Think the title says it all.
Might some owners/operators of the Spectrum h.o USRA 2-6-6-2 give us a honest review of this engine.
Those who added decoders and or sound.....speak up.
Inquiring minds want to know ;D
I just bought a third, undecorated, to join the VT&P fleet. I will add DCC sound to it. It is a good engine.
Gene
I own two of these beasties, and do like them. It was pretty straightfoward to install Tsunami decoders in them, albiet one must really plan out this project BEORE one starts it. I used a method I mentioned earlier; which is to drill a series of holes in the coal pile, and cover it with some kind of screening material-I have graduated to pantyhose-black pantyhose...and coat the whole with glue and sprinkle coal over it to your satisfaction. The speaker goes under that mess.
In sealing off the speaker, I had to let some of the decoder into that compartment because of space constraints, but it did work.
About the only problem i had was a broken wire on the newest one, which let the sound happen, but no engine movement. Again, a relatively easy fix. I found that (with Josh's help-Tony's trains) working in the CVs to my liking was OK; although I am not too crazy about the whistle variety. I used three Tsunamis so far; two USRA 2-6-6-2s, and one Mantua logging 2-6-6-2. They all have that characteristic in and out of syncopation business programmed. An articulated would sound strange any other way.
All in all, the engines have a great response, look great, and run smoothly. I do not run an articulated or a drag engine over 15MPH anyway. Crawling over a grade crossing with a string lf cement hoppers in tow is mighty impressive, if I do say so m'self...
I will send you a pic of the first engine.
RIch
I have three, two for my Atlantic Central on which I have replaced the tenders with the long vanderbilt.
The other is a C&O and is stock. Sorry no sound or DCC here, but all three are great runners and reasonable pullers.
Sheldon
Quote from: r.cprmier on May 01, 2007, 10:11:58 PM
I own two of these beasties, and do like them. It was pretty straightfoward to install Tsunami decoders in them, albiet one must really plan out this project BEORE one starts it. I used a method I mentioned earlier; which is to drill a series of holes in the coal pile, and cover it with some kind of screening material-I have graduated to pantyhose-black pantyhose...and coat the whole with glue and sprinkle coal over it to your satisfaction. The speaker goes under that mess.
In sealing off the speaker, I had to let some of the decoder into that compartment because of space constraints, but it did work.
About the only problem i had was a broken wire on the newest one, which let the sound happen, but no engine movement. Again, a relatively easy fix. I found that (with Josh's help-Tony's trains) working in the CVs to my liking was OK; although I am not too crazy about the whistle variety. I used three Tsunamis so far; two USRA 2-6-6-2s, and one Mantua logging 2-6-6-2. They all have that characteristic in and out of syncopation business programmed. An articulated would sound strange any other way.
All in all, the engines have a great response, look great, and run smoothly. I do not run an articulated or a drag engine over 15MPH anyway. Crawling over a grade crossing with a string lf cement hoppers in tow is mighty impressive, if I do say so m'self...
I will send you a pic of the first engine.
RIch
Rich'
Thanks for your input, I see micromark has them on sale and while a dedicated Great Northerner really think i should have a couple of these for our southwestern designed layout....maybe in Denver Rio Grand livery!
Looking forward to your pics....
I feel the same as Sheldon and I think am in the same situation ... i.e., no DCC or sound, using currently DC/Analog.
I have a Spectrum 2-6-6-2 and it is a beautiful runner. Doesn't pull up my grades quite as well as my Spectrum 4-8-2, but does a 'reasonably good job'. A very nice, smooth locomotive with beautiful detail (which, in my case, will eventually be stripped off when it becomes an ICRR 2-6-6-2! Yes ... it's true! IC did have a few 2-6-6-2s :D) . You will be happy with it ... however, you'll need to follow the advice of DCC experts as to sound, decoders, etc.
lanny nicolet
Thanks for the review of the 2-6-6-2. I decided to take advantage of the Micro-Mark sale and get one. It arrived yesterday and it's really fine looking. I will be adding a Tsunami to it as soon as I have a chance.
Like most of the Spectrum steamers it's reported to be light on pull so what have you all done to add weight to it? Where are the best places available for extra weight? I usually use birdshot with Elmers glue or A-Line weights when there is enough space.
Thanks,
Roger
Dear Friends,
Thanks for the heads up to Micro Mark! When was this beastie made by Bachmann? It is not listed in the current catalog.
What decoder would you install or recommend for basic ops, not sound? I am not interested in sound in this lass.
Thank you kindly.
Best, Jack
Roger,
I think the 'Virginian' among others uses 'bird shot'. I finally got a quantity (way more than I will ever use) and have added it to hollow steam and sand domes. Others have suggested the inside top of the cab or inside the boiler front around the headlight area. The Spec 2-8-0 already has a molded weight that fits inside the cab roof.
Perhaps some can make some good suggestions for places to add the bird shot. I do remember one of the experts on this forum explaining why it was important to get the weight added in the 'right' place in any given boiler, in order to gain maximum tractive effort. (I "think" it is over the center or closer to the front drivers? ... but I could easily be very wrong on this point)
The domes on the 2-6-6-2 may or may not come off easily. I haven't worked with my Spec 2-6-6-2 as yet. However I did find that the sand dome on the Spec 2-8-0 popped off without any problem.
Hope you get it weighted to your satisfaction. You will like the locomotive ... its a nice, smooth runner!
lanny nicolet
I have mentioned my never-fail bird-shot (gotta watch that spelling...)
installation: Take a balloon, or as I use...fill it up to the desired weight, and install it in the locomotive.
glued in shot has a habit of falling out and making a mess out of the scenery (can you explain a 9-inch metal ball lying on the track? I could never find a good explanation), much less potentially causing problems.
You can load a fair amount of weight in that engine.
For a DCC unit, I recommend Tsunami. You will get that in-and-out-of-syncopation that is right for articulateds and mallets.
RIch
The boiler top comes off the 2-6-6-2 easily, but there is little room form more weight. I put some moldable lead in the domes of one of mine but saw no real change in performance.
With the exception of the worst offenders, like the Athearn 2-8-2, I have had more success increasing pulling capacity by improving the rolling qualities of my cars as opposed to adding weight to locos.
The Bachmann Spectrum 2-6-6-2, 2-8-0, 4-6-0 and heavy 4-8-2 all pull reasonably well without any extra weight if your cars are free rolling enough.
My tested pulling capacity using my 4.3 oz piggyback flats, with my special truck setup, on level track:
2-6-6-2 36 cars
4-8-2 heavy 38 cars
2-8-0 23 cars
4-6-0 17 cars
Sheldon
From what i have read the 2-6-6-2 was the first in the Spectrum line,found a review i believe in the Feb 2004 MR.
Just wanted to add that I sure agree with Sheldon about making sure your rolling stock is 'free rolling'!
That was one of the first great lessons I learned on this forum ... what a 'reamer' was and the benefits of using one.
My personal favorite combination is reaming all delrin trucks (not metal ones ;D) with a Micro Mark 'Truck Tuner' or a Reboxx 'Reamer'. Then I use Intermountain 'semi-scale' metal wheel/axles. As Sheldon has pointed out, this probably is the best way to increase 'pulling potential' for most HO locomotives.
I might add that in my personal tests of 'before' and 'after' distances freight cars roll, using the 'reamer' and the adding the Intermountain metal wheel/axles in general increases the rolling distance of my cars 3 1/2 times the distance they originally free rolled.
lanny nicolet
Rich,
Not to hijack this thread, but how do you like your Mantua? Especially compared to the Bachmann? Micro-Mark has one of those babies for sale, too, although it is a 2-6-6-2T. Both can negotiate 18" radius curves.
Too, that birdshot in a balloon is a neat trick!
Why could you not cast a TBSP of lead, or similar size, then trim it to fit a sand dome, etc? Sheldon mentioned moldable lead. I presume this is similar to Al foil, and "scrunchable?"
Best, Jack
I just picked up one of these as well at my Local Hobby Shop. Is adding a decoder as easy as pulling out the insert on the tender board and putting in the decoder?
Sound isn't that important to me, I like it, but find it gets annoying after a couple minutes.
Jack;
You know, I like 'em both. The Mantua unit reminds me of something that should be on the G&D Lines; or on the roster of Whit tower's "Alturas and Lone Pine".
Boy, talk about that! I remember an article in 1966 MR on Whit's layout that really fired me up on modelling. I was overseas at the time, so this hobby was rather impractical to have gotten started on then.
I installed the "Tsunami" decoders in all three-two bachmann, and one Mantua. They all sound somewhat the same, but sooner or late, I will get good with this "CV" stuff, and THEN we'll boogie!!!
Rich
Dear Rich,
Thanks for your thoughts. I called Micro-Mark yestiddy, 5/08/07 and was informed the sale of the USRA 2-6-6-2 goes to 6/12 (I think). So if anybody wants one, there it is.
Best Wishes, Jack
Mine arrived from Micro-Mark in great shape and time.
Runs Great.
But the tender will not stay on the track.
Am using the last hole in the drawbar. 22r. track, plenty of slack with the wires.
I think the front truck needs to be removed and the hole needs to be reamed.
As soon as my arthritic hands loosen up I will work on it.
That's why I prefer On30, easier too see and work on.
Ralph,
The solution is simple - add some weight to the tender, about 2 oz.
Secondly, bend a small offset in the drawbar, just above the trailing truck, untill the drawbar is parallel to the track, rather than sloping down.
Do not inlarge the truck mounting hole, it will not help. But there may be small tabs on the truck bolster restricting its turning, remove them with an xacto knife.
These three adjustments should fix your derailing.
Sheldon
you could probably get lead sheets from a body shop. Remember lead sleds?
Dear Sheldon,
Great tips and I will file them for the future! Too, do you think reaming the tender trucks would make much of a difference?
Dear Paul,
I think I saw in Micro-Mark that they have 1/4 oz lead weights on a sheet with sticky backs for trimming models, airplanes, etc. Too, Rich Cormier suggested to put lead shot into small balloons before placing the weights where you want. A good tip, don't you think?
Best Wishes, Jack
Jack,
If you mean reaming the axle journals, DON"T! Bachmann tender trucks do not have tapered axles/journals, they are straight and reaming them will damage them.
Sheldon
Thanks for the advice.
The front truck does not swivel as free as it should.
Going to take it off and check the hole and the face of the mounting stud.
And will check the draw bar.
No I am not thinking of reaming the axles.
Adding weight will help, the tender is really light.
Lead Sleds?
Use to watch my Brother with the torch, the lead bar,
and the rasp working on his Rod.
You will probably have to cut the capacitors to add a decoder. My 2-6-6-2s do a nice job of hauling drag freight. The first Spectrum steamer was the 2-8-0. The 2-6-6-2 came after it, the USRA light Mountain, the Russian Decapod, and, I think, the Ten-wheeler.
Gene
paintjockey,
Adding a DCC decoder to the 2-6-6-2 tender will only take about 1 or 2 minutes. Turn the tender over, remove one screw just aft of the front truck, slide the top forward and lift off, pull the "plug" out of the receptical, stick the decoder plug in and repeat the process in reverse! It's really that simple.
Sound is a little more complicated but isn't rocket science. I've installed 6 Tsunamis in Spectrum and P2K engines with very little problem. Brass engines are a little more time consuming but not any more difficult.
Sound is one of the best advances in model railroading along with DCC as far as I'm concerned. A lot of folks get turned off because most people have the volume turned up so high. When running multiple engines it gets pretty annoying. I set mine so that I can barely hear them when over 3-4 feet away. The bell, steam release and pop valves can get on your nerves when set too high, I admit.
I guess I've been lucky with all my Spectrum steamers. I've had no shorting or derailment problems. I have 24"R code 83 Walthers flex track and use their #4 & #5 turnouts and #7.5 curved turnouts. I run my Russians, 2-8-0's, 2-8-2's & 2-6-6-2 with the tender in the first hole and they've never derailed.
Roger
Roger;
I had coniption fits installing the first Tsunami decoder into that 2-6-6-2 tender! I finally figured it out, and now it is pretty much "by the ripples" for everything with that particular tender. One thing I do is to "invade" the coal area with part of the decoder, as ell as installing the speaker there. I have to call Josh again, as I am getting lost wit hthe CVs to turn up volume. (old man...computer dummified). I didn't use a Vanderbilt on the articulateds, but did on my Santa Fes and a heavy mountain. The Vanderbilt tender was a ticklish proposition with a standard decoder; I would not be too quick to install a tsunami in one.
Gene: So far, I haven't had a hassle with the capacitors. The first Santa Fe is a bit finnicky at times, but the second one is the charm. I do think that some time I will pick up one of the Proto Santa Fe's (heavy), and do the "Pygmalion" thing with it too.
(You do remember "pygmal-aw fergit it, you probably do).
RIch
All I have found on Micro Mark are the N scale versions.
Stephen
Quote from: GN.2-6-8-0 on May 01, 2007, 08:10:21 PM
Think the title says it all.
Might some owners/operators of the Spectrum h.o USRA 2-6-6-2 give us a honest review of this engine.
Those who added decoders and or sound.....speak up.
Inquiring minds want to know ;D
My first HO 2-6-6-2 arrived from Micro-Mark last week (one of the last in stock). After a very short check using address 00 on DCC confirmed that it ran smoothly, I installed a Digitrax DH123PS decoder, a quick plug in. The printed circuit board in the tender is secured with only one small screw and no locating pins, so the mounting is a bit loose and seems improvised, however I decided it was not likely to be a problem in future. I then ran the loco for about 30 minutes on the club layout, at scale speeds from perhaps 1 mph to 35 mph, again very smooth running. The valve and rod motion on the two engines is a joy to watch, the overall detail is very good, the flying pumps make for an interesting front end.
After lettering the loco will join the Grizzly Northern (GNRy) as Number 8002 and will be known as the "Monashee" type, after the mountain range through which the Grizzly Northern runs. I will also add weights to the tender as recommended by another member of this forum.
:)
Lanny,
I'll be very interested to see what you do to create your IC mallet. I've been doing some research on these going back to their Central of Georgia days. I have two of the 2-6-6-2s myself with the same intention. I plan on using sand domes from the 2-8-0s which need to have their sand domes modified also.
The cab work should be fairly straightforward using styrene. I'm not sure yet whether or not I will leave the headlight on the pilot or move it to the smoke box front as the IC did.
George Waltershausen
Dear Stephen,
Micro-Mark is sold out. The Mantua version with or without tender looks to me to be a good substitute, according to Rich's comments. Looks like I will be thinking about the Mantua!
Best Wishes,
Jack
The Mantua 2-6-6-2 and the Spectrum USRA 2-6-6-2 are alike in two ways. They are both steam locomotives and they are both articulated Mallets with 12 drivers.
Gene
Dear Gene,
Too, you can get it with or without a tender. Not too sure if I like the looks of the 2-6-6-2T. Does not seem to be practical if long distances were involved, i.e. how much fuel could it hold? Both are quite interesting designs.
Best Wishes,
Jack
There is a third option available assuming that all of the old Mantua engines have been re-released.
I have the "Rayonier" Mantua 2-6-6-2T engine which comes with a small oil tender. Same basic engine as the other tank models, note the headlight is mounted high on the boiler and not low on the pilot.
Jack,
Tank locomotives were not meant to go long distances. Most were switchers. In the case of the Mantua 2-6-6-2T, it's a logging engine, so it, too, would be close to a water and fuel supply, Again, the Mantua articulated is not a road engine, with or without a tender.
Gene
Dear Gene and Dr,
Understood re tank engine usage. I just got back some pictures from the Altoona Railroaders Museum including a saddle tank Porter, named "Nancy." Will post pix on my website if interested. Also, there are a 250 ton crane that is operational, the "Mountain Air" passenger car from the Broadway Ltd., and Charles Schwab's personal coach, the "Loretto."
Best Wishes,
Jack
Quote from: SteamGene on June 02, 2007, 04:40:58 PM
Jack,
Tank locomotives were not meant to go long distances. Most were switchers. In the case of the Mantua 2-6-6-2T, it's a logging engine, so it, too, would be close to a water and fuel supply, Again, the Mantua articulated is not a road engine, with or without a tender.
Gene
You are still referring to the tank engine model and not the articulated engine with tender?
Both the 2-6-6-2 and the 2-6-6-2T are articulated. If you put them side by side you will find they are the same size up to the rear of thecab. They are both logging locos.
Gene
I placed the units on my test track and agree they are similar in size, not much difference with the exception of dome placement and cab size.
However I would certainly not consider the version with the tender "not" a road engine.
Would that also mean the Spectrum 2-6-6-2 engines are also not to be considered road engines?
The USRA light Mallet was a road engine. Compare it to the size of the Mantua and you will find it is larger. Granted the light Mallet got assigned to branch lines as heavier power came available, but it was a road engine.
IIRC, the Mantua's prototype was a three foot gauge engine that they modeled in standard gauge.
Gene
I agree with the premise the proto type for the Mantua 2-6-6-2 was a narrow guage logging engine.
However my point is that since the re-released units 2-6-6-2's are not narrow guage the units make a most interesting road engine. The GN 2-6-6-2 shown is not that large and engine.
http://www.gngoat.org/gn_steam_14.jpg
I have the Rayonier 111 which is the tank unit and ancillary slope back tender. http://loggingmallets.railfan.net/models/mantua/m-rayon111.jpg
this engine complements my logging railroad portion of my layout which also includes a couple of Shays and a Heisler.
For the mainline portion my main road engines are a couple of Spectrum 2-6-6-2's and a Mantua 2-6-6-2 in GN livery and the other steam being 2-8-0s, 4-6-0's
Why wouldn't you consider a USRA 2-6-6-2 a road engine? Wouldn'tthat sort of depend on what a road in question's needs were?
Rich
I consider the Spectrum USRA 2-6-6-2's and the Mantua 2-6-6-2 with tender road engines. The only engine I would not consider as a road engine would be the Mantua 2-6-6-2 tank (and variants)
doctorwayne,
Remove the steam dome, it just pulls streight up, remove the screw under it. The top half of the boiler will then lift off. The cab has a few simple snap points but should easily come off with the boiler.
I have three of these, had two at least partily apart. I would recommend getting the instructions before further disassembly.
I believe they may actually be available on the section of this web site, see the "product reference" tab at the top of the page.
Sheldon
Sheldon has the right instructions. The rear sand dome hides the screw. Use a small flat bladed screwdriver to lift the cab away and up.
Slow and gentle does it.
Gene
Quote from: SteamGene on June 03, 2007, 06:15:04 PM
The USRA light Mallet was a road engine. Compare it to the size of the Mantua and you will find it is larger. Granted the light Mallet got assigned to branch lines as heavier power came available, but it was a road engine.
IIRC, the Mantua's prototype was a three foot gauge engine that they modeled in standard gauge.
Gene
"Light" is a relative term when referring to the 2-6-6-2's. I believe that the Bachmann Spectrum is modelled after the C&O Class H6, of which the last 10 were built in 1949. They weighed about 449,000 lbs and had a tractive effort of 77,900 in compound and 98,300 lbs in simple. From MR/Linn Wescott's Cyclopedia Vol 1 Steam Locomotives I understand that the H6's, whether 1920's or 1949's, were not a USRA design, unlike the C&O H5's. Can anyone comment?
Isambard, you have it backwards. The Spectrum model is of the USRA light Mallet - 2-6-6-2, which is the C&O class H-5, not the H-6 or almost identical H-4. The USRA light is smaller than the USRA heavy, 2-8-8-2, which is the basis of the N&W Y class. You are correct that the C&O H-4/6 was not a USRA design.
Gene
Interesting,
I posted a similar reply to Isambard just before the site went down Monday night, I guess it got lost in the crash.
Sheldon
Quote from: SteamGene on June 06, 2007, 07:35:47 AM
Isambard, you have it backwards. The Spectrum model is of the USRA light Mallet - 2-6-6-2, which is the C&O class H-5, not the H-6 or almost identical H-4. The USRA light is smaller than the USRA heavy, 2-8-8-2, which is the basis of the N&W Y class. You are correct that the C&O H-4/6 was not a USRA design.
Gene
Thanks for the clarification Gene. Know any places where I can find a photo or details of the USRA light 2-6-6-2/C&O H-5?
C&O never did anything to their H-5s. They didn't like them - probably because they were so close to the H-4/6! The loco came with smokebox mounted pumps and C&O never changed the cab or the tender. If you take the small cab off a Riv H-8 and the 16V tender you have a reasonable model of the H-4/6.
You can find photos of the C&O H series by googling "fallen flags."
Gene
Quote from: doctorwayne on June 06, 2007, 12:44:28 PM
--Another problem with this loco is that the pilot is very low, actually rubbing on the railheads, with the result that the front coupler is also too low. While this doesn't appear difficult to remedy, I was wondering if this problem is a common one, with a "stock" way of making an easy repair. ---
Wayne
The pilot on my 2-6-6-2 (footboards with small boiler tube centre section) clears the railhead by about 1/16 in. and the coupler is about 1/32 in high to the Kadee coupler gauge. Thes dimensions vary a bit, depending on whether the loco is moving forward or in reverse, this affects the load on the front engine and its longitudinal tilt relative to the track, as the front engine is very flexible in all axes.
The looseness of the front engine doesn't appear to be a problem, however I have noticed a tendency for it to derail on uneven track or switches as the front engine loses rail contact with the loco running forward and with a load behind.
doctorwayne,
That is a very nice looking 'Connie' you have modeled and weathered. The whole photograph is really nice, very realistic looking scene.
Show us your 2-6-6-2 when you get it done and keep up the great modeling work!
lanny nicolet
After reading this whole thread I have a few things I would like to point out. First if the locomotive is a true Mallet and not just a simple articulated locomotive, the way to tell them apart is the size of the pistons. If one set is larger than the other then the locomotive is a true Mallet and will not have the syncopated sound of the simple articulated locomotive. The reason is there is only one set of exhausts coming from the front set of drivers. The rear cylinders are the high pressure ones and their exhaust is routed to the front or low pressure cylinders. Most of the Mallets could be operated in simple mode where both sets of cylinders received high pressure but his was only for starting the locomotive due to the difference in power the larger cylinders would put out. If you did not start them in simple mode the rear drivers would have to slip two or three revolutions before the front cylinders received any steam. Some railroad crews did refer to both kinds as Mallet’s but this was incorrect. Now as to the tank versions of the logging Mallets that Mantua builds, these were road engines for the logging railroads and had runs of 75 to 100 miles which is comparable to the mainline divisions of about the same length. The reason that they could go so far with out a tender is the fuel that they burned, oil. Usually two thirds of the saddle tank was water and the last third was fuel oil these percentages match tenders pretty closely. Most if not all of the western loggers used fuel oil for several reasons, first it did not have embers and sparks to light the woods, mill and other things on fire, two it was easy to store and it was easy to load into a locomotive, just pump it into the tank or pour in like water if it was heated. The tank Mallets had built in tank heaters with the tank sitting on the boilers but this causes another problem, the injectors don’t like warm water so it was some time a little difficult to get the injectors to work. One reason the logging railroads liked the 2-6-6-2T was that they ran backwards at a higher speed than the tender engines pushing their tenders
I know this kind of long winded but I thought some one might be interested.
Andre :)
Andre, the C&O H-1 through 6 were all Mallets. The H-7 (2-8-8-2) was a simple and called by its crews the "Simple Simeon." The H-8 (2-6-6-6) was also a simple.
Gene
Gene,
Thanks for the reply, I learned something new today. :D As I am on the west coast and have not studied the eastern articulated locomotives and did not know how the eastern crews referred to their locomotives. I do know the SP crews referred to the cab forwards as Mallets (and some referred to them as “Backwards or Backup Malletsâ€) even though only the first couple of orders were built as Mallet’s and they were converted to simple engines after about 10 years as the SP need more speed out of them. Most of the logging lines called any thing that was articulated a Mallet weather it was or was not, this I can kind of understand as the vast majority of them were Mallets.
My comments were more aimed at the sound question as people were expressing the fact that they liked the sound as each engine on the locomotive came in and out of sync with the other one. This would not happen due to the reuse of the steam by the low pressure cylinders and only one set of exhaust instead of two as with a simple locomotive and what was and was not a road engine.
Andre :) :)
Quote from: r.cprmier on May 01, 2007, 10:11:58 PM
...two USRA 2-6-6-2s, and one Mantua logging 2-6-6-2. They all have that characteristic in and out of syncopation business programmed. An articulated would sound strange any other way...
Hmm... I thought only simple articulateds (e.g., a Challenger, Big Boy, or N&W A-class) went in and out of syncopation. I would think a true mallet (which I believe the USRA 2-6-6-2 should be) would have its engines synchronized in a regular fashion... after all, the low pressure (front) engines are fed directly from the high pressure engines' exhaust. How could the phase relationship of the engines ever change?
Or am I confused?
--Jim
JimA,
All articulated locos go in and out of syncronization. Since there is no mechanical link between the the two engines there is nothing to keep them in sync, and the combination of curves and slippage will always change their relationship to each other.
The main point that almost everyone misses about this is that the steam on the intake side of the valves is in a plenum or manifold, just like the fuel mixture in a car engine. The steam "waits" there until it is needed by which ever side of which ever piston opens its intake valve port next. This is true of Mallets or simple expansion machines.
The only difference being if it is comming from the boiler or from the exhaust of the other set of pistons, and that controls the sound issues. The the sound system of a Mallet should be in syync with the front engine.
Sheldon
This is from Baldwin info from years ago:
Attention should be given to the slipping of the driving wheels in a Mallet locomotive. If the wheels of the forward group slip frequently, while those of the rear group do not, it is an indication that steam is leaking past the high-pressure valves, and these should be examined for blows. If the valves are in good condition, and the wheels of only one group slip, the unbalanced pressures resulting will tend to stop such slipping. Any continuous slipping can occur only in both groups of wheels simultaneously, and should be corrected by throttling the steam and using sand.
More can be found at
http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/blwmal00.Html
Morris
Quote from: amdaylight on June 09, 2007, 01:29:26 PM
Gene,
Thanks for the reply, I learned something new today. :D As I am on the west coast and have not studied the eastern articulated locomotives and did not know how the eastern crews referred to their locomotives. I do know the SP crews referred to the cab forwards as Mallets (and some referred to them as “Backwards or Backup Malletsâ€) even though only the first couple of orders were built as Mallet’s and they were converted to simple engines after about 10 years as the SP need more speed out of them. Most of the logging lines called any thing that was articulated a Mallet weather it was or was not, this I can kind of understand as the vast majority of them were Mallets.
My comments were more aimed at the sound question as people were expressing the fact that they liked the sound as each engine on the locomotive came in and out of sync with the other one. This would not happen due to the reuse of the steam by the low pressure cylinders and only one set of exhaust instead of two as with a simple locomotive and what was and was not a road engine.
Andre :) :)
The discussion as to what constitutes a Mallet continues all these years after the last ones, "true" or otherwise, have gone to the scrappers, museums or preservation societies. Certainly Anatole Mallet received a patent for a compound articulated locomotive, however I recall a British writer in LocoProfile argued that Anatole Mallet should also be given credit for the fixed simple articulated, and referred to the simple type as "Mallets".
Alfred W. Bruce (American Locomotive Company) in his "The American Locomotive in America" states "The term Mallet should be used only to designate articulated compound locomotives". Perhaps he was simply being academically correct, but then perhaps there was a patent Royalty issue lurking somewhere? :)
Quote from: jsmvmd on May 06, 2007, 09:49:20 PM
Rich,
Not to hijack this thread, but how do you like your Mantua? Especially compared to the Bachmann? Micro-Mark has one of those babies for sale, too, although it is a 2-6-6-2T. Both can negotiate 18" radius curves.
Too, that birdshot in a balloon is a neat trick!
Why could you not cast a TBSP of lead, or similar size, then trim it to fit a sand dome, etc? Sheldon mentioned moldable lead. I presume this is similar to Al foil, and "scrunchable?"
Best, Jack
Quote from: lanny on May 06, 2007, 09:25:42 PM
Just wanted to add that I sure agree with Sheldon about making sure your rolling stock is 'free rolling'!
That was one of the first great lessons I learned on this forum ... what a 'reamer' was and the benefits of using one.
My personal favorite combination is reaming all delrin trucks (not metal ones ;D) with a Micro Mark 'Truck Tuner' or a Reboxx 'Reamer'. Then I use Intermountain 'semi-scale' metal wheel/axles. As Sheldon has pointed out, this probably is the best way to increase 'pulling potential' for most HO locomotives.
I might add that in my personal tests of 'before' and 'after' distances freight cars roll, using the 'reamer' and the adding the Intermountain metal wheel/axles in general increases the rolling distance of my cars 3 1/2 times the distance they originally free rolled.
lanny nicolet
Hi. I hope I'm in the right place to add my two cents worth about Bachmanns 2-6-6-2's and the Mantua artic logger. This is my first time onto this site as I have only just found it. Although I live on the other side of the world I do operate both of these locos and find them both excellent although someone mentioned that the Bachmann was a little light on pulling power and it is, but it's still ok.The only thing I had to do to get the tender to ride correctly, was adjust the drawbar height, which I had to do on my 4-8-4 Niagra as well. Thats it from me.