Actually, I doubt that would void the warranty.  FWIW, I have the Legacy C&O USRA #875 Mallet, and mine came with the drivers staggered 90 degrees out of the box.  I think the positions of the drivers are the "luck of the draw", it's hard for me to believe they worry about that when assembling them.  Also, the fine position would also be dependent on the position of the drive shaft linkage when the worm is installed in the gearbox, so it's quite possible for many of them to have other than a 90 degree increment in the driver positions relative to the other engine.

Some examples of the "other than 90 degree stagger".

Lionel Legacy Y6b

MTH Premier Challenger

I have had the Challenger apart, but I didn't crack the worm gear box.  The Y6b came that way from the factory.

Attachments

Photos (2)
gunrunnerjohn posted:

Actually, I doubt that would void the warranty.  FWIW, I have the Legacy C&O USRA #875 Mallet, and mine came with the drivers staggered 90 degrees out of the box.  I think the positions of the drivers are the "luck of the draw", it's hard for me to believe they worry about that when assembling them.  Also, the fine position would also be dependent on the position of the drive shaft linkage when the worm is installed in the gearbox, so it's quite possible for many of them to have other than a 90 degree increment in the driver positions relative to the other engine.

Some exam

 

I have had the Challenger apart, but I didn't crack the work gear box.  The Y6b came that way from the factory.

My thoughts exactly John, it is our luck of the draw on how they get assembled.

A little confused... the 2-6-6-2s are compound engines, the rear cylinders feed the exhausted steam to the front cylinders then out the stack. How would this make any alteration to the sound (if it were even possible for the sound file to account for the out of sync drivers)? Should be 4 chuffs/ rev like a regular steam engine. 

Simple articulateds (4 independent cylinders, Challenger, BB, etc...) would drift in and out, but I dont know if the sound file has the ability to adjust. GRJ probably knows if there's a switch or hall sensor on both sets of drivers...

 

"Of course we know its O-gauge or no gauge." -- Sheldon Cooper

For scale Lionel or MTH steamers, the drivers are locked in whatever position they're assembled in as there is a inflexible gear train and one motor powering both sets of drivers. 

Talking about prototypes, Mallet locomotives have a "simpleing valve" that starts them out in simple mode.  I know the Legacy Y6b starts out with the articulated sounds and you can hear it shift into 4 chuffs at a certain speed just like the prototype would do.  I would think most Mallet locomotives would have to similarly start out in simple mode just to get moving as that's where maximum tractive effort would usually be called for.  That being the case, even the Mallet would have the articulated sounds at startup.

From the Catskill Archive Website, the simpleing value appears to indeed be a standard feature for the Mallet style locomotives.

In order to enable the locomotive to develop full power at starting, it is necessary to provide means for admitting steam direct from the boiler to the low-pressure cylinders. In the Baldwin engine, a small pipe is run from a starting valve in the cab, to the receiver pipe connecting the high and low-pressure cylinders. By opening the starting valve, steam will pass direct from the boiler to the receiver pipe and thence to the low-pressure cylinders, and the locomotive will develop a tractive force up to the limit of its adhesion. This device is recommended because of its simplicity and reliability in service.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

 From the Catskill Archive Website, the simpleing value appears to indeed be a standard feature for the Mallet style locomotives.

John,
That is correct, but, one must take into account that Baldwin pretty much gave up on the Mallet type and their way of doing things limited the operation of the locomotive.
A better representation of the way the mallet works is the ALCO version, also found on the Catskill site. This will be the way the N&W and C&O (and others) articulateds worked.

As for the OP assertion that should be this way or that, he couldn't be more wrong. The two engines operated independently from each other and their drivers/rods could be seen in any position in relation to each other. The only reason for doing what he did is entirely aesthetic depending on the individual's taste.

Boilermaker1 posted:

A little confused... the 2-6-6-2s are compound engines, the rear cylinders feed the exhausted steam to the front cylinders then out the stack. How would this make any alteration to the sound (if it were even possible for the sound file to account for the out of sync drivers)? Should be 4 chuffs/ rev like a regular steam engine. 

Simple articulateds (4 independent cylinders, Challenger, BB, etc...) would drift in and out, but I dont know if the sound file has the ability to adjust. GRJ probably knows if there's a switch or hall sensor on both sets of drivers...

Yep - still true. I made this point on another thread yesterday. I imagine that it will have to be made again.

And the "drifting in and out" is perceptible only at low speeds. Still.

Big Jim posted:
gunrunnerjohn posted:

 From the Catskill Archive Website, the simpleing value appears to indeed be a standard feature for the Mallet style locomotives.

John,
That is correct, but, one must take into account that Baldwin pretty much gave up on the Mallet type and their way of doing things limited the operation of the locomotive.
A better representation of the way the mallet works is the ALCO version, also found on the Catskill site. This will be the way the N&W and C&O (and others) articulateds worked.

Great link, that really went into some detail.  I love it when a thread expands the knowledge base.

As for the OP assertion that should be this way or that, he couldn't be more wrong. The two engines operated independently from each other and their drivers/rods could be seen in any position in relation to each other. The only reason for doing what he did is entirely aesthetic depending on the individual's taste.

Yep, as I illustrated, even the models have them all over the place. If you ever take them apart, even if you don't take the worm out, you only have a 1:4 chance of getting them aligned again unless you go out of your way to make sure they're aligned.  If you take the worm out for any reason, you have an infinite number of possibilities as the wheels and driveshaft can have any orientation.

Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Both interesting and informative. Question is, is all the articulated locomotives looking to be luck of the draw during assembly? That is sort of what it is looking like to me(mostly synced or lined up) as it appears. If its not luck of the draw, than why is it occurring as such?

The makers could be going to the trouble to line them up, but frankly I don't see the need.  Like I said, I see them right out of the box with pretty random distribution of the alignment.  Maybe, for whatever reason, the VL Challenger is lining them up to justify the lack of the articulated sound setup, hard to say until a bunch of them are in the hands of consumers.

gunrunnerjohn posted:
Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Both interesting and informative. Question is, is all the articulated locomotives looking to be luck of the draw during assembly? That is sort of what it is looking like to me(mostly synced or lined up) as it appears. If its not luck of the draw, than why is it occurring as such?

The makers could be going to the trouble to line them up, but frankly I don't see the need.  Like I said, I see them right out of the box with pretty random distribution of the alignment.  Maybe, for whatever reason, the VL Challenger is lining them up to justify the lack of the articulated sound setup, hard to say until a bunch of them are in the hands of consumers.

Maybe those with the first batches got screwed. Question is, if these get corrected(most likely by the consuming public) my guess is the sound would naturally follow the drivers and the smoke should follow that as well? As far as the Challengers, my guess the same could be said for them, but wagering that the smoke won't alternate as you had mentioned in that other topic like the VL BB's do.

The sound will never follow the drivers as the drivers for each engine are always locked into a specific alignment with respect to each other.  The best you can do with these without independent drives for the two steam "engines" is to have the chuffs locked to the rotation and have the articulated sounds vary similar to the sounds of the prototype.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

The sound will never follow the drivers as the drivers for each engine are always locked into a specific alignment with respect to each other.  The best you can do with these without independent drives for the two steam "engines" is to have the chuffs locked to the rotation and have the articulated sounds vary similar to the sounds of the prototype.

Oh, what I meant was that the sound is generated by the drivers(isn't the magnet or such located somewhere on the to register or read the chuffs)? Since each set are lined up it would be in unison unless you do what is in the above video or did I get that wrong as well?

The sound is generated by the electronics from tach sensor counts.  Since there's no indexing of the tach, there's no way for the electronics to know where any physical drivers are with Legacy.

Tony...very informative.  I sent you an e mail about the hideous paint scheme of the GN Mallet.  Lionel says it's a fantasy engine since the GN did not run the 2-6-6-2's.  I don't know for sure.  What is certain is that they totally screwed up the green color...horrible.  Not even close.  Looks like the aftermath of a bad dinner.

Jim

Actually, since the chuffs have been generated by the tach pulses, the drivers have never been in sync with the sounds.  Yes, there is a fairly accurate number of chuff/rev, but as far as when the chuff sound is generated, that isn't synchronized to the position of the drivers or cylinders.  Back in the old days with the chuff switch on an axle cam, it would have been possible to get them in the correct point in the driver rotation.

However, the articulated sounds have always been generated artificially.

 

I'm not sure how illuminating that video was, it was going too fast to see what was really going on.  I did a "stop action" and the drivers are in sync, but it's my understanding that at speed they will frequently "sync up".  Is there something else we're supposed to glean from that video, other than what an impressive beat the Big Boy is?

Jim Rawlings posted:

Tony...very informative.  I sent you an e mail about the hideous paint scheme of the GN Mallet.  Lionel says it's a fantasy engine since the GN did not run the 2-6-6-2's.  I don't know for sure.  What is certain is that they totally screwed up the green color...horrible.  Not even close.  Looks like the aftermath of a bad dinner.

Jim

Looks to me more like Southern Railway green... 

Mark in Oregon

The articulateds on my railroad are all MTH Rail King with PS2. I find that an odd number of chuffs per revolution (5) provides a prototypical cadence to the stack talk. I do need to stagger the engine's driver sets though.

By the way, the articulateds are best tracking locomotives on my railroad, and especially through switches. The Cab Forward AC9 has the worst boiler overhang, too much for my railroad, so I am thinking about trading it for a Clinchfield Challenger.

AC-12 Cab Forward [1)

New York Central USRA 2-8-8-2 No 5887 387kbN&W Y6b No 2195 528kb

Bobby Ogage

"I hear that train a coming,

it's Long Island No. 39 rolling

around the bend"

 

Attachments

Photos (3)
gunrunnerjohn posted:

I'm not sure how illuminating that video was, it was going too fast to see what was really going on.  I did a "stop action" and the drivers are in sync, but it's my understanding that at speed they will frequently "sync up".  Is there something else we're supposed to glean from that video, other than what an impressive beat the Big Boy is?

The OP said it was correct to have the rods at different points as they rotated and went to great length to do so. And, in my opinion could have been much easier just if one can open up the gear box.
My point is that is entirely correct for the rods to run in sync as was clearly shown in the video...and in many others.

Jim, I think the argument is that they're not ALWAYS in sync.  I believe that it was stated by several people that during running it's not uncommon for the two engines to sync up a majority of the time.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

Jim, I think the argument is that they're not ALWAYS in sync.  I believe that it was stated by several people that during running it's not uncommon for the two engines to sync up a majority of the time.

John,
Listen to the first 40 sec. of the OP's video. He says that it is incorrect to have the rods in the same visual position. I am saying that it correct and that is what i tried to point out in the video of the BB. It is also entirely correct to have the rods in any visual position in relation to one another.

Now, as far as sound is concerned, it is very common for the exhausts of the two simple articulated's engines to sync up where you only hear four exhausts per revolution. I have many recordings of this happening and for very long periods of time. So, yes this is true, despite what the naysayers think!

Big Jim posted:
gunrunnerjohn posted:

Jim, I think the argument is that they're not ALWAYS in sync.  I believe that it was stated by several people that during running it's not uncommon for the two engines to sync up a majority of the time.

John,
Listen to the first 40 sec. of the OP's video. He says that it is incorrect to have the rods in the same visual position. I am saying that it correct and that is what i tried to point out in the video of the BB. It is also entirely correct to have the rods in any visual position in relation to one another.

Now, as far as sound is concerned, it is very common for the exhausts of the two simple articulated's engines to sync up where you only hear four exhausts per revolution. I have many recordings of this happening and for very long periods of time. So, yes this is true, despite what the naysayers think!

You both are correct but the issue is just because the side rods are in sync does mean chuffs will be or vice versa.

Shawn Chronister

Shawn_Chronister posted:
Big Jim posted:
gunrunnerjohn posted:

Jim, I think the argument is that they're not ALWAYS in sync.  I believe that it was stated by several people that during running it's not uncommon for the two engines to sync up a majority of the time.

John,
Listen to the first 40 sec. of the OP's video. He says that it is incorrect to have the rods in the same visual position. I am saying that it correct and that is what i tried to point out in the video of the BB. It is also entirely correct to have the rods in any visual position in relation to one another.

Now, as far as sound is concerned, it is very common for the exhausts of the two simple articulated's engines to sync up where you only hear four exhausts per revolution. I have many recordings of this happening and for very long periods of time. So, yes this is true, despite what the naysayers think!

You both are correct but the issue is just because the side rods are in sync does mean chuffs will be or vice versa.

Not necessarily Shawn.

Big Jim posted:
Shawn_Chronister posted:
Big Jim posted:
gunrunnerjohn posted:

Jim, I think the argument is that they're not ALWAYS in sync.  I believe that it was stated by several people that during running it's not uncommon for the two engines to sync up a majority of the time.

John,
Listen to the first 40 sec. of the OP's video. He says that it is incorrect to have the rods in the same visual position. I am saying that it correct and that is what i tried to point out in the video of the BB. It is also entirely correct to have the rods in any visual position in relation to one another.

Now, as far as sound is concerned, it is very common for the exhausts of the two simple articulated's engines to sync up where you only hear four exhausts per revolution. I have many recordings of this happening and for very long periods of time. So, yes this is true, despite what the naysayers think!

You both are correct but the issue is just because the side rods are in sync does mean chuffs will be or vice versa.

Not necessarily Shawn.

So you're saying every time the side rods are in sync the chuffs will be too?

Shawn Chronister

Big Jim posted:

The rods don't have to be in the same position for the exhausts to be in sync. Remember that the drivers are quartered.

Thats my point people are saying the drive rods in sync are relative to to the chuffs being in sync which is not true. They can be 180 Degrees out and have synced chuff rate.

Shawn Chronister

The bottom line here is on the real prototype, the engines are sometimes OUT OF SYNC, and you would hear the articulated chuff sounds.  On virtually every other articulated steamer Lionel has done (MTH as well), they have had articulated sounds that go in and out of sync.  Suddenly, for this flagship version, they dropped the articulated sounds for reasons I guess many of us can't understand. 

I wasn't aware of any argument that sometimes, and maybe even a majority of the time, the engines would be in sync.  I know I certainly was not making that argument.

Hi, I have a question on this video. It concerns the "plunger" shaped swivel attachment point  for the front drivers used on many Lionel articulated steam engines, including this one.  The video shows it connected, then disconnected, but does not show the actual procedure to disconnect. Do you need to apply pressure at some point to release, does it just pull apart, etc.  Sorry, but I just do not have any experience working on large articulated engines. Thanks very much for any help you can provide, when I just plunge ahead blindly something usually gets broken. Please accept my apologies if the info is there and I just missed it.

Regards,

Bill  

BILLNJNC posted:

Hi, I have a question on this video. It concerns the "plunger" shaped swivel attachment point  for the front drivers used on many Lionel articulated steam engines, including this one.  The video shows it connected, then disconnected, but does not show the actual procedure to disconnect. Do you need to apply pressure at some point to release, does it just pull apart, etc.  Sorry, but I just do not have any experience working on large articulated engines. Thanks very much for any help you can provide, when I just plunge ahead blindly something usually gets broken. Please accept my apologies if the info is there and I just missed it.

Regards,

Bill  

Bill, no need to take the boiler screws out. You’re only dealing with the front driver. The only screw that needs removal is the flat blade screw. You will see a spring that fits over a 90 degree bend holding the front drivers in place. Push down on the drivers and pull the assembly out of the slot. Very simple to do. You can now pull the assembly out of the square coupler and turn by hand to offset the drive wheels to your liking. It’s a male/female coupler that simply slides together. You can also service the smoke unit with this procedure. 

Rod Miller

Don't forget the cupped washer and spring that sometimes fly off and drop inside the locomotive.   Truthfully, to service the smoke unit, you likely have to take the boiler top off.  There are also usually wires that go over the cross-member that have to be unplugged to totally remove the front power truck to be able to reach the smoke unit.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post
OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
330-757-3020

www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
×