# Breaking in New engines.



## BodsRailRoad (Jul 26, 2008)

I would like to know what you guys do to break in your new engines, if anything.
If you do have a preferred method I'd like know your reasons for doing it that way.

Ron


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I run them for a couple hours without cars. I start out at a slow speed and then gradually increase the speed. I will also run it in reverse at each speed.

Chuck


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I would like to know what you guys do to break in your new engines, 
Make sure they are well lubricated first.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Like Pete said: 

1. check all screws for tightness if it is a steamer 
2. check for lubrication 
3. run really slowly on rollers and see if it runs smoothly, if there is binding, then you might want to investigate first 
4. light load in both directions on the rails for me, and then check temperature of the motor, and check drive train for any problems. 
5. now run for several hours with a reasonable load and stop and check temperature. 

Excessive noise, significant difference in running in one direction, excessive heat, stop and investigate. 

Greg


----------



## Tom Parkins (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg in your break in procedures you mention: _ run really slowly on rollers and see if it runs smoothly. _

Question...Is there really any difference between doing that and running it real slowly back and forth on straight level track? I understand that rollers may simplify that, but just thinking that if you run a light engine, it should be the same on rollers or track. 

Personally I've never really done anything to break in a new engine except look it over then run it slowly a little back and forth and then slowly pick up speed. But after a few minutes, I'll put it on the train assuming nothing is wrong. 


Tom


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Absolutely there is a difference, if you are as picky as me... 

1. Much easier to see a "hitch in the getalong" when the loco is not moving. 
2. With less load on the loco, this method will show up a tight spot even sooner in many cases. 

You should have a set of rollers for working on locos, testing, etc. I like the bachmann ones because they are cost effective, and come in non-rolling ones for tenders and pilot trucks which cost half as much. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Pterosaur (May 6, 2008)

"Breaking in" would seem to suggest an action that is required for proper operation, I don't believe any such action is required. Never have I seen any operator’s manual suggest such a procedure. I put 'em on the track and run them, slow-fast-forward-backward. If something is wrong they go back (happened once). I can think of no reason why one would have to "break in" a new engine for improved life or running. 

This is not to be confused with maintenance or repair. Bachmann 1:20.3 stuff has specific lubrication schedules included with their engines and I've yet to find a single piece of AMS rolling stock that did not benefit immensely from an application of EZ-lube to the journal boxes. If I buy an old engine, used or NOS, I'll open up the case just to verify lube. 

Test stands certainly help with maintenance as you can bring your engine up close and personal. A lot easier than trying to balance a steam engine on it's back and apply power to the pick-ups!


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 20 Aug 2011 01:30 PM 
Like Pete said: 

1. check all screws for tightness if it is a steamer 
2. check for lubrication 
3. run really slowly on rollers and see if it runs smoothly, if there is binding, then you might want to investigate first 
4. light load in both directions on the rails for me, and then check temperature of the motor, and check drive train for any problems. 
5. now run for several hours with a reasonable load and stop and check temperature. 

Excessive noise, significant difference in running in one direction, excessive heat, stop and investigate. 

Greg 
Greg,

You must have had a bad experience or two......

When I get a new engine, I read the manual and follow the instructions there.
If it says nothing about lubrication or checking something, the loco goes on the track and I crank up the throttle.

When I spend $800 to $1000 on an item I expectb it to perform flawlessly out of the box unless the manufacturer tells me I have to perform certain functions first.
My days of being the manufacturer's final QA tester are over.

Knut


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Posted By Pterosaur on 22 Aug 2011 06:25 AM 
"Breaking in" would seem to suggest an action that is required for proper operation, I don't believe any such action is required. Never have I seen any operator’s manual suggest such a procedure.
There is the odd one that does.
Piko comes to mind, at least for their G-scale production in the first few years. You were supposed to run the loco for an hour or so in each direction to improve the wheel power pick up.

And some of the very expensive (out of my price range) locos require lubrication, but all of that is spelled out in the manual.

In general I'm of the same opinion as you - these things should run properly right out of the box.

Now - as a side note - if one buys new old stock (NOS as they call it) - say an engine that has been sitting on a dealer shelf or in someones closet for 10 or 20 years, then I would check the lubrication of the gearboxes to make sure it hasn't dried up and in general proceed very carefully along the lines that Greg outlined above.

Knut


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Manufacturers are not perfect. I found several new LGB engines that had gear noise from no lube in the gear box when they came from LGB0A in the past. 

On used items I always check the lube as some overl ube the gearbox and this actually creates problems by getting in the motors and burning them out!!! 

So protect your $1000 investment with a few moments of gear box inspection.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Exactly, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. 

Sure you can say: "When I spend $800 to $1000 on an item I expectb it to perform flawlessly out of the box unless the manufacturer tells me I have to perform certain functions first. 
My days of being the manufacturer's final QA tester are over." 

So do you "win" if you prove that the manufacturer forgot to tighten a bolt and your $1,000 loco is trashed? 

I'll check my locos over a bit, and save myself aggravation and grief. Just shipping a loco back to be repaired is a common way to get more damage. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## krs (Feb 29, 2008)

Greg, 

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the checks that you are making, obviously your choice. 

But do you do anything similar to other products you purchase? 
I just bought a new car - I didn't go and check if the various bolts were tightened to specifications, OK, so a dealer inspection is supposed to handle that. 
But I also just got a new lawnmower, no dealer inspection there - I take it out of the box, read the manual, assemple the handle, add oil and gas and pull the starter. 
Mind you, the lawnmower was only $600.- but I wouldn't dream of checking the bolts or anything else unless there is something obviously defective. 

I remember the early days of Aristocraft where people were rebuilding parts of the locos to get them to run properly and everybody thought that was just fine. 
I think on an item that expensive and with a fair amount of hand assembly, the manufacturer has an obligation to do a final test run of each loco before they ship it - or they can give that responsibility to their dealers, but don't expect me as the end customer to do their final inspection for them. 

Anyway - just my opinion on this matter


----------



## Cougar Rock Rail (Jan 2, 2008)

As soon as I get a new (or new to me) locomotive, the first thing I do is flip it upside down, pull the motor plates off and have a look inside to check for grease, proper installation of electrical contacts/brushes and make sure nothing else looks 'wrong'. I have had two brand new locomotives with issues--one where a drive gear was missing completely from the drive axle, and one where the axle was put in 180deg out so the gear didn't make contact with the upper idler gear. The latter I discovered when I was running it on rollers and one of the axles wasn't turning. You wouldn't catch that if it was on the track because that axle would just freewheel. As Knut says, it shouldn't be necessary, and I expect a new locomotive to perform flawlessly too, but the reality is that people at the factory don't always perform flawlessly. 
Another reason I like to check the gearboxes is that you don't know if it's been stored or shipped on it's side for an extended period, or been somewhere hot so the grease has all flowed to one side etc. 

Keith


----------



## mbendebba (Jan 22, 2011)

Posted By krs on 22 Aug 2011 06:59 AM 


When I get a new engine, I read the manual and follow the instructions there.
If it says nothing about lubrication or checking something, the loco goes on the track and I crank up the throttle.

When I spend $800 to $1000 on an item I expectb it to perform flawlessly out of the box unless the manufacturer tells me I have to perform certain functions first.
My days of being the manufacturer's final QA tester are over.

Knut 



Absolutely, and unequivocally agree. I too expect them to perform flawlessly right out of the box. I also beleive that dealers should be the manufacturer's final QA tester, not just the middle-man, as many are these days.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, I do, I drive a new car slowly and close to home at first, I don't buy one and then take a cross country trip.


Do I look over the general fit of a new lawnmower? No because if there is the smallest thing wrong, I can take it back to Home Depot.

I don't have to pay 25% of the cost of the lawnmower to send it back east to the manufacturer.

It's not that I settle for quality lower than I deserve, it's that I have a practical side, I know that Aristo is one of the lower priced manufacturers, and not everything is perfect... If I wanted something perfect, I'd spend double and get more. 

Compared to what people have to pay for LGB, Aristo and USAT and AML are bargains, but you don't get the quality control of LGB (or it used to be)... So, I accept it, and realize quality control is one area that is not up to LGB standards, and I protect my investment, rather than stamp my foot and complain over everything. Stupid stuff I will bring up, but the alternative to ship it back for $40 and wait a number of weeks and maybe get it back with more damage... this is smart on my part?


Nope, a little extra time correcting things is less time, less money, less anxiety... so I'm happy with my choice.

Greg 



Posted By krs on 23 Aug 2011 04:42 PM 
Greg, 

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the checks that you are making, obviously your choice. 

But do you do anything similar to other products you purchase? 
I just bought a new car - I didn't go and check if the various bolts were tightened to specifications, OK, so a dealer inspection is supposed to handle that. 
But I also just got a new lawnmower, no dealer inspection there - I take it out of the box, read the manual, assemple the handle, add oil and gas and pull the starter. 
Mind you, the lawnmower was only $600.- but I wouldn't dream of checking the bolts or anything else unless there is something obviously defective. 

I remember the early days of Aristocraft where people were rebuilding parts of the locos to get them to run properly and everybody thought that was just fine. 
I think on an item that expensive and with a fair amount of hand assembly, the manufacturer has an obligation to do a final test run of each loco before they ship it - or they can give that responsibility to their dealers, but don't expect me as the end customer to do their final inspection for them. 

Anyway - just my opinion on this matter


----------

