| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
 Posted - 09/06/2013 : 22:26:28
|
Today is Friday, September 6th, and my new Kato HO P42 finally arrived. Arrived a little late, but it's here. All I can say is... oh... WOW!!!
I was really, really skeptical of these things when I first heard they were going to use coreless motors. I was very concerned about the motors overheating, but later learned that coreless motors generally won't overheat unless stalled. I was also extremely concerned about whether or not the two motors would match. In the short testing I've done so far, which is about 10-15min, I've seen NO signs of the motors not matching. Of course, I'll be monitoring the locomotive's behavior as I put it on the road for real.
I must say that the photos on the Kato website do NOT do this locomotive justice. The locomotive looks really, really good. Now, there ARE some mistakes on the thing, but they're not as big a deal in real life as they are in some of the photos I've seen. I based many, if not all, of my comments/observations on Kato's photographs, which I realize now was a mistake. One point I noted was about the "bolt-o-nose". Close-up photography shows the bolted portion as raised above the carbody, when it's supposed to be flush. It is slightly raised, but it's barely noticeable. It actually looks very, very good. The twin-paned windshield is a bit big, but it's not obnoxiously big. Yes, it would be nice to have the wipers, but it may be just as well that they are not on there, since they probably would break off. It would be nice to have the mirrors on there, too, but their absence does not detract from the model. The plow is a little on the big side, but it's not nearly as obnoxious as it looks in the photographs. The radiator grilles at the rear of the locomotive are a little out of dimension, but it's not a huge deal. The overall presentation of the locomotive is really very outstanding.
Running characteristics? In a word, unbelievable. This is my first locomotive with coreless motors, and I am totally impressed. As I mentioned, I've only had the thing out of the box for a few minutes, and have only had a short test-run with it, but the test run was nothing short of amazing. Starts and stops are smooth, and there is more flywheel action in the locomotive than I saw in a demo on YouTube. The locomotive is quiet, and it pulls with authority. So far, it runs smoothly and evenly. I tested it running light, and also under load. The starts and stops are even smoother under load. I have it pulling a de-motored Athearn P42, a baggage car, and eight Walthers Superliners. It handled the train with no trouble at all, and the thing is capable of realistic passenger train speeds... and then some!
The lighting is amazing. Headlights, ditch lights, and numberboard light up, and the lights are very bright. Red markers light up in the front when reversing, which is cool. The toggle switch for the lights, posing as the GPS dome, works well, though I'm afraid the assembly may slip after "x" number of times toggled. We'll see.
Couplers... I'm not crazy about the factory-mounted couplers, as the shanks are long, but they work, so I'm not going to mess with them right now. I've heard they can be changed to Kadee or McHenry, or whatever, but, as I say, I'm not going to fool around with that right now.
What else can I say? This thing has totally blown me away, and I was a big skeptic. So, I would go ahead and get the thing, if you're thinking about it. I'm probably going to go ahead and get the other two road numbers. The one I just got is the AMTK 68. The other two numbers are 161 and 188. The first two Heritage units, AMTK 156 (phase I) and AMTK 66 (phase II) are due in November, I think, and I will probably get those, as well. Looks like I may be phasing out my Athearn fleet.
I will be contacting Kato, to let them know how pleased I am with their new P42. I would post a video of my new one in action, but I don't have a video camera.  Anyway, I think Kato has something really good here. I will try to add updates after I do some extended running with the thing, to see how it'll do long-term. I have high hopes for the future.
Now, time for me to put this thing on the road! 
Oops! Forgot to mention about the cab interior. The cab interior looks to be a partial interior. It's a combination cab interior and housing assembly for the lights. So, not a full cab interior. Engineer and fireman seats, with somewhat of a control desk, but the center and rear portions are the light assembly. |
Edited by - swchief3 on 09/09/2013 00:58:38 |
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2013 : 00:36:10
|
I've started the first "revenue" run with AMTK 68, and it got off to a shaky start. The locomotive started to surge wildly, alternating between losing speed and running away like a race horse. Stopped the train and checked the trucks, which removed very easily. (The press-fit trucks pop in and out quite easily.) No signs of the microscopic motors overheating. Cleaned the wheels, which I'd forgotten to do before we got underway, and found that the wheels were pretty badly fouled. The locomotive ran better after cleaning. I've been running for the last hour or so, with a handful of station stops. The surging is still there, but it seems to be working itself out, the longer the locomotive runs.
Current draw is absolutely minimal. 40mph (scale) on my throttle translates to 80-90mph (scale) with the locomotive and train, so it takes very little throttle to make the thing go.
The surging is a bit worrisome, but it seems to be going away. As I mentioned, I've never run coreless motors before, so I'm learning the characteristics as we go, as well as what it takes to break these things in.
I'm seeing differences between the Kato body and the Athearn body. The Kato's trucks and wheels appear smaller than the Athearn's, and the Kato body is less "robust" than the Athearn model. The Kato is more streamlined, overall, and its roof doesn't arch quite as high as the Athearn's. For what it's worth...
I'll be running the locomotive periodically through the rest of the evening, so I'll post again if there's anything major that happens. |
 |
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2013 : 04:49:29
|
OK... here are the photos.
I guess this board doesn't like Flickr.  |
|
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/07/2013 : 06:58:33
|
Well, I'm sorry to say that, the longer I run this locomotive, the less I like it. I stand by what I said before, though, about it being a good locomotive. It IS a good locomotive. I'm just finding that I am not liking its running characteristics.
At moderate to higher speeds, the motors and drives develop a two-toned buzzing sound that is hard to describe. The sound is not loud at all, but it's such that it makes me think the motors are about to explode. The Kato F40s are the same way. At higher speeds, those motors have a similar hum that makes me think they're about to blow up.
Acceleration and deceleration are not as smooth as when I first took the P42 out of the box this afternoon. The locomotive does surge during acceleration. It's subtle, but it's there, and I saw this on the YouTube demos. When I'm decelerating, the locomotive hangs up intermittently as it spools down. The twin motors still don't seem to be fighting with each other, but the locomotive feels tight, i.e., like it's working against itself.
As I mentioned in one of the previous posts, the Kato body is slimmer and trimmer than the Athearn. Check out the comparison photos, and you'll see the difference. The engines are exactly the same length, but, somehow, the Kato looks shorter from end to end. The Kato is slightly less tall than its Athearn counterpart, as well. The Kato kind of looks like an Athearn on a diet! This is just cosmetic stuff, though.
Since I've been running this Kato unit all evening, I will spend some time running a couple of my Athearn units tomorrow, to compare. Even though the Athearns often fail on the road, they are more consistent in their acceleration and deceleration than the Kato (so far), and they run more steadily and evenly at speed.
We'll see what the weekend brings, in terms of the side-by-side comparisons. I've learned a lot through this whole process. |
|
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/08/2013 : 03:50:47
|
Conclusion...
I just set up my next train run, this time with two Athearns... a P42 and a P40. The differences are significant. The Athearn units are much smoother in both acceleration and deceleration, and they do not surge like the Kato does. The Athearns have a much better throttle response than the Kato, overall. With the Kato P42, I didn't feel like I had much control over the engine. The Athearns hold cruising speed much better than the Kato, and with much less effort. The Athearns run smoothly and consistently at speed, while the Kato's at-speed running feels tight and "compressed".
I saw a cosmetic difference I hadn't seen before, and it's somewhat significant. In addition to the locomotive being generally undersized, its trucks are out of dimension. The sideframes extend too far past the ends of the wheels, thus making the entire truck look too long. Also, the wheels lack the height of both the Athearn wheels and the wheels on the prototype. (To my eye, anyway.) More nitpicking, I know, but I see what I see.
I'm glad I went ahead and got the Kato engine, so I could see for myself how it runs. Well, now I know, and I've found I really don't like it. The cosmetic issues are real, but I could overlook those things if I liked the way the locomotive runs. Unfortunately, I don't like the way it runs. That doesn't mean it's a bad locomotive; all it means is that I don't like its running characteristics. I'm staying with my Athearns, and the ones that have failed will get new motors. I will probably put this Kato unit up for consignment sale at my LHS.
My observations only. Your mileage may vary.  |
|
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/09/2013 : 00:57:54
|
Not so fast, rabbit...
To date, I've had a lot to say about both the appearance of and the running characteristics of the new Kato P42. What I failed to talk about was the drive.
"Failed" is an interesting choice of words, because, as I was running my Athearn P42/P40 combination this afternoon, I had a drive fail. I got the Kato P42 back out of its box, cleaned the wheels again, and put it back on the road. Believe it or not, it's running much better than yesterday. It's almost like a different locomotive.
Important note: this engine will perform poorly if the track is dirty. I had cleaned my tracks, but they weren't as clean as I thought they were. I'd been doing dry wipes only. When I did an alcohol-on-cloth cleaning, I pulled up a lot of ground-in carbon. I'm usually better about track cleaning than this, but my lapse in maintenance revealed that the Kato P42 has little to no tolerance for dirty track. Some engines will run OK on dirty track; this one will not.
Back to the drive. Though my impression of the Kato's running characteristics has been nothing short of a roller coaster, my impression of the Kato drive is good. I can't imagine this Kato drive failing.
I'll run the Kato the rest of the evening, and we'll see how it does. Sorry for going on at such length about this engine, but I figured I'd put my impressions out there, in the event it helps you make a decision about these things.
***
Since the above post, I've run this engine for about the last hour or so, with breaks, and it's the same as yesterday. Initial performance is quite good, but, the longer the engine runs, the worse it runs. It is surging and lagging again, even WITH clean tracks. The wheels get dirty very quickly, and you'll probably have to clean the wheels twice as often, given the engine's twin motors. Not only is the engine surging and lagging again, but it is now starting to stall on a section of track where I have wire leads. It hadn't been doing that before. It also stalled on a reverse move yesterday, after having run forward for several minutes.
No drive failures, at least, but the engine's overall performance is disappointing. It's time for me to write a letter to Kato. |
Edited by - swchief3 on 09/09/2013 04:08:55 |
|
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/10/2013 : 04:41:48
|
Good news. Significant improvement in running characteristics tonight (Monday, September 9th). Had yet another series of Athearn failures, so I put the Kato unit back on.
The difference tonight is that I cleaned the wheels differently. When I clean the wheels on my other locomotives, I dampen part of a cloth (old t-shirt) with rubbing alcohol, lay the wetted cloth down on the rails, put one truck over the cloth and the other truck on the rails. Open the throttle, and all the wheels spin. Clean one truck, and then the other. Can't do that with this P42. What I didn't realize is that, with twin, independent motors, spinning the wheels on one truck will not make the wheels on the other truck spin. (Oops.) So, I had to get my wire brush cleaner thing back out, and hook it up to the tracks and clean the wheels that way.
I've run this engine about an hour and a half this evening, and the thing is running smoothly. No surging or lagging during this session. No stalls. Starts and stops are really smooth. Straight-ahead running is smooth and unlabored, unlike before. This Kato P42 has been running like a champ tonight. I'm going to run for probably another hour or so, staying up past my bedtime, to see if the good running continues. I'm psyched.
|
|
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/11/2013 : 18:32:44
|
Ran the engine for a considerable amount of time last night (Tuesday, September 10th), and it's still running nicely. It will let you know when the tracks are dirty, but it's still doing very well, otherwise.
I had talked about the engine's overall size and ride height. While running the thing last night, I took a critical look at it, as well as watching some P42s in action on YouTube, and realized that the Kato ride height is actually correct. The Athearn units sit too high. We're talking fractions of degrees here, but it's still noticeable. So, the Kato unit may be better-proportioned than I'd originally thought.
I've hit the point where I'm seriously thinking about going ahead and getting the other two road numbers. I'm still not 100% used to this unit's running characteristics, but I feel certain this engine will not fail on the road, and that assurance goes a long way...
I did another side-by-side comparison to the Athearn units, and the Kato runs more solidly. There's a lot of room for error with the Athearns, in terms of road failures, e.g., a sludged commutator, dirty commutator grooves, thrown driveshafts, motor bearings binding up, fouled brushes, etc. These problems don't exist on the Kato. The Kato truck sideframes look a little artificial, but they don't show any signs of parts about to fall off. The Athearn sideframes are susceptible to parts falling off. Sometimes, the entire sideframe will break and fall off. It seems that Kato has made note of all these Athearn issues, and has ensured they don't happen with their units.
So, another $.02 from me, if it's useful to anyone out there.
|
Edited by - swchief3 on 09/12/2013 04:55:57 |
|
|
|
swchief3
Passenger
USA
142 Posts |
Posted - 09/13/2013 : 00:30:26
|
Not so thrilled with this thing today (Thursday, September 12th). This locomotive really gets the tracks dirty, and quickly. (Two motors = twice the gunk.) Once the tracks are fouled, it then starts to lose speed. I'm having to clean the rails much more often than with the Athearn units. Also, the Kato is starting to stall again at low speeds. It is stalling on random junction points on the rails, and it stalled right after cleaning both the tracks and the wheels. I would consider this a road failure, and that's a deal killer.
|
Edited by - swchief3 on 09/13/2013 00:42:26 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Kato HO P42 Review... good, bad, good again?
