I've been looking at rolling roads ……………………….


Most makes seem to have various, but different, problems associated with them.  Some appear to lack connectivity, others lack stability and I understand some have limited loco capacity.  Price doesn't seem to make any difference.

Which make do you use and what, if any, niggles do you have with them ? 

Hi Peter,

I've been using the DCC concepts active roller version for all my tank engines and am very happy with them. They all run well, forwards and backwards at all speeds and without dangerous wobble. I use a piece of code 100 track to power it.

You can buy various combinations of powered and non-powered rollers, dependant on the loco configaration. The rollers come pre-installed with 00 gauge spacers and others are included for N, EM and I think P4 (maybe).

I've not yet tried tender locos, just ran them on the test track.

Bon courage,

Bill

Thanks Bill.

The DCC Concepts version does seem very popular although, in spite of your experience, I have read of "wobble" problems leading to instability.

I do wonder if their popularity is something to do with the fact that it seems to be the only one readily available at present….. :roll:   Also, whilst I can see the argument from their point of view, I don't really want to pay for all the different spacers - all except the "OO" gauge one would end up in the bin here.  Maybe they don't actually add much to the cost of the road but they do seem to be very wasteful because the majority of modellers stick to a single gauge - before anyone shouts they model in both "OO" and "N" or "O" - note I did say "the majority of modellers".

[user=6]Petermac[/user] wrote:

Thanks Bill.

The DCC Concepts version does seem very popular although, in spite of your experience, I have read of "wobble" problems leading to instability.

I do wonder if their popularity is something to do with the fact that it seems to be the only one readily available at present….. :roll:   Also, whilst I can see the argument from their point of view, I don't really want to pay for all the different spacers - all except the "OO" gauge one would end up in the bin here.  Maybe they don't actually add much to the cost of the road but they do seem to be very wasteful because the majority of modellers stick to a single gauge - before anyone shouts they model in both "OO" and "N" or "O" - note I did say "the majority of modellers".

Like Bill, I've found them to be fine. Because each roller unit is standing "solo" on your own laid track the stability is only as good as your track is level. So nothing to stop you having a dedicated dead flat track bed for their use.

The spare gauge spacers are just extra bits, I imagine the main cost is in the engineered roller components which slot into the spacers of your choice. Just some plastic moldings surplus to req's.

Plenty of pics on line illustrate the design.

Colin

It does seem that, the odd unfavourable comment aside, most users seem to like them Colin.

My idea is to have a dedicated "rolling road" so the track could indeed be level.  From what I've read, some wobble could be caused by less than perfect placement of the loco on the rollers.  One or two users have apparently found it fiddly to get perfect placement - more so the more axles a loco has, sometimes also including the tender which, on at least a couple of mine, house the speakers or the chip itself.

Has anyone used the Zeller version offered by Ten Commandments ?  "Vorsprung durch technik" springs to mind with German engineering …………….

Colin has nailed this pretty well Peter and when my railway room is in full swing, I'll securely fix my length of track to a board as a dedicated programming track, with the rollers parked at one end, ready to be set up for any particular loco to be run.

The cheaper non-powered rollers are used to support non-power collecting wheels. The individual axel roller sets enables all wheelbases to be exactly catered and yes, you do need to adjust the fit under all axles to ensure wobble free running before powering up, which takes just seconds.

I also checked out other offerings and for the price, these seemed to tick my necessary boxes.

Cheers,

Bill

Peter, Hornby do one as well R8211

Thanks Sol.

I know of the Hornby one but I think it's length and roller setting restrict it's use somewhat.

Memory may be letting me down but I think it won't take a 4-6-2 plus tender - as I said, there are cases where I can't separate the tender from the loco.

I'm not sure how many "Pacifics" I'll be able to use but I do already have a couple.  It's likely that the layout won't be suitable for such large locos but I don't want to start off with that restriction unless I'm sure.

I had mentally written the Hornby version out of my list of potentials but I'll have another look at it.

The reason I asked about the Zeller one is that I've read some good reports and it's cheaper than some of the competition ………………….. :roll:

Old thread, may of be some use Peter.

http://yourmodelrailway.net/view_topic.php?id=12871&forum_id=19&highlight=rolling+roads

I've got the DCC Concepts 6 axle version, which has been ok for smaller (0-6-0) OO gauge and 009.



Ed

I actually have all of them  :roll:
I know I need urgent help 

I would put them in the following order.
Zeller.
Bachrus.
Dcc Concepts.
Hornby.

The Zeller is well made & very easy to use.
You just slide the units along the guide rails provided.
No chance of them falling off or turning sideways on you.

Tony.

I use the Bachrus system, which I believe is out of production. 6 live rollers, 4 dead rollers, 2 long live supports for tenders. Or, in the case of tender drives, engines with no motor but pickups. Means I can run a 4-10-4 tender k locomotive with trailing truck and tender pickup. Or a Mainline or Lima Bo-Bo diesel with one powered bogie. Works on EM/P4 and HO/OO as the roller width is adjustable.

IMO an essential piece of kit.

Nigel

I won't ask why you have a selection of them Tony - usually, people collect the locomotives, not the rolling roads …………

However, your "league table" is very interesting and, having read reviews on most of them, is similar to where I'd have placed them although I might have put Bachrus at the top with Zeller coming a close second.

Unfortunately, the Bachrus one is no longer manufactured.  Isn't it always the case ?  When something works well, they either stop making it or insist on altering it until it won't work !!!

Nigel, your experiences are similar to those I've read elsewhere but, given that I can't get one, rather like waving a carrot on a stick in front of a donkey ………………………………….

The full size OO Zeller RR looks to be an impressive bit of kit. Clearly better suited for larger locos and those with Pony Trucks at the expense of its large footprint (40cm long) vs my little 6cm x 4cm storage tub for individual rollers.

 If like me you have mostly smaller 0-6-0, 2-6-2 etc and the odd 0-6-0 tender locos then DCC Concepts is perfectly fine, quick and easy to use with a limited number of rollers. Remember, not every axle needs to be on a roller.

 Looking at the Zeller demo video, it appears feasible to build a support cradle of some sort into which individual DCCC roller modules could be slid in like manner for greater stability when using 6 or more. Now there's an idea for a little project  :roll:.

[yt]esOzBR-cZL8[/yt]

 

[user=1338]Ed[/user] wrote:

Old thread, may of be some use Peter.

http://yourmodelrailway.net/view_topic.php?id=12871&forum_id=19&highlight=rolling+roads

I've got the DCC Concepts 6 axle version, which has been ok for smaller (0-6-0) OO gauge and 009.



Ed

Thanks Ed - I had read this thread - some interesting comments in there.  I could, I suppose, try building my own but I'm not sure I'd actually save that much money by the time one adds postage costs to the parts bill plus, I already have too much on my plate without taking on yet another job - to say nothing of the frustration of trying to source the necessary parts ……………

Thanks Colin - I see from the Ten Commandments video that their version will take up to 6 axles.  I think there's an even longer version on the market.  I watched a video where someone was running in a continental 2 car diesel unit with all axles supported.

One of the main problems I'd foreseen was with tender coupled locos.  I think the old H & M road had a "shelf" for the tender but most now seem to disregard tenders either by not being long enough or by making the required extra rollers (cradles) very expensive.  As I said, I have at least a couple of locos where the tender houses the speaker so is permanently coupled.

Peter,

go to their Website where all their RRs are shown. The one I referred to has 7 rollers plus a pony truck platform, that's 40cm long as compared to the "Compact" version 30cm in the video.

They do warn that larger items don't ship outside UK, best to check.

Thanks again Colin.

There appear to be two "Zeller" rolling roads on the market.  Not sure what the relationship is between them but there is or was, certainly a family tie-up because they both sell the same product - or at least it looks the same online.

There's a "Marion Zeller" who produces one which, as I said, looks the same as that marketed by Ten Commandments but theirs is, according to them, manufactured by "KPF Zeller".

The former is far more expensive than the latter so I wonder if there's been a family split and "KPF" are trying to kill of "Marion" ………………..  Maybe, on the other hand, that from "Marion" is of far higher quality ……………….. :hmm

I'm going to have a look at delivery restrictions regarding the length.  "Marion" does a huge one at 1 metre long but the largest "KPF" offering is, I think, 800mm long and comes with 10 rollers.  Their website is terrible !!!

Hi Peter
I have the DCC concepts ones and have run in steam locos with tenders on a dedicated board.  I have not noticed any wobble and they work very well.  My complaint is that they only really balance on the track, so actually getting a loco onto them can be a pain.  I am sure that it is my clumsiness, but I am forever knocking them and they dislodge or fall off.  Nothing that a bit of patience can't solve (although that can be in short supply at times!) but I do wish they were a little more fixed on the rails.  I got them when there was a price offer at either Rails or Hattons, can't remember which, so I choose to put up with the niggle.

Michael

You need them fairly loose initially so you can accommodate the torque. Tighten up when the loco sits nicely. It also helps to have a bit of weight over the CofG, usually the center driver. Issues with chairs interfering with the base of the rollers? Just cut them off.

Nigel

[user=1512]Headmaster[/user] wrote:

Hi Peter
I have the DCC concepts ones and have run in steam locos with tenders on a dedicated board.  I have not noticed any wobble and they work very well.  My complaint is that they only really balance on the track, so actually getting a loco onto them can be a pain.  I am sure that it is my clumsiness, but I am forever knocking them and they dislodge or fall off.  Nothing that a bit of patience can't solve (although that can be in short supply at times!) but I do wish they were a little more fixed on the rails.  I got them when there was a price offer at either Rails or Hattons, can't remember which, so I choose to put up with the niggle.

Michael

 

Michael,

I know what you mean. When placing a tendered loco it can be tricky if the rollers are too far out of correct position, I line mine up first with the loco standing alongside the track bed. This was why I wondered if some sort of external cradle would provide some extra support to stabilise the individual roller units when getting the loco "bedded down".

Another idea that came to me was to use the central groove in the bottom of the roller modules. It's there to accommodate a 3rd centre rail, but could perhaps be used to advantage. Either a third "faux rail" on your test track for more stability or perhaps better would be to insert a small magnet in the groove with a metal strip on the test track bed to attract the module.

When I'm mobile again (soon I hope) I'm planning some experiments, it's a challenge.