Thoughts - Drawbars.

[atom3624]

I've briefly mentioned this in my comments for a recent purchase of 60700 R3844 W1 Rebuilt - B.R. Early.

I've a few larger Hornby steam locomotives which apparently permit closer coupling of the tender to the locomotive - drawbar.

This is with the screwed in drawbar normally, with 2 holes either separated or interconnected. Sometimes it barely permits any movement with the tender - demonstration only 'as it would be in full scale', but some you can set on the closer setting, and operate, whilst looking more realistic as well.

I could probably create a list, but would have to search through the locos. Of recent additions, I have the beautiful new-tooling 'Ivatt Coronation' Sir William A Stanier FRS and the much newer rebuilt W1 indicated above.

Neither can be 'close coupled' as when trying to move up the drawbar, it's got nowhere to go. The screw location in the tender is alongside the plug socket - don't want to remove / replace this more than necessary - and at the pony truck locomotive end, it's right against the pony truck, with no slot / access.

Strangely, I've a similarly new-tooled B.R. 'experimental blue' 46225 Duchess of Gloucester which having the normal Stanier pony truck does permit the alternative location - which you can actually use in normal operation, closer coupled.

It does appear that Hornby have overlooked these drawbar links and why they try to give the closer coupling option.

Al.

[ColinB]

I have spent a lot of time on Hornby drawbars, surprisingly they are not all the same length. I convert a lot of my models so the decoder is in the tender, rather than in the loco, as it is with older Hornby locos. When I was selecting the drawbar I found some are very flimsy and bend far too easily others are too far apart. Of course when Hornby used the drawbar with the contacts on, they seem to have been all the same length. I found the Royal Scot drawbar to be the best for me and my layout but it really is up to you. Ultimately you can always make your own all it is a piece of steel with two holes in it. Of course with most new locos Hornby have made the decision for you with their new tender connection design.

[atom3624]

Hi Colin, I've drawn a similar conclusion.

Little thought had really gone into drawbar application other than a minimal 'diesel fitter' compliance - the rest is left to the owner!

The older fixed drawbar with 'fingers' apart from solder breaks, I generally find to have been a 'good compromise'.

RS as you mention, is a favourite of mine and is nicely distanced.

I've had some which as/when the close-coupled drawbar selection is applied, there's no movement at all, perhaps 2mm maximum.

The other I like to address is the centring of speedo cables and better-adjustment of valvegear articulation. Hornby seem to be doing the opposite of what they should with these 2 lately, with the valvegear movement, quite simply, not moving at all!!

Al.

[ColinB]

I fixed a loco for a guy and his drawbar was incredibly short, he had cut a bit off the end of one of those with two holes in at one end, I just assumed he just had end to end track or incredibly large radii. He was saying this wasn't short enough so I gave him one of my really short ones that wouldn't work with my layout, he seemed to be happy. I could write lots about speedo cables and what a pain they are when trying to remove the loco body. I have broke no end of them when trying to fix a loco because I forgot they were there and then there is the case where they fall off the body and wrap themselves around eventually breaking. Other people must have the same issues as you can never get them as spares. Generally when I have fitted them on my locos they seem to spin around the same axis, although on some they don't but they are not that far out. Generally if they don't kink themselves while running I am happy. Why do Hornby just not find a way to attach them to the chassis so the body comes away cleanly.

[atom3624]

Made me laugh on the speedo cable comments - love the A4's for that!! 2 extras to remove / reattach when a late BR model!

Many don't like them - one reason or another - but I think the boss where the drawbar screws into the tender should be adjustable in/out in the manner Bachmann use for their 'pegs'. You can tighten where you like according to the layout requirements.

Anyway, it's been a good discussion.

The speedo / valvegear thing seems to be getting a bit worse, particularly the valvegear. It's almost as if the factory / designer's told to ensure the boss is centred for the speedo, so does the same for the valvegear linkage as well, and these hardly budge more than 1mm. I would say +/-2mm is ~ideal. Got to ensure that the throw isn't overstretched, when you can 'adjust' these!

Al.

[threelink]

It's not so much the length of the drawbar that is relevant to a loco's ability to traverse tighter radius curves as the relative movement between tender and loco. I only have older models, typically 1960s to 2000s, and close up the distance between loco and tender by shortening the drawbar and shaping off the loco and/or tender footplates/fall plates to a crescent shape, thereby allowing sufficient movement between the two to accommodate smaller radius curves. It works. With closer coupling, shaped fall plates and suitably arranged footplate doors, the horrible gap between tender and loco just disappears yet the locos will traverse smaller radius curves. It's a bit of a fiddle, but well worth it.

[81F]

Regarding the 3 hole type drawbar I have ended up mixing and matching them between locos, particularly my Scotsman, P2 and Tornado to get thge best looking result which will still traverse my curves. Unfortunately I have lost track as to what is running with what!

You might therefore like to try buying spare drawbars, intended for other types of loco, to see which suits your operating conditions.

I should also say I have had similar experiences with some of my Bachmann locos, but have not tried any drawbar switches between these.

However, I should add that I have nothing tighter than a PECO medium point on my mainline and goods loops. My Colliery branch is another matter with its setrack points, but as this is supposed to have a yellow weight limit, the large tender locos are rarely sent up there.

[atom3624]

You're right with the mix'n'match.

The 'proud new owner' shouldn't have to fath around just because Hornby weren't bothered enough to ensure a consistent application.

I've aluminium sheeting I can cut and shape, but thinner steel sheeting is better - for the articulation.

I too started building up 'a few extras' in the event I came across this, then simply started 'lightly folding' them on some locomotives - easier, with care, but shouldn't be necessary.

inconsistent gapping for the same curves shouldn't really be necessary, but alas it is what it is.

Al.

[ColinB]

To be fair to Hornby they don't know what track you will be running the loco on so they just go for the best fit. To be honest I have no issue with this, they obviously do some design as there are a lot of drawbar parts and they definitely are all different. On my latest HD Sir Nigel Gresley the gap looks incredibly small to the point where I wondered whether it would go round my bends (most are very large radius except for a couple), but it works perfectly well.

[atom3624]

Agreed, but within their design, they should have coupling settings which both permit articulation around the 'minimum recommended' which is generally 2nd radius, and also can apply closer coupling for 'more realistic appearance'.

It does appear very 'slapdash' where closer coupling isn't possible on some with the manufacturer supplied equipment implying it is.

Al.