Adding weight to rolling stock

[Thebaz]

What do people find best for adding weight to rolling stock? I can only find two obvious products on the market - DCC Concepts Liquid Lead and Deluxe Materials Liquid Gravity. The former is around £8 for 500g and the latter £10 for half as much. Can anyone explain why the Deluxe Materials is so much more expensive as they appear to be more or less the same product?

I've also looked for tungsten weights and asked on freecycle for any pieces of lead flashing people might have languishing in their back yards, but to no avail so far.

[Simon D.]

Lead strip from aquarium shops - used to weigh down plants.  Fairly inexpensive and easily worked.

[mickd247]

Or try this available from Amazon and or Ebay

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00IA5P86I/?coliid=I1JR8AOT5WO79D&colid=RLPIP8QLCCED&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it


No connection just a happy punter.




Mick

[Thebaz]

Couple of great ideas there - thanks chaps.

[Phoenix]

Hi Baz,

I have used this stuff before .....

https://www.anglingdirect.co.uk/korda-dark-matter-ultra-heavy-tungsten-putty

It is like a really heavy blu-tac, so like liquid lead, it can go into all sorts of spaces, but doesn't need glue and is really clean and easy to use.

All best wishes

Kevin

[Thebaz]

Hi Baz,

I have used this stuff before .....

https://www.anglingdirect.co.uk/korda-dark-matter-ultra-heavy-tungsten-putty

It is like a really heavy blu-tac, so like liquid lead, it can go into all sorts of spaces, but doesn't need glue and is really clean and easy to use.

All best wishes

Kevin

Ah, that looks interesting too. Cheers!

[Gordon]

Hi Baz,

I have used this stuff before .....

https://www.anglingdirect.co.uk/korda-dark-matter-ultra-heavy-tungsten-putty

It is like a really heavy blu-tac, so like liquid lead, it can go into all sorts of spaces, but doesn't need glue and is really clean and easy to use.

All best wishes

Kevin

Ah, that looks interesting too. Cheers!

The putty is non toxic which is an advantage

btw even normal blu tac can be heavy enough and is easily malleable into nooks and crannies. Play putty can also be heavy enough.

[PLD]

What do people find best for adding weight to rolling stock?

DON'T add extra weight to rolling stock!!!

I've never found a need for extra weight - the main effect is to reduce the number of vehicles that locos can move.
Those that advocate adding weight to cure other issues such as derailments are invariably attempting to address the symptoms of other issues such as poorly laid track rather than fixing the actual root cause...

[Train Waiting]

In the US, the NRMA has weight standards based on axle loading.  Within the context of British-outline 'N' gauge, I don't think this is necessary and I don't do it.  However, I do tend to weight the brake van, as I've convinced myself this makes goods trains move more smoothly.  Thus far, I do not appear to have worn out the bearings of my brake vans!

A well-known US 'N' scale layout used a friction device on the axles of the caboose of freight trains to similar effect.  This is, perhaps, a more elegant solution.

We tend to rely on overscale wheel and flange proportions to achieve the effect of suspension on the prototype.  Incorrect axle-loading can still be a source of 1:1 scale derailments, as a couple of hours in the company of RAIB reports will show.

Best wishes

John

[tunneroner61]

My experience is that most RTR wagons do not need additional weighting. However there are some kits such as the  laser woodcut GWR Macaws and Opens from the NGS and Osbornes that are so incredibly light that addition of a realistic load made makes them run much better. The load also makes them look better and more interesting. I have used brass tube, left over bits of rail, white metal signal parts and spare nuts, bolts and washers to good effect, the latter hidden under a cosmetic visible load. Just don't over do it to make the wagon too heavy.

[Phoenix]

Hi Baz,

Turneroner when saying don't make the wagon too heavy reminded me of something I should have mentioned about the fishing putty weight.

That is how easy it is to add weight little at a time by just pressing tiny bits on as needed.

I actually kind of used the stuff to loose weight on a tender.

The tender was really heavy, easily as heavy as the loco  , and so the train would not go up the incline to a bridge. I took the huge lump of metal out, then added the putty bit by bit until the tender was heavy enough to stop bouncing about, but light enough to go up the incline. 

It really is easy to use  although as Gordon said, normal blu-tac would probably have been ok

All best wishes

Kevin

[chrism]

My experience is that most RTR wagons do not need additional weighting. However there are some kits such as the  laser woodcut GWR Macaws and Opens from the NGS and Osbornes that are so incredibly light that addition of a realistic load made makes them run much better. The load also makes them look better and more interesting.

I recently built an NGS project no15 LM/BR 35 ton bogie trolley (Trestrol), for which the destructions recommended putting a load on it since it's so light (jut plastic and not a lot of it) and, being so low slung, has practically no space for adding any weight. However, I've found no problems with it running empty - when I was testing it to see how bad (or otherwise) it was at holding the track, it was always something else in the train that came off first. I will put a load on it sometime but it's not essential for running IMO.

The only wagons to which I do add a bit of weight is Peco LMS brake vans, which do seem to prefer running on the sleepers given half a chance.

As PLD said earlier, the real issue is more usually poorly laid track rather than excessively light stock with which I agree. I would also add excessive speed to that, whereby wagons can bounce off on dodgy joints.

IMO, the biggest cause of wayward wagons is, however, due to the constraints of practicality in the scale we use, in particular the gaps between the closure rails and crossing noses of points - partly caused by the need for excessive back to back and flange gap tolerances, further exacerbated by the unrealistic crossing nose angles we use. On a real point, one edge of a wheel starts to ride on the crossing nose before the other leaves the closure rail so it is supported throughout - ours have so big a gap that this doesn't happen, the wheel has to jump the gap. Often with short wheelbase wagons you can see it tip a little a it crosses the gap and, if it's travelling too fast it will hit the nose hard and bounce the whole wagon. Bogies on coaches and wagons are held more rigidly by the underframe/body so don't tend to have such a problem, however Steam loco bogies and pony trucks can also be problematic in this area.

To some extent, weight "could" help with the SWB wagons but, on the other hand, it can also exacerbate the problem if it's not dead central on the wagon's centre of gravity.

By far the simplest solution I've found is just not to run trains too fast, which also looks better anyway.

[Bealman]

I have never in my quite a few years (about 60, but losing count) of railway modelling found it necessary to add extra weight to any stock, no matter what the brand name.

[Thebaz]

An interesting discussion chaps, thanks for the contributions. Now I am in several minds about what to do 

[Steven B]

I've found that adding weight can help improve the appearance of a train as it runs as it holds the track better and bounces less on turnouts. However, you need to make sure that stock is free-rolling to start with.

However, I'd agree with the other comments that it shouldn't be used as a fix-all for poorly running wagons - I've seen 3d printed container wagons which weigh next to nothing running empty that can be pushed through complex pointwork without derailing because the track was well laid, the wheel-sets were to gauge and rotated freely.

It's easy enough to experiment with - take a few open wagons and add varying amounts of weight and see what effect it has and if it works for you.

Steven B.