Shupp

I'm fairly new to these forums, but I've been building Train MOCs for several years now. This is my most recent project: Since I joined PennLUG and started doing shows, I've been interested in building full train sets, rather than just locomotives, and I wanted them to run well. When you've got a big crowd at an event you can't be chasing down derailments every five minutes, and you can't have your equipment needing repairs when you're trying to run for 10 hours straight. My first big success in this area was my New York Central 20th Century Limited. I've mostly modeled older equipment up to now, but I live in a major city, so I interact with operating trains pretty frequently, and I do have an interest in modern equipment. I wasn't exactly sure what I wanted to do, though, until I watched an Amtrak AEM-7 pulling a set of Amfleet cars through the station in Trenton, NJ: I've seen trains like this a hundred times before but, for whatever reason, this time I was inspired. So, a little history. Amtrak inherited a whole bunch of equipment from its predecessors, both rolling stock and power, and only introduced new equipment as needed: it wasn't really a fresh start when they were formed. In the northeastern United States, where the main lines were electrified, Amtrak was still using Pennsy's famous GG1s into the 80s. They hoped to get an adequate replacement in the form of GE's E60. The E60 was not originally designed for passenger service, though, and they were not able to safely achieve the 100+ mph speed Amtrak was hoping for. They were mostly retired after a short service life. The GG1s were only finally replaced by the AEM-7, based on a Swedish design, in the late '70s and early '80s. The AEM-7s were smaller, lighter and faster than their predecessors and proved ideal for Amtrak's needs. They are still used in the U.S. Northeast to this day for regular regional service. Much like the AEM-7s, Amtrak's iconic Amfleet coaches were intended to finally replace much of Amtrak's inherited equipment. Their round shape and relatively low profile made them ideal for service through the narrow tunnels and low clearances in the Northeast. For my model, I began with the prototype Amfleet coach, utilizing the new 2x4 curve slope with bottom tubes for the round shape. I felt getting the shape right was more important than the silver color or corrugated texture of the coaches. Silver obviously would have been very expensive, and I couldn't conceive of a way to do the corrugated sides that would even get close to the right shape. From diaphragm to diaphragm, my Amfleet coach is 64 studs long, a similar length to my 20th Century Limited Pullman coaches (both were 85 feet long in reality). I only have one coach built now, but I plan to build three more when I get around to getting the parts. I didn't plan on building the AEM-7 right away, but I was inspired by a new PF powered truck design of Cale's, used in his new B&O Mikado. The truck design allows for gearing up a PF motor with a 20:12 step up in the truck itself. I thought that combining this with some more gearing up outside of the trucks could create a lot of speed. I mocked up the power system fairly quickly as seen here: I have 2 PF XL motors with 36 tooth gears attached to them. These are fixed to the body of the locomotive, and geared up to 12 tooth gears, which transfer power to the trucks. Within the trucks, Cale's design steps up the speed even further. I am very pleased with the performance of this engine. It is most certainly fast, and should have no difficulty pulling the 4 Amfleet coaches I have planned for it. (I tested it on some of my other long coaches.) I'm excited by these results, because it gives me hope that a design like this with two steps up can be used in a more complicated power train, such as might be in a steam locomotive. Here are some more pictures: And more on flickr. I don't consider it 100% finished, especially the coaches, so I am open to any suggestions for improvement!

Several members of my club have discussed the need/desire for larger and different sized train wheels, and the possibility of 3d printing them. Earlier this year, I was down with a back injury for a while, so I used the time to figure out some 3d design fundamentals and make my own. I don't have any 3d printing equipment so I put them on shapeways for my own use. I have had a couple requests for these since word got out that I made them, so I set up a shapeways store: www.shapeways.com/shops/shupp-s-brick-train-stuff I have made XXL sized (the next size up from Ben Fleskes' XL sized), a size between medium and large, and a medium diameter train wheel i.e. not a steam driver, just a thin train wheel but with a larger diameter. XXL Flanged Driver by Shuppiluliumas, on Flickr These are being offered at cost (I make no money) because I cannot guarantee the fit of the pin and axle holes and other aspects of the production which are out of my control, nor can I make any easy changes that would solve the problem. I don't know if I will be making any more different designs, and I probably won't make any changes to the existing ones at this point, but feel free to suggest ideas anyway. Again, I'm not putting these out here for my profit, but just because I already had them myself, and I figured I should share them, and I don't have a ton of time to devote to it. I have these notes in the store as well, but I will repost them here: The ML sized wheels do not 'align' with other sizes of LEGO train wheels. If you have a standard small LEGO train wheel, a medium sized driver, a large, and XL and my XXL size drivers running on LEGO train track, the centers of each bigger sized wheel will be one LEGO plate higher off the track than the next smallest. As such ML drivers are not really 'in system' and may cause problems in some designs where multiple wheel sizes are used. XXL sized wheels, while I think they are the right scale for many LEGO steam engine models, are a little too big for standard R40 LEGO curve track. If one were to use them in a flanged-blind-flanged arrangement to make, for example, a Pacific type locomotive, the two flanged wheels will be so far apart that they will bind in curves. The XXL wheels do work well when two flanged wheels are placed next to one another but, for other arrangements, you will need to look into after market wider radius curves if you are looking to run with these wheels. There are several options out there for wider radius curves, so maybe the curve issue is less important now than it once was.

I've gotten mostly positive feedback and some helpful suggestions from the community since I started offering these wheels. Thanks, everyone! I have had a couple requests for more types of wheels, and I finally got around to making some. First up, XL sized Boxpok drivers: XL Boxpok Driver by Shuppiluliumas, on Flickr These are available flanged, with or without traction tire groove, blind, and all can be had with either a larger or smaller counterweight. I have also made a size of wheel between large and XL: Large/XL Driver by Shuppiluliumas, on Flickr These are available as spoked drivers right now, but there will probably be a Boxpok available soon. They also come flanged with or without traction tire groove, blind and with small or large counterweight. I have not yet tested any of these, but I haven't changed any critical dimensions from previous wheels, so hopefully they work as well as the others. Everything can be found at my Shapeways store. https://www.shapeways.com/shops/shupp-s-brick-train-stuff I've also added new colors and materials for all of my wheels. Shapeways now offers a premium black strong and flexible, which is about 2x the cost of regular. If anyone tries it, I'd love to hear how they work out. I'm also offering metallic plastic, which is an identical process to Benn Coifman's custom side rods, and the wheels should look the same as those rods. Most of the colored plastic does not closely align with Lego colors unfortunately, but they might provide a better base if you intend to paint the wheels to match Lego. Cale has done this on his Blue Comet model recently, and the wheels seem to take paint well.

They're done. And based roughly off the later SP cab forwards, seeing as I had no other prototypes in mind. I made variants with large and small counterweights, flanged blind, and with and without traction tire grooves. Haven't tested them in person, so I can't guarantee how well they work. Large Boxpok Driver by Shuppiluliumas, on Flickr https://www.shapeways.com/shops/shupp-s-brick-train-stuff?section=Large+Train+Wheels&s=0 XL Boxpoks coming soon!

I agree with zephyr that friction is usually the limiting factor. 1 L motor should be able to pull an engine of that size and a few cars without too much trouble. In my experience, the best way to check for friction is to remove the motor for a while and check things by hand. Pick up the locomotive and check that the wheels spin freely. Push the locomotive through curves and switches by hand and see if you feel resistance. Sometimes a gear will just be too tight on an axle and prevent free spinning. Sometimes the way you have connected the pilot or pony truck to your drive wheels will cause binding in curves or switches. As you also say, friction in your other cars could also be an issue. I disagree that if adding cars makes the train slow down a lot, it must because the motor is too weak, though. If friction in the drive and articulation is not a problem, a lot of the motor's power can be lost if it is able to move or flex at all. I think this is usually more of an issue than lack of power in the motor itself. Motors need to be securely attached to their driven axles. I like to check for this by stalling the motor. Basically by picking up the locomotive, turning it on to full power and stopping the wheels slowly with my fingers. Does the motor twist or lift up from the frame? Do the gears start slipping? If so, that same thing is probably happening when you're running, and you're losing a lot of power there. Note that you can twist axles and break gears doing this, but I think it's worth it! If none of that works, I think you would be best off getting one (or two if you have room in your tender design) PF train motors and putting them under your tender instead of the L motor. Change the stock rubber on the LEGO wheels to plumbing o-rings and make the tender as heavy as you can. You can pull pretty heave trains at high speed with one of those motors. Echoing what others have said, electrically, the IR receiver is the weak link, and is limiting current to the motors. V2 IR receivers are a little expensive, but worth it in my opinion. Sbricks have the same motor driver circuits as V2 receivers if I recall, and also allow much more current through. Plus in an sbrick, each channel has its own driver IC, so the overall current limit is higher. I think your issue can be fixed with mechanical tweaking though, and you probably don't need to change electrical parts. I typically only hit the IR receiver current limit running 2 XL motors.

I've added all of shapeway's polished color options to all my wheels. I have never ordered polished pieces so I don't know how they will come out, but if anyone wants to try them and let me know, that'd be awesome. I have done it and uploaded them. No idea how they will work, so some brave soul gets to be the first to test them! I intend to do this at some point. The boxpok designs take a little longer to do, but I would like some as well. I will post here again when I get them done.

Well I'm glad you found it inspirational! As for the bullfrog snot. My club tried that on some engines as well and found it didn't seem to stick to the plastic very well. It would rub off fairly quickly. Did you have that issue or was there another reason you went to o-rings?

I'm glad to hear the fit was good. As for how well they hold up under wear, we have run some of these drivers at our last train show with no problems so far. I haven't seen any problems in the tests I've done, but they are still pretty new. Definitely let me know how they hold up for you if you run them a lot.

Really great job on this. I like the color scheme, and it looks like a solid runner too!

I have added several more types to my shop: Medium sized flanged and blind drivers with no pin M-L sized flanged and blind drivers with no pin Large sized flanged and blind drivers with no pin M-L thin train wheel Large thin train wheel https://www.shapeways.com/shops/shupp-s-brick-train-stuff Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I can probably do that. Are you thinking of a thin train wheel, or a tick driving wheel? The first one is probably easier, but a thick driver may also be possible.

Well, I don't have a standard sized wheel design worked up yet, so that would take a little longer, but it's doable. I've never seen wheels like the ones you're describing with springs. That sounds interesting. I use SolidWorks myself. Just what I happened to have access to. Models for wheels are probably basic enough that most CAD programs are up to the task. I had no idea libraries had this sort of thing. That's really interesting.

I am pretty new to Shapeways myself, but I believe they ship to most countries. As for talking to Ben Fleskes, I have not. I was in contact with him a little when he was making the XL wheels, because it was something I was very interested in having. At that time, he did not seem interested in anything larger, because of the issues with them binding in R40 curves. Maybe with all the wider curve options available today, it might be more feasible to make them. I guess it would be worth asking him about. I myself don't know much about injection molding except that it costs a lot of money to make molds! I think an ML without counterweight would be possible in the future. It's pretty easy to change 3d files like that. I do have an M sized train wheel available that can be used for that. No counterweight or pin hole, though I can understand maybe wanting even larger wheels like that for some models. If I add new things to the store, I will try to post them in here.

Really beautiful MOC! I'm glad I could help with the nose design and windows some. Fantastic job with the colors and striping too, especially since dark blue can be a tougher color to build with!

Yay! Wider guide rail. It was great to meet you at Brickworld. I think we all left feeling like these switches could really work. PennLUG has already found spots for half a dozen of them on our layout, so we are eagerly anticipating future updates!

Hey! That's my suspended monorail! Yeah, that's one option, and it runs pretty well. Now that there are PF L motors I want to build a new one sometime Well, I don't know that mine inspired it at all, but here is a video of that other suspended design. I want to try this sometime too!

That was my feeling as well. Looks like we're in luck, though. Check out the pink tiles on the shoulder pieces.

Cale Leiphart designed a catenary system for PennLUG's city streets/trolley tracks. It's more in keeping with that style rather than the catenary bridges you tend to get over main rail lines, though. Here's a picture: IMG_3405 by Shuppiluliumas, on Flickr We haven't yet strung wire from them, but there's no reason you couldn't do it. There are several designs from various builders on flickr here: http://www.flickr.com/groups/legotrains/discuss/72157622478854064/ I don't know if we'll ever "electrify" our main line, although I have built 2 electric locomotives for the club, now. It would be nice for realism, but actually stringing the wires would make the layout look really busy, I think.

That could very well be. I suppose I ought not to have posted at all, because I think our own opinion of what we do is the most important. It sounded like your first post was likewise giving your personal opinion of whether LEGO trains would qualify, rather than the consensus of other modellers, which is what I was responding to. I apologize if I misread it.

Well, you said "LEGO models" yourself just there. FWIW I agree with you about a layout really only being a good model railroad when it is cohesive, properly detailed and custom built. I posted as much above that I don't consider anything LEGO makes in any of their lines to be realistic enough to make the grade. I see the elimination of all the stock elements as an end-goal, though. I am happy to have a layout that hasn't quite gotten there yet, and will probably continue to engage in the grand conceit of applying the word "model" to it, or at least to sections of it. Most Lego train layouts are collaborations between multiple builders and often entire clubs. I don't want to be the one to start judging the quality and accuracy of everything people build for a club layout. I'm happy to have participation from the largest number of people. We all learn from each other and improve that way. My first efforts at 'serious' building were terrible, but I know I've improved some, and that's largely thanks to being encouraged by fellow club members and having the experience of showing off and operating the equipment I've built. I still have a long way to go, and I hope I'll never stop learning things from others. The end goal, as I said before, is to do exactly what you say, but if we turn away everyone who fails to meet the highest possible standard, our clubs would be pretty un-fun. If I was told I wasn't making models early on and wasn't likely to be doing so any time soon at the rate I was going, I'd have walked away from my club, for sure, and I'd have missed out on a lot of learning opportunities. Also, if we never ran or displayed anything until such a time as true model-ness was achieved, that also would take away a lot of the fun. I guess what I'm getting at is that most people who start making custom LEGO trains, cars, whatever, based on real prototypes, talk about building models. That's what I like to do, so I want to encourage that, even if not everything I see impresses me all the time. To me the crux of model making is attempting to capture the features of a real prototype, and that matters more to the definition than whether the result is really accurate. You can say a locomotive, car, or whole layout is not a good model, but if the attempt was made to make a model, then it's a model. The temporary (for me, at least) inclusion of stock elements is as much an issue of resolution as anything else. On the large scale of a train layout, a car or whatever is like a single pixel out of place. It means the model is of a lesser quality than it might be, not that the whole thing ceases to be a model.

That's a nice mod. I built a 3-axle truck out of one of those motors, once. (On the tender. Sorry I don't have a better picture of it.) Prussian P 3 Locomotive 2-4-0 by Shuppiluliumas, on Flickr It's just held in with a 2L axle and and the modified plate. This obviously won't work for a 12v motor lookalike, but could be useful for other applications.

Well again, I can only honestly speak for what I and the others I work with try to do. If it's found deficient by the wider LEGO community there's not much else I can say. Whether they're good models or not I suppose I will continue to build them.

Well, to be fair, I can only really speak for PennLUG. We have many long-term plans for our layout, but they're all very expensive and take time. Ballasted tracks and built roads took a full year and no small investment of cash. Our end goal is definitely to have every aspect of our layout be as accurate as possible, but we're also happy to compromise in the short term on things we haven't quite gotten to yet just to have a layout to run on. For most of us, we only get to run at shows, after all, so using a few stock buildings and vehicles naturally follows. The other issue is that the skill barrier for entry into really detailed LEGO modelling is in some ways higher, because you can't buy any of it in kit form. Not everyone wants to spend a year just getting their track in order, which I understand. I do hope as more people come up with detailed equipment, buildings scenery, etc. that it will be copied and improved upon by others, but I guess we'll just have to see about that.

This may be true, but a $3000 brass O gauge model steam locomotive is a model steam locomotive whether it's on a layout or not. I think a good Lego model locomotive is the same. That said, I agree the end goal is a complete model railway system, but I don't find it surprising that there aren't many out there. Our hobby is, in terms of really going for maximum realism, quite young, and LEGO, itself, makes very few realistic model rail components. In my opinion, nothing LEGO makes is at the crazy standard of realism I tend to strive for. The result is that individuals and clubs have to make everything themselves from scratch. Ask any other scale modeller how long that takes.

I agree that most people in the wider model community don't see Lego Trains as models or 'on par' with scale models. Then again, most scale modelers have never seen the sort of trains the people in our community make. Many are not aware that Lego even makes trains (this comes up repeatedly for my club at train shows). I also agree with The Brickster that few scale guys actually design and build all of their equipment from nothing. I think we deserve a lot of credit for that. Personally my goal is to make the most accurate models possible within the medium. I do it because I like model trains and model making in general, and I also do it because I find working within the limits of a prototype forces me to get better at other building. I certainly think Lego trains are real models and I'm continually impressed with what people manage to do with it.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who does this. I'm the only person in my club who runs 12v, and they all freak out when I break one. I'm just like "eh, it happens." My solution has definitely been to just keep buying more. It's a shame, but so many of the ones I have are really brittle. I suppose we could just go over to regular 2x8 plates. I don't really think the clips on the ties are that important to regular operation anyway.