 | | | | | |
Mike Walsh wrote:
> The battery container, the IR receiver, and the baseplate are all one
> unit. The motor is a separate unit, same form factor as the current
> 9v motor but without the wheels. The wheels are plastic and are
> attached to the motor via a Technic axel.
Hmm, does this mean the new motor could drive BBB wheels directly? That
would be way cool for steam designers.
Frank
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Frank Filz wrote:
| |
Mike Walsh wrote:
| |
The battery container, the IR receiver, and the baseplate are all one
unit. The motor is a separate unit, same form factor as the current
9v motor but without the wheels. The wheels are plastic and are
attached to the motor via a Technic axel.
|
Hmm, does this mean the new motor could drive BBB wheels directly? That
would be way cool for steam designers.
Frank
|
Good question. I’m eager to order a set and find out how BBB wheels will do
with the new battery powered trains. I’ve tried BBB wheels with the 845 motor:
http://guide.lugnet.com/set/845
Which easily accepts a technic axle. With large BBB drivers, at 9V the speed is
a little slower then the old 4.5v trains and hill climbing power was fairly
poor.
I’m anxious to test the new 9v train motor to see how it works with BBB wheels.
But I’m inclined to believe any decent looking steam engine would need to
position the IR receiver in a car following the engine and run a wire between.
Cheers,
Ben Fleskes
Big Ben Bricks LLC
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:27:25 GMT, Ben wrote:
> Good question. I'm eager to order a set and find out how BBB wheels will do
> with the new battery powered trains. I've tried BBB wheels with the 845 motor:
>
> <http://guide.lugnet.com/set/845>
>
> Which easily accepts a technic axle. With large BBB drivers, at 9V the speed
> is
> a little slower then the old 4.5v trains and hill climbing power was fairly
> poor.
>
> I'm anxious to test the new 9v train motor to see how it works with BBB wheels.
> But I'm inclined to believe any decent looking steam engine would need to
> position the IR receiver in a car following the engine and run a wire between.
I wonder if you could use the new IR motor in a steam engine, driving
the drivers, and an old 9V motor in the tender. With a wire between
the two, you could have a double-powerful steam engine, with powered
drivers and standard transformer (non-IR) control... could be very
cool.
This is assuming that the IR receiver is on the battery part, not the
motor, which I think is the case, but maybe not?
-Matt :)
-----------------------------------------------------
www.auctionbrick.com - username mchiles
Matt Chiles
1006 Horseshoe Bend Rd
Centerville, WA 98613 USA
Phone: 509-773-5724
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Matthew J. Chiles <mattchiles@gorge.net> wrote:
>
> I wonder if you could use the new IR motor in a steam engine, driving
> the drivers, and an old 9V motor in the tender. With a wire between
> the two, you could have a double-powerful steam engine, with powered
> drivers and standard transformer (non-IR) control... could be very
> cool.
>
> This is assuming that the IR receiver is on the battery part, not the
> motor, which I think is the case, but maybe not?
That would seem to be correct, but you're forgetting that if you put big wheels
on the battery motor, and connect it to a 9V motor with its small wheels,
they'll try to go at different speeds (assuming, as has been suggested, that the
motor innards are the same).
Jason Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton wrote:
| |
In lugnet.trains, Matthew J. Chiles mattchiles@gorge.net wrote:
| |
I wonder if you could use the new IR motor in a steam engine, driving
the drivers, and an old 9V motor in the tender. With a wire between
the two, you could have a double-powerful steam engine, with powered
drivers and standard transformer (non-IR) control... could be very
cool.
This is assuming that the IR receiver is on the battery part, not the
motor, which I think is the case, but maybe not?
|
That would seem to be correct, but you’re forgetting that if you put big
wheels on the battery motor, and connect it to a 9V motor with its small
wheels, they’ll try to go at different speeds (assuming, as has been
suggested, that the motor innards are the same).
Jason Railton
|
Yep, I can only dream that the adjusted the gear ratio in the new motors. The
current 9v train motors run way to fast, I’d gladdly trade that for a bit more
torque.
But even at differnt speeds, the BBB wheels have less traction, allowing them to
slip some, and motors tend to to syncronize a bit once they’re under way.
So it might actually be cool, the steam engine’s drive wheels slip as try’s to
start up, then the train starts to move forward, and the wheels grab, off she
goes.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Mathew Clayson wrote:
| |
Yep, I can only dream that the adjusted the gear ratio in the new motors. The
current 9v train motors run way to fast, I’d gladdly trade that for a bit
more torque.
But even at differnt speeds, the BBB wheels have less traction, allowing them
to slip some, and motors tend to to syncronize a bit once they’re under way.
So it might actually be cool, the steam engine’s drive wheels slip as try’s
to start up, then the train starts to move forward, and the wheels grab, off
she goes.
|
I think the process you’re describing is referred to as ‘clutching’...
...at straws... ;-)
Jason Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Mathew Clayson wrote:
| |
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton wrote:
|
| |
Yep, I can only dream that the adjusted the gear ratio in the new motors. The
current 9v train motors run way to fast, I’d gladdly trade that for a bit
more torque.
|
No idea about the torque, but personally I doubt it could have been improoved
(would empty the batteries too fast). The speed of the new trains is more or
less the same as now: a Metroliner waggon at full speed of the IR train
derailed.
Regards,
Ben
| | | | | | |
