# Accucraft 4-4-0 Issues



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Well since after 2 hours of running I loosened the one crosshead pin enough to bend the rod I had to tear it down to replace the bolts and straighten the rod back. Here is the new bolts I turned without the nuts that are on order.



















Sonce I knew there was a clicking sound coming from all the bushings I decided to measure all of them, they are all about .010-.013 difference from the crank pins. That means a lot of slop and within just a few hours you will have siginifiant wear on the crank pins as I do.

Here is the amount of clearance that is on my bushings.










As you can see from the light reflection there is a defined ridge already worn into the crank pins from the main rods. So far after 2 hours of run time I have a .005 groove worn into the pin. After another 10 runs at the current wear rate it would be at about .0125 At 20 runs at about a .025 groove. At this point the threads from the retaining bolt will start to show on the outside. Now this wear is only on 180 degrees of the pin to the pin will continue to oval itself out, along with the bushing already ovaled out on mine.



















According to Accucraft my loco is the only one with these issues as no one else had checked or called. I inspected 2 other 2nd run 4-4-0's and both of them are the same as mine. Neither of the 2 people had run the locos more than once so far and the bushings were just as bad. Accucraft seems not to want to change the design of these bushings since they do not get any complaints. I have noticied that on my older Accucraft locos the bushings and rods were still very tight. The newer design locos seems to all have oversized holes for the crank pins as on the C19 or Cabfoward where some people already made new bushings or installed roller bearings. If anyone else has the same issues please voice it as no one is being heard on the issues out there untilafter the parts are going to be long gone. As it is already they have no replacement parts 4-4-0 until they get enough requests for a part. Almost 260 were built and all were shipped but I think 1 or 2 units.

_(resized to max 640 pixel width, SteveC mod.)_


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Sorry about the photo size I cant get to my FTP site to change them right now. 600x800 is not that large and the file size is small anyway 

From Peter Bunce - moderator - I have asked Jason if he can reduce the size of his photos - from the above I think that is the case, and it will be done as soon as his FTP decides to play ball.


----------



## livesteam5629 (Jan 2, 2008)

Jay, 
If you are able to do so, it would be a good idea to inspect a new out of the box engine prior to running. Photograph, document ect the condition of the bearings prior and after 2 or so hours running. This would give you a solid base line on the problem. The problem could also be a issue of correct quarting of the dirvers and that is why the larger side rod holes. The early C-16's had this issue. I have replaced totally egged out bearings on at least three C-16's for folks. 
Noel


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Jay 
Of the 4 I know about it's been 50% with enlarged bearing, loose fits and cross head problems. Even higher percentage of running gear problems with the AC-11. As per the AC-11 it was been documented to Accucraft.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Noel - I dont know of any other locos that have not been run except Alan Redeker and he is away on business for a while and has not had any chance to even open it yet unless he did over the 4th of July. 
What were you using to check the quartering of the drivers? Did you make up a jig for it?


----------



## livesteam5629 (Jan 2, 2008)

Jay, 
Made my own jig out of angle brackets and 3/8ths inch nuts and bolts. I either found how to do it in a STIG article or on this site many moons ago. I will try to take some pics and send to you. 
Noel


----------



## Tim Hytrek (Jan 2, 2008)

I plan to make new bushings for mine, as they are very sloppy as well. I put roller bearings on my C-19, and I was able to fine tune the timing after that. It was sloppy as well right out of the box.


----------



## jmkling (Jan 2, 2008)

Jay, 

I just checked my engine, unpacked but has not been run yet. Pins are all loose and look like yours in the photo's. 

Looks like it will need a BB retrofit if someone can find the right size and will need the cross head work also. 

Jon


----------



## livesteam5629 (Jan 2, 2008)

Jon, 
Before you run it call Cliff and tell him. This is NOT good. Glad this is all coming out but not for you guys to have to deal with. I was planning to give Royce a call but now will wait. Seems that a rethink is iin order here. Perhaps even an price discount....heheheheh. 
Noel


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Dont worry Jon - There are no replacements though and our only option is that Norm fixes them on the East coast and Dave fixes them on the West coast. That was Cliff's answer to me. He is at the show this week so it will be a week before you get a response from him. 

Do you have a dial caliper that you can measure the shaft dia on all the pins and the bushing hole in the rods? Using the cheap Harbor Freight digital Calipers will give you false measurements. I have tried using them a few occasions and then checking again with the good set of calipers (Starrett) and a Micrometer it was off by almost .005" Not good then I was trying to thread a fine thread for an adapter. 

I think bushings will be sufficient so long as the tolerances are correct.


----------



## Taperpin (Jan 6, 2008)

I think the rapid early wear is more the result of a poor surface finish. on the pins..its asturned and certainly not polished.. 

it may settle once the thrust area is polished by the bush.. but if you want to make nerw bushes try a floating bush,not press fitted in the rods but aclose running fit with acouple of cross holes to allow oil into both sides..quite good method in guage 1 sizes.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Jon 
We have a good source for BB as we are replacing GS4, AC-11 bearing with this upgrade. I will send the name to you.


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

I have been thinking of Buying one of these locos, But if they have issues out of the box ,will Accucraft stand behind them and offer a fix or maybe pay for the fix?


----------



## jmkling (Jan 2, 2008)

Charles thanks. Look forward to the info. 

Jay, are you going to make me a few cross head bolks? I am sure we can work something out. 

Accucraft is usually good about standing by their product, I have a half dozen of their engines. I like to tinker,so I'll make the fixes rather than send it off to get it done. Cliff will make things right if you need to go that route. If you want to make improvements yourself, there is plenty of help here.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Jon 
As per Groucho, "say the magic word...." well, you said it; improvement. Most of us are like your situation. Instead of sending back for a stock replacement part would rather fix it with an improved part. That isn't to say that Accucraft will not deal with the problem as per their statement of satisfying the customer...


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Jon I guess I will be adding you to the list I already have going. The first set took 2.5 hours with screwing around, probally about an hour per set or so if Im really moving. These friggin things are tiny on a 10" lathe. Thank god for collet setups. Jon I need to know that the dia of the hole is on your crosshead and main rod. Both of mine were two different sizes and #99 and a #98 drill bit I think. Could be wear too though as my pins were already loose. I had turned my pins to fit both holes tight except for the .001 clearance I left on the shoulder for the Main Rod. Again both main rods had 2 different sizes.


----------



## linuxhost (Jan 5, 2008)

Hi all. 
I think that this problem is more wide spread then we think. 
All of my Accucraft rod engines ( C-21, Mogul, Ida, Ruby and even my new C-19) are experiencing the same problem. 
I have the Mogul on the bench now so it is the one that the measurement are coming from. 

First off for clarity, I’m numbering the drivers 1 through 3 starting from the front and working to the rear. So driver #1 is the set just behind the pony truck. 

Driver #3 has the least amount of slop with about 0.008" TOTAL clearance. Drivers #2 & #1 have the most with about 0.022" to 0.019" respectively. Both sides show equal amount of wear. I can easily stick a #76 drill bit in the gap between the bushing and crank pin on #2 driver. 
This yields CENTER clearances of... #3 about 0.004", #2 about 0.011" and driver #1 with about 0.009". 
Just for comparison, you car engine, rod bearings have around 0.005" to 0.010" of TOTAL clearance. 

On the Mogul, I don’t show the wear on the crank pin that Jason shows. But the rod bushings are definitely worn. 
This engine has never ran right, regardless how well tuned. I always blamed it on internal steam leaks in the valves. But I’m now wondering if has more to due with quartering problems due to the excess clearances. 
The engine does have some time on it, about 30 hours. It has also been very well oiled.. 

The new C-19 has about 5 hours on her, and without taking anything apart, there is definitely excess clearance also. You can see it just by grabbing a hold of the rods and moving them without moving the drivers. 

I don’t know what material Accucraft is using for their bushing, but it looks like just plain old brass. What ever they are using, it is obvious that it is not working out very well! 

Maybe we need to start looking for someone with access to a small lathe, to turn out some replacement bushings out of Oil Lite Bronze. Even if they are installed on to bad crank pins, they would be better than what we have now. 
But that would lead to the next problem. How does the average Joe replace them with nothing more than a $30 drill press, some dull drill bits and a sledge hammer!?!? 

Doug Bronson


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

Doug I think you are correct about the Bushing Material, I to think its Soft Brass, and maybe the pins should have been hardened. 

I am NOT BASHING Accurate, but if I am to pay $1800.00 dollars for one of these Locos which I am still very likely to do, I would like it to run more than Two Hours before it needs to be torn down and rebuilt. I also like to tinker and am not opposed to fixing the problem myself, and I do have the machinery to make the fix, it just concerns me that it needed to be done after what seems to be the first trip to the filling station. 

All in all I don’t think you can find a better Loco for the money! I currently have a K-27 with NO Problems. 
In any case their will probably be one of these in my Hands very soon, and I’ll just hope for the best, and I guess this is the Nature of the Beast. 

Why was Steam replaced with Diesel? 
Who cares, I like Steam!


----------



## Tim Hytrek (Jan 2, 2008)

Doug, getting rid of this slop will help with timing issues. If you add the slop from the main rod, and all connecting rod bushings between the actual pistons that are pushing them (and look to see which one has the eccentrics that are pushing the valves), It is quite a bit of slop. This amount of slop is relative to the accuracy in timing that you are able to achive. I use bronze when replacing bushings, and in the C-19s case, ball bearings. The siderod/ mainrod width on the 4-4-0 is only 7.9 to 8mm. So the bearings I found that worked on the c-19 would not work on the 4-4-0. The outside dimension on the Ball bearings that I found are 7mm with 4mm inside. Not enough meat on the siderods to ream the bushing holes out to accept 7mm bearings.


----------



## jmkling (Jan 2, 2008)

So it looks like we either need bigger side rods that will accept a BB, find smaller BB that would require the crank pins to be a smaller diameter to allow for a BB or just get better bushing material. Thoughts? 

Looks like you have about a 6mm outer diam for the bushing with a 4mm inner for the crank pin. 

Jon


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

At the present time we are re-bushing with BB several Accucraft GS4, Cab forwards and will be doing NG as will Jay. So, seem as if there will be quite a few orders to fill.


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

Has anyone checked the Distance between the Crank Pins? 
Should they not be the same distance apart as the Axle Centers? 
Would it not help to harden the Crank Pins and use a Bronze Bushing material? 
Just a thought.


----------



## linuxhost (Jan 5, 2008)

Posted By Tim Hytrek on 07/20/2008 6:29 AM
Doug, getting rid of this slop will help with timing issues. If you add the slop from the main rod, and all connecting rod bushings between the actual pistons that are pushing them (and look to see which one has the eccentrics that are pushing the valves), It is quite a bit of slop. This amount of slop is relative to the accuracy in timing that you are able to achive. I use bronze when replacing bushings, and in the C-19s case, ball bearings. 




Hi Tim. 

I 100% agree with you about the slop causing timing issues, but I feel that the biggest problem with the Mogul timing is the use of a single eccentric to control both valves. No way to dial in each valve. 

The major dim of the rods on the Mogul seems to be in line with the 4-4-0. Around 8mm. 
So it looks like this engine will need to use std bronze bushings. 


Posted By Charles on 07/20/2008 6:50 AM
At the present time we are re-bushing with BB several Accucraft GS4, Cab forwards and will be doing NG as will Jay. So, seem as if there will be quite a few orders to fill. 




Yes, Charles, I'll also need a few sets for all of my engines. 
Let me know what dim's you need and a price. 

Doug Bronson


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

As I mentioned earlier, my engine performed perfectly right out of the box (and I know how to ascertain that). After about the two hours being mentioned, running gear has loosened up a bit, but the engine continues to perform flawlessly. However, I have stopped running it because the left wristpin appears ready to fail. 
Taperpin was nice enough to send me a copy of his wristpin drawing, and I intend to do the retrofit soon. will have to investigate the rod/pin fits--they aren't too loose, but My Roundhouse 2-6-2 has many more hours on it and everything is still as it should be. Checked it yesterday. 

I agree Cliff does a great job for us. But, my frustration with Accucraft is on a steep rise again. Why does any customer of any expensive product have to put up with this. Why do we keep coming back for more? If we stopped buying, any company would have to shape up fast or go out of business. My two cents again. 

Larry


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Larry 
Depends on the company's philosophy,purpose along with competition and customer base. At this point Accucraft has the market in NG and most customers are newbies. As the customer becomes aware of the QC production problems then the demand will force Accucraft put into place corrective measures(as you said; if we stop pre-ordering). Sooner rather then later if they encounter a competitor we would then see a change in production standards (not just quality of details but running components).


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

I agree with Larry, as stated earlier I am not opposed to working on these engines but not after only 2 hours of use. 

Still this has not hampered my decision to buy one of the Locos, I believe Accucraft has a Quality product and if there is a “QC” Issue or just bad parts I believe Accucraft will stand behind their product, if they don’t take care of these issues, people will stop buying and they will go out of Business.


----------



## NHSTEAMER (Jan 2, 2008)

I have one of the early 4-4-0's in Lilly Bell, I have noticed that it has the same problems. The rods are very loose, so it sounds like they used the same plans from the limited production of the Lilly Bell. I have not yet had a problem with the wrist pins so they maybe different. Jason can you/have you checked and compared to Dan's Lilly Bell. Is this just a pass though problem from a special order loco that was not corrected after what 3 years between productions.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Bill The Lilly Belle is the same consturction along witht he same issues. No difference on the looseness or wristpin design. Being that Dan never wants to run the Lilly Belle I never really had the chance or thought to look at these issues before. We did get together and had the gas tank enlarged though. You shoudl ask Cliff for the redesigned tank. Its over 2X the size of the orignal. n 

the issue of the newbies they dont really know how it should be to say its not right. They are just happy with it "as is" Barring and out of the box running issues that continusally come up.


----------



## Tim Hytrek (Jan 2, 2008)

Jason, is the larger gas tank offered for the new 1.20.3 4-4-0, or just the Lilly bell?


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

Guys, has anyone else noticed all the typo's in the last few messages, including mine. Must be that our collective blood pressure has gone up! 

Larry


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

Jason. 
I am still interested in buying one of these Locos; do you think it’s a good choice? 

Even though when you buy something you would like it to be 100%, these still seem to be small issues that could be Easley fixed, and to me it’s still a great looking engine. 

Thanks, in advance for your opinion!


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Tim 

The gas tank was already installed in the recent run of the 4-4-0's if you have a Lilly Belle Id highly reccomend asking Cliff for a replacement as the OEM ones were just patheitc. 13 Mins run time REALLLY!!!! C' Mon 

As for purchasing one of the 4-4-0's they are just beatuiful looking locos, David Fletcher did a wonderful job in getting these produced this way.....Kudos to him on that. There were 260 built and all are in the dealers hands. I think it is a decent running loco, Barring melting the solder on the smokestacks or breaking loose the wristpins and loose fitting bushings. The couple issues can be fixed and I would recommend the loco but request that all these issues are fixed ASAP. Meaning purchase the loco than contact Cliff and request the repairs be done to your satifaction. So far I spent about 4 hours making these fixes and I still have to do all the bushings on the rods. Need to order material and get those turned. Norm Saley would be the East coast repair guy and Dave Hottman the West coast guy according to Accucraft. My personal choice woud be Norm only for the fact he has been doing these types of repairs and building locos for a very long time.


----------



## shaysteam05 (Jul 19, 2008)

I have run my 4-4-0 only about a half hour, and decided tho check the rods and bushings. Sure enuf, the bushings were .015-.017 larger than the crankpins. I will send this info on to Cliff to add to the mounting chorus of unhappy AC owners. This is my fourth AC loco, and I have had no problems with the others. Possibly because I do not run them hard, nor for long periods at a time.


----------



## Tim Hytrek (Jan 2, 2008)

I am just saying that overall, I am very satisfied with my Accucraft engines. I am not posting anything to bash Accucraft, as overall the 4-4-0 is a beautiful running and looking engine. I hope these posts educate any live steamers about the wristpins and bushing tolerance issues so they can take care of them. Again, this is a very good locomotive and with these minor fixes it will be an even better one. I feel fortunate that Accucraft is making 1:20.3 narrow guage steam engines for me to tinker with. Just my two cents.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Tim very true but not all of us out here are tinkers like us. Some just run them till issues arise or eccentrics wear out due to the stainless steel strap wearings out the brass eccentrics. There should be a bronze bushing in there too and stainless used on the eccentric also.


----------



## Skip (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Kovacjr on 07/21/2008 8:19 PM
Tim very true but not all of us out here are tinkers like us. Some just run them till issues arise or eccentrics wear out due to the stainless steel strap wearings out the brass eccentrics. There should be a bronze bushing in there too and stainless used on the eccentric also.




Exactly correct. My Mogul has less than 8 runs on it. The suspension still needs to be sorted out, the stack has split, and I'm not going to take a chance on the drive. When Cliff gets the replacement stack out, I will very likely put it up for sale, _before_ I have to waste hours of my life re-engineering it. I sold a well-made highly reliable piece of machinery to fund the purchase of the Mogul - I won't make that mistake again. While the Rubies are a lot a fun and represent reasonably good value, the Mogul does not. I have the tools to rebuild my Mogul, but not the inclination to want to.


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

Anybody know if Cliff reads this forum? I'm not sure how to send it to him, but it might be a good way of letting him know our feelings. 
Maybe I'll print it out and mail it, if forwarding can't be done. 

Larry


----------



## jfrank (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Tim Hytrek on 07/21/2008 6:53 PM
I am just saying that overall, I am very satisfied with my Accucraft engines. I am not posting anything to bash Accucraft, as overall the 4-4-0 is a beautiful running and looking engine. I hope these posts educate any live steamers about the wristpins and bushing tolerance issues so they can take care of them. Again, this is a very good locomotive and with these minor fixes it will be an even better one. I feel fortunate that Accucraft is making 1:20.3 narrow guage steam engines for me to tinker with. Just my two cents." border=0>




I have to agree with Tim. Until Accucraft came along the only options in this hobby were a Roundhouse English style puffer belly or a very expensive Aster and Aster only made a US prototype every 5 years or so. Along comes Accucraft and starts producing US prototypes, both narrow gauge and standard gauge, every year and sometimes multiple products a year and at a price the average person could afford. They are the reason I am now in this hobby and many others are also. If you have a problem with an Accucraft product you should just call them and they will take care of it instead of whining on this board continually. Their phone number is posted on their web site and a real person answers the phone. I appreciate the technical discussions about any product and how to fix various problems that come up. However, I am really sick of reading all this Accucraft bashing. I have many of their products and am very happy with all of them and where there was a problem they have always stepped up and fixed it or furnished the parts to fix it even when the warranty had long expired. If not for Accucraft there would be few options for anyone wanting to get into live steam.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

John 
The one positive that comes from the faults of productions is what is best about this board: 
"I appreciate the technical discussions about any product and how to fix various problems that come up." 
Without this mass communication network most of the problems would result in our hobby becoming static with lots of shelf queens at some point in time.


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

John, if they don't give you a reason to defend Accucraft, then you would only have about 3 posts in "live steam"/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/laugh.gif admit it, you love the fight.... even more then the product./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/whistling.gif Good to see your feeling better, we missed you /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/unsure.gif


----------



## shaysteam05 (Jul 19, 2008)

While browsing elsewhere in the forums, i came across an item in the forum about rail trucks. A source for miniature ball bearings was mentioned. Bocabearings.com, is the name. Has anyone checked with them? Has anyone come up with the proper dimensions for the bearings? 
Alex


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

After contacting Cliff a short while ago, he just sent this reply (edited for brevity): 
"I do read the posts on MLS---regarding a problem that comes up with an Accucraft item. Some 4-4-0's are now showing up with bearing issues on the side and main rods along with weak design on the crosshead. The crosshead mainrod assembly is one assembly and the side rods are another two piece assembly. The only other issue is the stacks coming apart on some models. All of these issues have been sent to the supplier and we will be getting replacement parts ASAP. These replacements will be sent out at no charge upon request with information including purchasing store name and locomotive serial number. Thanks for the heads up. If you want to relate this info on MLS it's OK to do so." 

We should thank Cliff for being on top of the situation and for clarifying how to get upgraded parts. 

Larry


----------



## Tom Burns (May 11, 2008)

Keep in mind that everything about a steam locomotive involves design compromises. I am surprised that nobody has correlated that Accucraft’s increase in rod bearing tolerance coincides with Accucraft’s switch to softer functional driver suspension springs. Prior to this, Accucraft suspension were so stiff that derailment problems were a commonly voiced complaint. Frequent derailment was a particular problem on earlier tight unmodified Accucraft suspensions run in uneven garden environments. 

To have a soft suspension operate freely, it is a fundamental requirement to have sloppy rod bearings. Prototype locomotives have so much slop you can visually see the rod flopping around on a slow moving locomotive even after being recently shopped. 

If you tighten the rod clearances, you will potentially impose restrictions on the suspension to move freely in all quartering positions. This could re-introduce derailment problems if you operate in a garden environment. By fixing one problem, you may create another problem. 

I will state that my later vintage C-19 and 4-4-0 engines have not had a single derailment which is a huge improvement to my K-27 that has had several major roll over derailments even after modifications. I am sure that the new Accucraft wheel profile also has contributed to the almost elimination of uneven track derailment problems. 

It is agreed that loose rod clearances will inherently result in measurable wear that will in theory be proportionate to operating time and loads. Given the pre-existing slop, I am of the opinion that significantly more wear than is currently being measured will be required before the timing is adversely affected. I would expect that Accucraft would consider the design free of defects as long as it runs reliably in forward and reverse on the track, not theoretically perfectly smooth timing on a test stand. 

I think it is unrealistic to expect that a steam locomotive properly designed to mitigate uneven track to also be maintenance free regardless of scale. I am willing at some point to replace rod bearings that wear to the extent that the locomotive will no long run. Until someone accumulates enough hours and wear to the extent that the locomotive no longer runs, expecting manufacturer warrantee resolution in my opinion is premature. I probably have 20 hours of heavy load accumulated on my 4-4-0. Based on earlier posts, I am sure that if I disassembled the rods, I probably could measure wear. Thus far, there is no detectable loss in the almost perfect factory set timing in either forward or reverse. 

John Frank has a stock C-16 with several hundreds of hours of operation over 5 years with what I consider to be highly worn and oblong rod bearings. Similar to the prototype, it just keeps running, and running, and running and similar to the prototype, you can hear the rods knock. I am now of the opinion that critical bushing wear does not exist until the bushing is almost totally worn through assuming the timing remains OK. 

I am sure both Roundhouse and Aster owners will correctly make claims of no measurable wear. I personally have not seen an Aster routinely run in a rough garden environment nor have I seen a Roundhouse loaded with anything more than an ultra-light string of LGB cars. If you operate a locomotive properly designed for highly uneven track under prototypical high loads (just below the threshold of slipping) prototypical maintenance can be expected. Since the bearing thickness are only a fraction of the prototypical bearing thickness, expected maintenance intervals will be proportionately short assuming the bearing stress are similar and wear rates are similar. If I can achieve 200-500 hours before bearing failure, I will be very happy. This is a much more attractive alternative than having to repair damage caused by a tight suspension derailment on nominally uneven track followed by the locomotive rolling down a hillside. 

I am not attempting to unjustifiably support Accucraft locomotives. I think however it is important that we realize that Accucraft locomotives are routinely being subjected to high operational loads combined with rough garden track running environments that combined place a much higher requirement on the locomotive than the +100 year old hobby has routinely experienced. The resulting maintenance requirement might be unique or excessive to some in this scale, but are accepted and considered normal in all larger scales with locomotive and maintenance costs orders of magnitudes greater. 

Perhaps what Accucraft might consider is producing a repair maintenance manual. 

Regards, 

Tom Burns


----------



## rbednarik (Jan 2, 2008)

Could someone give me the dimensions of the bearings on the big end of the main rod and side rods? There seems to be some confusion as to what is what. ID,OD and thickness are what is needed. 

Tom, 

Once again, and I am not sure if you are being a aggie on this, your statements are quite wrong. Full size engines have the notable clank in the rods and movement due to the high rotational mass, and the reciprocating force. There are tolerances that have to be met, that's why the brasses are either re machined or babbitted to match the crank pin specs. The rationalization that making oversize bearings to compensate for soft suspension is quite ridiculous. If this were true, the thousands of locomotives made by competitors would have slop to compensate, which is far from the truth. Yes, there should be a tolerance gap between the bearing surface and crankpins, but not more than what Jay has stated. 

I would think that since the 4-4-0 does not run at breakneck speed or pull enormously long trains, that a regular turned bronze or gunmetal bearing in the rod would suffice just fine. But, if the dimensions are correct, Ballbearings could be fitted


----------



## NHSTEAMER (Jan 2, 2008)

Tom, 
Although I see your point as it is a just a hobby, if you would take the .013 slop in the rods and put that to prototype scale that would be .25. I know for a fact that locos do not run with that much slop it the rods, and if they did they would have to be shopped immediately. So that seems excessive to me as our locos will wear out much faster then the prototype even if they had .25 slop. IMHO


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

My two cents, 
I called Royce and talked to him last night and he assured me that if I do have a problem he or Accucraft would take care of it, I believe him, tonight I am going to order the little 4-4-0. (BOONE #101) 
Accucraft, I for one am glad they came along, Narrow Gauge is all I care about and to me they are the ONLY game in town.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Cliff reading and being on top of "it" regards the problems is good, better if Ada was and best if Bing cared to read the customers feedback then ask the question of the factory about QC and why was the product released with problems into our customer hands?


----------



## NHSTEAMER (Jan 2, 2008)

My apologies for my last post it was rather rude. My only thoughts are that there is no doupt that Accucraft has added certain aspects to this hobby that were not there before. And they have done allot to bring more people into Live Steam, but no matter what the company is from Bic pens to Boeing aircraft there is a tight QC department that will not allow things of "less then acceptable quality" (to the consumer) to be delivered to the consumer. I do not think that any of us will stop buying Accucraft. (I myself said I would not Buy again) But that may change with the new 2-10-2 coming out, I will wait until the second round and all problems it may have have been fixed. 
I do not think of our comments as Accucraft bashing as most of us making the comments are Accucraft owners making comments about loco's we have. But something needs to be done to correct the problems and "mistakes" that are being made and delivered on these engines. 
My comment about knowing for a fact that loco's can not run with .25 rod slop is based on when I was a 1.1 engineer one day I had a main rod brass come loose (main rods have wedges) by the time I got to the yard it felt like I was riding a bucking bull. Turns out the brass had only separated an 1/8 of an inch but that was enough to think the loco was ripping herself apart.


----------



## jfrank (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By JEFF RUNGE on 07/22/2008 12:26 PM
John, if they don't give you a reason to defend Accucraft, then you would only have about 3 posts in "live steam"/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/laugh.gif" border=0> admit it, you love the fight.... even more then the product./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/whistling.gif" border=0> Good to see your feeling better, we missed you /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/unsure.gif" border=0>




Hi Jeff. Looking forward to seeing Art's S2 you are working on. It's a beautiful machine I am sure.


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks John, Hope Art likes it as much as I enjoyed building it. It is a sweet runner. But lets not steal this thread.


----------



## turbohvn (Jan 7, 2008)

My turn to chime in here on this issue... 

I have delivered about 25 of the new 4-4-0s and to date, three have been brought to my attention as having the large bushing clearances. I personally inspected three engines picked up by cutomers this past weekend and none of those had any clearance issues. 

I have talked with Accucraft, both Cliff and management, extensively about the bushing clearance issue and crosshead pin design weakness. I approached this as an experienced mechanical engineer and not as an Accucraft dealer. I can tell you this, Accucraft listens to the public when issues like this are brought to their attention. I have been told that new side rods are on order from the factory and these will be sent to those customers with high clearance rods/bushings. Accucraft is also looking into producing replacement crosshead pins similar to Gordon Watsons solution drawing. 

Now, speaking as a dealer (and customer)... in all the years I have been involved with Accucraft products, and this goes back before the Ruby even existed, Accucraft has always come through on fixing a problem to the customers satisfaction. They are not perfect, and neither is any other manufacturer. But, I feel they "learn from their mistakes" so to say. I do not think excessive clearances will ever be a problem on any future products. Quality control at the factory level is continually being revised to eliminate just these kinds of preventable issues. I personally think the 4-4-0 is a fabulous model and quite a bargin for the price. The bushings and crosshead pin fixes are minor and once completed, result in a model that will become one of my favorites.


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

I received my 4-4-0 today a Col Boone 101. This is a beautiful Engine with a lot of personality. 

Thanks Royce for the fast shipping , West coast to East coast 6 days. 

I measured my Side rods and on the Right rod Rear pin I have .018 of play and on the Left rod Rear pin I have .013 of play. I came up with these measurements with a Dial Indicator mounted to a piece of ¼ plate steel on which I had my 4-4-0 mounted. I ran the locomotive for around 10 min and it had quite a bit of noise coming from the rods, more so than my K27, I contribute this to the excessive play on the rear crank pins. 

Over all like my “K” I am very pleased with this engine so far, while I have not had it on the tracks, just on blocks it looks to be a Quality piece of work. 

The bushing in the rods are a small problem, the cross pin however I would like to make NEW with support from both sides and not just one as supplied with the engine.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Well after installing the new wristpins and making new bushings from Oilite Bronze my tolerances have tightened up and with no play left the loco runs much smoother. I was getting a limpy run at slower speeds and now that is gone. The new bushings have 4 different ID's as each pin on the loco was a different diamater. So each bushing is mated to its pin. 

Next run I will try to take a video or some photos


----------



## Brian Tusin (Jul 26, 2008)

I dont see why you guys always have to complain about Accucraft. If there is a problem Accucraft will fix it. My Red SPC #9 has about 7 to 8 hours of run time on it and runs great. Ya it has slop in the rods but it runs just fine and if there is a problem Accucraft will fix it. I really think you guys are giving Accucraft to hard of a time. I think if you have all this trouble with Accucraft you should stop buying there products. 
Brian


----------



## rbednarik (Jan 2, 2008)

Brian, 

Nothing like lighting a match under the seat again. 
Last I checked, we are not under the scrutiny of KGB agents on this forum. Everyone has their own opinion and are entitled to it, and best of all, sometimes the home made fix is better than any production line company fix. Case in point, turning up new pins and bearings for the 4-4-0 and solving quite a few of the issues. That's what this hobby is about if you ask me. 

Jason's "complaints" (which really aren't complaints or bashing, but rather telling it like it is) are completely justified. If I spent my hard earned cash on locomotives that were not even close to par, I'd be quite angered too. However, I choose to fix the problem and let others know of the issues at hand/future problems with the locomotives so they can correct them in a timely fashion. 

My Opinion: 
Function over form, the engine could be only a face a mother can love, but as long as all the tolerances and valvegear is hassle free/within the limits provided, it doesn't matter. Unfortunately, as it is the human complex, we choose the latter over the former more than 60% of the time. If it looks good in the picture, we buy it, but like they say, the grass isn't always greener on the other side.


----------



## GTW6037 (Aug 1, 2008)

I saw two of them run today and they both ran perfect. They are both stock except for the Weltyk Whistle on Brian's engine. I saw Brian Tusin's SPC # 9 run and Alex Azery's NCNG run. They dont need and modifications except for a Weltyk Whistle. 
Chuck


----------



## Brian Tusin (Jul 26, 2008)

Ryan, 
You missed my point. Its great if you love to fix something that does not need fixing. If you people like fixing things so much instead of letting Accucraft fix them why do you always complain about it on here? If my crosshead pin does fail ya I will be dissapointed, but knowing Accucraft will fix and problem with the engine makes me not want to worry about everything you THINK is wrong with it. I find it hard to believe you think it is not close to par when the engine can pull 20 of Bob Weltyk's coal cars (which are full of water) on his layout, so tell me now what is wrong with the engine? Why would I pay someone to fix the engine when if there is a problem Accucraft will fix it, that just does not make sense. 
Brian


----------



## rbednarik (Jan 2, 2008)

Brian, 
No, I didn't miss the point at all, the point was clearly addressed as these are not attacks on Accucraft, rather the thread is stating what is KNOWN to be wrong. 
It's not what I think, it's what I know is wrong. No, we are not all rich and have Asters, but I'll tell you something that will be of a shock, Asters have tolerance/wear issues as well. That's right. However, these issues develop after long hours of runtime or due to lack of proper maintenance. 

One other thing, if you would read the clause in the warranty of Accucraft engines, after the warranty has reached expiration, the consumer will claim all repair bills. There is no such thing as a free ride. It's like taking a car in for a service and only rotating the tires, but not replacing the ones that had reached their tread limit. Better to fix it once and be done with it than to fix it numerous times. 

Since I choose to not take this off topic, I do think it is time to drop this subject as your points are not holding much merit.


----------



## Brian Tusin (Jul 26, 2008)

How is there a problem when a little 4-4-0 can haul 20 cars without a problem! You saw Tom Burns video of his 4-4-0 running and pulling a load. At times you make Accucraft sound like it is junk! Yes you can expect and engine to have wear after an amount of running time. Do you want Accucraft to warranty an engine for life so they have to do warranty work for normal maintenace? I really dont care what you think because I am happy with my 4-4-0 and it runs great despite you thinking there are serious design flaws! 
Brian


----------



## rbednarik (Jan 2, 2008)

Brian, 

Good to know you are happy with the engine, you should be as it is your engine. I'm entitled to my opinion on the subject, but now you are putting words into my mouth and discrediting me. I have seen the engine in question and the faults at hand and, knowing the problems I think it needed to be corrected, so don't even being to try and insult me. 

I'm done here.


----------



## Taperpin (Jan 6, 2008)

Brian, hi, 
since I probably started this whole subject by giving David Fletcher replacement Crosshead pins for his 4-4-0, I guess its my rseponsibilty.. 
I am always very, very careful to avoid condeming any manufacturer of our little locos, all of them are subject to occasional hiccups in design or assembly . I myself have been liable for a few doozies! but over all everyone who supplies this wonderful hobby puts out thier best efforts. 
The reason I made these parts and installed them on the 4-4-0s before sale here is that under Australian consumer law the contract /liabilty for fitness for purpose /warranty is with the retailer/dealer, customers here expect repairs under Warranty to be free of cost to them, all 3 Major Loco builders , Aster, Accucraft and Roundhouse are unfailingly correct and prompt in supplying replacement parts for warranty repairs , but the labour costs /shipping costs etc are the Dealers account, these can be considerable and I try to avoid problems developing by pre-emptive action. 
It seemed to me that the existing riveted pin , loose in the crosshead would lead to a failure at some time, and this was indeed apparent form one poster here! This small end bearing in steam engines is the heaviest loaded in any Locomotive, and I was only looking to assist owners with avoiding future damage to thier lovely little Loco. 
These Locos run very well out of the Box, but correcting that Pin does make them run a little better/the valve timing/piston position relationship is more accurate, and thats where the improvement comes from. so two reasons to do the work! 

Gordon Watson.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Brian 
Yes, your engine might be running well at this point in time and maybe for the duration but..... listen to Gordon, Dave Hottman, Jay as the problems do exist with the running gear. Making an awareness is not bashing but working to improve the hobby! 
The point of offering a new correct item over what Accucraft is doing by stand behind the problem; their solution is only a replacement of OEM part, so it is prone to fail again. As Dave Hottman indicated a new designed replacement will only be done on the next run of 4-4-0 production(thus acknowledgment by Accucraft of a poor design). 
On a personal note, I saw Jay's engine and the poor design of that particular one. Then there is another steam buddy (Roy) who's engine failed already and if I recall correctly Nevada Bills also. 
Finally, I appreciate this forum as an interchange of our experiences regards the actual daily runs of our engines. MLS participation by owner/operations helps all of us with a broaden our experiences/knowledge base relative to any live steam engine. Yours and others have been problem free yet others have broken down; recognized by Accucraft as a design problem thus making OEM parts replacement parts available; too bad the OEM and not upgraded parts for the recent 440 production run. 
Please keep us informed of your running experience with the 4-4-0.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Quote "I saw Brian Tusin's SPC # 9 run and Alex Azery's NCNG run. They dont need and modifications except for a Weltyk Whistle." 

Alex along with many others new wristpins are on the way to them as they have the same thought: why let it wear down and break. This is a precaution for an unnecessary breakage. My left wrist pin was pretty loose out of the box, within 2 hours of running it had already wore the peeded metal down and was about to shear off. Once I removed the rod and layed it on the bench the rod was already bent from the pin shifting. This pin carrys all the pressure from the piston to make the loco move. It this was not such an important part peening it over would be fine, BTW the only other manufacturer that makes valvegear with peening or rivits looks like Mamod or Welesco..Last time I checked at 1850.00 I dont expect to get a Mamod. 

Accucraft is aware of the issues again with the 4-4-0 and were aware of the same issues with the C19 now if this is a problem that will not happen again as someone else stated Accucraft learns from their mistakes and listens to the customers we wouldnt be in this situation to begin with. Lately the quality of these engines have not been up to the par with previous runs going back 2 years. I can say that the detail and visual quality had increases drastically. They definatally reserve kudos to that. 
As for pulling 20 cars unless these are bachmann or the like and with ball bearings the 4-4-0 will pull 2 AMS coaches with well oiled axles. 3 coaches and she slips all over. It will pull 4 AMS boxcars without slipping. 

Brian - This thread was meant to bring some things to light not to bash, It was also to show how to correct the said problems. 

As for making some changes I ran my loco for 2 hours and had considerable wear on the crank pins due to the exissive slop in the bushings. The only way to tell is to actually remove the rods and inspect the pins. If you look at my photos at the top of the post you can clearly see the defined ridge on the main pins. 

I have to thank Gordon for his assistance on the design of the pins and it was my idea that we post it on here so others could benifet from the replacement pin as Im sure he does not have the time to be mailing out many copies of the drawings to people on here that would like to improve their locos... 

I'll step bown from the box now....


----------



## Dave Hottmann (Jan 2, 2008)

There are replacement cross head/main rod assemblies in the works from Accucraft for the first run of the 4-4-0s.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Seems as if there is a miscommunication as per the two ongoing threads. If one read this thread, a conclusion is made differently than a earlier thread: 
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...rumid/11/postid/41701/view/topic/Default.aspx 
Given Dave Hottman's statement(reading into it that assemblies would be upgrades), I would have to re-state my observation on this topic and correct to indicate Accucraft is replacing the problem area not with OEM but revised parts to make it right.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

I spoke to Cliff today and he did say that they are going to get an order of crosshead assemblys but that it is a few months away. What I dont know is what is the design of the new crossheads as they have used a few different designs in the past. If they designed it with as a U shape like the Mogul there would be more strength to use a shouldered bolt right through. With the current design the only was is a double ended threaded shaft with the shoulder for the rod. 

I had orignally requested new crossheads and rods but after the new Pin and Bushings I made and installed, I feel that what I have is much tighter and better than what will be supplied as a replacement because I machined each bushing to match the crank pin. My inital test run proved that yesterday. 

I also asked about the larger gas tanks for the customers with Lilly Belle's and he said they would be available if ordered but at a purchase to the customer. A estimate was well over $100.00 per tank.


----------



## Chris Scott (Jan 2, 2008)

I was at Accucraft yesterday and while talking about various things, curious with all the goings on I asked what the fix was going to be for the 4-4-0 crosshead. Cliff picked up a Mogul on his shelf and pointed to its crosshead. He said the fix kit will include the yoke crosshead, main rod and bolt. He mentioned he's been explaining this approach to callers asking about the 4-4-0 fix. He pulled up the photo below and said they sent the photo to the factory so the message was clear on what the fix should be. I believe Cliff also said the next batch of 4-4-0s will have the new crosshead. Hope this helps. Cliff seemed to me a bit frustrated that the details of this yoke fix has not gotten out as much as he's telling those who call about it. So I volunteered to post the photo. Hope this helps clear the confusion. I think Accucraft took the fix quite seriously with the best fix approach and it matches the yoke crosshead approach on most every other loco, well maybe except the Ruby? 












Not being a 4-4-0'r connecting rods were not on my mind so I don't have any info on that.


----------



## Brian Tusin (Jul 26, 2008)

What is your problem Jason? Do you ever think I might have had to sell the Mogul for other reasons then I did not like it, which I did. I have no idea what your problem with me is. I never did anything to you. I was just stating my engine ran fine and then Ryan comes after me and tells me my engine is junk, and that really pissed me off. 
Brian


----------



## livesteam5629 (Jan 2, 2008)

Dwight, 
You may want to consider locking this thread because of personal issues being aired by some. It has gotten off track. Yes there are issues with the 4-4-0 and other engines which have been addressed and answered. It is now into personal issues which has nothing to do with the subject. 
Noel


----------



## Tim Hytrek (Jan 2, 2008)

I agree with Noel, this thread has served its pourpose addressing the 4-4-0 issues. What is going on here is not healthy./DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/crazy.gif


----------



## Dougald (Jan 2, 2008)

The subject of the thread is relevant to many members in the live steam community and the discussion is worthwhile. What is unacceptable is the personal feuding that has entered this as some members have taken the commentary as a challenge to themselves. Members who feel they have been slighted should take the matter up privately by email and not post discourteous personal comments to the forums. 

Regards ... Doug (with my moderator's hat on)


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Having re-read the entire thread again, I have not been able to confirm the statement by Brian of anyone indicating that the 440 is "junk." Several people have determined that there have been failures, tolerance problems and specific parts that need to be upgraded. Bottomline is that Accucraft recognizes the situation and is offering a fix that is necessary to ensure customer satisfaction. 
Seems to me that Chris was good enough to relay word and visual from Cliff that should have settle this once and for all. So, as per Noel lets more on and let the matter be taken care of in due course.


----------



## livesteam5629 (Jan 2, 2008)

Thank you Doug,Charles and others 
Let us get this thread back to the subject and now. I am very seriously thinking about getting a 4-4-0 from Royce, but if I do it will be shipped directly to a certain young fellow for ball beraings on the rods and wrist pin replacement before I even see it. My decision(s) are based on what has been discussed on this thread about the engine. 

Noel


----------



## K27fireman (Jul 19, 2008)

Issues about the 4-4-0 how about its stack talk is louder than my K it sound great straight out of the box the more you put behind it the louder it gets. 

It smokes, probably due the fact I have the adjustable oiler wide open but the blue smoke coming out of the stack is just too cool. 

It’s a quick steam and not a handful when you go to the track. 

If you thinking of buying one of these Accucraft has already committed to fix the SMALL issues, I say go for it, it’s a great little engine. 

CALL ROYCE! You won’t regret it


----------



## Brian Tusin (Jul 26, 2008)

I dont see why I am getting the blame for everything when I sayd my engine runs great stock and has no problems. I dont see what the big deal to Ryan is that my engine is made right when he says it is not. I did not start the personal attacks, Jason did. I am the one getting emails for starting crap when I said my engine is fine stock, which it is! I guess I am not supposed to be happy with a stock Accucraft from what Jason and the Bednariks say. 
Brian


----------



## Dwight Ennis (Jan 2, 2008)

Okay. Enough is enough.


----------

