Kato C11 minimum radius? (And other small steam, diesel or electric locos)

[David]

Kato is rereleasing the C11 and old time passenger cars in a few days, and I'm tempted to order more then 1 despite not having been able to test one. I've heard that it operates well enough and I have no problems with it in the look department. However one reason I'm after a tenderless engine is I want to start seriously looking at putting together a diorama layout small enough to fit on my desk or be stored (probably with Tomix mini-curve, R140 or R177) so that I won't always be running on a featureless temporary layout.

 

To that end, does anyone have any idea what the minimum radius of the C11 is, or at least some curves that it has successfully navigated?

 

On a similar subject, what are some good "small" locomotives that are in production now or in the near future? Steam, diesel or electric.

 

For example the recently discussed, but mostly unavailable DD16 diesel  http://www.jnsforum.com/index.php/topic,2360.0.html

 

Micro-Ace has also re-released the ED17 and ED18 electric locomotives

 

http://www.hwjapan.com/sh/ACE09992.aspx

http://www.hwjapan.com/sh/ACE09995.aspx

 

A little bit longer are the ED74 and ED79 types available from Micro-Ace and Tomix, for example:

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10035526

 

Oh, and I can't forget the smallest of them all, the imported Deki 3 electric locomotives:

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10094235

[Mudkip Orange]

Kato is going to be doing an EF15 and EF16 - and they're fairly cheap.

 

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10100324

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10102630

 

Since it's Kato, I have some faith that these will actually be released - as opposed to the T-gauge Hankyu train...

[David]

Since it's Kato, I have some faith that these will actually be released - as opposed to the T-gauge Hankyu train...

 

Yeah, I was getting ready to pick up some T-gauge due to the potential for desktop layouts...but I'm still waiting for these rumored "improved" (better slow speed) trains and power supply to appear.

[David]

The C11 appears to run on well aligned R177, but definitely does not work on R140 (both pilot and driving wheels derail).

[Mudkip Orange]

EF15 is now out of stock at hobby search, but still in stock at HWJapan.

[Railtunes]

I've followed a rule of thumb that I picked up decades ago regarding minimum radius for steam locomotives. The safe, functional curve radius should be 10 times the rigid wheelbase. For the Kato C11, the rigid driver wheelbase - center-to-center on the three drivers - is 29mm, so the minimum radius should be 290mm - just over 11-inch radius. The D51 2-8-2 measures 33mm, so you'd want to use 330mm as your minimum radius. If you're using electrics such as the EF 57 and 58, measure one of the rigid 3-axle wheelbases and multiply by 10. Since most models have at least a little side play in the driver axles, this is a conservative rule that will serve you well, but don't try to push it too much!

 

The other corollary rule of thumb is that the rolling stock centerline should never hang inside the inner rail and the end swing centerline should never exceed the outer rail in a curve. This helps prevent coupler jamming and "straightlining" in curves. And that's why trams are so short!

 

- Paul Ingraham, AsiaNRail

[katoftw]

Your rule of thumb for minimum radi and Katos minimum radi are very different.

Edited January 15, 2015 by katoftw

[Railtunes]

Yes, that's true, my rules of thumb are different from those of many manufacturers.

However, one has to be circumspect about what a manufacturer says will work as a mechanical minimum and what is practical and esthetically acceptable. And, of course, even with Kato, you wouldn't expect a D51 2-8-2 to operate around their new Unitram curves. And Kato does say, in many cases, that certain models require a certain minimum radius to operate properly.

That's not to even consider what some of the European companies suggest as acceptable as the minimum curve! It's more like scaled-down tinplate trains!

One must accept, I suppose, that some modelers want the tightest possible curves in order to cram in as much track as possible in our impossibly restricted layout spaces, but I stand by my figures as reliable, time-tested guidelines. I especially say this because I do a lot of shunting operations with body-mounted couplings, and too-tight curves will cause a multitude of problems.

Bottom line: The minimum radius for each particular piece of motive power will be different - just as on the prototype. The minimum you choose is determined by the equipment you want to run.

 

- Paul Ingraham, AsiaNRail

[ToniBabelony]

Bottom line: The minimum radius for each particular piece of motive power will be different - just as on the prototype. The minimum you choose is determined by the equipment you want to run.

 

Or the other way around: the choice of rolling stock is limited by the radius you want to use. T-Trak lyfe.

[katoftw]

Aesthetics has nothing to do with it.  A model train can or cannot navigate a curve.

[kvp]

There are various levels of minimum radiuses:

-by curve type: single curve, S curve, turnout, superelevated curve, superelevated S curve

-by coupler type: solo, with bogie mounted couplers, with body mounted couplers

-by speed and direction: slow or faster speed, pulling or pushing

 

Model trains usually involve compromises. This can be as little as possible, using perfectly scaled down curves, tracks and wheels or on the other end tinplate curves with pizza cutter wheels and shortened rolling stock. Everyone chooses their own level or compromises or one of the 'standards'.

 

To be more concrete, i have a Kato C56 tender steam locomotive and it's minimum radius is around R150, but i was able to run it on Tomix R140, even through turnouts, but only at slower speeds. I would say the Kato mini rails and turnouts of R150 would work. Running it with bogie mounted rapido equipped passenger cars or shorter axle base 2 axle freight cars would work, especially that most of these can also run on R150. The steam locomotive and the short freight cars would even look convincing.

 

To determine the minimum radius for a certain locomotive or rolling stock, you have to determine on what type of track and in what type of consist you want to run them. The safe minimum radius should be one that still allows at least medium speed running through turnouts and S curves with both coupler types both in both pushing and pulling direction. The absolute minimum is the one for a certain locomotive, rolling stock and track configuration that still works with the desired movement patterns. (as an extreme example, it would be possible to have a layout where a certain locomotive works with some cars only by going through a certain route only in a certain direction, but if that's operationally acceptable, then it's ok to have those limits)

[velotrain]

Aesthetics has nothing to do with it.  A model train can or cannot navigate a curve.

 

Perhaps not to you, but it matters to some.  I couldn't find a photo I once saw of the entire mid-section of a passenger car hanging over the landscape beyond the inside rail of the track.  I did find these photos - titles came with the images.  Just because it can negotiate a curve, doesn't mean it's not going to look silly doing so.

 

 

 

 

While searching for images, I came across this aerial shot (Google?) showing a proto tight radius curve - which somehow looked familiar.

 

 

I then remembered that it was a riverfront export grain elevator I had seen in Portland, Oregon, when there in 2010. 

 

 

There's a very fine S-curve on the other side of it.

 

[katoftw]

Perhaps not to you, but it matters to some.

 

 

Minimum radi has nothing to do with me, or someone else.  A manufacturer does R+D and lists a minimum radi.

 

The question of the thread was about minimum radi.  If you wanna bring in emotions and aesthetics, good for you.  But that wasn't the question.

[velotrain]

  If you wanna bring in emotions and aesthetics, good for you.  But that wasn't the question.

 

But it rightfully is part of the answer.

 

As another poster said,

"However, one has to be circumspect about what a manufacturer says will work as a mechanical minimum and what is practical and esthetically acceptable."

 

There's "common sense", and then there's considered opinion.

[mags_minibuilds]

What is the minimum radius on the Kato curves for the C11 2002 (2-6-4)? I tried running the C11 on my Tomix 91080 fine track set but it obviously didn’t work. Will the steamer go through the turnouts that comes in the Kato CV2 set? Thanks!

Edited August 7 by mags_minibuilds

[bill937ca]

Hobby Search says R216.    https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10427001