# Accucraft E6 Owners manual



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Long awaited and I just completed it today.

You can download from my website as there is a file size limit on MLS

http://www.thetraindepartment.com/accucraft-live-steam/accucraft-american-1-32/


----------



## N7IPY (Mar 30, 2017)

Jason, Thank you for posting.... I downloaded the file and will read through it tonight. I hope to fire up my E6 tomorrow or the next day for the first time. I have serial number #027... -Will


----------



## N7IPY (Mar 30, 2017)

Jason, Thank you for posting.... I downloaded the file and will read through it tonight. I hope to fire up my E6 tomorrow or the next day for the first time. I have serial number #027... -Will


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Seem to be a few mistakes in the manual and for newbies could be confusing. Later RJD


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

aceinspp, your post would have a useful purpose if you would elaborate a little.. ;>)


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

I read the manual just to check if I had figured everything right and it seemed OK to me, allthough I had no problems firing the engine for two runs before I read it. I find that this is a very tight engine with no apparent leaks which I did find in other products from Accucraft before. So congratulations to Jason and to the Accucraft team for quality control. Just like the prototype this engine is powerful for an Atlantic.


----------



## Steve Shyvers (Jan 2, 2008)

M. Du-Bousquetaire,

When the locomotive sits on a level track, if the trailing truck is free to move vertically, then almost 100% of the locomotive's weight is on the four driving wheels. On my E6 there was only about 80g downward force on the pilot truck. I installed a stronger spring to increase the force to about 220g. I also changed the trailing truck spring so that it carries almost none of the locomotive's weight. Unfortunately I do not have a scale large enough to find out the total weight of the locomotive.

Steve Shyvers


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

JEFF RUNGE said:


> aceinspp, your post would have a useful purpose if you would elaborate a little.. ;>)


If you have read the manual you would have seen the mistakes minor as they are . Later RJD


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

I did read it, and thought it would be helpful to those new to the hobby. You could be a good guy and share the mistakes with the other owners. Jason may agree and wish to make changes to improve the manual. I'm NOT saying you are wrong, BTW. The whole point of these forums is to SHARE information, yes ? Have you ever read the pages of corrections for Aster assembly manuals?


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

When running live steam one should have very good track, which alas is not what I see on many videos. I spend months of my time every year improving my track now that I am retired because my track will be 40 years old next year (at least certain segments of it). 
Now to get back to your truck springing issue Steve, If you press stronger springs on the bogie (I am assuming that it is because you don't have good track with large radius curves and pointwork), You ipso facto reduce the tractive effort of this little beastie of ours. And as the prototype was developped when PRR was beefing up its track and bridge standards, the team at Altoona figured that with over 30 tons per axle on the drivers they could meet the power of the then current pacific (the K2 and the K3 class) and they did better it! Which is one of the outstanding caracteristic of this loco. Now in my book reducing the tractive effort of this little giant is a sad thing to do if you see it in that light. These engines were designed to hustle 10 pullmans at better than 75 on level track (IE the East Coast corridor)
As a matter of fact on model locos the great Henry Greenly of Basset Lowke fame suggested to weigh the leading truck with lead rather than increase the spring tension, to improve tracking on the rather rough track then available (tinplate days).


----------



## Steve Shyvers (Jan 2, 2008)

M. Du-Bousquetaire,

I do understand that increasing the pilot truck springing reduces the weight on the drivers. However I thought that the approximately 140g increase was a small percentage of the total locomotive weight. I did consider adding lead weight to the pilot truck instead, but changing the spring was an easier experiment. By the way, the pilot truck alone weighs 165g. Therefore I increased the total weight on the pilot truck from 245g to 385g, or 45%.

You are correct that I increased the springing in order to deal with less-than-perfect track. My E6 experienced two pilot truck derailments when going fast through the switch frog on a friend's outdoor track. Most of my running opportunities are on portable tracks on which the trackwork is sometimes a bit rough, so I decided to increase the weight on the pilot truck.

Steve Shyvers


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

JEFF RUNGE said:


> I did read it, and thought it would be helpful to those new to the hobby. You could be a good guy and share the mistakes with the other owners. Jason may agree and wish to make changes to improve the manual. I'm NOT saying you are wrong, BTW. The whole point of these forums is to SHARE information, yes ? Have you ever read the pages of corrections for Aster assembly manuals?


I'm not into steamers so I don't know if anything factual is incorrect in the manual, but throughout, the manual is full of typos, spelling errors and the odd strange sentence structure.
Starts right at the beginning with "form" instead of "from", filling spelled with a single "l" and phillips which should really be Phillips screwdriver.

If somebody has the original, before it was converted to a pdf, it would only take a few minutes to correct all that.

And just using spell check doesn't cut it - that won't pick up "full" when it should be "fill" and errors like that.

Knut


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

Well I guess this falls under the heading of " No good deed goes unpunished", hehehe


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Maybe it is a good idea to have something proofread before releasing?

Even better, send it out to a few people who have the loco and get their input?

Greg


----------



## mocrownsteam (Jan 7, 2008)

I think it would be nice if Accucraft, and not one of their dealers, would write the manual. If you are spending thousands of dollars for their product you should get a manual that the manufacturer wrote.

The Train Department was trying to be helpful and as the saying goes "no good deed goes unpunished". I suspect that The Train Department will not be writing any more manuals.

Mike McCormack

mocrownsteam
Hudson, Massachusetts 01749


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

Mike and others, I volunteered to write it because the manuals that do come with the locos are a blanket manual that they cut and paste in new photos. If you want a comparison go read the Royal Hudson, GS4 or any of the other older 1/32 ones including the J611 that is a copy of the Royal Hudson with new images. They don't touch much on each subject but are a generic read a locomotive not much specific to that one. I tried to do a little more detail and less of blanket cut and paste. Actually less than one page is operation. Others have read it including Accucraft that received the copy first and with no comment back I posted it up to the site. Actually the comments I did get back by others were very rewarding unlike some on here that just typically put people down for their efforts. But that's what you get on a forum. 

If you think you can do such a good job, go volunteer to write one, Its a free job. Just as a FYI that was a good part of 7 hours to get that done. I put my time aside to better the hobby. But as many tell me and I already know, you cant please everyone.


----------



## Mike Toney (Feb 25, 2009)

I thought the manual you did for Fairmead was well done Jay. I think the feelings are, for what Accucraft charges, they and not you should be making the effort to have nicely written directions specific to each engine. And written by someone that speaks fluent english. My guess is that Accucraft feels we all should know how to basicly operate these and they do not need to make an effort beyond the basic generic manual with different pictures each time. So, for those that think they need to do better. Post your displeasure directly to them. Direct feed back is the only way they are going to see that you all feel they need to do better. Maybe look at the Roundhouse directions, they are much better written, but then thier models are all nearly identical as far as control set up goes. Thanks for your effort Jay, something is better than nothing! Mike


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

mocrownsteam said:


> I think it would be nice if Accucraft, and not one of their dealers, would write the manual. If you are spending thousands of dollars for their product you should get a manual that the manufacturer wrote.


I agree, it's pretty unbelievable that Accucraft does not provide a proper manual for a relatively complex product that costs thousands of dollars.
It's not that one can just put that loco on the track and crank up a throttle to get it to move



> The Train Department was trying to be helpful and as the saying goes "no good deed goes unpunished". I suspect that The Train Department will not be writing any more manuals.


Writing a good manual for a complex product is a tough job - I can relate to that since I ran a PM department for a major High Tech company and having manuals written for our products was one of the departments responsibilty. We hired professionals to write the manuals and they still had to be revised numerous times to make sure everything was crystal clear and there was no room for misinterpretation.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

As I posted earlier, I'm not into Live Steam so I can only correct obvious typos and spelling errors in the manual.
Turns out some of the software I have on the Mac actually allows me to correct the pdf which I have done.

I would like to add these new Accucraft locos to the Large Scale database at www.gbdb.info and that would also include the manual for those.
I'll try to do that tonight either using the Accucraft images of the E6 or a picture if someone wishes to provide one.
My update of Jason's manual will be included as a download on the database entry of the E6 and I will be happy to make any corrections required.

Knut

PS: I didn't think I could easily modify a pdf, but since I can (up to a point I guess), I will be happy to do that.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

There are three areas of the manual where I could use some input:

At the top of page 6, item 3 it reads:
To fill the boiler you will use the hand pump to fill the boiler to *¾ full glass.

*Does that make sense or is there a better way to say this?*
-----
*About 3/4 down on page 6 it reads:For Alcohol – Open the fuel valve and allow *so sit* and flow into the *burner pot* for 1-2 mins to ensure good wicking of the fuel in the burner. Once ready to light, turn on the fan and using a stick lighter or a lit wick insert to the firebox to ignite. All pots should be lit and visible from the door. Close the door.I have no clue what "*so sit*" should have read...And burner pot - is "*pot*" the right terminology or should it be "*pod*"?*
-----
*On the next page, page 7 - just above "End of eun" it reads:Never allow the water level to get below *the top of top of *the lower nut on the glass as that exposes the flue from water inside.I assume this should read: ....*the top of the lower nut
*But then again it could also be *the top of the top*...so I thought I better checkAll input is appreciated.
Will try to post the updated manual, except for the three items above, tonight and will provide a link when done.

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

For anyone interested, the updated manual, except for the three items in my previous post, can be downloaded here:
http://www.gbdb.info/data/manual/Accucraft/AL97-431.pdf

I didn't make any changes to the information or structure of the document, just corrected typos or added punctuation to make things a bit clearer.

I might have still missed something even though I went through the manual twice - funny how the brain sometimes automatically corrects things.

Reading through the manual and checking Accucraft's website, I was actually surprised at how little information is provided by the manufacturer on these Live-Steam locos compared to G-Scale electric ones.
I couldn't find any information on some of the basics, like the length of the loco or the weight or if the loco was "R/C ready", to name just a few.
I was also surprised at the recommendation tp pick up the loco only by the front and rear buffers - I wouldn't dream of doing that with a heavy LGB steamer.
There is also a discrepancy in the minimum radius this loco can handle, the Accucraft page says 10 feet, the Specification page in the manual states 72 inches which isn't even close to 10 feet.
I left the 72 inches in the manual for the time being hoping to get some feedback from somebody who actually owns one and can speak from experience.

Knut


----------



## Mike Toney (Feb 25, 2009)

For min radius, Ernie Noa's E6 barely managed the outside loop on Jim Sanders layout, someone here might remember what its diameter is. I have heard the the individual alcohol wick holders called "pots" before. Yes you let it sit for a min or so to allow the alcohol to flow thru the line to the wicks, and for them to "wick" up the alcohol before you take your lighter to them. Picking up a heavy live steamer from the front and rear pilots(buffer beams) is normal. If I picked up my Pearse Countess by anything in the middle, I would dent in the cab or side tank plate work as its just thin sheet brass. Metal engine vs plastic electric engine so different procedures for picking them up. Also the ends of the engine will be a touch cooler(but not much) than trying to grab it around the middle with oven mits when the engine is hot at the end of a run(not all layouts have a cooling down track!) I think these companies assume that the buyer of this level of an engine already knows the major processes to steam up a model such as this And we all know what happens when you assume! Beautiful model none the less. We did notice when running Ernie's engine, the pilot needed more downward travel to allow for uneven track work. The stock down pressure was fine, but it lacked enough travel for a couple "humped up" table joints and would lift off the the rail at those points. Mike


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

I ran mine on 10ft diameter and that is about the limit as the rear pony truck can not turn any further due to the water line connection for axle pump and return low pressure line. Front pony truck will also rub on tubing going to the axle pump. Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

krs said:


> For anyone interested, the updated manual, except for the three items in my previous post, can be downloaded here:
> http://www.gbdb.info/data/manual/Accucraft/AL97-431.pdf
> 
> I didn't make any changes to the information or structure of the document, just corrected typos or added punctuation to make things a bit clearer.
> ...


On the Page talking about preparation to running loco item 3 talks about filling loco with water however you say can maintain the water level using hand pump during operation in conjunction with the axle pump. Reinstall the boiler filler plug, I believe this is incorrect as the loco does not have a filler plug. 

Under heading of lighting up: Check the flame make sure it is a strong blue flame , if yellow or green adjust air collar on burner flange in cab.this does not apply in cab as the fuel line is under the loco floor to feed the burner. These where the two Items I notice in first manual that was listed here in earlier post. Later RJD


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

aceinspp said:


> I ran mine on 10ft diameter and that is about the limit as the rear pony truck can not turn any further due to the water line connection for axle pump and return low pressure line. Front pony truck will also rub on tubing going to the axle pump. Later RJD


Do you mean 10ft *diameter*?
Accucraft specifies 10ft minimum *radius* which would be 20ft diameter
The manual Jason wrote specifies 72 inches minimum *radius *which would be 12 feet diameter.

I have seen that confusion between radius and diameter before - for some reason European G scale manufacturers use radius when specifying the tightest cirve equipment can negotiate and US manufavtures use diameter.

Seems to me 10 ft diameter (or 5 ft radius) minimum seems more reasonable - there probably aren't too many people who have layouts where the minimum diameter is 20 feet.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Mike Toney said:


> For min radius, Ernie Noa's E6 barely managed the outside loop on Jim Sanders layout, someone here might remember what its diameter is. I have heard the the individual alcohol wick holders called "pots" before. Yes you let it sit for a min or so to allow the alcohol to flow thru the line to the wicks, and for them to "wick" up the alcohol before you take your lighter to them. Picking up a heavy live steamer from the front and rear pilots(buffer beams) is normal. If I picked up my Pearse Countess by anything in the middle, I would dent in the cab or side tank plate work as its just thin sheet brass. Metal engine vs plastic electric engine so different procedures for picking them up. Also the ends of the engine will be a touch cooler(but not much) than trying to grab it around the middle with oven mits when the engine is hot at the end of a run(not all layouts have a cooling down track!) I think these companies assume that the buyer of this level of an engine already knows the major processes to steam up a model such as this And we all know what happens when you assume! Beautiful model none the less. We did notice when running Ernie's engine, the pilot needed more downward travel to allow for uneven track work. The stock down pressure was fine, but it lacked enough travel for a couple "humped up" table joints and would lift off the the rail at those points. Mike


Thanks Mike,

So for this part....About 3/4 down on page 6 it reads:
For Alcohol – Open the fuel valve and allow *so sit* and flow into the *burner pot* for 1-2 mins to ensure good wicking of the fuel in the burner. Once ready to light, turn on the fan and using a stick lighter or a lit wick insert to the firebox to ignite. All pots should be lit and visible from the door. Close the door.I have no clue what "*so sit*" should have read...*

So..."so sit" *should simply be* "to sit" *- that's easy enough and I leave* pot *the way it is.


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

aceinspp said:


> On the Page talking about preparation to running loco item 3 talks about filling loco with water however you say can maintain the water level using hand pump during operation in conjunction with the axle pump. Reinstall the boiler filler plug, I believe this is incorrect as the loco does not have a filler plug.




OK, I will just delete the last sentence in item 3 to fix that part of the manual.




> Under heading of lighting up: Check the flame make sure it is a strong blue flame , if yellow or green adjust air collar on burner flange in cab.this does not apply in cab as the fuel line is under the loco floor to feed the burner. These where the two Items I notice in first manual that was listed here in earlier post. Later RJD


So is there an air collar under the loco floor to adjust the flame?
Or do I jus dlete "*in cab*" and leave the rest of the sentence as is?


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

I have updated a few corrections on the manual and updated the download file. I'm sure that many will be greatly relieved that they can now read the manual. As many already know these are not beginner locomotives and if you are, you should get a seasoned live steam operator to run through in person a advanced locomotive like the E6 is or at lease do a phone session on the operation in detail.

Its pretty simple the changes here and the ones that did contact me as I wrote it said they understood it without an issue and any 1/32 hobbyist would be able to run with no manual as many do already when you purchase 2nd hand or a scratchbuilt locomotive. At any rate the few grammar errors are corrected with the assistance of a couple guys that contacted me directly.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Kovacjr said:


> I have updated a few corrections on the manual and updated the download file. I'm sure that many will be greatly relieved that they can now read the manual. As many already know these are not beginner locomotives and if you are, you should get a seasoned live steam operator to run through in person a advanced locomotive like the E6 is or at lease do a phone session on the operation in detail.
> 
> Its pretty simple the changes here and the ones that did contact me as I wrote it said they understood it without an issue and any 1/32 hobbyist would be able to run with no manual as many do already when you purchase 2nd hand or a scratchbuilt locomotive. At any rate the few grammar errors are corrected with the assistance of a couple guys that contacted me directly.


See the above for changes one should really read what you are coping from a previous manual. For those that are novas they sure going to be scratching head. Later RJD


----------



## dougiel (Jun 3, 2008)

krs said:


> Seems to me 10 ft diameter (or 5 ft radius) minimum seems more reasonable - there probably aren't too many people who have layouts where the minimum diameter is 20 feet.


Here in the UK 10ft radius is suggested as the MINIMUM radius for G1. Anything less than that, especially 5ft does tend to look a bit "toy like". We have a test track that is 6ft 8in radius and any of the larger loco's struggle on those curves.

DougieL


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

krs said:


> OK, I will just delete the last sentence in item 3 to fix that part of the manual.
> 
> [/COLOR][/COLOR]
> 
> ...



You can delete entire part about adjustment. Later RJD


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

krs said:


> For anyone interested, the updated manual, except for the three items in my previous post, can be downloaded here:
> http://www.gbdb.info/data/manual/Accucraft/AL97-431.pdf
> ....
> Reading through the manual and checking Accucraft's website, I was actually surprised at how little information is provided by the manufacturer on these Live-Steam locos compared to G-Scale electric ones.
> ...


Knut. Live steamers are made entirely different to plastic models. They are more like the real thing, the chassis and end beams are the strongest points. Side tanks and cabs are often just thin brass sheet that can flex and even pull loose because the way the models are constructed and are so heavy where a plastic model is often safer to pick up by the body because of its integral molding and lighter weight.

Some large live steamers are very difficult to pick up. Each having it's own particular way to go about it. Cow catchers and other details often make it hard to pick up by the end beams too so a few fingers front side and a another few fingers diagonally at the other end in another free spot is often the only safe way to do it.

I think plastic models are more specific in the design phase and have a much larger production run so all the specs are well known ahead of time and the marketing is entirely different. Limited run live steamers are often still a little unknown in the late stages. A production prototype model is evaluated and gets changes just before manufacture so not all the exact details are always known until in the final stages. Often the marketing is over by then especially if only by pre order so published specifications don't always make it. 

Andrew


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

I appreciate your comments. Andrew.

I never reallythought about the differences other than the obvious, ie the powering of the loco.
I wonder if the live-steamers that LGB and Aristocraft offered were just modified typical electrically powered locos or if tere was more to it - same the other way around, electrically powered Accucraft locos that were originally designed as live steamers.
As to specs, I didn't think listing length and weight would be too much to ask - and especially for a quite expensive loco some information about R/C readiness would I think also be approciated.
If I spend that much for a loco a would definitely also spend the extra money for remote control.

knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

dougiel said:


> Here in the UK 10ft radius is suggested as the MINIMUM radius for G1. Anything less than that, especially 5ft does tend to look a bit "toy like". We have a test track that is 6ft 8in radius and any of the larger loco's struggle on those curves.
> 
> DougieL


The question is really what is the smallest radius this particular loco can negotiate. 
No question that a tighter radius will look 'toy like' but the bigger the minimum radius required the lower the sales numbers.
I was jut questioning the very large difference in the spec - 10ft radius specification by Accucraft, 6 ft radius spec in the Accucraft manual and 5 ft radius which is what experienced seems to show.
Larger curves, if possible, are always better, but what is the minimum for this locomotive - obviously not 10 ft radius.

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

aceinspp said:


> You can delete entire part about adjustment. Later RJD


Thanks, but I will just stick with the updated version Jason published alhough I don't understand why all the typos were not corrected especially after they were detailed in this thread.

But I don't think its a good idea to have two slightly different versions of a manual floating around.

Knut


----------



## Garratt (Sep 15, 2012)

krs said:


> ....
> I wonder if the live-steamers that LGB and Aristocraft offered were just modified typical electrically powered locos or if tere was more to it - same the other way around, electrically powered Accucraft locos that were originally designed as live steamers.
> As to specs, I didn't think listing length and weight would be too much to ask - and especially for a quite expensive loco some information about R/C readiness would I think also be approciated.
> If I spend that much for a loco a would definitely also spend the extra money for remote control.
> ...


Knut, I think the live steam Aristocraft Mike has a plastic body so I guess some of the parts from the electric version were used.. 
I have the Baldwin NA in both live steam and electric. Both use the same parts except the obvious like electric motor instead of internal boiler and detailed backhead instead of steam controls etc. 

Yes you would think the specs would be known but you know how the Chinese are, a 2mm sheet of steel is actually 10% less than 2mm etc. You don't know until it is in your own hands.  It all really goes back to who commissioned the locomotive and the communication through to the factory and back. In my opinion, the K1 was poorly marketed, not even a photograph of the model design prototype or published specifications like running time etc. The accountants demanding deposit money from interested customers 18 months before that. That really got my goat so I passed on it. It's the cost of a good second hand car so not something you just take a punt on like a loco a few hundred dollars. I'm sure they could do better but it's like telling a dog how to play poker sometimes.  There is some faith involved in the producers. 

Andrew


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

krs said:


> Thanks, but I will just stick with the updated version Jason published alhough I don't understand why all the typos were not corrected especially after they were detailed in this thread.
> 
> But I don't think its a good idea to have two slightly different versions of a manual floating around.
> 
> Knut


Just be confusing telling folks you can adjust flame which one can not. Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Shame not to make a correct instruction booklet. Later RJD


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

krs said:


> OK, I will just delete the last sentence in item 3 to fix that part of the manual.
> 
> [/COLOR][/COLOR]
> 
> ...



Well I ether missing something but here is a pic and I sure do not see a collar to adjust. Later RJD


----------



## pickleford75 (May 3, 2012)

I could be wrong but in that picture it looks like there's a air collar just in front of the air intake holes on the burner tube


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

pickleford75 said:


> I could be wrong but in that picture it looks like there's a air collar just in front of the air intake holes on the burner tube


Click on the pic and then enlarge and you will see no collar. I also had another LS personally view it and he also says no collar. Later RJD


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

Getting into live steam is much easier if you belong to a group or club. We in France back in the late seventies had to discover everything ourselves and that was quite an experience, but being part of G1MRA helped a lot. Then we met some english friends and it made a big difference because they had acces to all that in England.

About radius of curves: The atlantic having a relatively short rigid wheelbase (that of a large drivered 0-4-0 in fact) can surely negociate sharper curves than 10'. That doesn't mean that it looks good on a shorter radius. Nor does it garanty that it will stay on the track if it isn't hauling an appropriate weight of train. Steam engines running light can tend to resemble missiles if not controled or charged with an appropriate train!


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

du-bousquetaire said:


> Getting into live steam is much easier if you belong to a group or club. We in France back in the late seventies had to discover everything ourselves and that was quite an experience, but being part of G1MRA helped a lot. Then we met some english friends and it made a big difference because they had acces to all that in England.
> 
> About radius of curves: The atlantic having a relatively short rigid wheelbase (that of a large drivered 0-4-0 in fact) can surely negociate sharper curves than 10'. That doesn't mean that it looks good on a shorter radius. Nor does it garanty that it will stay on the track if it isn't hauling an appropriate weight of train. Steam engines running light can tend to resemble missiles if not controled or charged with an appropriate train!


If you do not have this loco than you do not know what the restrictions the loco has for negotiating the specified radius/diameter curve. And most of us here are into LS and pretty well know the ins and outs of operating LS and appreciate our thoughts . RJD


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

I have the loco, but my minimum radius is 11' so I haven't tested it yet on anything tighter. What I know for sure though is that for instance I once ran my SNCF 2-3-2 U 1 on a friends pike which sported 2,5 meters radius that's about 8'6" radius, and it is a much bigger loco. Just from experience, I would say theoretically it should go around small curves. It also depends on what pipe connections you have between loco and tender. If Jason says it goes around 72" radius it probably does. An atlantic will go in a lot of places a decapod or a duplex won't. In any case enjoy it, its a beautiful brute of a loco.


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

I have customers with the E6 running indoors on a 6' radius portable track. it runs on it fine.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Which is basically 12 ft and I have had mine on 10ft and just makes that do to the obstruction to front and read pony trucks. Later RJD


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

From what I have studied, and by reading virtually EVERY single post on 4 forums, the side play in the drivers has a lot to do with what curves a loco will negotiate. Even a small difference makes a lot of difference in the minimum radius.

So, it seems that minimum radius is affected by a lot of factors, not just the Whyte designation.

Greg


----------



## David Leech (Dec 9, 2008)

Greg Elmassian said:


> From what I have studied, and by reading virtually EVERY single post on 4 forums, the side play in the drivers has a lot to do with what curves a loco will negotiate. Even a small difference makes a lot of difference in the minimum radius.
> 
> So, it seems that minimum radius is affected by a lot of factors, not just the Whyte designation.
> 
> Greg


Greg,
I'm not too sure about that when you only have 4 driving wheels, especially with live steam.
I would think that a lot of side play will make for a very unstable loco, probably wobbling down the track.
Cheers,
David Leech, Delta, Canada


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

There is very minimal side to side play on the drivers. Clearances are always tight on the rods to the actual working cylinders. Live steam is always different than a electric loco. Also at Diamondhead I ran the E6 on the small track, both inner and outer loops. I think it is 5' and 6' radius. While it ran on the 5' it looked like garbage with way too much overhang and slowed down very much.


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

I agree with David you dont need any side play on an 0-4-0. You do need side play on a 2-10-2 or a Duplex for instance, though. As a mater of fact the state of the art of the loco industry at WW2 era was getting to the conclusion that it was better to have a rigid frame loco with side play devices than articulateds like the challenger, at least if high speeds were desired, because of better stability at speed. Which is why the Pennsy went for duplexes. As far as the atlantic goes it does not need much side play on the drivers, but it does need to have some latteral play for the front truck and the rear Kiessel bissel truck. Don't forget that a good many roads turned their backs on articulateds (AT&SF and PRR to name a few).


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Sorry guys if I gave you the impression that I think there is a lot of side play in the drivers of live steam... note that I never said that, and I'm telling you directly that I know that there is very little.. it must be so or the system would not work... but if there were not differences between locos then you could determine minimum radius by driver diameter and spacing alone... that's all I was saying...

Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Kovacjr said:


> Also at Diamondhead I ran the E6 on the small track, both inner and outer loops. I think it is 5' and 6' radius. While it ran on the 5' it looked like garbage with way too much overhang and slowed down very much.


Still begs the question why the manufacturer would specify 10 feet as the minimum radius for this loco.
http://www.accucraft.com/modelc/AL97-431.htm

This must cut into their sales


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

krs said:


> Still begs the question why the manufacturer would specify 10 feet as the minimum radius for this loco.
> http://www.accucraft.com/modelc/AL97-431.htm
> 
> This must cut into their sales


I'm not aware of that spec but I can tell you 10ft diameter is the least amount this this loco can negotiate do obstruction from axle pump lines interfering movement of the front truck and the rear trailing truck also hits the loco frame. Later RJD


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

10' radius or 3 meters is the accepted or recomended standard minimum radius for gauge one. It also stems from the fact that most real locomotives even big ones were designed so as to be able to negociate these kinds of radiusses found in engine terminals wyes and yards at very restricted speeds without derailing.

No sweat Greg, just shooting the breeze about subjects that I like.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

du-bousquetaire said:


> 10' radius or 3 meters is the accepted or recomended standard minimum radius for gauge one. It also stems from the fact that most real locomotives even big ones were designed so as to be able to negociate these kinds of radiusses found in engine terminals wyes and yards at very restricted speeds without derailing.
> 
> No sweat Greg, just shooting the breeze about subjects that I like.


This maybe recommended radius For gauge 1 by whom I do not know but not stated as such by Accucraft for the new E-6. Just saying Later RJD


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

aceinspp said:


> This maybe recommended radius For gauge 1 by whom I do not know but not stated as such by Accucraft for the new E-6. Just saying Later RJD


Now you lost me.
Accucraft did state the 10' radius as the minimum even though that's nowhere near the minimum the loco can actually navigate.
See the link I posted previously
Where did you see Accucraft specify something different

As to the "Gauge 1" ten foot (3 meter) minimum, I get that from gauge 1 model railroaders in the UK and Germany as well but I couldn't find anything like that specified by MOROP (NEM) or NMRA.
The G1MRA does specify a 3 meter radius but that is not an official organization.

Knut


----------



## David Leech (Dec 9, 2008)

krs said:


> The G1MRA does specify a 3 meter radius but that is not an official organization.
> 
> Knut


Knut,
I think that The Gauge One Model Railway Association who are celebrating their 70th year, this year, would have something to say about that statement.
I certainly do!
They are as official as they come.
Regards,
David Leech, Delta, Canada


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

The G1MRA may not be "official" in some definition, but their standards are good, better than the NMRA in my opinion (for G scale).

Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

David Leech said:


> Knut,
> I think that The Gauge One Model Railway Association who are celebrating their 70th year, this year, would have something to say about that statement.
> I certainly do!
> They are as official as they come.
> ...


Divid,

I don't see how you could sau that.

For one that association is very much UK-centric.
I didn't know they have been around for 70 years, but that makes it even worse - if you look on their website, there are a total of four standards listed - yes *four.
*Minimum suggested radius isn't even one that I found - maybe it's there somewhere.Nothing againsthat association, but their standards are used by themselves - period.I see the G1MRA no different than the IG Spur II group in Germany - they already list over 20 of their standards and I'm sure they have not been around for 70 years. And they relate their standards to the MOROP standards.
https://www.spur-ii.de/standards.html

Manufacturers of the smaller scales do adhere to MOROP standards, we in Large Scale are a bit of a stepchild.

Knut


----------



## du-bousquetaire (Feb 14, 2011)

Right you are David the G1MRA has been recomending that radius for years although for smaller locos (up to 4-6-0 and consolidations) you can use 2 m 50 which is 8'63 radius if pressed for space. This is of course for standard gauge.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

krs said:


> Now you lost me.
> Accucraft did state the 10' radius as the minimum even though that's nowhere near the minimum the loco can actually navigate.
> See the link I posted previously
> Where did you see Accucraft specify something different
> ...


As yet unable to find where AC listed the recommend radius. later RJD


----------



## Kovacjr (Jan 2, 2008)

I think its time for this thread to be locked as it is serving no further use. It was a post to have a copy of the manual for download before the buyers for their loco but became just a storm of complaints and chatter about how G1MRA is not a official group.

BTW did no one figure out yet that Accucraft puts 10' radius on EVERY Gauge 1, 1/32 loco spec on the website? Its a blanket size as they do run best on wider curves and the speed many run them at it needs the 10' radius. But I know it will run down to that I specified in the manual that Accucraft approved.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

http://www.accucraft.com/modelc/AL97-431.htm

Under specifications. I did not find this page the first time, although it is the "main" page for the E6.

Greg

p.s. I see Jason figured out the 10' radius, I noticed the "blanket spec" too. I think this must be the real answer. Keeps Accucraft "safe"


----------

