Motorized Class 143

[gvb2003]

Two days ago I made a motorized Class 143. The idea came from someone who also made a Pacer and posted it on Eurobricks. With gears I connected the 2 axles to the L-motor. I'm now trying to make the L-motor stable so it will not jump out of it's place.

But I was thinking, how much can a L-motor withstand? It really has a though job moving this train. And is there another way to mount this motor?

 

 

[Phil B]

The axle out of the motor seems bent, which seems to indicate that the big gear is not correctly spaced wrt the small bevel gear. You might need to raise this by 1 or even a half plate. Use a technic construction to fix the L motor to the baseplate - much sturdier than just a brick-on-brick solution.

[gvb2003]

8 minutes ago, Phil B said:

The axle out of the motor seems bent, which seems to indicate that the big gear is not correctly spaced wrt the small bevel gear. You might need to raise this by 1 or even a half plate. Use a technic construction to fix the L motor to the baseplate - much sturdier than just a brick-on-brick solution.

Thanks, I see that the plate came loose on the picture. I Indeed need to make a technic construction. And what about the L-motor? Can it take this train without breaking or something?

[Pdaitabird]

I've never used any PF or PU motors, but I've seen them used to pull much heavier trains than a single railcar. What I immediately noticed was your long wheelbase.  If those axles are fixed that far apart, you'll have trouble getting through curves. Are you using standard R40 track?

[gvb2003]

I use standard tracks and it went very well. I think because both axles are driven.

I only have struggles to fit this L motor inside a 4 wide room with a better support so it will not jump from the gear. My current construction is very weak

[Phil B]

32 minutes ago, gvb2003 said:

Thanks, I see that the plate came loose on the picture. I Indeed need to make a technic construction. And what about the L-motor? Can it take this train without breaking or something?

The issue is not with the plate, though that is a result of the issue. The problem is that the vertical gear you used is too big and doesn't fit properly on the horizontal small bevel gear. You will have to raise the entire axle, but likely raising it by a plate will be too much, and raising it by a half plate is not easy (and might still be too much). You need to find another gear that meshes (another small bevel gear) and then build a construction around that.

[zephyr1934]

In an ideal world I would suggest going with an all technic frame, from motor to wheels, 4 wide (except the wheels). That should get you the spacing you need and the strength that you want. Then you can either attach the body to the frame using various techniques, or just set it on top as a removable shell. Trouble is, building in technic requires a whole different set of parts and unless you already have an extensive collection, the only easy way to do so is digitally.

Or if you want to stick with brick built, perhaps dropping the large gear for a small bevel gear and then coming out of the motor use this gearbox

[Roadmonkeytj]

When I put a L motor in the EN I found the spacing was not ideal.   I found the motor would torque and over come the clutch or the bricks.  Your motor mounts need reinforcement so that the who structure is stable ..  otherwise it will come apart and bind.  The other issue I ran into was there was not an perfect mesh solution with the gears/space available.  I had to sandwich two bevel gears around a straight gear to get the proper height I needed.  

I have had no issues with this set up at all dispite the nay sayers telling me it will never work ... I've not tore the engine down the last four years of shows and it still works.  

 

[rday1982]

That is quite the gearbox solution. You've given me an idea for a potentially un-powerable train to suddenly become powerable. Truly, this forum is a wonderful resource once a person has time to trawl through it for hidden gems like this.