C&O 2-8-4 to 4-8-4

[MilwaukeeRoadfan261]

What would be the best pilot truck to use for making the Bachmann Standard C&O style 2-8-4 into a C&O 4-8-4?

[ryeguyisme]

well to fit an appropriate 4 wheel leading truck without it looking weird or cheesey looking you're going to have to extend the smokebox and move the cylinders forward more to add room for that extra wheel along with the modifications to the valve gears. Not a very easy task if you don't have experience kitbashing, not saying you don't....

My favorite lead truck to use is from a varney casey jones, it can be bought at yardbird trains I believe or ebay, due to the weight of the bogie holding the axles they usually stay on the rails quite nicely

Keep in mind that your idea, although interesting and may be something neat, its impractical without major surgery and it's like opening a can of worms.

[J3a-614]

I would agree with Rye; the job would be awfully big.  You're talking about cutting the frame ahead of the drivers to move the cylinder block forward, extending the frame, cutting and extending the boiler, and changing the drivers and the valve gear to have the main driver become the No. 2 axle instead of the current No. 3.  Overall proportions of the J3 and J3a types are very different from the K4 as well. 

I have a question that might be worth asking.  What are you doing this for?  Is it to have a 4-8-4, or is it to have a C&O passenger engine?  If it is wanting a 4-8-4, there are a number of other models available, and even some brass C&O engines can be had at decent prices (although they are often not the best examples of the brass builders' art). 

If it is to have a C&O passenger loco, there are two alternatives I would look at.  The far easier one is to use the 2-8-4 as is; C&O regularly used these engines in passenger service in the wartime and postwar eras, until the delivery of the last 4-8-4s--the J3as--in 1948.  Another possibility would be to find a NYC Hudson of some kind, and figure out some way mount the boiler and trailing truck on the mechanism.  Use the 2-8-4 tender, and change the pilot and a few front-end details on the 4-6-4 mechanism, and you are pretty close to a C&O L-2 (Baldwin, 1942).

I'll get some C&O 4-6-4 shots up later.

[ryeguyisme]

rivarossi made a run of their hudson i believe with a nickel plate/C&O boiler on it

[MilwaukeeRoadfan261]

To be honest, I was wondering if the Spectrum 4-6-0 pilot truck was short enough yet prototypical looking enough to use to make the C&O 2-8-4 a 4-8-4 since the C&O 2-8-4 and 4-8-4's look very similar.

[Doneldon]

Milw261-

I must agree with the other posters; adapting a four-wheel lead truck to a C&O Berk would be a huge, complicated and demanding challenge. I've been modeling for more then 50 years and I wouldn't attempt it.

The reason you can't just add a larger pilot truck is that steam locos were designed for a specific number of wheels. Builders/railroads didn't plan on changing lead, driving or trailing wheels because doing so would mess up the engineering which went into the original plans. Various considerations like curvature to be encountered, weight bearing capacities of bridges and viaducts, side clearances, the anticipated weight and nature of trains to be hauled, desired speed ranges and, most importantly, the output of the actual steam plant itself all dictated a particular set of standards for all three kinds of wheels and their spacing. Yes, railroads did shop their locos and made modifications but that only rarely included changing the number of wheels.

Driver diameters were fairly easily changed in response to evolving demands for power or speed but other changes were massive projects which weren't undertaken lightly. Pilot truck wheels were not often changed because there usually wasn't enough change in the characteristics of a modified locomotive to justify the enormous expense of redoing the frame and at least the smokebox for a larger lead truck. Trailing trucks were enlarged at times, especially when fireboxes were enlarged in order to get more steaming capacity or increase steam pressure, or to add boosters. Drive wheels were made larger or smaller, within limits, but only very, very rarely was the number of drive wheels changed.

I concur with RyeGuy and J3a in suggesting that you look for an appropriate C&O passenger engine. Just using your Berk is an excellent idea because they were used in passenger service by the C&O, and not just for occasional fill-ins. Berkshires were big, powerful and usually fast locomotives which could easily handle the speed and weight demands of a passenger train. Yes, Northerns were bigger yet and more powerful, but not because they had four wheel lead trucks. Those larger trucks were installed because those larger locos weighed a good deal more and usually had larger drivers (and therefore heavier side rods), and a more stable truck leading the parade reduced wear and tear on the locos, rails and crews.

On the other hand, if you decide to go ahead with your expansion plan, I wish you good fortune and ask that you keep us up to date on the project with words and photos. It really would be an interesting thing to watch, even if I'd be too intimidated to try it myself.
                                                                                                                                                         -- D

[J3a-614]

Well, here are some photos:

L-2 303:

http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/CO303.JPG

305:

http://psc1.virtualfocus.com/O%20C&O%204-6-4%20L2%20proto.jpg

J3a-614 (Why does that sound familiar?); note how much l-o-n-g-e-r the whole engine is compared with the 4-6-4s:

http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/CO614.JPG

L-2a (Baldwin, 1948, poppet-valve version) 314, doubleheading with K-4 (2-8-4) 2729:

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h79/janswede/Railroads/CO314and2729.jpg

K4 2717 from a site called Shorpy: this is a GREAT site for all sorts of vintage photos, everything from trains to street scenes to (ahem) girls, all of which can be blown up to check out all the details:

http://www.shorpy.com/node/9401

2735:

http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/522/C_O2-8-4_2735.jpg

Photos of brass models from a dealer; the nice thing about this firm is that it photographs its models from a standard set of angles, including at least one broadside shot, which gives an idea of length and height proportions, including driver diameter and wheelbases:

L2, driver diameter is 78 inches, only 2 inches smaller than that of the NYC 4-6-4.  Overall size was much larger (fatter), and the weight much greater than that of the NYC machines.  Boiler only 8 inches shorter than on the 2-8-4, but with an identical firebox/rear end.  Major visual difference between 2-8-4 and 4-6-4 is a much smaller sand dome on the Hudson; other differences such as running board steps in a different location, would be considered relatively minor.  Cab shape is different and cab is smaller (no need to provide seat space for a head-end brakeman on a passenger locomotive), but a saving grace for cab scratchbuilding or modifying is that the cab is welded, and has no rivets:

http://www.brasstrains.com/Classic/Product/Detail/030140/HO-NJCB-CO-4-6-4-L-2-Baker-cpw-Sound-DCC

K4; overall boiler length on the prototypes was only about 8 inches longer than on the 4-6-4, drivers a relatively low 69 inches, typical for later fast freight engines. 

http://www.brasstrains.com/Classic/Product/Detail/037033/HO-Brass-PFM-United-Hi-Grade-C-O-Chesapeake-Ohio-2-8-4
 
J3a; much longer, larger drivers than the 2-8-4 (74 inches), but not as leggy as the 4-6-4:

http://www.brasstrains.com/Classic/Product/Detail/036379/HO-PFM-United-1981-C-O-Chesapeake-Ohio-4-8-4-J3a-612

J3 (1935 version, as built); headlight lowered, valve gear changed to Baker, and illuminated number boards added in the early 1940s:

http://www.brasstrains.com/Classic/Product/Detail/033489/HO-PSC-16976-2-C-O-Chesapeake-Ohio-4-8-4-J-3-603-George-Washington

Have fun.

[Steve Magee]

And never forget, despite it (the J3a) being a 4-8-4, to the C&O they were Greenbriars. No railroad company with its headquarters in Richmond, Va, were ever going to call them "Northerns". :-)

[J3a-614]

I have a strange brain; I think of something, or someone says something, and I think of something else.  In this case, Steve Magee's comment reminded me that the Greenbriars, though larger and heavier than the Kanawhas (C&O's name for a 2-8-4), had a lower axle loading that allowed them to go places the 2-8-4s could not.  The most notable example was the long viaduct along the James River in Richmond.  For years, the Greenbriars could run eastward from Charlottesville into Richmond and beyond to Newport News and Old Port Comfort, but the K4s could not.  The limitations were due to that viaduct and also some low wooden trestles in the Newport News area. 

Imagine that--a big 4-8-4, weighing with tender some 434 tons, running on a wooden trestle! 

That extra axle to spread out the weight was just enough to make a difference in the eyes of C&O's mechanical and right-of-way departments.

Now, considering that a post-war version of one of these engines still exists, and that it has an excursion history, and that it just plain looks good, I have to wonder if this machine might be a candidate for replication in the mass market. . .