Hi everyone,

I like to make you aware of the Märklin brush plate with a couple photos showing you the distorted brush holder.
What I've done with mine is, lift the brush holder up slightly and add a drop of superglue using a toothpick between the brush holder and the brush plate and than hold it for a few seconds with a pair of nose pliers.
The first picture show the brush holder is not level with the brushplate (slight angle) and the second picture shows clearly the brushholder is not resting on the brushplate, hence the loss of: maximum speed, increased noise level and sometimes variation of speed.

Märklin has had many innovations over the years but they haven't done anything about the brush holder since its introduction many many years ago.
They have adjusted the machine force which stamps the brush holder onto the plate, suppose the cheapest option out (after I've informed them of the problem) but haven't fixed the problem over a 20 year period and I must admit there aren't many, if any who has noticed it, which brings me to an interesting observation: most modelers are more concerned about the outside appearance than the inside workings.

John








John

Hi John,

Maybe a bit history on why the repair was required/how did you notice it/what where the symptons.

Thanks.

Ian.

Hi John,

Thanks for taking the time to go over that with me, I learn something new about Märklin every day, from guy's like yourself who do not mind sharing their wealth of information with us "beginners".

It makes our forum such an interesting place to visit.

Thanks.

Ian.

Excellent analysis, John.

I think you're right in saying that most modellers are more concerned about the external appearance of the locos than the insides. I, for one, will only take the body off the loco when it's absolutely necessary for lubrication, repairs, or conversions. As long as the loco performs reasonably well I'm happy not to tweak it. I tend to accept that some locos will be noisier and run a bit rougher than others, and haven't really bothered to look at the insides carefully.

Thanks for making us aware of the brush plate issues.

Hi John,

Thanks for this very good tips!

I haven't paid any particular attention to this before, so just for my curiosity I opened a brand new "cheap" 60760 motor and decoder kit I had waiting for a coversion to come.
To my surprise, the brushplate was even worse than yours!



The brush guide on one side was not only lifted, but also twisted.
The misalignment was "fixed" with the soldered litle capacitor!



Looking at the inside, one of the brushes would not be perpendicular to the commutator.



Of course the motor would have run, but not with full performance.

I really need to check more locomotives now.....

Thanks again, John!


Regards

Bent

John,

I will try the Superglue instead of getting a replacement brushplate from my dealer under warrany. (A replacement brushplate would probably not have been much better).

Another thing that surprised me is that the brush holder can turn around its single fixing point - the rivet with the spring. The small capacitor which is soldered between the two brush holders is actually preventing the holders from turning around their rivets. If you install an ESU decoder, this capacitor should be removed according to ESU instructions and the problem will increase.
That is - without the super glue!

I agree that such nuisance is not what you expect from a quality manufacturer like Märklin.

Hopefully they will change this soon!

Just for the sake of comparison, I'd like to see a coverplate from Hag. How do they measure up in this area?

Impressive bit of kit. Shame Maerklin cannot do the same.



r/Thomas

But there's nothing to stop an enterprising entrepreneur from doing the same thing and producing an after-market replacement - accurate brush holder design and a ball bearing. Heck you could probably cast some from resin to do a proof of concept and test the market before going into production.

But you can be sure if someone did release a better one, then Marklin would finally do something about it, redesign theirs and kill the opportunity so who would be willing to pony up for the tooling up costs faced with that risk?

The tweak suggested by John will certainly fill the gap for those of us wise enough to belong to this forum.

Cheers

Cookee

I'm very impressed with the HAG motorshield, no room for errors and a sturdy and what looks like professional design.

Märklin shame on you by not attending to a problem earlier, they've adopted the design from the "shifting sand society".

What also annoys me when you put a question forward and they come back with an answer, Oh if we do this the cost of material and labour cost it would prevent us from doing it unless we increase the price, with other words they have no intention to go further and actually do something about it and include it in the price with an adversising campaign, our new revolutionary motorschield.
If they want something for us to know, they don't mind spend any amount of money to advertise their "New Technology"

John

Ray,

Although I have no quarrels with your opinion and I except a toy will always be a toy, it amazes me thou when we talk about other small irregularities the whole forum is up in arms and this wasn't my intention, on the same note having put up with somemthing for years, shows how we accept things without any great astonishment.

Oh well it has worked for me for years, what's the problem ?

So in a nutshell we are prepared to pay for it and just put up with it, regardless about the obvious, on one hand it is a toy and on the other hand we are told our new mould is exactly an 1:87 prototype extraction and what is inside is gone by the wayside, so the look of the loco and the type of a loco than dominates the outcome of the price structure and with this statement we are prepared to pay for it, regardless how much it costs, with other words, we than automatically ignore any shortcomings or what is described as shortcomings is debatable or becomes irrelevant.

Unless Märklin is getting rid of this motor all together and replaces it with other more modern or suitable designs and in my estimation it will not occur in the next few years.
What is foreseeable however a new direction is taking place about the whole motor and driving characteristics design. e.g. wurm drive, cardan rods and C-sine or can motors.

John

Ray,

Fully understood, my other observation was, Marklin got away with this motor for so long and no one has pointed it out to Marklin or not enough modellers have queried the end result of the brushholder assembly for them to warrant a change of heart or a change the design without major alterations and hassles.

As you said, the can motor is big enough or small enough to house it in a position to allow all the other bits and pieces to be where they should be but I still hear people mentioning the noise the gear mechanism produces at higher speeds so we may find the same problem lingering on for years with out any changes but an improved version overall or covering most aspects of having a steam loco with a proper cab view, instruments and not showing cog wheels (hopefully).

Marklin may has given way to be innovative by abbandoning the C-Sine motor as you said in years to come or maybe even sooner, which I think is a petty, I thought the motor was or is excellent with an enormous amount of torque behind it.

In the end its the dollar how much it costs for a C-sine motor and how much a can motor costs, not that we will benefit for any price reduction but Marklin will encrease their profit margins.

Another example of getting away for years they haven't produced a c-track double switch as yet or given us the choice of sleeker k-track turnouts. this again shows you how slack a company can be and get away with it which brings me to another question are we really modelers or can be classified as modelers having 3 rails not because of the concept but the restricted and monoplized system we are using nobody else has copied or tried to produce for professional modellers, except Weichen Walter's modified turnout system.
We all praise Marklin for its quality (I can vouch for my locos are still running after all these years) and is it a nostalgic phenomanon we will never abandon or loose the effection for these trains and therfore except shortcomings from time to time or jusut go along with an outdated policy the company has itself engaged in over years.
If I had my way again building a layout I would use 2 rails for my eletric locos (using prototypical turnouts angle) and 3 rails for diesels & steam locos.
And it isn't Marklin alone, I've mentioned before, Roco has the golden opportunity to change their steamlocos tender motorization to extend it to the main driving wheels to the loco itself.

John

Hi!
Same applies to HAG motors. They use the same design pattern, but run much smoother and much more quiet. Maybe because cogwheels have been carefully de-grated, maybe because the brush plates have a better precision.
Some Märklin rotors are said to have grates at the collector - this increases noise and carbon dust.

Märklin's standard HEP motors are easy to maintain. With better precision they could be quiet and easy to maintain. They'd still be too big for modern steamers.