a fact of life, but I'm curious if I can tune the locos to go smoother through the switches. I just wanted to see if anyone felt the same or had a tip.   That is why these forums are valuable. 

Try ROSS #10 switches, that should smooth things out.

OK, but now I'm a bit confused. You want to work on (tune) the locomotives, instead of tuning the turnouts????? If the locomotives do NOT exhibit any issues at any other locations throughout your track system, except at the turnouts, well then,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.

 I am now converting a rare brass Santa Fe Mikado to 3 rail for the sound and smoke. I run 72 to 80 inch radius curves, so . . .

Beginning to get the picture here.  The obvious comment is that sound and smoke have nothing to do with how many rails you have.  When you run wide radius curves you can retain many of the features of a truly scale locomotive, like tailbeams and properly sized cylinders.  

Sounds a bit like you are new to the hobby, and probably should select whether you want to be full scale with sprung everything or 3-rail scale where things are designed for rough switch work.  If you like that center rail, there is an excellent thread that starts with full scale track and a center rail.  If you do that, you can lay your own switches and get smoother operation.

I've been watching this thread develop.  I think we now have enough information to at least begin asking some good questions.

OK, but now I'm a bit confused. You want to work on (tune) the locomotives, instead of tuning the turnouts?????

Hot Water has a fine point there.  A Scaletrax No. 6 switch has a list price of $69.95.  It is likely a much more cost effective place to start than rebuilding or replacing locomotives.

ScaleTrax switches have nicely designed frogs and guard rails and have provided reliable tracking with a wide variety of locomotives and rolling stock.  What specifically are you seeing when locomotives "shake' through a switch?  Are you seeing vertical lifting or lateral nosing?  Are you seeing it when pilot or trailing trucks pass through a switch or when the drivers travel through?  Is this only observed when the locomotive travels through the diverging route?  Is it observed with facing or trailing points?

One of the problems known to show up on some Scaletrax switches is that the center rail casting can fail to be properly seated and stand proud of the running rail height.  If a locomotives center rail rollers do not have adequate travel the tall center rail can cause the locomotive to lift momentarily as it passes through the switch.  The easiest fix for this depends on weather or not the switch has been placed permanently.

I run 72 to 80 inch radius curves, so all of my railroad can support high prototype speeds.

Radius or diameter?  Of you are using ScaleTrax sectional track you have 72 and 80 in diameter curves.  They are far, far tighter than prototypical mainline curves, let alone high speed track.

I run scale wheels where they can really be discerned, such as the lead trucks. My opinion is that a truly well detailed operating layout doesn't have to live or die based on the number of rails.

A railroad can live or die based on incompatible wheel flange and switch frog and guard rail dimensions.  Have you modified any of the locomotives that you see shaking through three rail switches with two rail wheel sets? 

Perhaps it is my imagination, but the sprung locos seem to be somewhat smoother at scale speeds of 40 to 60 mph straight through the #6 scaletrax switches on my layout.

If you are running TMCC how do you know the scale speed of your locomotives?  Are you comparing their speed to Proto 2 locomotives, taking mile post timings or otherwise estimating the speed?

I know something about suspensions being a race car driver, albeit retired.

If your speed measurements or estimates are accurate all I can advise is to SLOW DOWN!!!!!!

I have run trains at an outdoor O scale layout with 120 inch radius curves.  Forty to sixty SMPH looks great there.  On an indoor layout it looks more like slot car speed.  It may be time to recalibrate your estimate of realistic speed.

Cutting your speeds in half would be more realistic. Twenty to thirty scale miles per hour is plenty fast unless you have tangent track stretches that cover dozens and dozens of feet between curves.  Taking the diverging route of a switch at 15 SMPH or less is also realistic.  We aren't modeling Daytona! 

Ted,

I appreciate your comments. My curves are super elevated 12 ft to 13.5 ft in diameter. The shake I mention is very minute and  tracking is no problem even with NWSL scale diameter wheels on the lead trucks.

I have been addressing the shortcomings of the Scale trax switch such as filling down the center  rail casing to match the height of the rail. This eliminates the shock to the rollers which can lift a loco.

 I have even experimented making my own frogs and guard rails, but have stayed with the ones in place for now. 

I chose Scaletrax due to the t rail.

I calculate speed by time over distance.

As a boy I saw some of the crack passenger trains run by at 80 and 90 mph. Glorious.

So occasionally I run my NYC and Santa Fe passenger trains at those speeds and they look great.

So--- on the locos I am going to try and cost effectively equalize the weights between the drivers and trucks and add some centering force fore and aft. It may come to naught and that's OK. After all I'm just playing. If it works I'll video the before and after.

Bob2

Can you please explain the Varney/Allnation method of the lead truck leading the drivers into the curve.

Sounds interesting.

Thanks, Ron

Could the problem be in the inherit design of 3-rail switches?

The gaps between rails and frogs and depth of clearances are dictated by the large 3-rail flanges and tapered diameters and wide width of the tires.  I get up and down bounce from all my engines when they pass thru a switch, some minor, some not so minor, which I contribute to the wider than need be gaps between components of the switches.  Using more scale-like wheels can only amplify the bounce.

What we need (and this has been discussed before) are tighter tolerances on switches so scale wheels can be used.

Bob D.

You are absolutely right about the switches. I made a frog for one of the switches I haven't installed and I found it is the placement of the guard rails when you lengthen the frog to be critical. I had partial success, but ran out of fiddle time.

I've noticed Rich's engines bounce around a bit in his Black Diamond videos and that's Scaletrax.

Our engines do the same thing through many of our Ross switches, and I've found that most of the time it's the switch itself that needs tuned up. Many times with the Ross, I find the spikes are sticking up too high and the drivers hit them as they go through. I can also see spots on the leading edge of the frog where the wheels are hitting it. A nail set and file seem to take most of that bouncing around away.

I haven't used Scaletrax, but I would start looking at the switches first.

He is going to spring his locomotives.  It's a hobby.

The All-Nation lead truck is forced down and center by two springs tugging on the bolster from below.  Best to just buy one on the used market, then copy it.  Or find a drawing - I believe they are in the catalogs.

Springing your locomotives will make you a better machinist and mechanic.  If you also see an improvement in operation, that is an additional bonus.  Good luck.

You will not find real trains going through switches or turnouts at sixty MPH, unless they are special switches.  And most real switches have very gentle curvature.  There is no rule that says a model cannot go through a switch at top speed.

One more suggestion, and I am outta here.  Go to this place:

https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/t...er-looking-3rs-track

and lay switches in the same vein, adding the center rail so you retain the 3-rail appearance.  I believe adding the center rail would be more or less trivial, since it does not have to actually connect to anything.  You might have to glue pieces of plastic in there to avoid bouncing rollers.  Then you can have all the advantages of 2- rail, and retain the center rail too.  You could set it up so that 2- rail locomotives could run without modification at times when you did not want to run sprung 3- rail locomotives.

OK, but what if the newly modified sprung locomotive/locomotives STILL exhibit the same issue? Wouldn't it be best to address the possible root cause of the whole problem by FIXING THE DARNED TURNOUTS????

Hey guys,

1. I do not go through the divergent at speed=== EVER

2. I am going to fix the switches as time permits

3. If springing the locos doesn't present a better loco----Oh well, it was fun trying.

4. I really appreciate all the input

Thanks again

Ron