foiled again LOL

Thank you for the correct information, goes to show that incorrect photographic information is out there, you cannot believe everything you see or are told!

Dazz

Could show you more than one in a couple of respected authoured books.

Although, sometimes its easy to make mistakes in photo's.  I have to rely on memory with many items as the book that I had that had years of records in it has gone missing, it included all the tours, train numbers, dates, loco numbers working them & engines in depots at the time.

As bad as that is there was at least 1 200 foot reel of film taken on the Short South & 1x 400 foot real of film taken on the Short North along with several other memento's.

............. and it has a clear headlight lense.

Sorry, just my nitpicking genes at work. LOL

My 3265 doesn't pull much of a load in comparison with my TrainOrama C32's (3265 with 3 NCR cars vs 3229 with 4 NCR's, 3 NRNY's and an Austrains LFX/LHG works set) up a 1:40 - 1:50 grade.  Will have to investigate a bit further.  Plus 3361 needs to be trialled as well.

Happy P'ing,

John

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).

As I remember it, we might have forgotten that Bob was disappointed with the first Trainorama 32, so much so that he scrapped the plastic body and built a new cast body to give it added traction (after taking control of the Company) Perhaps your comparison is an indication that he did not waste his money, despite getting his teeth kicked in here on RP for his model?
We can only hope future small engines do come out in metal, as  Eureka also learned with the K Class, which is also going to be metal. Was the 50? And Austrains have indicated they are moving to metal as well.  Perhaps a6et can tell us what he remembers a C32 can haul up a 1:50 grade in reality 1:1
Cheers
RodRod, Just a correction.  The 32cl was a model that was the work of Bob Cooke, but under the TOR brand, it actually arrived well before the change of ownership when he bought out the business.

Way it was reported back then was that the factory used at the time, SDK & its engineer Ivan told BBB after some tests, that the plastic body with metal underframe would not provide enough weight & said to not be able pull much at all, even with the full geared driven wheels which after all does take up space inside the limited boiler area.
The one thing that should not have changed though was to go with the metal tender rather than ABS or plastic as it added unnecessary weight that had to be pulled. The Ixion tender though I believe is ABS, so that should not be a problem with it.memory? I thought old memories became crystal clear when you reached the end of the line? Anyway you are right, but you did not tell us the loads these things could haul up 1:40-1:50 grades?
Cheers
Rod

Rod,

A 32 Class can haul 210 tons up a 1 in 40 grade.

PS - Don't tell James about 3229 with the time travelling train (just a trial of course).

As I remember it, we might have forgotten that Bob was disappointed with the first Trainorama 32, so much so that he scrapped the plastic body and built a new cast body to give it added traction (after taking control of the Company) Perhaps your comparison is an indication that he did not waste his money, despite getting his teeth kicked in here on RP for his model?
We can only hope future small engines do come out in metal, as  Eureka also learned with the K Class, which is also going to be metal. Was the 50? And Austrains have indicated they are moving to metal as well.  Perhaps a6et can tell us what he remembers a C32 can haul up a 1:50 grade in reality 1:1
Cheers
RodRod, Just a correction.  The 32cl was a model that was the work of Bob Cooke, but under the TOR brand, it actually arrived well before the change of ownership when he bought out the business.

Way it was reported back then was that the factory used at the time, SDK & its engineer Ivan told BBB after some tests, that the plastic body with metal underframe would not provide enough weight & said to not be able pull much at all, even with the full geared driven wheels which after all does take up space inside the limited boiler area.
The one thing that should not have changed though was to go with the metal tender rather than ABS or plastic as it added unnecessary weight that had to be pulled. The Ixion tender though I believe is ABS, so that should not be a problem with it.memory? I thought old memories became crystal clear when you reached the end of the line? Anyway you are right, but you did not tell us the loads these things could haul up 1:40-1:50 grades?
Cheers
Rod

Rod,

A 32 Class can haul 210 tons up a 1 in 40 grade.

Based in the 1965 Western WTT, 32cl could haul 255tons on both goods & passenger trains unassisted on the 1:40 grade.

Further west the through load for single 32 from OGE & Dubbo the load was 275 Mullion Creek - Dripstone for goods & 265 passenger.

Tumulla represents the worst case grade application for all loco's on 1:40 grades, the load was less for stopping passenger trains at Loftus 195 Tons owing to no momentum. Northern line the above loads shown for Tumulla also applied on the West Ryde Hornsby section, but most trains hauled heavier loads north of Hornsby.

easiest way to upload photos is use another site for hosting, I use this one it's very simple. https://postimage.org/

I thought it was worth testing to make sure it still worked, so used it to post up this interesting picture, looking forward to duplicating this when my pair of 32 class arrive.

Hi Dazz

Thanks for the tip will do it when i get back home.

Regards

Paul

To put that tonnage into perspective, the following are weights unloaded/loaded for some common rolling stock.

CCH 9/25
RU 11/35
BWH/BCH 19/61
S 8/23
GSV 10/14
BCW 17/27
LV 9/21
MLV 22/46
GLX 25/23
MHG 22/30
LHG 25/31
TAM MBE MFE 49
FS/BS 37
MHO 35
HUB 7 car 310
RUB 8 car 348
End platform cars 25

From what I have found in an old AMRM article, a 32 class was rated at the following tonnage for goods train loads on grades.

1 in 33, 165
1 in 40, 255
1 in 50, 325
1 in 66, 455
1 in 100, 720
level, 1000

To put that tonnage into perspective, the following are weights unloaded/loaded for some common rolling stock.

Based on these figures, for a 32 class on a 1 in 40 ruling grade, an empty goods train of 20 four-wheelers and van is not an unreasonable ask. Any model is invariably going to be running on sharper than scale curves. Can they do it?

To put that tonnage into perspective, the following are weights unloaded/loaded for some common rolling stock.

Based on these figures, for a 32 class on a 1 in 40 ruling grade, an empty goods train of 20 four-wheelers and van is not an unreasonable ask. Any model is invariably going to be running on sharper than scale curves. Can they do it?

of course prototypical applications would see many goods wagons loaded on the down and empty on the up, exceptions being among others, grain and live stock of course. What I really mean is that few trains were run completely empty. This just helps a little when you calibrate what your little model engine should pull.
The next thing to consider is the weight of the models. old epoxy kits have given way to modern injection molded stuff with needle point bearings in delrin type plastics, which helps them along the flats but still drags them back on the slopes. As well they appear heavily weighted sometimes for reliability.
As mentioned our curves can be too sharp,  as well. Our skills in laying track need to be considered also, with railway engineers using transitions into curves and following the lay of the land, even stepping long grades, tapering grades on curves and in some cases elevating the outside rail as well. They dug out cuttings and used the dirt removed to create embankments to soften the grade on the approach and departure Things we rarely worry about when laying model track.

One thing that Railways never do, is run empty vehicles in both directions all the time.

mind you my Eureka R Class, pulls 3 standard powerline cars or 3 Auscision E cars, up a 1 in 75 helix, drivers slipping all the way. I am told that the side rods will not take this punishment, and so I keep them in their boxes. I consider that 8 cars would be OK and prototypically I expected 14 cars, which my two Dockyard R's cannot do either (10 cars) However my SEM R does haul 14 cars with little slipping.  Must run the Eureka R's on a load of 4 wheelers and see if it can do any better

A lot of us at Exhibitions still run trains much too fast (happens to me towards the end of three days, as if I want to hurry it along to the finish ) And because we tend to mix our steam and diesels suggesting the end of steam is upon us, we should think about why the branch lines were closing and how short these last trains actually were.  

So what length should we run our model trains?   Rather than testing them and causing them to stall, maybe they would look better on our small garage layouts running them as the Railways actually did. In the marshaling yards combine the trains behind a diesel for the final run into the smoke
Cheers
Rod

putting all of this into a visual example, in the following photo, fully loaded wagons would represent around or a bit over 400 t, which would be more than a 48 class could handle on a 1 in 40, and more than a 32 class could handle on a 1 in 50 grade.

To put that tonnage into perspective, the following are weights unloaded/loaded for some common rolling stock.

Based on these figures, for a 32 class on a 1 in 40 ruling grade, an empty goods train of 20 four-wheelers and van is not an unreasonable ask. Any model is invariably going to be running on sharper than scale curves. Can they do it?

of course prototypical applications would see many goods wagons loaded on the down and empty on the up, exceptions being among others, grain and live stock of course. What I really mean is that few trains were run completely empty. This just helps a little when you calibrate what your little model engine should pull.
The next thing to consider is the weight of the models. old epoxy kits have given way to modern injection molded stuff with needle point bearings in delrin type plastics, which helps them along the flats but still drags them back on the slopes. As well they appear heavily weighted sometimes for reliability.
As mentioned our curves can be too sharp,  as well. Our skills in laying track need to be considered also, with railway engineers using transitions into curves and following the lay of the land, even stepping long grades, tapering grades on curves and in some cases elevating the outside rail as well. They dug out cuttings and used the dirt removed to create embankments to soften the grade on the approach and departure Things we rarely worry about when laying model track.

One thing that Railways never do, is run empty vehicles in both directions all the time.

mind you my Eureka R Class, pulls 3 standard powerline cars or 3 Auscision E cars, up a 1 in 75 helix, drivers slipping all the way. I am told that the side rods will not take this punishment, and so I keep them in their boxes. I consider that 8 cars would be OK and prototypically I expected 14 cars, which my two Dockyard R's cannot do either (10 cars) However my SEM R does haul 14 cars with little slipping.  Must run the Eureka R's on a load of 4 wheelers and see if it can do any better

A lot of us at Exhibitions still run trains much too fast (happens to me towards the end of three days, as if I want to hurry it along to the finish ) And because we tend to mix our steam and diesels suggesting the end of steam is upon us, we should think about why the branch lines were closing and how short these last trains actually were.  

So what length should we run our model trains?   Rather than testing them and causing them to stall, maybe they would look better on our small garage layouts running them as the Railways actually did. In the marshaling yards combine the trains behind a diesel for the final run into the smoke
Cheers
Rod

Rod, & others,  Loads are not straight forward, whether in HO or 1:1 gauge especially for steam, they are affected by grades, & curves, even a 1:40 on one line may well be different to that on another line or even differences on the same gradient on the same line but different location. As mentioned, the Short North, had a load as far as Hornsby for all loco’s  & trains, both goods & passenger. But from there on to Broadmeadow a higher load, even though there was 2 more 1:40 grades Hawk Mount & Fassifern.
Holiday times & heavy bookings made passenger trains on the short north having 30cl tank engines assisting the mails & other express services hauled by even 38cl loco’s from West Ryde to Hornsby, where the train engine would take it on by themselves, often there were 2 such 30cl rostered for the working.
Thing is that there are also the amount of vehicles on the train as well as it composition, heavy & loaded vehicles had to be marshalled at the front, light & empties at the rear, pick up trains were rarely fully loaded but marshalled in order of the sidings they had to shunt en route.
Anyone with 1:40 grades on their layout has a lot of working out as to the curve as well as load & how long the section, I have one, & it has provided some problems, but so do some other spots. For the layout, I have made a point of making a train be no longer than the average loop on the layout, that also applied in the 1:1 gauge as well, why loads & lengths were vital in the composition of trains.
When told the load & length that was compiled for all stations on the line that may be affected, especially in some locations with limited loops or refuges, the driver would know if the train was going to be too long to allow a crossing, therefore the train would sent on to the next location for the crossing that had the length required, although on double lines if there were point work available it was possible for the train to be shunted to the opposing line to allow the other to run through. Yerrinbool, Bundanoon & Wingello were 2 cases in point regarding that.
As for empty vehicles, some types of wagons, such as wheat, oil, & perishable wagons would usually only run empty & loaded in one direction only.  Other types such as open wagons which were essential to operations across the state was another matter altogether, as you would see both down & up trains with large numbers of empty S & K wagons, likewise bogie empties, which were very much dependant on orders from customers.
Pick up trains were often full of empty wagons & built up with the above types in case an SM wanted extras for customers. This was especially so on lines that ran 3 trains a week in each direction, they would be dropped off on the down & picked up loaded the next day on the up.

Ixion has posted a message to facebook regarding some issues noted by some receiving their models via Austpost. refer https://www.facebook.com/ixionmodels/posts/1099398203458899

My 32 arrived damaged. I have lodged an official complaint with Aust' post. Good to see that the IXION team have acknowledged the issue and are taking steps to address.

My 32 arrived damaged. I have lodged an official complaint with Aust' post. Good to see that the IXION team have acknowledged the issue and are taking steps to address.

Not much point in complaining to Australia Post when Ixion admit that the problem is in the packaging.

I had Lodged my complaint before I found out about the packaging issue.

I found that my Ixion 3273 could only haul four bogie goods vans on level track before severely slipping on 36 inch radius curves. I removed the front bogie and discovered three spacing washers and a small spring. I left all of these off and re-attached the bogie. The result was a transformation and a loco that now happily pulls six Austrains end platform cars plus a van on level track.

Alan

Did you add any weight to the leading bogie?
I've had the bogie off and noticed the washers and springs. When I reassembled I found the tiny spring and washers to be a pain in the you know what! To put back!

Cheers

Did you add any weight to the leading bogie?
I've had the bogie off and noticed the washers and springs. When I reassembled I found the tiny spring and washers to be a pain in the you know what! To put back!

Cheers

It worked fine for me without adding extra weight to the front bogie. I suppose it might depend on track conditions on each layout but certainly worth trying.

Alan

Did you add any weight to the leading bogie?
I've had the bogie off and noticed the washers and springs. When I reassembled I found the tiny spring and washers to be a pain in the you know what! To put back!

Cheers

It worked fine for me without adding extra weight to the front bogie. I suppose it might depend on track conditions on each layout but certainly worth trying.

Alan

All my loco's have the spring removed, helps more than one can imagine.  I also put a small strip of lead flashing each side of the cut out for the main pin, I secure them both on the top side of the bogie with clear roof & gutter sealant. after securing allow 24 hrs for the sealant to set & then trim any excess that has come out.  Using the sealant means that if you have need to remove, you can peel the flashing off & the sealant comes off as well.

I found that my Ixion 3273 could only haul four bogie goods vans on level track before severely slipping on 36 inch radius curves. I removed the front bogie and discovered three spacing washers and a small spring. I left all of these off and re-attached the bogie. The result was a transformation and a loco that now happily pulls six Austrains end platform cars plus a van on level track.

Alan

That is a terrible tractive effort for 32 class, even after removing the spring from the leading bogie. As a comparison my lightest locomotive, a Hornby PUG 0-4-0 weighs only 75g. It pulls 7 Austrains end platform cars on straight flat track. My brass 32,s weight just over 200g, and can haul 8 Austrains end platform cars + 2 Austrains dog boxes up a 1 in 40 straight or a 1 in 70 grade around a 914mm radius curve.

Cheers,

Terry Flynn.

Got my 3361 out of the box and onto the layout. It effortlessly hauled 6 Austrains End Platform cars and an extra R car for good measure. Then hauled a non-prototypically large load of bogie and four wheel wagons around the layout and shunted through the yard with numerous tight crossovers.
Must have got a good one! Just needs DCC and a bit of weathering.

Now that I have my C32.....
My take on this model. Disclaimer first up, I have no association with Ixion other than as a customer. A very satisfied customer for that matter.

1) I found my loco to be well packed and arrived undamaged noting that Ixion have run into damage issues.

2) Visually, the loco looks good. I have noticed the funnel and in the layout room under layout lighting, the joins are not that noticeable. They are much more apparent in the photos I've seen on the net. The headlight lens is a little weird, but it is not a major issue for me.The loco has rear marker lights on the tender which I wasn't aware of. I like that touch as it saves me adding them. Though, I think they are too "white" for this kind of loco. A similar comment for the headlight... it is very "white". Others have mentioned the headlight stand and the clack valves... neither of these items are of a concern to me. Other details are quite stand out. There is beautiful detail inside the cab. Really nice and fine stands for the tools that are packed separately. The wheels are nicely blackened. Lots of very nice detail all around the loco.

3) Getting into the tender for DCC purposes is without a doubt, the easiest task I've ever encountered. And when you take the body off... it goes back on just as easily and no tools required!

4) Running qualities.
Out of the box, on my test track, it ran very sweetly. It traversed a S-curve set of point work without any issues either in forwards or reverse. All wheels were within gauge. I should also add, power pickups on all driving wheels and all tender wheels. Also assists making the loco a smooth runner.

5) Hauling qualities.
Last night, I had it at a friends layout. This layout is USA prototype. I had the loco circling around this extensive layout for quite awhile through numerous double slip junctions without issue. We then tried hauling wagons. Again, I state that the loco was as delivered. I attached four US 40 foot box cars (vans) and a caboose and it hauled that load effortlessly around the layout (large radius curves likely greater than 900mm radius) including a 1:70 up and down gradient. We then attached another box car and with that load, it just began to slip on the up 1:70 grade. The addition of a sixth box car brought the train to a stop on the gradient near the top. On each run, the voltage was kept identical so that the same power was used.

We then tried hauling a load on the flat with the same power. At 12, 40-foot box cars and a caboose, the loco began to struggle with the load but was not slipping, just noticeable reduced speed.

I was personally quite happy with this performance.

Changes that I intend to do which may add performance is taking the spring and washers off the leading bogie. I'll add a little lead to the bogie. I also intend to take the spring and washers off the post for the tender draw-bar. I'll also let out the tender draw-bar hole a little just to make that action a little looser.

6) Layout owner's opinion, sight previously unseen.
This friend of mine was quite impressed with the loco. He is a very experienced modeller and was quite impressed with running qualities and the visual impression of the loco.

7) Summary.
I am quite happy with the loco. I'm happy with how it runs. I am happy with the detail. I am quite pleased with my investment. I think that it is a great little loco for my layout.

Cheers to all,

Dan

My 32 arrived damaged. I have lodged an official complaint with Aust' post. Good to see that the IXION team have acknowledged the issue and are taking steps to address.

The sender has the contract with Australia Post to deliver the loco, your contract is with Ixion.  Ixion need to repair or replace.
Mark

I note the photos in the AMRM News section in August are carefully arranged to avoid showing the headlight lens.

While that isn't dishonest, it is misleading.

M636C

To put that tonnage into perspective, the following are weights unloaded/loaded for some common rolling stock.

Based on these figures, for a 32 class on a 1 in 40 ruling grade, an empty goods train of 20 four-wheelers and van is not an unreasonable ask. Any model is invariably going to be running on sharper than scale curves. Can they do it?

My experience is as follows.

Austrains ultimate S wagons are around 35g, so 20 adds up to 700g. Add say 80g for the tender. On the straight up a 1 in 40 the locomotive weight to train weight works out at 0.23, so our locomotive needs to be at least 180g. This assumes all the locomotive weight is on the driving wheels, and the tender and s wagons run freely. Both Brass and the Trainorama 32's are heavier and can haul 20 Austrains ultimate s wagons for a 1 in 40 on the straight if you remove the spring from the leading bogie, add weight to the cab roof of the brass model and ease the tension or remove the pickups from the Trainorama tender. For 914mm curves to get the same result you need to ease the grade to 1 in 70. So the answer is yes, it is doable if your models are designed correctly.

Cheers,
Terry Flynn

Got my 3361 out of the box and onto the layout. It effortlessly hauled 6 Austrains End Platform cars and an extra R car for good measure. Then hauled a non-prototypically large load of bogie and four wheel wagons around the layout and shunted through the yard with numerous tight crossovers.
Must have got a good one! Just needs DCC and a bit of weathering.

What was your non-prototype large load? I assume your layout has no grades.

Cheers,
Terry Flynn.

Now that I have my C32.....
My take on this model. Disclaimer first up, I have no association with Ixion other than as a customer. A very satisfied customer for that matter.

1) I found my loco to be well packed and arrived undamaged noting that Ixion have run into damage issues.

2) Visually, the loco looks good. I have noticed the funnel and in the layout room under layout lighting, the joins are not that noticeable. They are much more apparent in the photos I've seen on the net. The headlight lens is a little weird, but it is not a major issue for me.The loco has rear marker lights on the tender which I wasn't aware of. I like that touch as it saves me adding them. Though, I think they are too "white" for this kind of loco. A similar comment for the headlight... it is very "white". Others have mentioned the headlight stand and the clack valves... neither of these items are of a concern to me. Other details are quite stand out. There is beautiful detail inside the cab. Really nice and fine stands for the tools that are packed separately. The wheels are nicely blackened. Lots of very nice detail all around the loco.

I noticed the prototypical joins in the funnel from normal viewing distances.

3) Getting into the tender for DCC purposes is without a doubt, the easiest task I've ever encountered. And when you take the body off... it goes back on just as easily and no tools required!

It's easy until you want to install a stay alive capacitor. Not enough room using the factory supplied board.

4) Running qualities.
Out of the box, on my test track, it ran very sweetly. It traversed a S-curve set of point work without any issues either in forwards or reverse. All wheels were within gauge. I should also add, power pickups on all driving wheels and all tender wheels. Also assists making the loco a smooth runner.

The problem with the tender pickup on the Ixon 32 is they wipe on the wheel rims. This results in a high drag tender, adding to the poor pulling ability of the model. There are better ways of providing tender pickups.

5) Hauling qualities.
Last night, I had it at a friends layout. This layout is USA prototype. I had the loco circling around this extensive layout for quite awhile through numerous double slip junctions without issue. We then tried hauling wagons. Again, I state that the loco was as delivered. I attached four US 40 foot box cars (vans) and a caboose and it hauled that load effortlessly around the layout (large radius curves likely greater than 900mm radius) including a 1:70 up and down gradient. We then attached another box car and with that load, it just began to slip on the up 1:70 grade. The addition of a sixth box car brought the train to a stop on the gradient near the top. On each run, the voltage was kept identical so that the same power was used.

We then tried hauling a load on the flat with the same power. At 12, 40-foot box cars and a caboose, the loco began to struggle with the load but was not slipping, just noticeable reduced speed.

I was personally quite happy with this performance.

Changes that I intend to do which may add performance is taking the spring and washers off the leading bogie. I'll add a little lead to the bogie. I also intend to take the spring and washers off the post for the tender draw-bar. I'll also let out the tender draw-bar hole a little just to make that action a little looser.

After you have removed the bogie spring you may notice the model centre of gravity is to far forward. I would suggest you add a piece of sheet lead under the cab roof. I would also remove the tender pickups to improve traction.

6) Layout owner's opinion, sight previously unseen.
This friend of mine was quite impressed with the loco. He is a very experienced modeller and was quite impressed with running qualities and the visual impression of the loco.

I am unimpressed with the height relationship between the  funnel and dome, the dome should not be taller then the funnel. Ixon's manufacturer has used the same sized counter balances on the driving wheels to save money. All these deviations from prototype are difficult to correct.

7) Summary.
I am quite happy with the loco. I'm happy with how it runs. I am happy with the detail. I am quite pleased with my investment. I think that it is a great little loco for my layout.

Cheers to all,

Dan

Summary
I am quite happy I waited to see what the model was like and saved my money.

Terry Flynn.