When listening to the faults, I worked these in service and I can say you described the actual class 142 :D

Great vid again, the only experience I've had with Pacers were its final couple of years in service between Leeds and Barrow, and I loved them, yes they rocked and rolled, nowt wrong with R n R ha ha, and coming down the Bentham line was always "interesting". But the thing to remember these were a cheap stop gap transport solution for poorly used services and because they were cheap to run they managed to save great chunks of our railway system, and for that they deserve a great vote of thanks, and they lasted over thirty years. One day I hope I'll take a ride on one courtesy of our Hertige lines.

An informative video - thank you for sharing! Recently had a Pacer visit Ewhurst Green model railway - sadly it fouled the conductor rail so was carded. As a aside my last journey on a Pacer (decades ago) was memorable for the wrong reasons having consumed a curry and much ale - fortunately my arrival in Leeds was without incident.

Your videos are entertainingly fascinating. Not sure those "healing hands" of yours are best deployed on a Pacer!

Useful to have tackled this one, Bill, as we now have videos for both types. I have the pretty (and hard-to-find) chocolate and cream version. It's twin motor, so I need wire the two cars together as you have.

Great video and a nice little model

Despite the ride these units were probably the comfiest to drive.

While soldering that connector perhaps a clip-on heatsink might of helped, but it doesn't look as though there was a place to clip one on. In any case, I enjoyed this video very much indeed, as do I all of them. Thanks for sharing and cheers from Wisconsin!

Great job Bill, that runs really well now 👍

Rather charming as it seems to rattle and squeak round the curves just like the real thing.

Sweet runner Bill same livery as mine, nice job.

Good video. I have the same model and it looks and runs OK but not a patch on the modern MUs. An old and very basic design but still appealing, just like the real thing! In my experience it is best to keep the two cars permanently coupled to reduce wear and tear on the very fragile connector. Definitely the component most likely to fail if not treated with care.

Another great video Bill

Another good job 👍

Looks like a typical cost cut by Hornby removing one motor. Mine is in Greater Manchester colours of orange and brown. It too has a motor in each car which seems better. Nice repair once again Bill

@beeble2003

Жыл бұрын

One motor should be plenty for a small two-car unit. It's not like a Pacer is going to be pulling other rolling stock. So, rather than "cost-cutting", I'd call it the removal of unnecessary expense. Especially if the reduced cost was either passed to the consumer or spent on extra detailing elsewhere. (Hahaha, how naive.)

@PeterJewell2

Жыл бұрын

There's also the problem that if one of the two motors stalls (dirty wheels, points, poor contact, etc) the other motor isn't powerful enough to drag the dead unit along so it just stops and sits there spinning. Bill's solution of commoning all the pickups should avoid that.

Another good one, Bill. It's enjoyable watching your initial analysis then moving on to the repair. I'm afraid I thought the model had a pretty cheap and plasticy look about it, but, looked nice when you got it running. (Wonder if there's an n-gauge equivalent? Mm) Cheers

@353madman

Жыл бұрын

Theres a dapol N guage 142

Hi Bill. Good job, well done as per usual. Personally, I prefer your Pacer, as I like the idea of a motor in both cars. If one fails, then the other one is still functioning and will bring the train to its destination. Not only that, but it has more torque as a result of running on two motors, thus avoiding the annoying drag on long curves. Happy Bank Holiday! Paul. 👍

@oobill

Жыл бұрын

Two motors brings about it's own issues but yes it has better torque so doesn't slow down so easily. I think if the axles had a single conductive wheel each, a single wiper pickup on the axles rather than one on each wheel and a single traction tyre on the drive wheels it would be much better. Or a centrally mounted can motor in the power car with drive shafts to each axle to have 4 drive wheels. Probably what Heljan would have done with this.

@platformten5958

Жыл бұрын

Bill. Hmmmm, a couple of interesting points that you make there. Maybe replace the Can motor with a Coreless motor which is far more efficient (if you research the science behind it) and, only about £3.50p to purchase. I think that, with your profound knowledge of locos and acuity, it would be very interesting to see you design a loco that would be more efficient than the RTR models that are currently on the market at an extortionate price. Do give it some thought! Paul. 👍

@beeble2003

Жыл бұрын

If one motor fails, it will lock one set of wheels and the other motor will have great difficulty overcoming that. And, with two motors, it's twice as likely that one will fail (though two times almost zero is still almost zero). On the real thing, they could put the gearbox of a failed engine into neutral, but that's not an option on a model,

@paulc9588

Жыл бұрын

On balance the single motor version actually performs better. The double motor Pacer I had always struggled to run smoothly as the two motors would not run at the same speed. As OOBill says, the best option is probably a central can motor in the power car with drive shafts to both axles. This is a relatively crude model from a different era though, if they were designing it now things would be done differently.

I notice that you seem quite happy to let models that are barely running go into the tunnel on your layout. Is it easy to retrieve things from inside the tunnel if they get stuck in there? It doesn't look as if it would be - you've made the landscape over the tunnel look good and solid.

@oobill

Жыл бұрын

The back of the tunnel isn't hard up against the wall there is plenty room to get in there. More often than not though I can shove my arm in the tunnel mouth and pull things out.

@kleedhamhobby

Жыл бұрын

@@oobill Makes sense and sounds like good planning. I try not to run iffy locos into the tunnel on my N gauge layout, as if they die in the middle, the only way to get them out is to lift the whole tunnel and the landscape on top of it... and then I've got to get it back into position properly afterwards, which is rather awkward and fiddly. And I've got a little mine head, with some rails serving it and a dummy train on top of the tunnel now, which makes lifting the tunnel even more discouraging. Of course it has to be done once in a while anyway, to clean the track in there better, else even good locos will stop in there.

i was in one Saturday on the midland railway, not nice to ride them.

Hi Bill, nice video, my pacer, same as your blue one, when I bought it, had an ultra close coupling so I ripped it off and now it has no couplings, and I planned to add some as a replacement, what would you recommend doing to add some

@oobill

Жыл бұрын

Magnetic couplings with no NEM pockets and hard wire cars together. Might take a bit of trial and error to get the spacing right.

@reliantrailways

Жыл бұрын

@@oobill cheers ill have a look at that

Did you check radius of axles ?

Reluctant to start, struggles on curves and points. Gearbox causing problems ? Totally accurate model then.

can you fix my princess Elizabeth I have had it when i Was a kid

Ha ha, it runs about as dreadfully as the real thing! Excellent prototypical modelling.

I want your shirt.

@beeble2003

Жыл бұрын

If you do an internet search for the words on the shirt, you can buy your own.

If people don't like it just having one motor fitting a second motor cost next to nothing as the motor is a few quid

OMG! When will people learn NOT to run their trains on carpets?

even though you have improved te general runnng of the 142 its still a terrible model