Spectrum 2-6-2 'Prarrie' Wanted

[Atlantic Central]

Andre,

You are correct, however the ATSF Prairies are the exception, not the rule, for that wheel arangement. They where also unusual in their large driver sizes, 69 and 79 inches, compaired to most other Prairies and Moguls which had 63" drivers.

Sheldon

[andrechapelon]

2-6-2s were made in many gauges besides standard. They were really intended for light work and tight radius. The large Santa Fe Praries were the exception rather than the rule. The Southern Pacific only built two to the Harriamn standard before just going to Pacifics

Actually, Espee's 2-6-2's were ex-EP&SW loco's. There were some 2-6-2T's built in the 1880's for Central Pacific commute service.

Andre

[rogertra]

Andre.

Perhaps the Santa Fe didn't get the memo but it still doesn't lessen what I wrote.

[japasha]

I have a pair of MDC Santa Fe 2-6-2 s and they are a crude but nice running model. #1010 is on display at the California Railroad Museum.

The model took some time to get the bugs out of it an acquire a pair of rear trailing wheels that were closer to prototype and spoked. It is not an exact model of the #1010 as the boiler is shared by the MDC Sata Fe 4-4-2

[RAM]

The last live Santa Fe steam locomotive That I was in was a 1800 class 2-6-2 in Norman Ok.  The summer of 1951.

[andrechapelon]

Andre.

Perhaps the Santa Fe didn't get the memo but it still doesn't lessen what I wrote.

I'd love to discuss the issue further, but  I broke a bone in my left wrist yesterday and I have to type with one hand.

However, ATSF apparently did something right with 2-6-2's as N&W did with Mallets (i.e. compounds) when everybody else had given up on them.

Andre

[SteamGene]

Uh, the C&O received ten Mallets - class H-6 - in 1948 while the N&W class A's were simple articulateds.  So I'm not sure the statement "...N&W did with Mallets (i.e. compounds) when everybody else had given up on them." is very accurate. 
Gene

[andrechapelon]

Uh, the C&O received ten Mallets - class H-6 - in 1948 while the N&W class A's were simple articulateds.  So I'm not sure the statement "...N&W did with Mallets (i.e. compounds) when everybody else had given up on them." is very accurate. 
Gene

I was talking about the Y's, not the A's. The C&O H-6's were not designed as main-line locos

Andre

[SteamGene]

Andre,
I responded to what you wrote, not what you thought,  Your statement was very general and very general statements tend to be inaccurate. 
While I will agree that the 1948 order for H-6s was mainly for branchline, they started out their career as mainline locomotives.  But your comment said nothing about branch vs mainline.
The N&W was very proud of its A class Locos and featured them in ads with the Y6 and the J.  The Y6 was a modernized USRA 2-8-8-2 you must remember, while the A was an all modern locomotive.
Gene

[andrechapelon]

Andre,
I responded to what you wrote, not what you thought,  Your statement was very general and very general statements tend to be inaccurate. 
While I will agree that the 1948 order for H-6s was mainly for branchline, they started out their career as mainline locomotives.  But your comment said nothing about branch vs mainline.
The N&W was very proud of its A class Locos and featured them in ads with the Y6 and the J.  The Y6 was a modernized USRA 2-8-8-2 you must remember, while the A was an all modern locomotive.
Gene

What difference does that make? "Modernized USRA" or not, the Y-6b was enough of a locomotive to stop EMD in its  tracks for several years as far as N&W locomotive acquisition was concerned. That 's modern enough for me.  It's also a tribute to the fundamental soundness of  the original USRA design that  it could be developed so far.

Andre

[Atlantic Central]

Andre,

Again you are correct, but the fact remains that there where only about 1700 Prairies built in North America. With the exception of the ATSF and one or two others, it was a largely obsolite wheel arrangement by 1920.

Not saying it was a bad loco, just not widely accepted and used. This hobby needs more of the common place and less of the "one of kind' models.

How about a list of roads that used them, pretty short from what I have researched.

Sheldon

[andrechapelon]

Andre,

Again you are correct, but the fact remains that there where only about 1700 Prairies built in North America. With the exception of the ATSF and one or two others, it was a largely obsolite wheel arrangement by 1920.

Not saying it was a bad loco, just not widely accepted and used. This hobby needs more of the common place and less of the "one of kind' models.

How about a list of roads that used them, pretty short from what I have researched.

Sheldon

There were only about 1100 4-8-4 's built. If you go solely by numbers built,  the 2-6-2 was a more successful loco.

'Course 700 of the 1700 2-6-2's were built for shortline/logging applications.  Not a good use for a 4-8-4.

Just  off the top of my head: ATSF, GN, MILW, SP (ex EP&SW), NP, CB&Q, WAB, NYC (LS&MS), PENNSY.

Andre

[SteamGene]

Sometimes it's good to open the horse's mouth and count the teeth.  According to steamlocomotive.com, U.S. railroads had 1,100 2-6-2s and American loco builders erected another 600 for export.  OTOH, te 2-6-0 had 11,000 built while the 2-6-6-2 totaled 917. 
One thing to consider.  Sheer numbers don't necessarily mean that much.  There were more Bf-109s, in all it's variants, built than any other fighter in all time.  Does that mean you want to engage an F-22 with a Bf-109G? 
Gene

[JDLX]

I find this thread interesting.  A lot of the feelings expressed so far seem to be more from the frame of reference of the poster.  To many a decent prairie would be a waste of materials and efforts.  To be fair, the type was not exactly the most popular in mainline situations.  As noted, quite a few railroads did own them, but tended to use them in niche situations.

That being said, a prairie would be a boon for those of us who prefer shortline or industrial prototypes.  Especially logging roads.  Prairies saw use in the logging railroad industry in all corners of the North American continent.  A prairie type in the 50-60 ton weight range would be ideal for so many operations.  No, it won't be for everyone, but there are a lot of us who would welcome such a model.

My dream model would be a 2-8-2 mikado type, of the 80-90 ton weight range riding on 44-48 inch drivers.  Baldwin and a couple other manufacturers built several hundred of these for the logging, industrial, and shortline market.  Like the prairie type, they have only been done in brass.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV 

[rogertra]

One thing to consider.  Sheer numbers don't necessarily mean that much.  There were more Bf-109s, in all it's variants, built than any other fighter in all time.  Does that mean you want to engage an F-22 with a Bf-109G? 
Gene

Not in a Gustav Gene, no.  :-)