# Bark Box/ver/Southerland Churfer



## Bob in Mich (Mar 8, 2008)

I am about to get a Chuff enhanser ,One is $100.00 and one is $40.00 whitch is the better for the Buy?Doze one have a Deeper sound? is one easy to install? I know that some of You have both,Whitch do You like better?Just want Your opinion..........
Thanks
Bob


----------



## rwjenkins (Jan 2, 2008)

I was at a steamup at Larry Mosher's on Sunday where we had my K-27 running at the same time as Mike McCormack's Aristo Mikado, which he has done a beautiful job of kitbashing into an EBT-esque narrow gauge engine. I have a Bark Box in the K, while Mike's Mike has a home-built chuff pipe based on the Summerlands design (I think... Mike please correct me if I'm wrong), so it was a good opportunity to compare the two side-by-side. The Bark Box has deeper sound, but the Chuffer is distinctly louder. Here are a couple of video clips of the two engines in action...






My train was following behind Mike's, so you can still hear his engine chuffing away at the beginning of the K-27 clip.


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

Not sure, but I think the Bark Box requires a smoke box removal, the Summerlands does not.


----------



## rwjenkins (Jan 2, 2008)

I didn't need to remove the smokebox from the K-27 to install the Bark Box, it fits in through the smokebox door. Guessing that wouldn't work for a K-28 though!


----------



## D&RGW 461 (Jun 4, 2009)

The Bark Box for the K-27 is easy to install thru the smoke box door. The Bark Box for the K-28 requires the front cover to be removed, due to the very small door size. Very easy to do just 2 screws and slide the handrail out with the cover. No need to remove the whole smokebox, just the cover.


----------



## CapeCodSteam (Jan 2, 2008)

One think I like about the bark box is it eliminates the water splatter from the stack when starting out. The box also gets a light coat of oil, so while waiting for pressure to build, there is some nice smoke coming out of the stack


----------



## Kurt Sykes (Feb 28, 2008)

What needs to happen is to compare the Barkbox and the Chuffer in the same loco. 
Not apples to oranges. 
In the near future I will be doing this test with my Mogel. 

Kurt


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

All right, science at work Kurt!


----------



## Chris Scott (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Kurt Sykes on 05 Nov 2009 03:52 PM 
What needs to happen is to compare the Barkbox and the Chuffer in the same loco. 
Not apples to oranges. 
In the near future I will be doing this test with my Mogel. 

Kurt A side by side comparison would be better. Two identical locos, one with each (chuffer or box), running side by side. Hear the difference?









I bet that's what Mr. Science or Mr Wizard would do.









But... One loco only proves the case for that one loco model - would the results be the same in a different loco model, say a K-27? Two or better three different loco models would be a more thorough and representative comparison; i.e., Mogul, K-27/K-28, Shays, etc. These three are very different in size, acoustics, etc.







Pick any three or more of equal or greater differences. It's that old saying, "if it's worth doing... "


----------



## CapeCodSteam (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris, 

You make a valid point. I have an S-12 with Richard's bark box. If there was another with a chuff pipe, I'd be happy to send mine for a comparison...


----------



## mocrownsteam (Jan 7, 2008)

Richard, 
Thanks for the kind words about my Aristocraft Mike conversion. It is equipped with the homebuilt chuffer. This was built from plans that Chris Bird (the inventor) put in the public domain. I have also purchased Summerland Chuffers and they sound exactly the same. You can vary the intensity of the sound by positioning the chuffer at different places in the stack (for my home built version). For 25 pounds ($40.00 US approx.) I don't think you can beat the value. I don't bother making my own anymore at that price. 

I think what it comes down to is your personal preferences as to sound. My advice would be to buy a Chuffer. Try it out. If you don't like it you can always buy a Bark Box and you can sell the Chuffer. I suspect you will be happy with the Chuffer. 

Mike McCormack 
Hudson, Massachusetts


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Thanks for the kind words about my Aristocraft Mike conversion 

To change the subject (briefly) - how about some more info and photos about that conversion? It looks good in the video.


----------



## Jim Overland (Jan 3, 2008)

Mike M 
Where does the top of the chuffer sit relative to the base of the stack (top of smoke box)? 

jim


----------



## rwjenkins (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 06 Nov 2009 08:19 AM 
To change the subject (briefly) - how about some more info and photos about that conversion? It looks good in the video. 
Here's a photo from the steamup on Sunday... 










The upperworks and tender are scratchbuilt in brass, over the original Aristo boiler and running gear. I'm sure Mike can fill us in on the rest of the details.


----------



## mocrownsteam (Jan 7, 2008)

Jim, 
The Chuffer sits in the stack, with the top of the Chuffer about 3/8" below the top of the stack. I've installed two in Accucraft K28s and found that sitting them a little lower in the stack (so that the organ slot is sitting just inside the stack) gives a lower, more mellow tone. Sitting high in the stack gives the load bark that you hear in Richards video. 

Pete, 
I have sent Ron Brown an article about the construction which should appear in the next issue of SiTG or so. Basically stripped the mike down to running chassis, trail truck and boiler. For the tender the only thing I re-used were the trucks. New smokebox, new boiler mounts so it sits lower, new brass (.025)cab and boiler wrapper, scratchbuilt tender (.025 brass with embossed rivet detail) with new gas tank and water bath, and loads of Trackside Details castings. Thanks for asking! 

Mike McCormack 
Hudson, Massachusetts


----------



## Shay Gear Head (Jan 3, 2008)

*Mike,*

*ANOTHER beautiful job on a locomotive! Hope to see it at DH and hear what your next project is going to be.*


----------



## trainmax (Feb 16, 2008)

I never thought a aristo mike could look so good!!!


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

in the next issue of SiTG 
Looking forward to reading it. And the chuffer sounds good too!


----------



## Bill4373 (Jan 3, 2008)

Kent, 

the water splatter from the stack.....SitG issue #88, July/August 2006, had an article, Modifying the Accucraft Shay Lubricator , will correct that. The Shay lubricator is the same one installed in all Accucraft engines. You run the steam pipe through the lubricator rather than just on the side. 

Bill


----------



## trainmax (Feb 16, 2008)

Bill I tried that mod on my shay and it did not seam to work very well. It still spit water and oil out the stack.


----------



## Shay Gear Head (Jan 3, 2008)

Try this thread for more information on how to eliminate the spitting and blue clouds of smoke from you 2 cylinder Shay.

archive.mylargescale.com/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=33624


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

Mike, a great looking engine, one I would like to see in person someday. Will you be coming to the ECLS show next Spring? 

Larry


----------



## trainmax (Feb 16, 2008)

Hey Bruce it's a broken link


----------



## Bill4373 (Jan 3, 2008)

Shay Gear Head sells a "Spitalator (sp?) for the Shay. Contact him off-line. This is not an AD, just information for people wanting to solve a problem... 


.


----------



## mocrownsteam (Jan 7, 2008)

Bruce, 
Thanks for the kind words. I've just started a new job so DH is out for this year. First time I'll miss it in 10+ years. But, there are good things to say about a steady job!!!! 

Larry, 
I'm planning on being there as well as Cabin Fever in January. Look forward to meeting you. 

Mike McCormack 
Hudson, Massachusetts


----------



## trainmax (Feb 16, 2008)

Thanks Bill I got it fixed. I installed a Bark Box in the Shay works great. 
I have tried the Spitnator. I had two issues with it. Once the chamber filled with water and the oil needed for lubrication you were right back where you started from. There does not seem to be any place for the water to go but out the stack. I installed a drain on the tank to get the water out and watched in horror as oil came out.


----------



## Shay Gear Head (Jan 3, 2008)

Richard,

If you installed one of my original Spitinators something is wrong. They were all provided with a self draining design that lets all the water and oil of startup and running to drain as it is produced. Nothing makes it to the smokebox. Either you didn't install the drain properly or it is plugged up.

Mike,
Congrats on the new job. I will miss delivering all thos envelopes of money to you.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Mike
Certainly an eye catcher, something special for Cabin Fever!!


----------



## mocrownsteam (Jan 7, 2008)

Bruce, 
Not as much as I will miss getting those envelopes! And no tubes to make boilers out of! What's a man to do! 

Charles, 
Thank you. I look forward to seeing/meeting you all at Cabin Fever. 

Mike McCormack 
Hudson, Massachusetts


----------



## Shay Gear Head (Jan 3, 2008)

Mike,

Just when I found a source for in-between sizes and larger stuff.

I could mail some and see what the PO thinks is in the package!


----------



## maculsay (Jan 2, 2008)

I installed Summerland's chuffer in my Ruby-Forney Bash Loco and ran it at a steamup this last weekend. I'm very satisfied, with the chuff sound, especially under load. It was a deeper sound than I was hearing on some of the YouTube videos. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned shortening the chuff pipe had a good affect on the sound. The stack on this engine is 1/4" taller than a standard Ruby, so the chuff pipe's top end sits 1/4" lower in the stack. 

I'm also wondering if the inside diameter of the stack might have an affect on the throatiness of the sound. As you can see in my signature line pictures, the Forney's stack is diamond shaped....maybe I'll open up the straight-thru 1/2" dia. tube so that the entire interior of the diamond shape can be used as the resonator. 
Like this: 










Howard


----------



## Chris B (Oct 18, 2009)

Hi Howard
It is great to hear that the Chuffer is working well on your loco - but the evidence that I have so far suggests that it would be a bad idea to remove that tube. Larry Green reported on another thread that he had to install a tube when fitting the Chuffer to a balloon stack on his Accucraft 4-4-0. There needs to be a column of air to give the secondary resonance and I think the full, open stack is too big to do this well.

Regarding the position in the stack - the whole of the Chuffer body needs to be inside the tube as a minimum - then if you have a modified longer stack, it is trial and error to get the best result. On my 7/8ths scale loco, I put the sound slot an third of the way up, but a friend with a Roundhouse Darjeeling B gets the best result when it is low down. To be honest, I am not sure that 1/4" will make a difference, but you can experiment by cutting the copper pipe and sleeving in a piece of K&S 5/32" tube - it will be a good push fit and will work fine and if it is at all loose, just put a slight bend to make it grip. 


There is a section on the website named "Chuff-acoustics" which applies to most chuff pipes.

I hope this helps
Cheers
Chris (Summerlands Chuffer designer)


----------



## trainmax (Feb 16, 2008)

Bruce I did not mean to inply that I bought one of your Spitinators. I built it myself I look at one in DH and model it after that one.


----------



## maculsay (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris....thanks for the input. 
I went to Summerland's site and read about chuff acoustics. With the exception of experimenting with the placement of the chuffer body's sound slot, I won't be opening up the stack tube. 

Again, thanks. 

Howard


----------



## emartin187 (Jan 19, 2008)

For Chris B (Southerland Chufer): I have the Ruby Chufer, and I didn't like the gurgle-sound made by condensate when starting to run the loco. As a fix, I drilled a 0.041 inch hole (#59 drill or approximately 1mm) about half way up the screw base of the Chufer. This small hole appears to drain at least some of the liquid before it is pushed up the tube into the resonating chamber. The result is a cleaner chuff sound on my Ruby.

Thanks for your design.

Earl Martin
SA 360
Thunder Valley Narrow Gauge Ry
Designer of the Martin Track Sweeper Cars and Martin TrakrTotes


----------



## Chris Scott (Jan 2, 2008)

AThere was an article on this approach in a past G1MRA Newsletter & Journal on a slightly unorthodox solution to the condensate going up the stack. The article described converting the Tee fitting at the port exhaust to stack exhaust junction with a "+" (cross) fitting. Then add a drain cock to the added orifice (fitting port?) oriented so a lever from added drain cock to the side of the loco will operate the drain cock. Most of the startup condensate will exit the added drain cock. One additional feature could include running the lever shaft to both sides of the loco so the drain cock can be operated from either side. On many locos adding this drain cock directly under the exhaust Tee fitting would conflict with the steam like below. A short length of pipe from the fitting to the drain cock can solve this problem.


----------



## Chris B (Oct 18, 2009)

Hi Earl - and thanks for the feedback! I find that most locos "clear their throats" within a few yards, but your solution is interesting. I would have thought that it would reduce the chuff volume but it seems not and it would be easily reversible with a little solder. 
Any chance of a video of it in action....?
Cheers
Chris


----------



## emartin187 (Jan 19, 2008)

Hi Chris - I don't any longer have a "stock" chufer to compare, but I believe that no volume has been lost, and the high pitched hiss has been reduced. The sound is more distinct and lower pitched. 

I don't yet have any video, and when I do, I'll have to try to figure out how to get it uploaded to MLS. 

Earl


----------



## lvst4evr (Feb 28, 2008)

Howard; I talked with you at train show in Pomona a few weeks ago. I've got an Ida that I installed oversize cylinders on. I recently purchased a Summerland chuffer also but I don't have that 1/2" tube you said your's has! Mine just has the factory crimped pipe going up into the HUGE balloon stack! From the different posts I've seen on this, & Chris from Summerland's reply, I'm going to fab a K&S tubing extension so that the Summerland chuffer "outlet" will exit inside of tubing instead of the large area of the balloon stack! What do you think? Jim Spanier


----------



## maculsay (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi Jim...it was nice talking to you at the train show a few weeks ago. Sounds like a plan Jim. You have the opportunity to experiment with varying lengths of brass tubing without too much trouble....like how far the chuffer outlet is up into the tube. Let us know how it goes.


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

Good idea Jim, you need to have that slot on the chuffer in a pipe, could hang it from above to go down over the chuffer some. Chimney I made for my Mikes chimney is 1/2" o.d. K&S.


----------



## Larry Green (Jan 2, 2008)

Jim, your tube plan is what I came up with for my 4-4-0 large ID stack. It definitely is the way to go. My engine went from a mushy exhaust with the original install, to a real nice bark after the tube was added. 

Larry


----------



## Jim Overland (Jan 3, 2008)

I just ran my 4-4-0 Col Boone with a chuffer. Nice and load 

What I also notices was an improvement in torque and power at low speeds. the right back pressure is important and perhaps the free flow on the chuffer 
made a difference. anyone else see performance changes?


----------



## Chris B (Oct 18, 2009)

I have the Ruby Chufer, and I didn't like the gurgle-sound made by condensate when starting to run the loco. As a fix, I drilled a 0.041 inch hole (#59 drill or approximately 1mm) about half way up the screw base of the Chufer. This small hole appears to drain at least some of the liquid before it is pushed up the tube into the resonating chamber. The result is a cleaner chuff sound on my Ruby. 
Hi all 
I finally got to test Earl's idea today by setting up a circle of track in my garage (much too windy outside). I modified an Accucraft Edrig Chuffer and I have to say that I was impressed with the result. It was definitely a cleaner sound and volume loss was minimal. Earl has kindly agreed to my putting it on the Chuff-acoustics page (most of which applies to most chuff pipes) of our website. The idea, which is only applicable to Accucraft locos, needs more testing and will certainly have different results on different locos - but it certainly is very interesting. Thanks Earl! 
Cheers 
Chris


----------

