Class: SBB Re 4/4 I
Manufacturer: Märklin
Ref. No.: 26557
Year of Production: 2010
AC or DC: AC
Era: IV
Length: 102 cm (locomotive with coaches)
Decoder: Trix mfx Decoder (NMRA producer ID is 131)
Motor: High-efficiency propulsion with flywheel (but not the 60901 motor))
Powered axles: 4
Traction Tyres: 2
Whisper Pickup: no
Digital Address: 41

Digital functions:
F0: Headlights (LED, warm white)
F2: German station announcement
F3: Whistle blast
F4: De-activates acceleration/braking delay
F6: Headlights at cab 2 off
F8: Headlights at cab 1 off
F6+F8: 3 white lights both at front and rear

Light functions:
You can have:
3 white front lights and 1 white rear light (normal light for Switzerland pulling a train)
3 white front lights only (normal light for Germany pulling a train)
1 white rear light only (for whatever it's good for)
3 white lights both at front and rear (shunting light used in Germany)

The locomotive uses mfx technology to register automatically using the name "RE4/4 I 10O33".
Please note: they managed to get a letter O into the loco number.
I changed the name to "Re 4/4 I 10033" without letters in the loco number.

The loco comes with two different pantographs - both are silver-coloured and not blackened.

All coaches come in the "new, longer length" which means 1:93.5 for these coaches (scale varies depending on prototype length).

Some pictures:


The DB compartment coach:

The SBB dining coach:

The DB open seating coach:

Here's a picture showing the DB compartment coach and the SBB dining coach (it seems that both prototype coaches have the same window size):

Here's a picture of the SBB dining coach and the DB open seating coach:


Here's a picture showing close-ups of the windows (sorry for the zig zag, I didn't have the camera straight; I didn't rotate the images in order to make stitching more easy):

Südwind, Bavaria (both compartment coaches), Bavaria (dining coach), Bavaria, Südwind (both open seating coaches)

Note: The Südwind coaches have the "old, not so long length" not the "new, longer length".

The motor hums. Sounds very similar to the TRAXX and Ludmilla hobby locomotives. 95 % of my Roco locomotives are more quiet than this one; OTOH many Märklin locomotives make more noise than this one.
This humming allows you to hear that load regulation cannot keep a constant speed, motor gets faster in curves and slows down when back on straight tracks (maybe this happens with other locos, too, but I haven't heard it before).

There was a lengthy discussion about the windows of the dining coach.
I think the windows are too small (but I haven't measured the model yet). The "handmade sample" in the new items brochure (obviously coming out of a 3D plotter) sure looked better.

Nice trainset, performance of the loco is OK.

Good Review.

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the review and piccies... (finally for 26557!)



For me this is quite disappointing.
The can motor in TRAXX feels and sounds cheap, which it is - but it's acceptable considering the price we pays for it.

The 37044 cost more than twice as much than the 'cheap' TRAXX (26557 even slightly dearer) - and to share the same sort of motor characteristic is just unacceptable... might even be a deal breaker for me.

Ok, AFAIK, all can motor hums.. my ICE-3 hums, my BR89.70 also hums.. but these are all quieter than the TRAXX.
The Maxon DC motor in BR45 OTOH is excellent, almost SDS-like, although lacking the later's pulling power.

As for the windows... (sigh)

....does Mr Pluta install now same cheap motors that we use to find on 2 rail DC models from other manufacturers ???
....since the last directions & trends expressed on many internet forums by neurotic river counters becoming the most important part of MRRoaders....I'm not surprised .

Tom HO still find it noisy ?.....Don't worry for you Mr Pluta will install cheaper plastic gears soon just for his pleasure and yours....

As for me ( and I'm not the only one ) I used to choose Marklin for 1 main reason : manufacturing quality (by comparison with other manufacturers). Metal housing, good painting,more serious manufacturing, above all : reliable concepts of motorization & drive, metal gears, Marklin DCM motors, C-sinus brushless motors & SDS-Brushless motors,..... and if not brushless I was always sure to find at least some Faulhaber or coreless MAXXON motors.....

I'm with Tim : if they trully have been installing the same kind of cheap motor we find on the HOBBY range.....I find it just innacceptable. That will lead Marklin to surely loose their reputation of making serious & reliable products. Now I don't see no reason not to choose some Roco models instead of Marklin, if they'll use same kinds of motors...and in a near future probably installing plastic gears for having silent ghost models...(in spite of the fact that plastic gears are not a guarantee of silence. Last models from Jouef are quite noisy...)

To river counters : have you ever seen silent locomotives & trains in real ?
Real trains are noisy.
Coach models and train models rolling on a HO track are making much more noise than any gear drive....What do you suggest for a silent roll on , or silent track ?

BTW ! I would like to know which type of motor there is on the last V140 model....( the only non-SDS motorized model I planned to buy...is it the former Trix engine or something similar to this Re 4/4 I ? )

.....The Trix has not same interior "fitting" (not same electronics).... doesn't provide same resonance.....Different elements = start resonating in different ways....may be ?.
we had an experience with RE 4/4 II : the digital Marklin more silent than the analog Trix.

It may be a question of grinding as well, after a few hours noise decrease

Thanks for a good review and some nice pictures Tom!

OT: your postings are always a treat to read. Knowledgable, objective and helpful!

/Torbjörn

I've re-watched the clips again, and the Trix one in particular do sound like a hobby lok...
The Marklin one does sound a bit quieter, but not the best in terms of noise - at least in comparison with other can motors that Marklin had fitted. I was hoping that they'd at least match the BR45 in refinement, or failing that, the ICE-3 is very good too... but this new can clearly is a grade lower compared to those two.

Problem with this Re4/4 I model is;
well, let's not kid ourselves;
the can motor is cheaper and nowhere near the refinement of its predecessor;
might be acceptable if the newer model is slightly cheaper,
but it is not..

Tom,

I have not posted in this thread about the size of the windows of the SBB WRm diner because that issue has dominated the discussion in the thread in the HO Topic Forum.
Can we please for once and for all agree that this reported 0,08mm deviance was incorrectly reported. The difference is actually somewhere around 0,80mm, which is a little more significant than the figure quoted by you. For a window with a height of around one cm, a difference of 0,08 is almost 10% of the size. Repeating the alleged figure of 0,08 just confuses readers.

Back to the issue of motors, I have always been a big fan of Maerklin motors. They were amazing compared to the Triang Hornby DC motors on my Canadian trains I had as a kid. In order to standardize material between Maerklin and Trix, it was decided to use as much standard parts as possible for models that were to be released in both AC and DC. Trix engineers had issues with the C-sinus, mini-sinus and Soft Drive (SDS) motors. As a result, Maerklin decided to go with the motors that were acceptable to the Trix Engineers. I would much rather see the classic motor built into the bogie (4 traction tires) and the other bogie used for current collection than the design being used now. I hope that my lok is quiet (or that it sounds like an electric lok and not a can opener) and that is performs comparably to my 39420 and 39421.
But, I guess, who can stand in the way of progress?

Regards

Mike C

nice pictures and great sharing
are the red headlight dummy or effective?

Why ?
How could you say 0.8 instead of 0.08 as long as you haven't measured it
They said they have measured 9.55 mm in height. this could be verified with a caliper rule by anyone of us owning this set ...
AT 1:93.5 scale it should be 9.63 mm....9.63 - 9.55 = 0.08 mm

....actually models are designed with software . They enter measurement data of the REAL coach from plans. Then the software is giving the perfect "homothetic" design at any choosen scale(sorry, I don't find the English word for "homothetique"...). Then they can modify all they need to modify to make it rolling on a layout model (R1 curves etc...) but the size of windows has no influence on rolling characteristics.. ..If they want it at a 1::93.5 scale lenght, the software do it with 1 clic in an "homothetic" way for all the lenghts of all elements of the coach.....also.... for all "spaces between windows", , doors, end of coach, ...etc...
Reducing only the lenght of window = increase the space between window.....here we are still talking about tenths of a millimeter
You say that the lenght( width) of windows should be 1:87....heem, heem....that would mean that they operate reducing of the lenght of coaches only on " spaces between windows".... ?....depending on how many windows , why not ! (...funny how people seem to care about windows....not about spaces between window", doors, end of coach.. ..etc...)

Normally they don't need to deal with the heights, excepted if.....they find that a slightly reduced lenght of the window misrepresent the correct shape of the window itself.... ....Specially here : all lenghts of the original coach has to be reduced at 1:97 scale intead of 1:93.5. So they had to find a small compromise between : Mike C shouting about the distance between roof and window and another guy shouting about an exaggerated distorsion of the whole window !!

I was talking about :





I believe that it was the dining coach mentionned as a 1:97 scale lenght in the other thread....but it seems that you were talking about another dining coach ....was the German dining coach the same as the SBB dining coach in different livery.. .... I probably got it both mixed up .

...your answer came while I was modifying my message .

The whole issue comes down to one fact. The DB TEE coaches were designed in 2007 and first appeared in the 26540 "Rheinpfeil" Set. The SBB WRm is a new model and was developed this year. Whoever was responsible for the final mold screwed up. The windows are not tall enough. They could have compared the final design to photos of the actual prototype. More importantly, they should have examined photos of the actual coaches and the model and maintained the same ratio of window heights so that the same rule was followed for both. It seems to me that whoever was inputting the data into the CAD design for the final mold forgot to factor in the height difference and the windows were rendered completely in 1:93.
I have already addressed the issue of quality control and continuity. I will elaborate again. Quality control means that somebody should have overseen the design of the mold and noted the discrepancy in the window design. Continuity means that somebody should have compared the design and the first production model to prior models, including the DB TEE coaches and noticed the discrepancy. It also means comparing liveries of compatible models (ie TEE coaches) to make sure that new and old models have the same colors and inscriptions. This is a dual level process that ensures that the model will not have any flaws. Better quality control and continuity means better models -> happier customers -> more sales -> more profit = better business.

Regards

Mike C

Mike, interesting thread as always. I am with you 100% percent on the quality control issue, that we have discussed here, many times. My thought was with all the downsizing, turnover, layoffs that Ma has had recently, maybe this one "slipped through the cracks"?

Stummi forum might provide some answers:
http://stummiforum.de/vi...amp;t=52144&start=25

Scroll to page 3 of the thread for a picture of the motor.

The sparepart database:
http://www.maerklin.com/...search/spare_parts.html#
is still showing the diagram of the previous release of SDS Re4/4 I - and even shows SDS motor instead of the large can-type motor used on this model - which is again quite misleading...
and motor seems to be out of stock (again, the confusing riddle of the database..)

One can speculate what type of can motor this is.. it's certainly not a Maxon or Faulhaber, but an el-cheapo one.
From the (large) size of the new motor, I don't think SDS would fit in this newer one.
The Stummi guys suggested that it is a similar type of motor like the one used by Roco.

Good in a way,
since for the first time ever, we don't really have to turn to Marklin for motor replacement spare part.



Same concern with you here, Ashley..

I've now decided to shy away from this set as it pales compared to the standard set by the TEE Rheingold.
Personally, I felt that as customers we've been shortchanged - getting a cheaper (and lower quality) motor and electronic for the same price as what used to be an SDS package.
As you suggested, I would happily accepted something in the line of Maxon as compromise,
but otherwise, I won't pay the same money for a lesser quality item.