Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Discuss Hornby Model Railway products and related topics here. This includes (Lima, Rivarossi, Jouef, Electrotren).
User avatar
markS&D
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:16 pm

Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby markS&D » Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:11 pm

I recently purchased a mint condition '92 Squadron' model is immaculate, everything in as new condition.

However, it struggles to haul much more than 5 coaches, without suffering wheel slip, my layout is all on the level. The loco has plenty of weight, and all loco and tender wheels turn freely.

My rebuilt Merchant Navy and rebuilt WC models will all haul 12 coaches, so I am a bit confused as to why this model struggles so much.

Is this typical of the original bulleid models?
My layout, only look if you are interested:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=48422

Latest Video Link:

https://youtu.be/g5ytOK5FCZc

RFS
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:09 pm
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby RFS » Sat Aug 05, 2017 10:04 pm

Your model is R2220 which is quite early. I have R2221 which is 34067 Tangmere, and I assume the only difference between the two models is the paintwork. Mine is currently running on a schedule that has 8 Hornby Maunsells and previously its duty involved a train consisting of 3 Bachmann Bulleids plus 4 Bachmann MK1s.

However it's not as powerful as my other Bulleids. For example, I have a representation of the Golden Arrow which consists of a bogie luggage van, two Bachmann Mk1s and 7 Hornby lighted Pullmans. It's currently the duty of a Hornby Britannia - 70004 William Shakespeare. I did recently try Tangmere on this train but it slipped to a stand trying to start it. However my latest acquisition - unrebuilt 35028 Clan Line - has no problem at all with this train.

As I found when I hard-wired a decoder into Tangmere there's plenty of space inside to add more weight. I haven't done this but it's something you could consider. The Hornby Maunsells are exceptionally free-running which no doubt helps.
Robert Smith

User avatar
SRman
Posts: 1080
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:26 am

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby SRman » Sun Aug 06, 2017 3:15 am

Does this model have the sprung rear driving axle? This can cause some problems if the spring is too soft and allows the adhesive weight to be transferred off the front driver and onto the trailing truck. One solution is to add extra weight at the front of the loco, another, more drastic operation is to render the rear driver rigid by removing the spring and adding a wedge of plastic.

Also check that the front and rear bogie/truck are not lifting weight off the driving wheels for any reason.

User avatar
markS&D
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:16 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby markS&D » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:31 pm

Thank you for the replies.

I have had a bit of time to look at the loco again today, I found that when on the track, the bogie pivot arm, was curved downward, which meant that there was no upward movement for the front bogie at all. This was lifting the leading driving wheels slightly off the track.

I have hard wired a decoder into the model, and at the same time, glued some metal plates to the inside of the loco body sides, in line with the leading and middle driving axles.

The loco will now start a train consisting of 6 hornby mk1 coaches, plus 6 Lima '6 wheel milk tanks'.

There is however a lot of room to add more weight, which I may yet do

Thanks again for the advice :D
My layout, only look if you are interested:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=48422

Latest Video Link:

https://youtu.be/g5ytOK5FCZc

GWRLover
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 7:35 am
Location: Canterbury, New Zealand

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby GWRLover » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:26 pm

I removed several of the weights out of the new Pullman coaches and glued them onto the inside of the casing on my Air Smoothed(the correct term for them, not unrebuilt!) WC class locos. Worked great and there was room for 2 on each side. Managed a 13 coach train of the new Pullmans after that.

User avatar
markS&D
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:16 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby markS&D » Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:03 pm

Air smoothed, original, unrebuilt, they all amount to the same thing in my mind :lol:

It does surprise me though, that hornby didn't put more weight inside the model, given the amount of room inside the body. It should be able to haul decent length express trains of at least 9 coaches.

The model I have, has the sprung rear axle, which I personally don't like on this model or the Rebuilt MN, as all it appears to do, is make the rear driving wheels oscillate.

The rebuilt version of the light pacific that they produce, seems to be a lot heavier by comparison. With less room inside the body.
My layout, only look if you are interested:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=48422

Latest Video Link:

https://youtu.be/g5ytOK5FCZc

Bigmet
Posts: 7639
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby Bigmet » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:05 am

markS&D wrote:...I have had a bit of time to look at the loco again today, I found that when on the track, the bogie pivot arm, was curved downward, which meant that there was no upward movement for the front bogie at all. This was lifting the leading driving wheels slightly off the track...

Have you corrected this, as it makes a big difference?

For anyone who hasn't tinkered with this item: with the bracket the bogie pivot runs in being screw attached, its an easy test to unscrew the bracket and thus remove the bogie; then reassess traction. If that instantly improves the traction, then a slight adjustment of the bracket is the way forward. With the loco on track, the bogie should be able to lift slightly - bogie wheel tyres just clear of the rails - without lifting the driven wheels off the rails at all. On some models I have seen, the bracket is the right shape, but cannot quite locate properly where it screws onto the chassis block, because it is a tight fit in the chassis block recess. A wipe or two with a file on the edges of the bracket will sort that out.

User avatar
markS&D
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:16 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby markS&D » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:05 am

Yes, I had to gently bend the bogie pivot arm back into shape, as it was curved downwards for some reason.
My layout, only look if you are interested:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=48422

Latest Video Link:

https://youtu.be/g5ytOK5FCZc

User avatar
Metadyneman
Posts: 1133
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:09 am
Location: Portslade-by-Sea East Sussex

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby Metadyneman » Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:25 am

Whilst "air smoothed" was the original term for the unrebuilt locos. Unrebuilt became the name for them when the rebuilds started to appear so in actual fact both terms are correct for the locos that were not rebuilt. Unrebuilt became the popular name and that is how most people refer to them. As for the Hornby loco, I have the same "92 Squadron" in my collection and I also experienced adhesion problems with it. The main cause was the rear pony truck coupling which was slightly bent up at an angle so when the tender was attached it lifted the rear driving wheels just clear enough off the track to lose traction. Straightening this out cured the problem and it now happily hauls 8 Bachmann Mk1s round my garden. Incidentally the Hornby unrebuilt W/C BoB locos do differ in detail, most notably 92 Squadron has a much wider cab & tender than "Blackmore Vale" and this is prototypical. Later locomotives built at Brighton during BR years were fitted with much wider cabs.
A voice from the distance said unto me "Smile, things could be worse" so I smiled and lo, things did get worse!

RFS
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:09 pm
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby RFS » Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:53 pm

The first 70 locos had 8'6" cabs and tenders with a view to their being used on the Hastings line, but in fact never used on that route. The last 40 had 9' cabs and tenders. 6 of this second batch were built at Eastleigh, all others being built at Brighton.

The 60 locos that were rebuilt were provided with 9' wide cabs if they didn't already have them. It was the practice to put 9' wide tenders behind rebuilt locos, but there were not enough of these to go round, so there were many engines - rebuilt and unrebuilt - that had 9' wide cabs with the narrower tender.
Robert Smith

User avatar
markS&D
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:16 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby markS&D » Sat Aug 26, 2017 8:50 pm

RFS wrote:The first 70 locos had 8'6" cabs and tenders with a view to their being used on the Hastings line, but in fact never used on that route. The last 40 had 9' cabs and tenders. 6 of this second batch were built at Eastleigh, all others being built at Brighton.

The 60 locos that were rebuilt were provided with 9' wide cabs if they didn't already have them. It was the practice to put 9' wide tenders behind rebuilt locos, but there were not enough of these to go round, so there were many engines - rebuilt and unrebuilt - that had 9' wide cabs with the narrower tender.


I have got a couple of rebuilt light Pacific's, '34036 Westward Ho' which has a 9' cab with an 8'6" tender, and '34045 Ottery St Mary' with a 9' cab and 9' tender.

I have added a fair amount of weight to '92 Squadron', this I have glued to the inside of the body sides over the leading and middle driving wheels, I wanted it to be able to haul a 10 coach train. It will also pull a train of 6 hornby mk1's plus 6 ( not very free running) Lima 6 wheel milk tanks.

I have blackened the loco and tender wheel rims, added all of the detail pack, and I have ordered a set of cylinder drain pipes from RT models, the other mod I will do, is to close couple the loco and tender and add the weather screen between the cab & tender roofs. I will post a few pictures when all the mods are complete.
My layout, only look if you are interested:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=48422

Latest Video Link:

https://youtu.be/g5ytOK5FCZc

GWR_fan
Posts: 4750
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:57 pm
Location: Antipodes

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby GWR_fan » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:54 am

I just received a 2001 "Blackmoor Vale" and was amazed at the amount of compensation in the rear axle. I can easily see the loco lurching back on the sprung rear axle when asked to haul a load. This would obviously relieve weight on the forward axles causing slippage. Perhaps additional weight over the forward two axles may be my next mod.

Bigmet
Posts: 7639
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:19 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby Bigmet » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:25 pm

Best to make the rear driven axle fixed in my experience.

User avatar
Metadyneman
Posts: 1133
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:09 am
Location: Portslade-by-Sea East Sussex

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby Metadyneman » Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:59 am

Later versions of the unrebuilt WC/BoB do not have the sprung rear axle and the running quality is an improvement as a result. I have "92 Squadron" and "Blackmoor Vale" and I also have 34041 which has been fitted with a later chassis. The difference between them is quite noticeable although they do all now manage a rake of 8 Bachmann Mk1s round the garden.
A voice from the distance said unto me "Smile, things could be worse" so I smiled and lo, things did get worse!

rejrob
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:46 pm

Re: Unrebuilt bulleid poor haulage ability

Postby rejrob » Fri Sep 29, 2017 6:33 pm

Hi all,being like so many other modellers ,a SR enthuse,and loving everything Bulleid,I think at the last count there were 14 Spam cans and 6 rebuilt light pacific on the layout.Bearing in mind the locos by and large were those in the Kent an sussex area and mostly shedded at the 73/74/75 codes the later spamcans were mainly Squadrons and the earlier rebuilds (34001/3/5/17 21 etc with 9ft tenders.Because later spams are like hens teeth I have purchase I believe 3 of the 34081 92 squadron loco,s,all repainted numbered, with correct tender added coal and crew.They all have had to pull at least 7 bachmann Mk 1,s in their turn and none have let me down yet.I will say that the rebuilt does seem to be better at pulling its load up the incline on the layout than the spamcans but they all do it.Oh happy days Cheers Ron


Return to “Hornby - including Lima, Rivarossi, Jouef, Electrotren”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests