It's a year overdue, but it looks like the 1702 is going to make its date with the Tuckesegee River Excursion this year. Opening day of steam on the Great Smoky Mountains Railroad is on April 3, 2004.

Ex USarmy #1702 moved under it's own power today for the first time since October of 2002. It didn't venture far from the Dillboro yard because of track work just West of Cowee Tunnel, but made an appearance at the Dillboro boarding platform before spending the rest of the day stretching it's legs around the yard. (I was going to post a picture, but haven't figured that part out yet)

Among other things, the 1702 recieved four new (and I mean NEW) drive axles, 8 new driver boxes made from billet material, 6 new crankpins, all new shoes/wedges, and rod brass. Automatic lubricators were installed to suppliment the new hubliner design so that they might last even longer on this curvy RR.

A big thanks goes out to Steam Operations Corporation, Tennessee Valley Railroad Museum, and the Durango and Silverton NG RR.

Come see the 1702 this year. The only operating S-160 in the US! (Sorry, shameless plug I know)

Ryan



lima709@usadaily.net

Great news! One steamless year on the GSMR is a year too many. I noticed on the schedule that the engine is mostly confined to Dillsboro to Bryson City trips and is not making many trips into the Nantahala Gorge. Is there a specific reason for this, maybe something to do with the longevity of the bearings? Anyways, you guys have a great operation that I always enjoy visiting. See you in May!

higginson_john@hotmail.com

We're all glad to hear that you've got 610's cousin all back together. If no one has heard ever the bark of one of these USATC 2-8-0's, then you need to visit either the Great Smokies or the Tennessee Valley (yes, another shameless plug).

I'll also be interested to see what kind of temps you see on the new oil lubricated journals. I think it should be better than journals lubricated with that waxy stuff they call hard grease.

G. Mark

Look at our Revamped Website
aw90@comcast.net

> I'll also be interested to see what kind of
> temps you see on the new oil lubricated
> journals. I think it should be better than
> journals lubricated with that waxy stuff
> they call hard grease.

I hope I'm not jinx'ing this, but two days of running and the temps never got above ambient that I could tell. Of all the bearings, journals and rods, the only ones that showed a sign of heating up were the rear main rod bearings. One heated up to around 130 F and the other around 100 F. This is while pulling against a trailing dismal with full dynamics at about 7-10mph for about 4 miles. (GP-9 with std taper dynos, about 250-300 amps). This was a bit harder pull than a 10 car train from Dillsboro to Bryson City. Everything else ran down around 60-70 deg F. Everything is dead quiet (except the stack), and the loco is pretty well square.

I am using Journaltex HD57 with standard 6x11 journal pads in the cellars, with a slightly modified oil groove pattern (from the box pulled form #611)that carries the oil from each side of the axle (depending on direction of movement) to a groove almost the width of the bearing at about 10 and 2 o'clock. That should help lubricate the top of the bearing and also pull more oil down to the pulling face of the bearing. The loco rolls like it was still on the roller bearings. I happy with it at this point, but it will be interesting to see how it does once everything losens up and wears in.

My local distributer just informed me that the Texeco product has been discontinued and the new Shell product is the same stuff with a different name. I hope that the name is all that is different, because Exxon and Mobile don't carry their comparable products anymore. (De Zha Vue, anybody?!)

Ryan


Lima709@usadaily.net

Since G. Mark started the shameless plugs, I finally put up my photos of the Tennessee Valley Railroad from when I was in Chattanooga last year. Click on the link, and then the "Tennessee Valley 2003" link on the left side of the page.

Enjoy!


Al's Rail Photos.
acp19809@yahoo.com

May I ask why you switched to friction bearings? Did the roller bearings give problems? We at the MCRR have debated doing roller bearing conversion and I would be interested in hearing the good and the bad. Thanks,
Jess

cjvanwinkle@hotmail.com

Hi Ryan:

Glad to hear the 1702 is out and about with her new parts.

The bad news about Texaco discontinuing its HD57 Journaltex lubricant is not unexpected as the market for journal oils has all but disappeared in the larger railroad industry. Whether the Shell product is comparable remains to be seen. Even if it is comparable Shell will probably discontinue it too.

I can buy and drop ship ARG's railroad journal oil (55 gallon drums) at their refinery in Bradford, PA if anyone is interested. ARG's railroad sales manager told me last year they are the major competitor for Texaco in the East and their journal oils are equivalent or better. I believe him because I buy all my cylinder base stocks from ARG. ARG is in no danger of closing out their journal oils because they are a small specialty producer and a tough competitor. Their refinery is the oldest continuously operating lube oil refinery in the world. Kendall cranked it up in 1881 when Pennsylvania was the world's leading producer of oil. Nonetheless, this operation is thoroughly modern and exclusively refines Pennsylvania paraffinic crudes from New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio. Their and our products are USA all the way from the well head to the drum.

Where bearing loads are heavy and speeds are low my Pin, Bearing & Journal Lubes are superior to light viscosity journal oils. In fact I beleive car journals that run under 15 mph and locomotive bearings that operate in the boundary lubrication modes are better lubricated with the ISO220 (SAE90) PB&J lubricant because it has better oiliness and viscous shear at low speeds.

Scott Lindsey had me forward specifications to you during the engine's overhaul but I never got a response. If I can be of service please contact me. I welcome inquiries from any other operators looking for a good source of lubricants made specially for steam railroad equipment.

Bill Petitjean

> I hope I'm not jinx'ing this, but two days
> of running and the temps never got above
> ambient that I could tell. Of all the
> bearings, journals and rods, the only ones
> that showed a sign of heating up were the
> rear main rod bearings. One heated up to
> around 130 F and the other around 100 F.
> This is while pulling against a trailing
> dismal with full dynamics at about 7-10mph
> for about 4 miles. (GP-9 with std taper
> dynos, about 250-300 amps). This was a bit
> harder pull than a 10 car train from
> Dillsboro to Bryson City. Everything else
> ran down around 60-70 deg F. Everything is
> dead quiet (except the stack), and the loco
> is pretty well square.

> I am using Journaltex HD57 with standard
> 6x11 journal pads in the cellars, with a
> slightly modified oil groove pattern (from
> the box pulled form #611)that carries the
> oil from each side of the axle (depending on
> direction of movement) to a groove almost
> the width of the bearing at about 10 and 2
> o'clock. That should help lubricate the top
> of the bearing and also pull more oil down
> to the pulling face of the bearing. The loco
> rolls like it was still on the roller
> bearings. I happy with it at this point, but
> it will be interesting to see how it does
> once everything losens up and wears in.

> My local distributer just informed me that
> the Texeco product has been discontinued and
> the new Shell product is the same stuff with
> a different name. I hope that the name is
> all that is different, because Exxon and
> Mobile don't carry their comparable products
> anymore. (De Zha Vue, anybody?!)

> Ryan


petitinc@nwlink.com

> May I ask why you switched to friction
> bearings? Did the roller bearings give
> problems? We at the MCRR have debated doing
> roller bearing conversion and I would be
> interested in hearing the good and the bad.
> Thanks,
> Jess

Jess,

Ryan supplied info on this which appears in a story on my "News" page. See the link below.

Hugh


The Ultimate Steam Page- News
whodom2001@yahoo.com

> May I ask why you switched to friction
> bearings? Did the roller bearings give
> problems? We at the MCRR have debated doing
> roller bearing conversion and I would be
> interested in hearing the good and the bad.
> Thanks,
> Jess

My earlier post that Mr. Odom refered to below should give you an overview of the things that were identified as weak points in the roller bearing conversion design. I believe that a roller bearing conversion can be done with sucess, but that it must incorporate those things for it to be successful. Then it all becomes a cost vs. benifits analysis.

The return to friction bearings on #1702 was not a case of simply returning to the original design. Other changes were made to deal with the issues that originally sponsered the decision to make the roller bearing conversion. One of these reasons was that there was alot of wear on the locomotiveÂ’s hub liners. The locomotive routinly works in curves at an excess of 12 degrees, and up to as sharp as 17 degrees. Another reason is that the figurative odemeter on the locomotive is 0, because it never gets turned (I'm working on that). That #4 drive axle catches it every day on the way back East. Another issue was the lack of facilities to work on the locomotive. This is still an issue, although a solution is in the works. For instance, there will still be a need to remove the drivers from the loco, but we are hoping to decrease the frequency by being able to replace the hub liners without disassembling the running gear. That doesnÂ’t mean we wonÂ’t inspect the running gear any less often.

During the retrofit to friction bearings, and at the suggestion of Scott Lindsay of Steam Operations Corporation, we designed, fabricated, and installed a replacable hub liner. This hub liner can be replaced and the lateral reset to "new" without removing any other componants of the locomotive. In fact, it could be done every 31 day boiler wash if it was necessary, for only the cost of the replacable part. We are currenly using a bronze hubliner that is common across all eight drive wheels.

Any operation that is looking to convert their locomotive to roller bearings, I would caution. Give Scott Lindsay or myself a call. We have learned a thing or two about what makes the roller bearings survive or not survive. There are other things that can be done, like the replacable hub liners, that will save your operation many $$$ in the long run, and dodge the large initial investment in roller bearings.

Ryan


lima709@usadaily.net