Hey Joe question on the "new wheels"

Rob de Rebel Dec 15, 2009

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rob de Rebel

    Rob de Rebel Permanently dispatched

    493
    0
    19
    I'm hearing (actually reading) that Micro trains new modified non pizza cutter (aka compromise again) is not NMRA compliant.
    Is this true?
    If so I am very disappointed with MT. while others are refining their wheels, Mt is still in the "dark ages" are we still "cow cowing to the collectors"?

    If that be the case, I guess its FVM wheels, or atlas or intermountain, or the flood of other new manufacturers that seem to have the handle on progress for me.

    I think Micro trains advertisement and description of their models that reads, quote "the Cadillac should be changed to the "studebaker" of N scale trains. (more appropo description don't you think?)

    I view a company like FV models like a ship thats got the throttle open to progress, whereas, Micro trains seems to keep throwing the "anchor" out and not putting out a great deal of "headway"
    Any other "good" news? are we going to see some coupler changes? Thats used to be what Micro trains was really good at!

    Perhaps Mt ought to do some research? there is one company coming out with a boxcar, with scale body height, body mounted (wouldn't you know MT couplers) very fine details, probably equal to or possibly better than brass. Intermountain has added parts, (not cast on) ladders and grab irons, fine steps etc. Some companies have etched brass parts. Seems to me the Cadillac phrase isn't cutting it anymore.
    On a positive note, its nice Mt has loads for the cars, and the heavy weights will be a nice addition, (although that should of been done 20 years ago) structures ok thats nice too.
    But the wheel issues, what can I say, almost every manufacturer except MT has finer wheel profiles. In a nutshell:
    two steps forward one step back!

    A just for general info, I'm not having a bad day, unless I have bad news as the above about the wheels. But just for info, others are doing it better, and in some cases cheaper. The collector boom has bust. MT's cars are no longer commanding outrageous prices.

    R
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2009
  2. EricB

    EricB TrainBoard Member

    872
    2
    23
    Wow Rob. Before I respond to your post, let me ask, do you actually own any of the new wheels and have you tested them?

    I must say, just because something isn't NMRA compliant doesn't mean its junk. Perhaps the new wheels are an improvement on the standard.

    Eric
     
  3. grant-sar

    grant-sar E-Mail Bounces

    330
    0
    15
    I have tested the new wheels on one of my longest heaviest drags. A unit sulphur train of 48 cars. I use resin cast loads so we're talking some good weight when loaded. I have a 120 foot long helper grade that hits 2.2% at it's steepest. Manned helpers are required to assist the road power, 2 up front 1 on the tail arrangement. Pizza cutters work, lo pros (MT or FVM) don't. The new 36 inch wheels do and now I can happily convert to code 55 without worry. From my perspective the new wheels are fantastic.
     
  4. Tony Burzio

    Tony Burzio TrainBoard Supporter

    2,467
    144
    41
    No, I have them on my new Trainworx gons. The wheels keep falling out of the side frames. Bleech! They are all set to be put into the dust bin and replaced with good wheels.

    No, you can't. :tb-biggrin:
     
  5. Rob de Rebel

    Rob de Rebel Permanently dispatched

    493
    0
    19
    Just so others know where I stand, I just believe that N scale (and others too) should be progressing, improving. finer wheel standards, equals finer track, which will attract more "modelers"

    R
     
  6. SteamDonkey74

    SteamDonkey74 TrainBoard Supporter

    7,160
    171
    90
    Has anyone tested them for NMRA compliance? I would be more persuaded by an actual test with an NMRA gauge and not just what Some Guy said. This Some Guy seems to crop up everywhere, spreading all sorts of interesting information bordering on superstition.
     
  7. EricB

    EricB TrainBoard Member

    872
    2
    23
    What does that have to do with them meeting NMRA standards? There is no standard for axle length or type (shouldered v. pointed) is there? If they are falling out, maybe you bought the wrong type of wheels.

    Eric
     
  8. Metro Red Line

    Metro Red Line TrainBoard Member

    2,494
    696
    46
    Can you post a link to where you heard this, or if it's printed, give us a citation (i.e. "February 2008 Railroad Model Craftsman, Page 47")?
     
  9. Westfalen

    Westfalen TrainBoard Member

    4,094
    32
    55
    That is puzzling, the Trainworx gons come with MTL trucks, yet the new MTL wheels fall out.:tb-err:
    Mine all got FVM wheels as soon as I took them out of the box.
     
  10. jagged ben

    jagged ben TrainBoard Member

    1,832
    4
    31
    FWIW, someone on the Atlas board has testified that he measured the flanges at .022", which makes them NMRA compliant for standard N scale wheels (let alone 'hi-rail').

    In fact, everything I'm reading everywhere suggests the new wheels are NMRA compliant, so I don't know where Rob is reading what he says he's reading.
     
  11. Ristooch

    Ristooch TrainBoard Member

    171
    12
    24
    In seach of a cheap way to convert my old high-profile standard MT wheels to low profile, I bought a pack of Micro Trains low-profile brown plastic wheels. I am not impressed with them and plan to change them.
    They seem very derailment-prone.
    Although my trackwork is anything but pristine, the cars with either Intermountain or Fox Valley wheels generally perform better on my Atlas Code 55 layout.

    Although this is slightly off the topic, I prefer the IM wheels to FVM. They seem to have marginally wider tread and work better through Atlas turnouts.
     
  12. wcfn100

    wcfn100 TrainBoard Member

    1,049
    63
    30
    Paul, two things...


    First, the last (second) rendition of MT low-pros were junk. No doubt about it. These new wheels have a more correct profile on the flange and shouldn't give you the problems you had previously.


    Second, FVM just released 'wide tread' wheels for exactly why you said. Maybe give the new ones a try before committing to IM wheels. The FVM wheels just look so much better.


    Jason
     
  13. Rob de Rebel

    Rob de Rebel Permanently dispatched

    493
    0
    19
    My post was a question, and for the life of me

    I cannot recall where I found the info but you can bet that I'll post a link If I can find it
    again.

    The second reiteration of the low pro has a flange which is too sharp, thus it catches any and all slight imperfections in the track, including correctly spaced points. The older version had the rounded flange which wasn't track sensitive.

    I don't know whom at MT redesigned the low pro, but its obvious he didn't know what he was doing.

    If MT's flanges measure at 022 of an inch or less I'll apologize

    R
     
  14. Traindork

    Traindork TrainBoard Member

    1,299
    393
    35
    As a silly "non-modeler" who likes to run his 50-60 car trains in roundy little circles, I like the pizza cutters. They don't derail on my Code 80 track. I don't ever see a reason to change. Even at slow speeds it's hard to see oversize flanges, or missing details.
    Some people don't seem to enjoy this hobby much, makes me wonder why they stick around.
     
  15. EricB

    EricB TrainBoard Member

    872
    2
    23
    You are a joke

    Sorry, I can't let this go without comment. Without any evidence whatsoever, you accuse someone of not knowing "what he was doing." And then in the very next sentence you state that, if you were wrong and they were in fact right, that you would apologize. How does this work? You are lazy. You should have researched your facts before you recklessly spewed your dribble condoning a MT product and employee.

    This rhetoric reminds me of your continuous dribble about code 55 track on the Atlas forum years ago. I was just getting into the hobby then and it seemed like you would pop your head up in every topic just so you could inflame those who weren't modelers because they were using code 80. It was tiring. This is also tiring. I will NEVER read another one of your posts or topics. You have every right to post your opinion. I have every right not to want to read it. It has no value to me or my modeling. Good day.
     
  16. Rob de Rebel

    Rob de Rebel Permanently dispatched

    493
    0
    19
    hey Eric, go dribble a basket ball! we are talking two different wheelshere, low pros and their new modified aka reduced pizza cutter. If you don't have the old low pros to compare the current version. Well, go fishing, maybe you'll find them. Anyone that uses and had the old and new versions knows what we're talking about. Dribble hmm?

    See the first paragraph.

    R
     
  17. Mark Watson

    Mark Watson TrainBoard Member

    6,000
    1,317
    85
    75% of the time, I'm with you. As long as it looks decent and runs well, use it. However the other 25% of the time I like to photograph and record my models in as much of a realistic way as possible. Its that time in which things as tiny as "flange size" and fine detail makes a difference.

    Check out the following photo. My eyes go straight to the odd looking wheels.

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Grey One

    Grey One TrainBoard Supporter

    8,903
    3,622
    137
    Um, er, please, while you are at it could you find where this is recorded as an undeniable fact. I can't prove anything as I never leave trainboard but what I have read here overtly contradicts your statement. Rephrase: What I have read here is that there are a multitude of factors involved in the attraction of "modelers". None of which have anything to do with the nature of track. Seriously, do you have _any_ evidence that negates my perception that people become involved in model railroading for a wide variety of reasons?

    Note: To those who don't know me I personally do not care one whit about historical anything. If it looks good and runs well I run it, (on Unitrak). I also openly acknowledge that there is a need for a vocal minority to push the manufacturers to greater levels of quality in all respects.

    I believe it was Henry Ford who said:
    "They can have any color car as long as it is black"
    History has shown he was wrong.
    There will always be a need for improved designs, inspiring innovation and dynamic development. I do not feel there is a need for undeniably undocumented, self serving, and misleading vitriolic.

    Rob - We need folks like you to push the manufacturers. Please keep up the good work. Don't loose site of the concepts that facts are your ally. Present them in a systematic rational manner and you will make progress. Rhetoric is your enemy. It will destroy you and all you believe in.
     
  19. jagged ben

    jagged ben TrainBoard Member

    1,832
    4
    31
    Actually, my eyes go to the thick roofwalk on the boxcar...once I've gotten over how awesomely real the photo looks! :)

    But yes, you are right, replace those wheels with FVM wheels (and replace that roofwalk with a Gold Medal Models or something) and you'll be able to actually fool people with that picture.
     
  20. Rob de Rebel

    Rob de Rebel Permanently dispatched

    493
    0
    19
    greyone,
    I can't tell you how many times I've heard an HO or other modeler say he wouldn't consider N because of the toy like flanges and poor operation. In my experiences of 40 plus years in model railroading, and talking with modelers, that was the major consideration (details or poor motive power performance were other considerations).

    In the last 10 years operation has improved dramatically, dcc makes it easy (somewhat) to tailor your operation. And finer track standards with finer wheels have gained quite a large positive reception. The availability of code 55 rail and turnouts along with micro engineering have made N scale comparable to HO scale. One only has to look at the various forums and see the great modeling being done. Yet we have a long way to go.
    Body mounted couplers, realistic ride height are starting to be addressed but at a very slow rate. My hats off to those whom push the envelope and address those issues, especially manufacturers. I dont take my hat off to those that perpetuate those stone age standards we started out with. Matter of fact I will continue to belittle them as they are acting as an anchor and slowing our progress to better things.
    Got it?

    R
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page