I bought one of the recent release of NW2 a few weeks ago. It's very light, and it is unable to pull the length of train (45 inches) that most of my other locomotives manage. Among the advertisers for this site is BULLFROG SNOT. Of those members who have used it, what's your opinion, please? I have found a supplier over here, but is it worth my money? Regards, Pete Davies
Assuming that you have checked into adding any additional weight like Tungsten putty and took an emory board to the wheels for the sometimes slippery wheel blackening to improve traction then the application of the old Bullfrog in the absence of traction tires is the only other option. I saw no reference to traction tires in a product description so I will assume it has none. I would use it on one wheel on the inside axles of each truck only, opposite sides. Removing the blackening does help it adhere better and as thin as you can apply it while the wheels are turning slowly in a cradle. The product can be cut some with a drop of water so it will spread even thinner. Stuff does work but you are decreasing the electrical pick-up by one wheel to each truck as a negative.
Loss of traction for a Kato NW-2 most probably has nothing to do with the wheels. While yours may be the exception, the rest have a design flaw. Deep inside the mechanism, the main drive gear is a white gear inside what might be called the "transmission." This large white gear slips and is poorly designed. You must find a way to lock that gear down. I sumitted an article to N-Scale Mag on this over a year ago, but they have done nothing with it so far.
I have two that were in the Chessie system issue just to date them. I had DCC decoders installed. They seem to push and pull what I consider a typical string of cars okay. Have you contacted Kato?
10 cars or about 32 inches is the max i can get my NW2 to pull. But I only use it as a yard switcher moving no more than 4 or 5 cars at a time.
8 at max for me, If I want my NW2 pulling long strings I'll hook 'er up to the RS1 or C424. But that may not happen as those atlas SP&S ballast hoppers I ordered will ensure a short train for it to move around.
I think comparing the ability of this small locomotive to others on your roster is probably a bit out of balance. What are most of the other locos, if they are small switchers, then fair comparison, if road locomotives, not so comparable. You state a train length of 45", made up of what type of rolling stock?, curve radius? grades? or is this comparison straight and level, I have one of these locos and around eight NMRA weighted 40ft cars on the straight and level is about it reliably.
Thank you, gents, for your comments. I note that George, in another thread, comments on the poor "pulling power" of new locomotives. I have found that getting rid of the blackening on the wheels does help, but I agree with his contention that we shouldn't have to. I accept that some degree of "running in" is necessary, as with any machinery, but it never used to be the case - at least over here - that the wheels had to be cleaned and it shouldn't be now. Following comments from John, and from some friends away from this forum, I shall be using the bullfrog. Ted, my train length of 45 inches includes locomotive and caboose and as many assorted cars as I can fit into the space - some boxcars of 40 or 50 foot, some hoppers. The number of cars, obviously, varies according to car and locomotive length. The radius is Kato Unitrack 9.75 inch, and there are no inclines. Thanks again, and have a happy Christmas! Regards, Pete Davies
I figured based off of the length about ten cars of the 50 foot variety a few more if 40 foot. Based on the radius and the lack of any grade a consist that loco should handle with ease. The issue of the blackening is not consistent with all the newer power but varies among the manufacturers or even the batches or runs from the same folks. I am not sure whether the substance used is the same among all but the chemical blackening that I have in my selection of stuff does not leave the slippery effect that I seen on the commercially applied. Unfortunately with the newer stuff I have seen both the lack of weight for tractive effort and what ever the danged product that is being applied to the wheels being both a factor. Problem with all those whiz bang circuit boards is that they take space that used to be weight. Case in point was Bmanns S-4. Fine loco but would not pull crap on a grade. Three to four cars on a 2% was it. Taking off some excess blackening improved it some and adding additional weight improved it some more. Finally a small amount of the Bullfrog got what I needed. And small locos like the S-4, SW-9, and NW-2 are the road power on the branch line due to light track and lighter bridges, ala prototype, and 8 inch radius curvature.
I also have the NW-2 and am quite disappointed with it because of its weak pulling power. One of those "...wish I hadn't bought it...". On the other end of pulling ability, the Kato GG1's are great. My layout has two helices each having a 2% grade over a 6" rise and ~16" radii. For more than 8 - 10 cars, depending on their weight, I need to have consists (of two units) for the Kato diesels (SD70's, ES44's, etc) but only need a single GG1 for the upgrade. Dan
I've finally been able to get hold of some Bullfrog Snot, and applied it. This being my first attempt, I obviously didn't apply it properly because it wobbled, so I took the stuff off again. There is no room within to apply any more weight. As far as I'm concerned, it has joined my version of the "wish I hadn't bought" file Buckwheat mentions. Goodbye, NW2!!! Regards, Pete Davies
The NW2 is a itty bitty loco, with teeny wheels. At some point, i think we arr dealing with physics. Does anyone have a comparably sized, wheeled loco, that will pull a ton of cars? Are all the cars perfect rollers? I'm not defending Kato, so much, as I'm questioning the physics here. Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
The cab on a Kato NW2 is empty; only the cab interior. You can load that empty cab up if you really want more weight in it. The interior piece DOES do some frame insulation and spacing, so if you just pull it out you need to put a spacer in there and also insulate any metal weight from shorting out the frame halves. If you think a Kato NW2 is bad, try a new Atlas GP38. Don't ever confuse tractive effort in N scale with prototype tractive effort of the model, it's all about gross weight and coefficient of traction to the railhead. You do need to verify that all eight wheels are actually spinning together and it isn't slipping that gear. The tests I've done with the NW2 were equal to the tractive effort of the Life-Like SW8, and the SW8 had a cab weight in it. Kato had better wheel material and a coefficient of traction. So the design isn't inherently all that bad, for it's size, necessarily, but there are a lot of variables at play here. If its not doing what you need to do, it's your call, but the easiest way out is to take the body shell off and start filling up the cab with more weight and see what that gets you. OK: Specifics: My own NW2 weighs 51.2 grams and scale-pulled 11 grams for a TE ratio of 21%, third highest of any locomotive I've tested. No cab weight. It's a first run, and if the new version weighs less, it would be great to know that detail. A similar-sized Atlas MP15 weighs 50.6 grams and pulled 3.5 grams for a TE ratio of 6.9%, brand new, and one of the worst I've ever tested. If you need a stump-puller, get an old Kato GP38, which weighs in at 128.4 grams and pulls 28 grams, single-unit champ and 21.8% adhesion. I've done a lot of 'lab testing' on these rats over the last five years, and you can measure in cars, cubic miles, inches or any other unit, but I've been trying to prove what I've been seeing - that many 'new' design locomotive have horrible tractive effort purely due to wheel material.
N scale switchers are an exercise in expectation management. Volume increases with the cube, so it's no surprise that a road switcher has way more tractive effort than a yard switcher. Asking a yard switcher to pull four feet of train is unfair to the switcher, and disappointing to the operator.
I gotta agree with urodoji and randy. What was the OP's expectation vis'a'vis pulling power? Most N scale yard switchers are limited to, at best, 12-15 small/light freight cars on level track. If you want a real hoss, I think the strongest puller I've yet encountered is the old Con-Cor MP15 (about which there are many appearance gripes). So, pick yer poison? Cheers, -Mark
Ah, but that's not true. Data testing on my Atlas C-630 indicated a total weight of 82.4 grams and tractive effort of 9.5 - LESS than the NW2, despite a locomotive that would appear to be much larger and is much heavier and a 'road' unit. And until I get a whole lot more people to catch on to these issues and gripe more, the problem will remain.... cutout frames, lighter frame material, slippery wheels. And while the Kato GP38 is a champ the Atlas GP38 (same size!!!) is a complete dud; weight of 73.2 (compared to 128.4 for Kato) and tractive of 7.5 (compared to 28.4 for the Kato). Your mileage may vary, but trying to base ANYTHING on something as obvious as what it should be able to do is an invitation to frustration. No relationship at all to 'supposed' function, performance, prototype, etc. What I'd really like from anybody that's got a 'new one' of the Kato design is that weight to see if they actually changed anything. I'm skeptical that they did; the frame was already DCC compatible and Kato is pretty picky about both their frame material and wheel material, it's significantly better performing overall.
Personally, I'm not a proponent of traction tires, unless we're talking steam. The info Randgust reports on the tractive effort of various locos is interesting, as it seems I've read several complaints on the NW2, but nothing on the MP15 by Atlas - Amusing as I feel Atlas rarely gets the criticism that other mfg's regularly get here on the forums. I also have to agree with those who think a switcher is likely to be working a handful of cars, one of my favorite aspects of the hobby is adding additional locos to a diesel powered train, and from what I have read, most people have way more locos than I have. If one diesel isn't cutting it, I'll gladly add more. I own 2 NW2s, I'm satisfied with their tractive effort, but as I mention above, I usually use them in switching operations, working a dozen or so cars.
unfortunately my Kato NW2 that I repainted gave up the ghost a couple days ago so I'm need of a new one, may buy two seeing as how I'd like to have both NP numbers. While the NW2 didn't pull much when I placed far more than I'd need to pull with it, maybe two will double the cars that can be pulled.
I haven't tried putting weight into the cab area, and haven't looked at the possibilities, but I have been told there's no room. If I was keeping it, I'd want to put crew in there. What I wanted to do, and accepting it's a YARD switcher and not a ROAD switcher or main line locomotive, was to use it in the same way as we used to have 'station pilot' locomotives over here: couple up to the back of the train and draw the passenger cars out of the station to release the incoming locomotive which is at the buffer stops. Possibly move the stock to a different track. The NW2 is fine for moving five or six passenger cars on the straight. Mine struggled to move seven on the straight and refused point blank on a bend. Regards, Pete
I know you've made your decision, but I'm still puzzled by what you're seeing. Seems to come down to about three possibilities here: 1) You're getting slippage someplace other than on the wheels, possible that well-known gear problem. Possible. 2) Kato lightened-up the current release, or changed the wheel material, making your unit more slippery than the first run, could be proven with some scale and pull testing.... unlikely though. 3) The passenger cars you're dragging around are high-friction, which is also possible.... wheel/axle wipers for lighting, Bachmann Amfleets with inside bearings, some other passenger cars are notoriously high-drag trucks. The fact that most passenger units are full-body and can pull very well can kind of disguise it. Also possible. On my pulling charts the F-units of all manufacture (Trix, Kato, and Intermountain) score very well in tractive effort as they are so heavy. If your passenger lead is dead-flat, just the curve, and the cars roll well.... still generally puzzled.
