I will start it off:
1) A Gear ratio conversion kit for China drives to convert from 10:1 to 20:1 All it might take is a new layshaft/worm gear and replacement motor with new 2 start worm.
2) Rail joiners that actually fit and work for code 125 and 148 rail. Like the OLD Atlas/Roco style that look like current Atlas HO and N joiners (I've seen the old Atlas 6041 joiners go for as much as $20 for a pack of 48)
3) I can only come up with two items.
Discuss
Replies sorted oldest to newest
The Milwaukee SDL39 that is coming
Milwaukee SD40-2 that is coming as well
Dick
1. REASONABLY PRICED TRACK!!
2. Deleted
3. Single motor double-truck drives become standard (like a CLW drive, for example).
4. An affordable SDL39; like an MTH Premier 2-rail could have been, for example.
Hi Jim, for code .125" you might want to try Peco code 138 joiners from Ted at Rails Unlimited 847 697 5353, he just got some more in.
I filed a slight taper on the base of piece of rail to make it slip on. Snug but it works. Also somewhat doable on early Atlas flex. Tight but better than the sloppy fit of late Atlas joiners.
If you want I will send you complementary sample card of the Peco joiners.
Also if you want a reasonable single digit price on late model Atlas .148 just ask, contact in in my profile.
Die cast drop-bottom gons for under $100 - see Ulrich in HO for how to design them.
1.) Mass produced high quality passenger trucks such as the CUDO and 41N series with mounting areas in the center and offset for the modeler to use as applicable his/her conversion.
2.) A P&D Hobbies style six axle EMD and GE style truck with gear tower that could be used for conversions.
3.) A top quality RTR GP38, GP38-2, GP40, GP40-2, U36B, B36-7, F40PH, SDP40F, and P30CH that are tooled specifically for O Scale 2 Rail (with easy P48 conversions) that have tower drives and DCC Sound. *I think RTR in some variants would help grow our 2 Rail side and scale and running fidelity out of the box would make the transition for some wanting to jump ship from other scales.
*I would love to see how the Peco Rail Joiners worked out. I bought some of them from Ted at the O Scale Meet last year and haven't got around to trying them yet.
Interesting title i must admit.
Complete re-run of all the Atlas California Zephyr lineup!
Of course it's fun to try and fill in the holes too... 
Chuck
Railthunder, I have NOT been able to fit the Peco joiners onto the late model .148" Atlas track due to it's hefty size.
However, code .125" and early .158" Atlas/Roco with it's trim profile can use them with some TLC.
1) Atlas to offer their endcab SW switchers, again.
I'm pretty good on everything else.
1) someone buys MTH and continues 2 rail releases
2) someone buys MTH and continues 2 rail releases
A decent and reasonably affordable modular turn-key drive system with all the components that could be installed into diesel locos.
An emergence of the Wagner (Current Line) trolley and traction supplies company from wherever it is now.
More (any!) early era (pre-1920) steam and passenger cars.
As I’ve started more seriously pursuing O scale proto 48, I realize the scale lacks so much that is easily available in HO. I’d like to see.
1. More modern 4 axle locomotives.
2. More modern rail cars.
Full range of freight and passenger car truck types that will work for both 2 and easily adaptable for 3 rail. Still searching for a really good set of Dalman trucks that don't cost a fortune (or at least more than the car they support).
Same thing for freight car doors. Not sure how someone could manage it being each model maker uses different methods of securing the doors to the cars. I'm fine with the doors not moving, but they would have to be prototypical for the car. And if these already exist, give a decent description of the item to help the modeler determine what will fit, just a picture won't do anymore.
More off-the-shelf cabooses that match southern RR prototypes.
My days of scratch building are about over; arthritis in my hands, bone deterioration, arthritis, inflammation, torn ligaments, and bone chips in my shoulder have taken their toll. Got a reverse joint replacement coming up, but I'm trying to wait for the urologist to remove an 8mm kidney stone before I have my right arm put in a sling.
A third item, NO MORE CHINA DRIVES!
Dick
@mwb posted:A decent and reasonably affordable modular turn-key drive system with all the components that could be installed into diesel locos.
An emergence of the Wagner (Current Line) trolley and traction supplies company from wherever it is now.
More (any!) early era (pre-1920) steam and passenger cars.
The Stanton drives are 'available' in OW5, P48, On3 and more with varying wheelbases.
I should have gotten a Stanton drive for my SAL motorcar!!! Still possible I guess, will have to do some calculations.
How do you mount the sideframes?
@Jim Scorse posted:The Stanton drives are 'available' in OW5, P48, On3 and more with varying wheelbases.
Thanks for the info - would be nice if NWSL might do a bit of advertising about such stuff.
But the rest of the Wagner/Current Line catalog is still needed; sideframes, interior/exterior details, underbody sets, etc.
1) 36 inch version of the Intermountain wheel set.
2) 70 ton roller bearing version of the Intermountain truck.
3) 100 ton roller bearing version of the Intermountain truck.
Jim; most vertical drive motors have 'double lead' worms on them. (which you probably know) Changing to a single lead worm effectively reduces the ratio by doubling it, Some time ago I bought that spec worm and worm gear set from NWSL to experiment with. It works! Toughest part was getting the OEM worm off the motor shaft!
My wishes:
An affordable kit to build a GP7/9, (ala Kemtron).
An affordable higher amperage DCC decoder w sound.
World Peace!
https://ogrforum.ogaugerr.com/...9#154167236017511529
Jim - I had thought about using Stanton Drives for my ALCO C-415 build, but just don’t know enough about them. If I used two powered drives, would this be sufficient to pull a dozen cars or so up a grade? Second question - are there four wires from each motor - two for pickup two for motor? Or are the pick-ups something you have to add yourself? My concern, and I base this on experience with the original HO Bachman 44 toners with two separate self contained drives, is if one looses contact on a frog... I’d like to be able to tie all the feeds together and then send back to motors via decoder.
1) A well-engineered branch line/shortline steam locomotive, preferably a Cuban or Panama mogul, a 2-6-2, a 4-6-0, or even a 2-8-0 (like the Sierra Rlwy #24 or the V&T/Nevada Copper Belt #5), and preferably in plastic.
2) A plastic GE 44-ton, 70-ton, Whitcomb center-cab, and/or Atlas to release their SW switcher.
3) A nice plastic version of a “typical” (if there is any such thing) steam era wood-bodied caboose.
And I’ll add a fourth:
4) Greater availability of late steam/transition era freight equipment in road names of Texas and the Southwestern US railroads.
Kyle
Retrofit/ upgraded replacement truck/motor drives for Weaver Ultraline diesels, the Korean E8's in particular. Ones that don't die (gear lock) after 20-30 hours of use, perhaps having some form of lateral thrust support for the spur/worm tower axle?
Maybe just better design and metalurgy or perhaps drives derived for 2-rail 1:48 instead of high rail, mmmmm that's a thought.
As far as the latest PRC built "twinky" decent GP-30, GP-38 and F40's would be nice too.
1) Wheels with large flanges.
2) Lobster claw couplers.
3) A third rail.
Ah, just teasing you fellas. I might get there some day. I've already eliminated some need for a center rail with my BPRC engines.
Have Fun.
Ron
@Jim Scorse posted:I will start it off:
1) A Gear ratio conversion kit for China drives to convert from 10:1 to 20:1 All it might take is a new layshaft/worm gear and replacement motor with new 2 start worm.
Discuss
Personally I would love to see #1 happen but I think there is so much loathing and hatred among 2 railers for the China Drive that even if someone came out with the kit to change the drive ratio IMHO no one would buy it. The first reason of course is because of the hate for the China Drive and the second reason is since most 2 railers hate the China Drive so much they wouldn't be caught dead owning any. Why would they need a conversion kit for something they do not own? ALL OPINION.
My wish list would be:
1) someone buys MTH and continues 2 rail releases
2) someone buys MTH and continues 2 rail releases
[copied from Engineer Joe--I hope you don't mind Joe]
I would dearly love a logging 2-6-2 with a fat boiler and small drivers for my logging fleet. They made a few in HO but only Pecos River did a 2-6-2 and it’s all wrong for a logger.
Other than that I’m good, thanks.
Peter
@Peter E B posted:I would dearly love a logging 2-6-2 with a fat boiler and small drivers for my logging fleet.
Peter
That's a good one. Or a similarly sized 2-8-2. There were lots of those used in my area, back in the day...
Mark in Oregon
Some people have mentioned products and others have mentioned items such as more space. This what I think that 2-rail needs to expand its base.
1. A major manufacturer to support 2-rail scale with engines, cars and track that is affordable to most modelers. $1,000 plus engines are not, in my opinion, really affordable for most people. All engines would come with DCC and sound installed.
2. A prolific author who writes about his or her O scale layout in major model railroad magazines such as Tony Koester does for HO. 2-rail O scale had Frank Ellison and Lorel Joiner but sadly they are both long gone.
3. All models including engines being built to go around 36 inch radius curves. I believe that if highly detailed models such as the new Lionel Vision Line GS class locomotives can be built to operate on 36 inch radius (O-72) curves so can their 2-rail counterparts. (Suggestion: All 2-rail modelers should check out the various forum posts and videos of these models. I think that many 2-rail modelers would buy a 2-rail version of the these models if it would go around a 36 inch radius curve. Lack of space for large radius curves is one of the primary reasons new 2-rail O scale layouts are not being built by clubs or individuals.)
NH Joe
Simon
Here are my wishes for two rail:
1) A major manufacturer either introduces or obtains the rights (business) to the two rail products previously offered by MTH.
2) A manufacturer of locomotives to realize that there should be a price differential between a small industrial switcher, a 44-tonner, and a 6-axle 4000+ HP mainline freight diesel., and also a differential for 4-axle vs 6-axle diesel models.
3) That manufacturer to realize that there is some resistance to the purchase of diesels, since either two or three are required for prototypical operation, and for this reason why a quantity discount and multiple road number should be considered.
4) A major manufacturer offers a cost effective two rail, completely assembled and ready for installation, motorized turnout in at least two sizes, one closest to 072 and another scale turnout, say a #5, and these turnouts are compatible with Microscale Engineering and Atlas two rail track systems. And the motor is reliable, trouble free, and works well.
5) Selection of track metal and wheel metal to discourage wheel to rail contamination, and the subsequent need for frequent cleaning.
6) A snap relay rated higher than 2 amps that is not junk. Engines with 8 car passenger trains generally required four amps with incandescent lighting.
7) A reasonably priced signal system, with capabilities similar to that previously offered by Custom Signals/Atlas, and this would include signal bridges that would permit adjustment for various track center rail dimensions with adjustments possible for four track mainlines.
8) Fairly priced passenger equipment with the following features:
-Scale length, and prototypical with regard to window size and spacing, door height, etc. (I don't need doors that open, etc.)
-Correct paint schemes, both inside and out. (A "no-brainer".)
-LED lighting, either golden glow or blue-white as appropriate to the age of the equipment modeled, with a hold up feature for operation over rail gaps and for station stops. Lighting to operate and be visible in a voltage range from 12 volts to 18 volts, with a greater range if possible to a 6 volt minimum. Lighting to work with either DC or AC. Cars to be suitable for 2 rail and also 3 rail to reduce overall project cost (and price).
-A weight limit for each car, probably to not exceed 2-1/2 lb.
-Insulated wheelsets (one side) with NO wipers to wear grooves in the wheels.
-An on-off switch for interior lights.
-Predrilled for Kadee couplers at the correct height
-Harder/higher quality wheels and axles, and side frames sufficiently hard that the axles will not wear ovals in the side frames with extended use. Some MTH and Lionel cars have either a metal boss on the inside of the side frame, or a pressed in bronze insert, to prevent this wear pattern.
-Diaphragms that won't crumble with age.
-The ability to easily disassemble a car for the purpose of adding figures.
-Recessed windows with a prototypical appearance. Window film to be one piece on each side of the car, and located with a channel and not an adhesive, in order to prevent individual window panes falling inside the car as the adhesive dries out.
-A finished interior that is exactly prototypically correct. ( I recently considered adding figures to my "prototypically correct" passenger train, and realized that the interior seat spacing was not even close to correct. My HO friend has the same train, and his are perfect to the prototype....)
@New Haven Joe posted:Some people have mentioned products and others have mentioned items such as more space. This what I think that 2-rail needs to expand its base.
1. A major manufacturer to support 2-rail scale with engines, cars and track that is affordable to most modelers. $1,000 plus engines are not, in my opinion, really affordable for most people. All engines would come with DCC and sound installed.
2. A prolific author who writes about his or her O scale layout in major model railroad magazines such as Tony Koester does for HO. 2-rail O scale had Frank Ellison and Lorel Joiner but sadly they are both long gone.
3. All models including engines being built to go around 36 inch radius curves. I believe that if highly detailed models such as the new Lionel Vision Line GS class locomotives can be built to operate on 36 inch radius (O-72) curves so can their 2-rail counterparts. (Suggestion: All 2-rail modelers should check out the various forum posts and videos of these models. I think that many 2-rail modelers would buy a 2-rail version of the these models if it would go around a 36 inch radius curve. Lack of space for large radius curves is one of the primary reasons new 2-rail O scale layouts are not being built by clubs or individuals.)
NH Joe
NH Joe, I like your #3 idea but I would amend it slightly by saying many but not all locomotives. Steam engines with 10 or 12 drivers are not going to look good or operate well on 36” radius curves. I think there are a lot of smaller steam locomotives that can make a 36”R curve without making major modifications to the model to do so. Currently Mr. Muffins Trains is offering a Lionel Pacific in the Road name I collect. If, that model could be ordered with scale flanges, scale wheels, Kadee coupler pads, 2 rail capability, and DCC I would buy it. The problem is most 2 railers wouldn’t. Any model that ever so slightly looks a little bit toward the toy side of the hobby will be shunned by most 2 railers. Sometimes the name of Lionel alone will cause 2 railers to look away. This is why some of the MTH scale wheeled steam locomotives had such low production numbers. This is basically the niche MTH was filling although the MTH steam locomotives did not always have the ability to handle such a tight radius. One thing to remember is if Lionel offered such a locomotive that doesn’t mean that more prototypically correct/more expensive locomotives requiring larger radii can’t be offered by other companies. I agree with you that such a line would slightly expand 2 rail O. And any expansion in our little niche of a hobby is a good thing. All opinion.
And as Bob has often said the center rail has nothing to do with the ability to negotiate a given radius.
@PRR Man posted:Some time ago I bought that spec worm and worm gear set from NWSL to experiment with. It works! Toughest part was getting the OEM worm off the motor shaft!
I was able to get ONE Atlas worm off the shaft using a homemade induction heater (the gears are sweated on) before the heater circuit blew up due to using underrated components from my electronics junk box.
You are correct about the dual start worms.
@Hudson J1e posted:NH Joe, I like your #3 idea but I would amend it slightly by saying many but not all locomotives. Steam engines with 10 or 12 drivers are not going to look good or operate well on 36” radius curves.
And as Bob has often said the center rail has nothing to do with the ability to negotiate a given radius.
And Simon says Bob's engines have swinging pilots, blind drivers, and look STUPID going around tight curves. You need to look at S or HO! You can't get 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag
Simon
@Simon Winter posted:And Simon says Bob's engines have swinging pilots, blind drivers, and look STUPID going around tight curves. You need to look at S or HO! You can't get 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag
Simon
Who the heck said anything about swinging pilots or blind drivers? Not me. You go to HO or S. I am fine where I am.
The three things thread made me think a little deeper about what the O Scale 2 Rail industry could use to really boost the scale and the potential. Aside from my earlier "wish list" reply here's some additional thoughts. This is NOT attacking the beautiful craftsman ship that exist in kit form or the wonderful custom built drives - they are certainly works of art and excellence.
1.) Track has already been mentioned. First, there are some beautiful looking track that is available, but it’s build it yourself. Certainly not a bad thing, but then again if someone wants to build a large railroad in a quicker fashion their only real alternative is via Atlas. I've got a consortium of ties, rails, and frogs waiting for my soldering iron to turn them into track. They will be beautiful, but when you have quite a few to build it can be daunting to get started.
- Atlas is nice stuff out of the box and will certainly get you started, however it could still use some tweaking (especially those huge frogs!) and you're very limited. In fact, I've got some replacement frogs to try and cut out the huge Atlas ones!
- What about something similar to Bachmann, Atlas HO, and Kato HO &N where the roadbed is already in place with the ties? It would certainly not be a choice of experienced folks (myself included), however it would be a good way to run stuff if a layout wasn’t convenient or that circle around the Christmas tree, and of course that display track here and there. This would also help sell the scale in hobby shops where customers could see trains operating on 2 Rail track.
2.) I would propose a 2 Rail Chassis system that could have the same four and six axle trucks with the same gear configurations with the ability to swap/change out the tower height. The chassis could be made to handle the existing manufacturer shell (Lionel, MTH etc.). Included in the chassis system would be the drive shafts and high quality can motor. The assembly would take a typical one evening of construction. In addition, make the correct pilots that are scale for select models such as Lionel SD and GP series as well as MTH ones. These would come with the chassis. This basically would mean if you purchase a whole locomotive in 3 rail you could simply take the shell off and sell the chassis outright. With the existing and seemingly never ending parts challenges one could recuperate some of the costs for the 2 Rail conversion. On the flip side the chassis system could also be used for just shell only purchases which are also possible in some runs. The bolster conversions could be designed for different manufacturers. The win-win is the truck gear ratio could be consistent. If you bought a GP40 and converted it over with the chassis system and then and SD35 etc. you would have the same speed match once both were completed. Not to be outdone, the chassis could also have a mount for a decoder and speakers. For those modeling in P48 could also use the same chassis but with the P48 wheels that would be available and easily interchangeable.
- The chassis conversion systems would be designed for the complete array of manufacturers 3-Rail products that are scale such as Lionel, MTH, Atlas, Overland, Sunset, CLW, etc. The outright swapping of the whole chassis fills the parts gap that seemingly exists for periods of time from all of the major players.
- The same system could be used to change out a China Drive system to a tower drive system as well.
- This isn’t to decry some of the excellent and amazing craftsmanship that exists in the hobby in repowering projects. In fact, I absolutely LOVE the four that have been done for me. The chassis system is just a quick way to get 2 Rail power that looks and runs great in both four and six axle designs and takes the headache out of all the fitting etc. It also allows for a conversion without delay. This satisfies both sides as the 3 Rail folks could have their parts in whole fashion.
I would be remissed if I didn't also mention fuel tanks for the chassis. Manufacturers have consistently stuck with one size fuel tank. There would be applicable fuel tank sizes available that would match the prototype.
The chassis system sounds like a tall order, but with modern technology such as CAD, laser cutting, die cutting etc. It's plausible that chassis could be made to order in a couple weeks and sent to the modeler. The expense would be in the technology and manufacturing, not so much of producing a ton and having them sit around on shelves etc. This would also be a way for an entreprenuerial type to buy shells, construct chassis for retail sale and/or custom orders. No matter how many folks would build these to sell there would be consistency between all of them with detail and high performance. Probably the largest up front expense would be the powered trucks as there would be Blombergs, AAR, HTC, Adirondack, etc. etc.
3.) In addition to the drive chassis we need a new manufacturer that is solely dedicated to O Scale 2 Rail / P48 that will make high quality locomotives with tower drives and not just limited runs, but multiple runs spread out of several years etc. which can also be the same model in different road names. The possibilities are exciting.
With a chassis type system of retrofit it would make a diesel conversion easy and consistent for a win. The 3 rail chassis could be sold so there would be opportunity to recover some of the 2-Rail chassis costs for another win. Between a chassis company and a new company with highly detailed and performing units it could run the corner for the 2 Rail market with availability.
Availability and patience are a large part of the challenge in 2 Rail modeling once you have the focus of where and what you want to model. Then it's finding it and the subsequent 2 rail conversion or drive improvement. If this can be overcome in a quicker fashion and getting away from consistent limited runs with repeated runs every several years it could change the course of the market to a brighter future.
I'm not defracting those whom enjoy doing the 3 to 2 Rail conversions. In the greater picture of needs vs. wish list things like this could give the scale some much needed growth, economy, consistency, and satisfaction all in one. In today's world many lifestyles are at a faster pace and time for hobbies is not what it used to be and if we can trim the painful part (3 to 2 Rail Conversions and daunting track construction of many turnouts at once) we can retain more and get more in the scale in the long run.
Happy Modeling!
RTR US PROTOTYPE fully detailed flex track in O and P:48 in rail sizes from code 100 up to 148.
RTR US PROTOTYPE fully detailed switches in O and P:48 in sizes from #4 to #20 in rail sizes from code 100 up to code 148.
RTR US PROTOTYPE fully detailed crossings in all degrees in O and P:48 in rail sizes from code 100 to 148.
None of those 3 exist today in a package like a 21st century fusion of snap track and the old Shinohara track line. Yes I know of the ROW flex track and the custom switches made which are very nice but have holes in the concept when compared to a “track system” like snap track. And most require you to “roll your own” with things like all of the rail braces on real track and switches.
A modular highly detailed track system.
If I ran into money they WOULD exist.
@Hudson J1e posted:Who the heck said anything about swinging pilots or blind drivers? Not me. You go to HO or S. I am fine where I am.
If you want to run stuff on 36" radius it's that or all smaller engines.
Simon
@Rule292 posted:If I ran into money they WOULD exist.
That is the requirement for most of the ideas in this thread. Someone has to supply the $$$.
Rusty
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
