Just an update on the weight issue , added as much lead sheet weight to the underside of the cab roof , between the wheels on the keeper plate and anywhere else that i could . (Lets just say i know why i and a diesel era modeler ! ) Still no luck getting it to pull a load of 5 traino S trucks & traino MHG . If anyone wants to buy it send me a Pm im over it , i,ll stick to diesels .

Just an update on the weight issue , added as much lead sheet weight to the underside of the cab roof , between the wheels on the keeper plate and anywhere else that i could . (Lets just say i know why i and a diesel era modeler ! ) Still no luck getting it to pull a load of 5 traino S trucks & traino MHG . If anyone wants to buy it send me a Pm im over it , i,ll stick to diesels .

Flat layout or grades...?

Paul

I am not sure what other people have found but I have just completed a load trial of my Wombat 30T on my layout. I tested it on a 1 in 50 gradient formed using a Woodlands Scenics 2% incline system. The loco is as delivered and I used a very old Triang controller as I haven’t fitted a DCC chip. The grade begins with a 26” radius left hand curve through 90* and then continues to climb straight. The loco was able to haul 10 empty Austrains S trucks and a Powerline MHG. The loco was able to haul this steadily and it was able to stop and restart. There was a bit of wheel spin to start but it settled to a steady pace. I added another two S trucks and it managed to pull the train up the grade but with more wheel spin. I added six resin wool bale loads and this was too much. On full throttle it sort of moved the train but it wasn’t a practical load. I hope this gives you an idea of the locomotive’s ability and limitations.

Lloyd

I am not sure what other people have found but I have just completed a load trial of my Wombat 30T on my layout. I tested it on a 1 in 50 gradient formed using a Woodlands Scenics 2% incline system. The loco is as delivered and I used a very old Triang controller as I haven’t fitted a DCC chip. The grade begins with a 26” radius left hand curve through 90* and then continues to climb straight. The loco was able to haul 10 empty Austrains S trucks and a Powerline MHG. The loco was able to haul this steadily and it was able to stop and restart. There was a bit of wheel spin to start but it settled to a steady pace. I added another two S trucks and it managed to pull the train up the grade but with more wheel spin. I added six resin wool bale loads and this was too much. On full throttle it sort of moved the train but it wasn’t a practical load. I hope this gives you an idea of the locomotive’s ability and limitations.

Lloyd

That's under what a 1:1 gauge could hall, even a snotty nosed variant on a 1:50grade. As my load books are packed away I cannot give the proper load for them but both snotty and superheated variants hauled the same load and conditions on all lines, although in reality the superheated ones could do pretty much the same load as a 32cl.

I am wondering though about the make up of the driving wheel tyres, whether Stainless steel or Nickel Silver, and I would say that the metal is polished rather than worn. Havining polished SS tyres generally means the model will slip more when new, I know that happened with my TOR 32 at first until run in a bit which improved with the wheel faces getting some roughness on them. I know one modeller who puts his models on the rolling wheels and uses a dremel with wire tip to lightly roughen the tyres up a bit and that helps on his graded layout.

Now there's discussion about the model's practical layout use, what do we think should be done about fitting a front coupler?

Now there's discussion about the model's practical layout use, what do we think should be done about fitting a front coupler?

I personally don't like kadee's on the front of steam loco's especially of those that never had them in their real operating environment, although some classes of loco's did have them fitted in later years of service life mainly for use on engines that were used on yard shunting duties.

For many modellers who may want to only use a model for shunting work then its likely a good idea, but I have modified a couple of wagons for use as cover trucks for use in shunting, and no problems so far.  I was getting a 30T specifically for that purpose or for short haul trip working, which would not have taxed the model.

I am actually wondering now whether the motor that is fitted to the model is strong enough, also whether its an all wheel geared model as against just one axle and relying on the rods to apply power to the other two wheel sets.

Agreed that a Kadee on the front isn't a real good look, but engines on my layout all have to do their share of shunting.
This model has a single small screw holding the detachable part of the buffer beam. It should come off easily enough but I'm wondering how to make up a coupler box.

Agreed that a Kadee on the front isn't a real good look, but engines on my layout all have to do their share of shunting.
This model has a single small screw holding the detachable part of the buffer beam. It should come off easily enough but I'm wondering how to make up a coupler box.

Shouldn't one of the kadee boxes be able to fit in the cut out?  Check out the long neck scale head types, even the medium ones, not hard to cut the box a bit short either.

I'd start with #252 coupler boxes. https://kadee.com/htmbord/page252.htm If you are really limited for space, leave the top off, and sand down the top of the bottom. Then it is time to sort out which "scale head" whisker coupler meets the gauge. If they are all too far above the track, invert the coupler box.

Scale head couplers are much less obtrusive than #5s. Modifying the curve of the trip pin may enable use of a shorter coupler.

Answer from Wombat Models to a question I posted on Facebook regarding front couplers...

"Hi Paul we are currently in the process of designing a coupler box to suit and we are trying to use a much smaller coupler on the front such as a Microtrains 1015"


Paul

Thanks all. The front bogie & buffer beam centre are now off & it's time to see what will fit, or hope the Wombat box arrives soon. While the model was inverted I whipped the keeper plate off & can report that it relies on the siderods for power transmission, no gearing between the wheels.

Just an update on the weight issue , added as much lead sheet weight to the underside of the cab roof , between the wheels on the keeper plate and anywhere else that i could . (Lets just say i know why i and a diesel era modeler ! ) Still no luck getting it to pull a load of 5 traino S trucks & traino MHG . If anyone wants to buy it send me a Pm im over it , i,ll stick to diesels .

I am happy with the load my 30T will pull. Layout is all level and not big so I am not expecting long trains, but it easily hauled 5 4 wheel wagons and an HCX which makes a nice little branchline train.

Out of the box, the leading wheel on the front bogie would not turn, but I took it off and freed up the axle and it now is working fine. I added a Kadee red fibre washer under the metal washer holding the front bogie so maybe this just added a little more pressure.

No extra lead etc, and it is running quite well. Hope you have more success,

Les.

Well, I put extra lead weight wherever I could and the result is a slight improvement. The loco looks terrific and runs well but mine is a disappointment when it comes to pulling power. I'm happy to treat it for what it is---a light branchline loco.

Well, I put extra lead weight wherever I could and the result is a slight improvement. The loco looks terrific and runs well but mine is a disappointment when it comes to pulling power. I'm happy to treat it for what it is---a light branchline loco.

I am a bit mystified by all this as I remember seeing what was to be the running/production of the model at Liverpool with Geoff Hope, the model was a nice weight for its size but never saw one run. I would not mind knowing how much one of these models weighs compared to the Ixion 32cl, and I refer to the locomotive only.

The Ixion 32 had some weight put inside the boiler IIRC that helped it as well, all things being equal I would have expected the 30T to have pulled a fairly accurate load more especially on flat terrain layouts and lighter grades say at around 1/75 based on what I saw at Liverpool.

Again I come back to the motor and how strong - powerful it is.  If there is no binding of the rods on the wheels, also if all driving wheels are in good contact with the rail head, then it should pull a load comparable with other models.  Maybe a good comparison would be with the Austrains 30 tanker, as to overall weights and pulling power along with the quality of the motor.

I am a bit mystified by all this as I remember seeing what was to be the running/production of the model at Liverpool with Geoff Hope, the model was a nice weight for its size but never saw one run. I would not mind knowing how much one of these models weighs compared to the Ixion 32cl, and I refer to the locomotive only.

The weights are quoted in a post on the first page of this thread.
Wombat 30T - 151g
Ixion 32 - 160g
Austrains 30 - 203g
(not my figures, and I make my Austrains 30 at 199g)
The Wombat 30T is very light, and much of its weight is apparently too far forward.

For what it's worth, I have the Austrains 30tank and the pulling power is no comparison.I will say again though, the 30t is a fine model.

I am a bit mystified by all this as I remember seeing what was to be the running/production of the model at Liverpool with Geoff Hope, the model was a nice weight for its size but never saw one run. I would not mind knowing how much one of these models weighs compared to the Ixion 32cl, and I refer to the locomotive only.

The weights are quoted in a post on the first page of this thread.
Wombat 30T - 151g
Ixion 32 - 160g
Austrains 30 - 203g
(not my figures, and I make my Austrains 30 at 199g)
The Wombat 30T is very light, and much of its weight is apparently too far forward.

Thanks, I forgot about that.  Being 9grams under the Ixion 32 would indicate a lesser load ability to pull, but with the strategic placing in the areas of the 30T should help it, especially if spread out over the driving wheels.

With the tanker, the extra weight would likely be in the side tanks and bunker.

With the 30t, if the tender is also metal that as against delrin or similar types that adds extra weight that the motor has to contend with.

Again I come back to the motor and how strong - powerful it is.  If there is no binding of the rods on the wheels, also if all driving wheels are in good contact with the rail head, then it should pull a load comparable with other models.  Maybe a good comparison would be with the Austrains 30 tanker, as to overall weights and pulling power along with the quality of the motor.

I was going to shoot some vid of a Lloyds 30 tank and the Wombat 30 climbing a 1 in 40 26" curve and 1 in 20. Unfortunately, I dumb-thumbed my Gaugemaster controller sending my long suffering 3112 tank flying off the unfinished dive on the Demondrille underpass hitting the concrete. It lost buffers, bent the front headstock and other things but amazingly still runs smooth. To make matters worse I backed the Wombat down the dive with load and sent a PHG and K wagon off the end. So I gave up on the vid but I did get similar results to what others have posted already.

I realise it's not a fair match up with the Lloyds 30 weighing 294g but it's a fantastic smooth running loco that's quiet and is an excellent slow runner that's good for comparisons. I don't think the Wombat's motor is lacking in power so far as I haven't witnessed it stall. When it slips it's very smooth and the speed of the drivers at slow speed doesn't change. So I think the motor and mech delivers enough torque. Having said that the motor's tiny. Compare below with a Casula(Lloyds) 30 motor.


https://flic.kr/p/29ZLHk2

But I can't see how one could put a bigger motor in the Wombat without invading the cab as can be seen below in the Lloyds 30. Both locos have the gear tree connected to a single driver with all others driven by the rods. The only difference is the Lloyds is connected to the middle and the Wombat to the first driver, see second pic below. Both of my Wombat locos runs smooth without binding in the running gear.

https://flic.kr/p/MCr4LZ

https://flic.kr/p/PftGQb

It's a light loco but I don't know where I would add more weight. It's obvious from the first and third photo with the cast gear tower, chassis plus the slug in the smokebox, they've done what they could to weigh down the loco. Mine will be fine as is.  When I compare the Wombat with the Lloyds that I built 10yrs ago I can see a lot of detail that look s more refined. I think it's an impressive 30T. Of particular note is the drivers. The Wombat's are 2.23mm v 2.6mm or 0.088" v 0.102" approx and the diameter is 16mm v 15mm. Doesn't sound like much but look at the difference in the second photo.

Bug bears - there's two thing I haven't seen mentioned yet. The middle wheels on both of my Wombat's tenders rarely turn. The axles have bushes and regardless of accuracy and the chassis being flat there's not enough friction between the middle wheels and rail, or not enough weight on the middle axles or independant movement to move downwards. I've got a fix in mind but haven't had time to implement it but it will involve allowing the middle axle to drop a little.

The other minor thing I've noticed is performance from a standing start under DC. I've seen the exhibition video showing smooth running under DCC. For me though, using a Gaugemaster with and without simulation, both my Wombats will jolt into action rather than a smooth slow start. It's not jerky or abrupt but it's not as slow a transition from stop to slow as I'd like. Once they're running they'll coast from any speed to a controllable very slow speed. But once stopped it'll take that extra few volts to get moving.

Lastly, charcoal makes great coal for the tender. Crushed in a bowl with pliers then sifted through screens it's glued in by dripping diluted PVA, guessing 70%water.

https://flic.kr/p/MCqXuv

Thanks for an informative post, Oscar. Sorry to hear about the damage to the loco and rollingstock (I've had stuff hit tiles before - it did not end well). I hope they can be repaired.

I was going to shoot some vid of a Lloyds 30 tank and the Wombat 30 climbing a 1 in 40 26" curve and 1 in 20. Unfortunately, I dumb-thumbed my Gaugemaster controller sending my long suffering 3112 tank flying off the unfinished dive on the Demondrille underpass hitting the concrete. It lost buffers, bent the front headstock and other things but amazingly still runs smooth. To make matters worse I backed the Wombat down the dive with load and sent a PHG and K wagon off the end. So I gave up on the vid but I did get similar results to what others have posted already.

I realise it's not a fair match up with the Lloyds 30 weighing 294g but it's a fantastic smooth running loco that's quiet and is an excellent slow runner that's good for comparisons. I don't think the Wombat's motor is lacking in power so far as I haven't witnessed it stall. When it slips it's very smooth and the speed of the drivers at slow speed doesn't change. So I think the motor and mech delivers enough torque. Having said that the motor's tiny. Compare below with a Casula(Lloyds) 30 motor.

But I can't see how one could put a bigger motor in the Wombat without invading the cab as can be seen below in the Lloyds 30. Both locos have the gear tree connected to a single driver with all others driven by the rods. The only difference is the Lloyds is connected to the middle and the Wombat to the first driver, see second pic below. Both of my Wombat locos runs smooth without binding in the running gear.

It's a light loco but I don't know where I would add more weight. It's obvious from the first and third photo with the cast gear tower, chassis plus the slug in the smokebox, they've done what they could to weigh down the loco. Mine will be fine as is.  When I compare the Wombat with the Lloyds that I built 10yrs ago I can see a lot of detail that look s more refined. I think it's an impressive 30T. Of particular note is the drivers. The Wombat's are 2.23mm v 2.6mm or 0.088" v 0.102" approx and the diameter is 16mm v 15mm. Doesn't sound like much but look at the difference in the second photo.

Bug bears - there's two thing I haven't seen mentioned yet. The middle wheels on both of my Wombat's tenders rarely turn. The axles have bushes and regardless of accuracy and the chassis being flat there's not enough friction between the middle wheels and rail, or not enough weight on the middle axles or independant movement to move downwards. I've got a fix in mind but haven't had time to implement it but it will involve allowing the middle axle to drop a little.

The other minor thing I've noticed is performance from a standing start under DC. I've seen the exhibition video showing smooth running under DCC. For me though, using a Gaugemaster with and without simulation, both my Wombats will jolt into action rather than a smooth slow start. It's not jerky or abrupt but it's not as slow a transition from stop to slow as I'd like. Once they're running they'll coast from any speed to a controllable very slow speed. But once stopped it'll take that extra few volts to get moving.

Lastly, charcoal makes great coal for the tender. Crushed in a bowl with pliers then sifted through screens it's glued in by dripping diluted PVA, guessing 70%water.

Thanks for the post and happy to be proven wrong regarding the motor, as the 30t you have is a saturated version I wonder if the superheated versions are better owing to the slightly longer smokebox, I believe they have weights in there for the purpose of balancing the weight across the driving wheels.

I notice the motor in the 30T is a larger Mashima which are good motors, I also wonder how much of the problem may be the drive wheel is not on the middle wheels as against either of the others.

I notice the motor in the 30T is a larger Mashima which are good motors, I also wonder how much of the problem may be the drive wheel is not on the middle wheels as against either of the others.

Am willing to stand corrected but you may be mistaken, he states that he has placed the larger Mashima motor from a Casula / Lloyds 30 alongside the Wombat 30T for comparison.

The Wombat 30T motor has a brass flywheel attached to it.

The size of the motor may not affect performance, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better, its how the power / torque goes through the drive train / gearbox and its ratio to apply force to the wheels.

Regards,

Catchpoint

What you said catchpoint, was going to say the same.

I’ve got one of each and saturated weighed 145g v 149 for superheated on my scales. Both have weight in the smoke box but I’ve put 3063 away so can’t tell how different they are. I did notice on both though that the leading driver will fall into a frog’s flangeway on peco code 75 large radius points. The rear driver does too but not so noticeable. The Lloyds doesn’t and I would presume that’s due to the larger tread compared to the finer .088” tread on the wombat.

I don’t know if centre v rear axle being driven makes much difference. I’d guess no, but I dunno. The tread finish or material used as mentioned earlier is an interesting thought and if it improves over time with wear. Imagine traction tyres . But out of pure interest I might follow what some others have done and see how heavy I can make this sucker. As I said earlier, they suit my needs as is but I enjoy a challenge in seeing what it can v what it should pull. But before that we need a saturated v superheated tug o war.

I notice the motor in the 30T is a larger Mashima which are good motors, I also wonder how much of the problem may be the drive wheel is not on the middle wheels as against either of the others.
Am willing to stand corrected but you may be mistaken, he states that he has placed the larger Mashima motor from a Casula / Lloyds 30 alongside the Wombat 30T for comparison.

The Wombat 30T motor has a brass flywheel attached to it.

The size of the motor may not affect performance, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better, its how the power / torque goes through the drive train / gearbox and its ratio to apply force to the wheels.

Regards,

Catchpoint

Fair enough but the photo's for some reason did not show up on the main page, and still show black blobs in the main pages, then then were there when I went to reply the photo's came up in relatively small size in the reply box.  I still only see the photo boxes as full black boxes

When I refer to the size I was linking it to performance, as I am aware of the aspect regarding size, and Mashima motors are vg motors even the smaller ones. Its also worth considering the unknown quality of the motor in the 30T, from the unknow factory as well.

It's a light loco but I don't know where I would add more weight. It's obvious from the first and third photo with the cast gear tower, chassis plus the slug in the smokebox, they've done what they could to weigh down the loco. Mine will be fine as is.

Thank you Oscar for your photos and insights to the Wombat C30T. It does appear that space for additional weight is limited, and only small improvements are likely to be achieved by weighting.

I am wondering whether it might be possible to reconfigure the engine-tender drawbar to transfer weight from the tender to the rear of the loco? If this could be done, addition of weight to the tender would improve the loco’s pulling power.

I notice the motor in the 30T is a larger Mashima which are good motors, I also wonder how much of the problem may be the drive wheel is not on the middle wheels as against either of the others.
Am willing to stand corrected but you may be mistaken, he states that he has placed the larger Mashima motor from a Casula / Lloyds 30 alongside the Wombat 30T for comparison.

The Wombat 30T motor has a brass flywheel attached to it.

The size of the motor may not affect performance, bigger doesn't necessarily mean better, its how the power / torque goes through the drive train / gearbox and its ratio to apply force to the wheels.

Regards,

Catchpoint

It's mainly about weight on driven wheels.  If the loco can spin it's wheels changing the motor or gearing will not change the load it can haul.  Wheel (and rail) material makes less difference as does drag from other wheels.

Mark