Thanks Mike, it was great to work with you on the video

Yes Richard, Inox works ok but the oily residue does cause problems on the hills

Hi Doug, thanks for the comment. I’ve had an area that I’ve been testing for 12 months with a number of different products, NoOx, CRC contact cleaner, Jaycar Electroclean and their Electrolube. The No Ox stayed the cleanest but collected a lot of dirt and fluff, the CRC contact cleaner also has lasted 12 months with no cleaning, but had definitely oxidised more and the electroclean and electrolube both needed cleaning because of oxidation and some black gunk build up after around 6 months. I’ve taken some microscopic images and video plus done some solubility testing of the black gunk and what is obvious is that the gunk has built up more on the oxidised areas, which then traps dust, fluff and other fibers which leads to the gunk getting wider and thicker. So keeping the oxidation under control seems to be very important, but then also stopping the microarcing too. For the latter I’m trialing graphite on the inside edge of the rail, wiping off the tops of the rail and this is currently working well. Will do up a follow up video soon of the results.

Hi Gregg, thanks for the comment. I’ve watched your great video on INOX and have looked into it and a couple of other products like No-OxID etc. I never have cleaned the wheels on my locos either, but I have read up on the analysis done by Joe Fugate at MRH and also have done some experiments myself. The black gunk is definitely a non-organic compound mixed together with fluff, lint, hairs etc to form the build up. Adding a solvent to the gunk sees it quickly lose cohesiveness into very fine particles and the fibers, with no oils etc seeming to be present. The nickel silver track doesn’t wear out in the same way that using an abrasive track rubber all the time doesn’t wear out the track, it is only a very fine amount that is ablated from the rail surface by arcing but when that combines with fibers it quickly builds up. While I don’t run 8m long trains, my UK stuff is still lots of four wheel wagons and steam locos so traction is a bit of an issue on my 1-1.5% grade and they are quite sensitive to anything that reduces adhesiveness. I completely agree regarding the conductivity and oxidation, they’re the big issues we want to avoid and perhaps the easiest solution to all that is to run trains regularly. The contact cleaner I use is CRC 2-26 when I can get it and also the WD40 brand contact cleaner, both of which seem to work very well like what you are experiencing with INOX. If you are ever in Brisvegas and want to catch up to chat about it, just sing out. Happy to talk about this some more.

@@trw1089 Hi Tony , thanks for watching my video and I'm glad you enjoyed it. We have had issues with contact cleaner at work , in some cases on our turnouts, the detection contacts fail after being cleaned. The contact cleaner does clean them , but in harsh environments, it leaves them sterile, and open to oxidation. I've heard that CRC make a cleaner and protector in one? I've had visiting steam on the layout, and initially , the Inox was not an issue, but the traction tyres seem to "soak" it up and become useless! Also we found that the wheels with the tyres on , were slightly larger than the other drivers, thus lifting weight off the other drivers, placing more on the tyers...fine until they don't work , then you only have the front axle on the ground! All very interesting I'm actually in Brisbane, so if you want to visit the Sub' , let me know. Cheers Gregg

Sorry Arthur, which ones are you talking about? The CRC contact cleaner and the WD40 contact cleaner don’t have lubricants in them, just volatile hydrocarbons which fully evaporate. You can get ones with lubricant as well, which I also show towards the end of the video. Sorry if I’ve misinterpreted your comment.

@@trw1089 yes they do. Use ACT 6000. It's call oxidation of rails.

@@arthurhouston3 thanks, I’ll check it out.

Thanks, the test in the video is illustrative but we both have run other tests looking at both rails and cleaning sections with IPA and non-polar solvents with the same results. I’ve also got some longer term tests running at the moment to look at long term build up which I’ll post on in a month or two

@@trw1089 I think when making a video like this, you probably should use a fairly scientific approach and show repeatable results. There are plenty of videos out there saying clean your track with this or that and kinda half-done testing. With long term tests, you really need to document it well and it needs to be done on the same track to rule out issues with the track etc. Some questions come to mind such as how long did you wait before running the test? I've used IPA in my CMX, but at night before I'm wrapping things up for the evening. The next time I run things on the track the IPA has fully evaporated. Different results with DCC vs DC? Just some thoughts :)

@@Oorail I'll just come in here, the tests were done by myself but repeated several times before we went live with the results. The track treated with IPA certainly shows signs of oxidization in short order. The track treated with the contact cleaner simply does not. I've not had to clean my track for two or three weeks now, used to be a weekly event or before every new video. The information Tony and I are setting before fellow modelers is not new at all, its all been proven years back but for some reason the word has not got out there. Both IPA and the non-polar options evaporate within minutes. Hope this helps?

@@Oorail thanks, we certainly have followed the scientific method with our tests, our hypothesis was that non-polar solvents, according to the evidence, should provide a better connectivity between wheel and rail because of minimizing oxidation. We proved that hypothesis through a number of tests, but we also saw the build up of oxidation deposits (black crud) on the IPA cleaned track both on my layout and on Model Railway Unlimited’s testing. The results we presented illustrate what we found, but we also need to keep the video entertaining and not too long. The problem with IPA is that the polarity of the solvent means that even after cleaning and evaporation it will allow the formation of active sites for oxidation on the railhead, especially if an abrasive track rubber is used beforehand. As for DC vs DCC, I think the only real difference is that DCC is more sensitive to dirty track because of loss of signal, not because 14VAC is worse than 12V DC.

@@trw1089 Not really. You haven't even mentioned what kind of IPA you are using - 50%, 70%, 91%, 99%? DC and DCC, along with the direction of travel would have an impact on the flow of electricity through the rails no? You are also saying that an evaporated liquid is reacting with the wheels on the loco? However it's evaporated so it's no longer there? When asked about it as I have here, you say you have other testing, why not show it?