NYC 5500 - the Poppet Super Niagara!


el3637

Member
I posted this to a few other forums but thought it might be of interest here too.

Key Imports by Samhongsa, early 80s:
a38e_12.JPG


It arrived today. 5500 was the 27th and last Niagara built, the only one of its experimental S2 class, the first to be retired and probably the first scrapped. Arguably the best locomotive ever built for the NYC, it participated in head-to-head trials against diesels and did very well. But steam was done, and the 5500 was doomed by being an oddball so its days were as short as the stroke of its nearly nonexistent poppet valve gear.

I put a T1 decoder in it. Wiring extremely simple and clean. It had some kind of DC lighting circuit in it but it was just one in-line button shaped thing. The main thing I had to watch out for is the bottom motor terminal is perilously close to a spring screw that is grounded to the frame. That's a no-no. I bent the motor tab up a little and put black tape in between. Wired up a 1.5v bulb and resistor. There is plenty of room - the Niagara is the Fat Lady supreme. There's a large cylindrical weight in the forward half of the boiler, but enough room to easily run the headlight wire around it.

Discovered the difference between the 5500's tender and the normal S1B tender... coal bunker is slightly smaller - the humped part is about two feet forward. Would never have noticed without putting them side by side.

Comparing it to my unpainted Key S1B, the lack of differences is pretty striking. The 5500 is a Niagara through and through, almost nothing on the boiler is different. The two striking, instant spotting features are the lack of conventional valve gear - as in, just about nothing, and the Westinghouse compressors hung on the sides. The latter is made even more noticeable by the white edging on the walkways, so the notch really stands out. Gives it a strange, almost SP look - the drivers have the white edging too. Essentially it's in "builders photo" appearance. I will probably leave it alone for now but reserve the right to add a little dirt and do away with the edging later on.

The Canon motor is indeed the ubiquitous EN-22, which just sort of hangs at one speed on DCC between about 10 and 70. Not exactly, but it's weirdly unresponsive. Kind of jerks to a start and then just sort of does what it wants. It is absolutely dead silent. I mean, dead silent. All you can hear is the clickety clack of the 6 passenger cars. Well you can hear the clickety until it hits the high spots, then it sits there and slips. The 5500 is plenty heavy, but struggles to pull 6 Walthers passenger cars. A BLI Niagara can handle 10, perhaps even 12 easily.

We'll see. I am happy just to have it running and tolerating my Kato Karpet Route for now. Headlight looks good. Came with a #5 already on the back end. It may actually run ok with the BLI double headed. The Canon motor is somewhat sympathetic. Oddly I didn't turn off the BEMF on the T1, it's acting like it could use BEMF.

I suspect down the road, this guy is going to be gifted with a Kato motor, and quite a bit more weight. I see no reason why it wouldn't pull a lot better if I got more weight on the drivers. They are sprung and I suspect the lead and trailing trucks have a little lift. But the main problem is that it's nose heavy, very common in brass Niagaras. I can cram a lot of lead sheet up in there, when I take it apart to put the Kato motor in :)

Oh yeah, it doesn't like the Bachmann switches. Big surprise there. But that's only staging. Mains are all Kato and it handles it all just fine. Oh yeah, flat out floored I clocked it at about 60, slips down to 30 uphill, and runs out to about 80 downhill. It's just all over the place. Whatever I have left in EN-22 motors will find its way to ebay. It's too bad - they are super quiet motors but lack torque and have a very weird response curve under load. I actually think it's not the RPM spec of the motor, it's a lack of torque.

Andy
 
Nice looking engine indeed but those Canon EN-22 motors! I think they were literally first built for shutter advances on those really big Canon press corp cameras. I had one in a PFM NKP Berkshire in the late 70's As you say, it was was the quietest motor I ever had in any locomotive before or since. Unfortunately, it could hardly pull itself and two passenger cars around the track. I ened up relacing it with an NWSL can motor and added about 6 ounces of lead shot and it would them pull a respectable size train. That Canon motor never ran right in DC either. I remember having to use pulse control on my power pack to get so it wasn't always running at 50 scale MPH.
 
Very nice! The Niagara is in the top five all-time for steam on my list. I think it is as nice as the Duplex T1, even though they're different beasts.

I hear that brass engines, almost to an engine, have to be balanced by the owner. Guys who own lots of brass say they have to be re-balanced by adding weights here and there. Some put weights in the cab, in the cylinders, in the domes....wherever they can add a couple of ounces to get all the drivers gripping the rails. I think if you swallowed hard and tried it, you might find it can pull many more cars.

Just a thought.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As I type, the Double-Nickel-Double-Ought is running with 9 cars in tow on the Kato Route. This is the train it wouldn't even pull 2/3 of last night.

I opened it up and added one course of lead wrap in the firebox, another small loop in the hollow part of the boiler, a partial wrap around the cast weight, and a 1" or so long coil of lead in the smokebox. I probably added 3 ounces to it. It made almost no difference initially. I removed the lead truck and trailing truck, and it pulled the train with no problem. I tried it with no spring on the lead truck, but... it wouldn't make it even halfway around. I weakened the spring slightly by uncoiling it. Now it's doing ok, but I think the biggest problem is that the drivers have a surface like teflon. Between that and my oiled track, it can't get traction on even a slight grade. Which is all I have - the only grade is due to the uneven carpet and overall tilt of the house.

Other locos are not bothered at all by the oiled track, at least not to this extent. I'm hoping that by running it and breaking it in, the driver tires will get roughed up a bit for better bite. I also discovered an old trick works great: if I douse the rails in the spots where it slips with lighter fluid (which is a solvent for the oil), the 5500 marches right through. I ain't giving up oiled track though, it just tells me a little more tooth on the drivers and the problem will be solved. Question is, how much run-in will it require? I got time.

I guess I can determine the before / after weight by comparing to my other Key Niagara, which is virtually identical mechanically except for the S1B / S2 differences. Identical motor, drivers, lead/trailing trucks, weights, etc.

Andy
 
Very nice! The Niagara is in the top five all-time for steam on my list. I think it is as nice as the Duplex T1, even though they're different beasts.

True, but the T1 is the closest thing the Pennsy had to a 4-8-4.

I always wondered what a 2-10-4 would have looked like with Niagara styling. There was one other loco with Niagara styling... the A2 Berkshire. With the fat boiler, Selkirk front end, lack of elephant ears, small drivers, etc. it looked like a bald Niagara. Even had the same style cab, but no PT tender.

I hear that brass engines, almost to an engine, have to be balanced by the owner. Guys who own lots of brass say they have to be re-balanced by adding weights here and there. Some put weights in the cab, in the cylinders, in the domes....wherever they can add a couple of ounces to get al the drivers gripping the rails. I think if you swallowed hard and tried it, you might find it can pull many more cars.
Just a thought.

See above. What fascinates me is that plastic steam like BLI which weighs a lot less seems to have no pulling problems at all. I think it's just in the driver surface. I don't know how many Walthers passenger cars a BLI Niagara can pull, but I know it's at least 50% more than the brass 5500. Something to test for.

Andy
 
Nice looking engine indeed but those Canon EN-22 motors! I think they were literally first built for shutter advances on those really big Canon press corp cameras.

I'm glad somebody else has had the same experience. I've been told there are different specs for the EN-22, but every one I've seen is the same. Machine servo motors do not necessarily make good locomotive motors. Guy used to do the show circuit and sell these giant can motors as replacements for all kinds of stuff. The thing is, those equipment motors are designed to run at a steady speed, with a fixed load - and probably designed to stay very close to that speed even with variances in voltage. That's the exact opposite of what you want a loco motor to do, and that is respond in a linear fashion to small voltage changes, with enough torque to carry it through to the movement of a whole train.

It's just a matter of time until I replace this Canon motor. The first loco I had with one was a 1976(?) Key USRA 2-8-2. On my old Throttlepack, it had two speeds - zero and 25 mph. Like you say, I had to use the pulse to make it run at slower speeds, and then it cogged very strangely. I sold that loco after a couple years.

I'm hoping I can adapt a Kato motor to my Niagara. I can just cut one end of the shaft off. The shaft diameter seems to be the same (2mm) as most Japanese and Korean motors. I've never used a Kato motor without a flywheel - and there isn't room to include one without a major makeover of the gearbox and coupling, which I ain't gonna do. But I'll bet this thing warms right up with a Kato motor. In fact, I've never yet failed in any Kato remotor job. I've stuck them in OMI diesels to replace the Canons, and the difference is astonishing.

Andy
 
We musn't forget the mighty Mohawk with its elephant ears, Andy. I don't know if they were ever pressed into pax service, but I wouldn't be surprised. Speaking of which, the BLI version is due out sometime soon.......I hope. I don't know that I will get one right away, unless there is a hefty discount offered to the great unwashed.....including me.

-Crandell
 
We musn't forget the mighty Mohawk with its elephant ears, Andy. I don't know if they were ever pressed into pax service, but I wouldn't be surprised. Speaking of which, the BLI version is due out sometime soon.......I hope. I don't know that I will get one right away, unless there is a hefty discount offered to the great unwashed.....including me.

I think the BLI Mohawk may be stillborn. I haven't heard anything about it in a long time. OTOH, the MTH Mohawk is likely to get here fairly soon. I am taking a wait and see approach on that one. I have only had a close look at one MTH HO loco - a K4. The sound was so-so, of course I'd rather save a few $$ and get it without but MTH isn't offering it that way. It seemed mechanically to be pretty strong though. I own four NYC Hudsons and 11 Niagaras... but have no Mohawks. I've looked at the 1980's Key Mohawks off an on since they were new, but never had $$ and motive at the same time. They are likely to have similar issues (and EN-22 motors) but seemed to be fairly decent models. It may still be possible to acquire one (unpainted) for less than the announced sticker price of the MTH Mohawk.

Andy
 
BLI's delivery schedule posted on their website says Dec 08 through Jan. It may change, but that's what is posted there now. I know that Matt Williamson posted last week that we should ignore that list because it has some errors, but I can't say whether he was quick to correct it.

-Crandell
 
NIAGARA UPDATE.....

More pics... here you can see the Kato motor installation.
5500-02.jpg


Not yet wired in this shot. The white plastic is just a scaffold to keep the decoder from falling on the drive shaft. You can see the white paint on the driver tires - which I thought was tacky looking so I scraped it off - mostly with my fingernail.

5500-01.jpg


Side shot just a few minutes ago. Above the lead truck's lead wheel, you can see where I ground a notch in the frame to prevent the wheel from shorting against it in the 31" curves. The driver tires are back to natural nickel silver (pending weathering). The purple wire under the drawbar is my temporary fix to keep solid contact between loco and tender. Also notice how the pilot is practically dragging on the rails. My plastic insulation on the bottom makes it hit more often, but without consequence at least so far.

After all I did to it, it still looks fairly good. The valve gear pin fell out somewhere in shipment before I got it, so I need to replace that.

Andy
 
Andy, maybe it's the camera angle but it looks like the whole front of the engine is sagging slightly forward. Is there a way you can adjust the pilot angle from the frame? It doesn't seem like it should be so low that it's touching the tracks and its seems like the wheels should be shorting on a 31" curve.
 
Andy, maybe it's the camera angle but it looks like the whole front of the engine is sagging slightly forward. Is there a way you can adjust the pilot angle from the frame? It doesn't seem like it should be so low that it's touching the tracks and its seems like the wheels should be shorting on a 31" curve.

If there is a single most-common problem on brass locos - steam and diesel - it's the problem of the pilot being too close to the rail. In the noble effort to be accurate the pilot can end up being a very close shave, which is not tolerant of any track abnormalities. Add to that, pilots are easily bent in handling and shipping and they tend to bend... down.

I bent this one up just a shade. The pilot section includes the Selkirk shield and the pilot beam itself, fastened to a flat piece of brass that screws to the frame. Bending it up anymore isn't an option, it would be tilted at the wrong angle. About the only thing I could do is shim it at the point where it joins the frame, but if I do very much there, the bottom of the smoke lifters will start hanging below the pilot cross beam which ain't right either.

OTOH, take a look at this photo:
NYC6013X.JPG


The bottom of the pilot beam is even with the bottom of the smoke lifters, but the cowcatcher is well off the rail. Looking at this, it appears that my pilot casting is just too tall/too thick on the bottom. But if I start grinding, that will hose up the appearance as well. One thing off throws everything else off.

For the moment, the plastic shim is preventing shorts when the pilot does hit, and my grind on the frame keeps the lead truck out of trouble.

Andy
 
Andy, it's too bad there's no easy way to lift that pilot a few millimeters. You can certainly see from the prototype photo that the pilot itself was made too long since the steps are in about the right place compared to the lead truck. I guess the plastic shim is about the best fix as long as you don't run into any derailing problems. Does make you wonder if they ever test ran those things at the factory.
 
You are running this engine, I take it, and have not purchased it as an "investment"? Would it make sense, to retain the proportions, to grind away what you can at the bottom of the pilot and carve and sand to shape a plastic filler to look like the real thing? If you do a good job, no one else will ever know, unless they take a close look at the pilot. But it seems to me the plastic cover just compounds the problem as you have attached it because it reduces the span between irregularities in the rail surfaces and the pilot, itself.

-Crandell
 
Does make you wonder if they ever test ran those things at the factory.

Test run? What's that? Sure they test run. They stick it on a 3 foot section of straight track and run it back and forth.

The pilot doesn't drag on the rail, it just hits at any irregularity, or just from the soft springing of the drivers any time it pitches forward a little.

I'd like to say that brass of today doesn't suffer the operational problems that 1980s brass did. But I'd be lying... it's just as bad, overall, the occasional gem notwithstanding.

I have an OMI J1E Hudson that is a thing of beauty, and it runs very nicely as well. But... I have not installed a decoder in it yet. Thus, it has only a few minutes run time. I wonder if after a couple of hours, the paint will start wearing off in a few places and it will be sputtering and sparking just like my Niagara...

Andy
 
You are running this engine, I take it, and have not purchased it as an "investment"?
-Crandell

If I were going to invest $800, I'd buy some P&G stock, not a brass loco.... nope, for that kind of money, I don't want a pretty paperweight. It's gonna run, and I've already "defaced" its factory perfection by replacing the motor, adding weight, removing the (incorrect) lettering from one side of the tender, removing the tacky "whitewalls" on the wheels (all of them), grinding a notch in the frame, soldering jump wires on the tender, and gluing that piece of plastic to the pilot. Oh yeah, decoder and new light bulb too.

Still to go: weathering, tender jump plug, coal load in tender, and perhaps some pilot mods.

The shim on the bottom of the pilot is .005" styrene so it doesn't take up much room. And it is hitting the rail frequently, if I am to believe the streaks being left on it. But now after looking at some photos of the real Niagara pilot, I can clearly see the bottom of the cowcatcher is too thick. Which means I can take probably .030" off the bottom without spoiling its appearance, and still have room to add the .005" plastic insulator strip. Just need to check a few more photos and be 100% sure.

Andy
 
I ain't giving up oiled track though, it just tells me a little more tooth on the drivers and the problem will be solved.

The local club I'm a member of is currently experimenting with Automatic Transmission Fluid for track oiling. It's got all of the oxide reducing capabilities of the regular stuff, but it also is designed to not be as slippery as most oils, so it doesn't reduce the traction like the others do.

So far the experiments have been quite positive.
 
If I were going to invest $800, I'd buy some P&G stock, not a brass loco....

I dunno... Seen the market lately? Some stocks make brass lokies look like blue chips in comparision. $800 bucks worth of WaMu for example is only good for toilet paper now, and it's too rough and scratchy for that...
 
I did a little calculation and found that its caloric content is better than its monetary value. Burn it. :rolleyes:
 



Back
Top