# Query concerning HLW LaPorte Forney



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Finally got to run my HLW LaPorte Forney at our local club's display for Rail Day this past Saturday (05/14/11). I am pleased with the appearance and performance of this locomotive, but I did notice one quirk. Our layout was set up on the tarmac behind the O. Winston Link Museum (formally the Roanoke VA N&W Ry passenger station). The Forney would slip on one corner of the outer loop of track. Gently pressing a finger to the cab roof would allow the Forney to move again, and once it got going, momentum carried it through the slippery spot.

What the other club members and I determined was that the pony truck and the rear two-axle truck had just enough downward force to lift the drive wheels at that one spot. The track was low there due to a crack in the asphalt and a rail joint right over that crack. Couldn't see the dip from a standing perspective, but the locomotive let us know it was there.

I have not had this problem with other HLW locomotives, but they are either 4-4-0 or b-b configurations - or a single truck. The 2-4-4 seems to be more prone to this problem because of the rigid frame and a fairly stiffly supported carrying truck in front and behind the drive wheels.

So, has anyone else seen this problem with their LaPorte Forney? I'm certainly not getting rid of the locomotive, but I may see whether I can add more weight over the drive wheels.

Thanks,
David Meashey


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I suspect you found the cause of the prototype's demise...light footed by design, not intent. 

Maybe softer springs fore and aft. 

John


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

"Maybe softer springs fore and aft." 

Thanks John; 

Might work for the aft bogie. It has a spring. I don't think the fore pony truck has a spring. 

Not to worry though. I'll figure it out, but I plan to take my time. 

I got my Bachmann Indy working pretty well by adding almost two pounds of lead "here and there" - but mostly between the frame and the boiler. 

Best, 
David Meashey


----------



## Steve Stockham (Jan 2, 2008)

This is really the main complaint of small locomotives: they are too light as they come from the factory! The Indie is a wonderful little locomotive but is too darn light to pull anything over a 1% grade! Adding weight is the only way to improve it's performance. I'd be really interested in knowing if Bachmann has added more weight to the Indie with this latest run. They removed the lead weight that was in the original 2-4-2 (the Indie is an upgrade of this design) when they brought out the 1st run of the Indie. Bad mistake! Correct this and you'll have a pretty sweet little locomotive! I'm guessing that the HLW locomotive will benefit from more weight as well. HLW motor blocks are pretty robust (at least in comparison to Bachmann ones!) so you should be okay. Keep us informed as to what you figured out if you could please. I'm very interested in what the outcome will be.


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Steve; 

Yeah, I think I may rig up one of those "saddlebag" temporary holders for weights. like Kevin Strong does. Then I can see what will work best before I try concealing the weights. 

Yours, 
David Meashey


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Be careful with adding weight, HLW has plastic Driver wheels and the extra weight might crack them. A club member had this issue with a 4 4 0.............


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Nick; 

Thanks for the warning. It may take a while before I have some time to check out adding weight, but I will go easy. 

Oh, and glad you are back. 

David Meashey


----------



## Nicholas Savatgy (Dec 17, 2008)

Thanks Dave.


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

The later LGB Austrian U class 0-6-2T steamers (made from 1988->) do this too. 

The once documented fix was to remove the rear trailing bogie, and cut a bit of the spring off. There was some slight springy-ness to the rear trailing bogie, but not enough to lift the rear of the loco.


----------



## jgallaway81 (Jan 5, 2009)

I have a problem with my first gen pacific.. the springs on the trailing and lead trucks did the same thing. Since they don't provide the support like the real engines, I removed the springs completely and then weighted the trucks to hold them to the [email protected] url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Providers/HtmlEditorProviders/CEHtmlEditorProvider/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css);


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Looks like I may remove a coil or two from the rear truck spring before I try anything else. It just may be June before I have the time though. 

I'm still trying to find time to upload and post some of the photos I took last Saturday (05/14/11) of our local club's display at the O. Winston Link Museum for Rail Day. 

Thanks everyone, 
David Meashey


----------



## norman (Jan 6, 2008)

June 18, 2011 

Hi Dave Meashey: 

On your HLW La Port Forney is the decorative brass boiler band located: 

between the bell and the steam dome 

or 

between the bell and the sand dome? 

The You Tube video of the HLW La Porte Forney, running on a layout ,shows the decorative boiler band located between the bell and the steam dome. 

The HLW catalog photo the the HLW La Porte Forney shows the decorative boiler band located between the bell and the sand dome. 

Where is the decorative boiler band located on your HLW La Porte Forney? 


Thank you 

Norman


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Norman; 

I had to look at a photo in one of my other postings, but the band on my locomotive is between the bell and the sand dome. Don't know whether all the locomotives are like that, but mine is. 

Yours, 
David Meashey


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Just another note about this locomotive. I ran it last night for some guests. I found out that it does not like the LGB R2 curves. I suspect the trouble is from that rear truck again. Since things are about to get really busy at our household due to my wife's impending back surgery, it may be quite some time before I will get time to tweak this locomotive. 

What really messes with my mind is that my two LGB Moguls will happily doublehead on R2 curves. 

Like somebody already noted, the operational quirks of the Forney locomotive are what led to the prototype's demise. 

I'll try to dredge this thread up again once I get the time to tweak the locomotive. 

Yours, 
David Meashey


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

BUMP!

Finally got to tweak this locomotive today. The problem was the rear truck, but not the spring tension as I had thought. The rear truck was very tight in the slot that was supposed to allow the truck to slide from side to side. I tried graphite, but it did not help. I had some LaBelle #12 plastic safe grease with Teflon. That did the trick. Now the locomotive runs happily on LGB 1500 curves. I tested it running clockwise and counterclockwise; also tested in forward and reverse. The locomotive seems happy, but I would not try to negotiate the LGB starter set curves with this locomotive. 
I have a photo of the locomotive being tested on the 1500 curve. The quality is not too good, but I will attach it anyway. Let's just say that at my age, trying to take photos while lying on my belly does not go over so good anymore.










Have fun,
David Meashey


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Hey, I'm glad you found the cure. 
Yeah the pics is a little fuzzy (I use a tripod to cancel my shakes) but since you got back up to post, it's Great!









Happy Rails 

John


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Glad you found a fix Dave! 

Quick favor to ask, would you mind posting a "full side view" photo of the loco, I am interested in how the truck is under the tender/bunker and the coloring of the loco, it looks different from the photos on the web and in their ads. 

You can do it from a table or the like, no need to lay on the floor! 8^)


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Garrett; 

Didn't see your request until this morning. I will have to try it tonight if I get a chance. Presently at work. 

Yours, 
David Meashey


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

No hurry, thanks!


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Garrett;

Here are the photos you requested. The second one is a bit over exposed. The full sun came out just as I clicked the frame. Anyway, I think they are still servicable.



















At least I was able to take them standing up this time.

Yours,
David Meashey


----------



## DennisB (Jan 2, 2008)

What really messes with my mind is that my two LGB Moguls will happily doublehead on R2 curves. 

This may be old info but LGB has a Golden Rule that all LGB engines and rolling stock will operate on any R1 curve. The R2 should work even better. Yes I am a card carrying member of the Red Box Brigade. Regards, Dennis.


----------



## Dave Meashey (Jan 2, 2008)

Dennis; 

I also remember reading somewhere that LGB made the drivers on their Forney pivot in similar fashion to a Mason Bogie. Because the rear truck on my HLW Forney was not traversing the slot smoothly, the rear truck would force the lead drive axle to derail. This was a 2-4-4, yet 2-6-0s did not have that problem. Of course, there was flex between the rear of their cabs and their tenders. No such luck with the HLW Forney. It's a small locomotive with a fairly long wheelbase. I can see why LGB chose to make the drivers pivot. It really helped their locomotive to track better. 

Anyway, all's well now. I just have to make sure never to try any R1 curves. 

Yours, 
David Meashey


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Thank you Dave, just what I was wanting photo wise. We need more brown-gamboge steam locos....


----------



## norman (Jan 6, 2008)

Hi Dave: 

That Forney is a very nice model. I like your side photos. The boiler is longer than it looks to be on the HLW web site. 

The ground level photo seems to be just out of focus rather than a camera shaking problem. 

The HLW Forney is exactly the type of product I would like to see Bachmann make. HLW really knows how to reuse components for various models. 

Too bad that Bachmann had not planned a multiple loco prototype product plan prior to the release of their 4-4-0. Pick a group of Baldwin locos which could 
use common mold parts to sell various Baldwin locos at a lower cost. The HLW headlamp is far nicer than the Bachmann 4-4-0 headlamp. 

This latest HLW Forney features a redesigned fuel bin, larger trailing truck wheels, upgraded brass domes as well as the CP173 stack and headlamp bracket. Great dollar value. 
Nicest HLW product I have seen yet. First HLW loco which I bought as I am somewhat of a rivet counter. This model passes the rivet counter test as the Bachmann Forney is far too large for my 1:24 collection. 
However, the Bachmann 1:20.3 4-4-0 fits in with my 1:24 collection. 

The HLW cab could be a little shorter with the cab front wall moved aft and hence a longer boiler but then mold costs would increase as well as the product price. 
See through spoked drivers would also be nice but again product price would increase. 
A smaller compressor or just excluding it would improve its appearance. I prefer a straight boiler rail as per the engineer's side. 

The product could be kitbashed into a more scale model but that paint job is just too nice to mess with! 

This is a great product at a reasonable price. Fits in great with the Delton C-16 loco. 


Norman


----------

