Now that Bachmann has done the 4-8-4 Northern that they said they would not be doing again, will they also be doing the 2-10-4 that they said they would not be doing again?
Jim
A T&P 2-10-4 would save me a lot of work; especially if it came through with sound (Hey Johann; you listening?)
Rich
Say it loud, say it long, we need more small steamers. We need 2-6-2s, 2-8-2s, 4-6-2s, even 4-6-4s. Give the West its Harrimans.
Gene
More small steamers are needed like the Harrimon types. Enough huge steam.
Stephen
Quote from: r.cprmier on July 29, 2007, 06:53:19 PM
A T&P 2-10-4 would save me a lot of work; especially if it came through with sound (Hey Johann; you listening?)
Rich
Rich, Congratulations! You've earned my "favorite person of the day" award!
I'd buy at least 3 Bachmann Texas & Pacific 2-10-4s.
Harriman, Harriman, Harriman, Harriman .... 2-8-2, 4-6-2 etc. Please, please, please, consider the 'West' as another mentined ... a Harriman would be oh so nice! :)
lanny nicolet
Tell you what i'd really really really like to see added to the Spectrum line with DCC and sound is the Norfolk & Western M2 4-8-0.
Just love that great looking wagontop steamer....But then I have a soft spot for the Mastodons regardless of the home road. ::)
Now that they are doing a 2-8-4, the next logical step would be to extend one to make a 2-10-4, that's what the real railroads did.
YES! I would LOVE to see a 2-10-4. I would also love to see some smaller steam. Sorry bachmann, but the 0-6-0's 2-6-0's & 2-6-2 are train set quality... and that only... too bad you stopped the Spectrum 0-6-0's... I wouldn't mind seeing a Hudson either...
Jake;
The Hudsons were more or less a "regional" locomotive; that being New York area. The "J"s were mighty snorting beasks (popeye) and looked high wide and handsome on stud of the passenger trains plying thier business oer' the Hudson River Valley.
However; I do believe that interest might be somewhat limited to that area-I could very well be all wet-...also, BLI and Rivarossi pretty much did a class act with the J series Hudson; unless you are drooling lecherously over a brass import...
Would Bachmann fare well with yet another Hudson on the marketplace? Maybe-it works with Mikes, but the Mike is a common horse, whereas the Hudson is not. My money on it? I think not...BUT...Proto certainly struck gold with the DL-109 in New Haven livery...1000series yet...!
Rich
Rich,
The C&O had Hudsons and the Milwaukee Road actually invented the wheel arrangement - the 4-6-4 really should be called the Baltic. So the type was not really centered around New York.
Gene
from steamlocomotive.com
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe 16 (Baldwin)
Baltimore & Ohio 4 (B&O)
Boston & Albany 10 (ALCO), 10 (Lima)
CCC & St. Louis 30 (ALCO)
Canadian National 5 (MLW)
Canadian Pacific 65 (MLW)
Chesapeake & Ohio 13 (Baldwin), 5 (C&O)
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy 12 (Baldwin) 2(CB&Q)
Chicago, Milwaukee, St Paul & Pacific 6 (ALCO) 22 (Baldwin)
Chicago & North Western 9 (ALCO)
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western 5 (ALCO)
Illinois Central 1 (IC)
Maine Central 2 (Baldwin)
Michigan Central 30 (ALCO)
National Railway of Mexico 10 (ALCO)
New York Central 195 (ALCO)
New York, New Haven & Hartford 10 (Baldwin)
New York, Chicago & St. Louis 4 (ALCO), 4 (Lima)
St. Louis-San Francisco 10 (STSF)
Wabash 7 (Wabash)
Surviving Hudsons
Gene
Gene;
On the Milwaulkee Road, the 4-6-4 WAS a Baltic; improperly referred to as a Hudson.
On the New York Central system, a 4-6-4 was referred to as a Hudson; but specifically, I was referring to the "J" series of NYC-specific construction, which was definitely a Hudson.
BTW, I also finally found a pic of a J series with deflectors...('member my quest?) Now I can do them without fear of being lynched!...
Rich
Gene;
Ref. your roster; I have a picture in two books of either a Cenrral Vermont or a Rutland "Texas", both at the engine terminal, I am not sure where; and also at the crossing at Palmer, Mass. I also believe these engines were delivered in 1947! That is interesting, considering that the diesel conversion was well under way by then. "Lend-Lease" cast-offs, perchance?
Also, let me throw my hat into the ring for favouring production some smaller engines, like moguls and ten-wheelers, modern type.
Rich
Good Morning All,
I keep seeing a request for 10 wheelers from Bachmann. How did the last run of their 10 wheeler do and have we aleady forgotten or do you want a different version of that engine? Do not forget, Bachmann offered it in two different boiler styles, high and low. As for the 2-6-2....yes, I think there would be a nice market for that wheel arrangement in HO, N, and even On30......hint, hint, EBT #11.
ebtbob,
The current Bachmann ten wheeler is a turn of the century, slide valve, small boilered loco. Many roads built (or had built for them) larger modern ten wheelers well into the 1920's which resemble locos like the current Bachmann consolidation in boiler size and capacity. One excelent C&O example rests at the B&O museum today.
This is the type of ten wheeler myself and other keep requesting.
Actually, the boilers are the same on the two Bachmann ten wheeler models, it is the drivers that are different. Baldwin offered this loco with 52" or 63" drivers in the exact same frame. The driver spacing allowed this change. So the 63" version "raised" the boiler up, hence the term "high boiler".
The current Bachmann loco is a great piece and I have several, as do many modelers I know, but a 1920's ten wheeler would be a much welcomed addition to my roster.
In my opinion on the other hand, while a 2-6-2 would be a nice addition as well, it would not have the broad appeal of a modern ten wheeler. Modern ten wheelers where use by roads big and small, all over, and lasted to the end of steam. 2-6-2's on the other hand where few in prototype number, largely obsolete by the 20's and where primarily a short line loco, even in their peak.
Acording to NMRA data sheet D9a.1, revised 2/51, there where only 1,700 2-6-2's built, the last of which in 1910. They list it as a "rare light freight type"
That same source records 17,000 ten wheelers, many built as late as the 20's and listed them as still in use.
In fact, ten wheelers come in third on the all time quanity list:
2-8-0 33,000
4-4-0 25,000
4-6-0 17,000
0-6-0 15,000
2-8-2 14,000
2-6-0 11,000
4-6-2 6,800
These are the locos we need more examples of, as opposed to the following list:
4-8-4 1,000
4-8-8-4 25
2-10-4 450
2-8-4 750
As for the earlier talk of 4-6-4's well there were only 500 of those and NYC had most of them, so anything other than a NYC J would be a nice addition to that wheel arrangement.
One of my personal favorites, while not produced in staggering numbers, was more common than many models on the market, is the 4-4-2. They come in at 1,900 examples and many lasted quite long as well.
Another favorite of mine in the 4-8-2, (2,400 prototype copies) which Bachmann has done quite well as the USRA examples go, I have a large fleet of Bachmann Heavy Mountains. Some non USRA examples would be nice at some point. Many could use the drive they already make since driver spacing and size was copied from the USRA versions for many later versions. While not a USRA "copy", the very last loco built by th B&O in their Mt Clair shops was a 4-8-2. They found this design so usefull they never owned a Berkshire or a Northern, imagine that!
Sheldon
Sheldon.
An excellent post.
Yes, we do need a "modern" 4-6-0. I to was disappointed with the two Spectrum 4-6-0s as I was hoping for something a little more modern.
I've suggested on this board before that Bachmann could reissue both 4-6-0s but with modern fittings. Piston valves instead of slide valves, modern, smooth dome and sandbox, taller tender, modern airpumps and headlight(s).
In fact, they now seem to have most of these parts on the more modern looking of the 4-4-0s.
You may have seen my post about Customer Service not answering their 800 number?
The reason I'm phoning customer service is I want to order a couple of sets of piston valve cylinder castings, steam domes and sand boxes from the 4-4-0 and see if I can get them to fit onto the two "low boilered" 4-6-0s I've got sitting here in their boxes. I just don't think the 4-6-0s, right from the box, are really suitable for a class one railway set in 1958 so until I can modify them, in their boxes they stay.
I agree 100% with your comments on the 2-6-2. The prototype, though very popular in the Uk for example where 2-6-2Ts were very common and in use almost rignt up to the end of steam in 1968, they were not common in North America. The 2-6-2 offered little in extra power over the 2-6-0 and was generally not as powerful as a 4-6-0. It was neither fish nor fowl in the locomoitve world and would, in my opionion, be a poor choice of rtr locomotive.
A modernised 2-6-0, with piston valves and smooth not wedding cake dome and sandbox, a bigger and "modern" 4-6-0, a 4-6-2 smaller than a USRA Pacific and a 2-8-2, perhaps using the 2-8-0 with one more boiler course added, would be very good choices for future models.
Roger, I agree with you. Despite the fact they have limited use to me, I support the addition of Harriman locomotives. It's funny that on another forum at least one member decried the fact that "the West gets all the glory and Eastern modelers get nothing!"
Gene
These are the locos we need more examples of, as opposed to the following list:
4-8-4 1,000
4-8-8-4 25
2-10-4 450
2-8-4 750
-Sheldon
But at least one good plastic Texas & Pacific 2-10-4 is needed on the market. Right?
Whoa! Sheldon provided that information - I didn't. But I agree that there should be warnings - just like on cigarette packs, though they might not be heeded . THIS LOCOMOTIVE NOT SUITED FOR A 4X8 LAYOUT! The same thing applies to cars. I wonder about the number of folks who have bought an articulated well car set and wondered why it looked so shabby on their 4x8! (Ah - somebody is surprised I know what an articulated well car is! :D)
Gene
Quote from: SteamGene on July 31, 2007, 06:18:48 PM
Whoa! Sheldon provided that information - I didn't. But I agree that there should be warnings - just like on cigarette packs, though they might not be heeded . THIS LOCOMOTIVE NOT SUITED FOR A 4X8 LAYOUT! The same thing applies to cars. I wonder about the number of folks who have bought an articulated well car set and wondered why it looked so shabby on their 4x8! (Ah - somebody is surprised I know what an articulated well car is! :D)
Gene
My bad. I changed the quote.
Ref: Berkshire offering:
I hadn't gotten wind of that. Can someone tell me where I can find it pictured?
There were several variations on that wheel arrangement; and Boston and Albany had the A-1s and A-3s. I believe the boiler was a little bigger than the NKP S-3s, I have always liked them both; but for obvious reasons, the A- series would be my choice to pick. Whistler's Western!! Love dat Boston to Pittsfield run...over the-yep, you guessed it...the Berkshires!!
Rich
Rich,
In the General Discussion area, 1st post, Train Show announcements. than there is a post that says train show resource, that one has some photo links.
Sheldon
ebtbob,
Here is a link to a picture of a modern ten wheeler,
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo-s2012.jpg (http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo-s2012.jpg)
Compare that to the Bachmann model and you will see the differances.
Someone makes a spectrum/proto quality model of this and I will buy a half dozen, at least.
Sheldon
Sheldon;
The Berkshires that are forthcoming are basically the Baldwin-Lima-Hamilton issues, so thefore, wouldn't be practical for a B&A type "A-3" conversion. They are still a great looking locomotive, though.
WHile stationed at Bunker Hill AFB in Indiana, I happened upon a C&O Berkshire in the park at Peru, Ind. It looked like it was fairly well-kept-but this was in 1967, so I hope it is still in good shape. As a matter of fact, it was the prototype for an O scale superdetailing project in either June or July 67 Model Railroader.
Rich
Rich, the C&O had KANAWAHAS. :D
Gene
Gene;
Are you referring to my post about that 4-8-2 in Peru? If they were called "Kanawahas", that is OK by me. We learn something new every day...and my learning hatch is always open for more. Doesn't make it stand out any less in my mind as a really pretty engine.
I still would love to see something I could easily convert to a B&A A-3 Berkshire. My other thoughts about what I would like in a large steamer: A Yellowstone. I think that would be the bee's knees steaming around my layout with a string of cement hoppers trailing her...She was a real corker of an articulated!
Small steam would be, in general, a welcome sight; especially some of the later ten-wheelers and Moguls, like the B&M, Rutland, Central Vermont, and the Maine Central, as well as on the New Haven, f'rinstance...
Rich
Quote from: Atlantic Central on July 31, 2007, 11:02:43 PM
ebtbob,
Here is a link to a picture of a modern ten wheeler,
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo-s2012.jpg (http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/bo/bo-s2012.jpg)
Compare that to the Bachmann model and you will see the differances.
Someone makes a spectrum/proto quality model of this and I will buy a half dozen, at least.
Sheldon
You and me both Sheldon.
They'd become a main stay, along with the 2-8-0s, for my GER. Mind you, I'd like a nice, modern looking 2-6-0 as well.
Something like this perhaps? :-
http://www.steamlocomotive.com/pennsy/rmop/cnr89.jpg (http://www.steamlocomotive.com/pennsy/rmop/cnr89.jpg)
In this case a nice little CNR 2-6-0 but generic enough to satisfy many needs.
Sheldon;
Great picture of a nice-looking engine. THis is what I am talking about when I mentioned 2-6-0, 4-6-0, etc. Post turn-of-the-century equipment.
I too, would buy some if they came out, either Spectrum or another high-end entity-but not brass!
RIch
Rich,
The 2-8-4 in Peru. :D The C&O was not going to call a locomotive the name of a damnyankee mountain range in New England. Just like the 4-8-4 was a Greenbriar. Sadly, the 2-6-6-6 got the damnyankee spelling, not the Virginia one.
Gene
Gene;
Typo. Size 19 ring finger in the keyboard...
A 4-8-2 is a Mowhawk...
Rich
Only on the Water Level Route. Everybody else used the C&O name - Mountain, named for the Blue Ridge and Alleghany Mountains the originals traveled between Charlottesville, Va and Hinton, WV.
Gene
Yeah, Gene; on the water level route. There were some really neat looking Mowhawks plying their trade there, and some great photos of both 'hawks and Hudsons on their respective runs. Some were equipped with smoke deflectors, mostly for use on passenger service.
HOWEVER...Us DamnYankees did indeed steal the name "Mountain" didn't us now? We had some really neat engines up here, on the B&M, Maine Central, and yep-the good ol' NYNH&H! The "R" series engines could be found almost anywhere on the New Haven system, doing a variety of chores. Had one come tearing through Quincy station once when I was about five-didn't know about Whyte;s system, but I knew it was BIG!! I found out later on that they ran them down to Middleboro sometimes.
Did you check out the Central Vermont "Texas's" yet? THey were beautiful!! Even had an all-weather cab; just like its Canadian brerthern-and sistern too.
Rich
bump
???This person wants big steam, this person wants small steam. This thread, like so many like it on other forums, is becoming political like the Catholics and protestants in Ireland, like the Jews and Islamics in the middle east. People, this is America, why can't we have both at the same time and learn to live with it? I, for one, would dearly love to see anew ATSF 2-10-4 come out. But I won't begrudge the little engine lovers thier desires either.
Dick
Texas Chief
Quote from: TexasChief on August 09, 2007, 12:06:13 AM
???This person wants big steam, this person wants small steam. This thread, like so many like it on other forums, is becoming political like the Catholics and protestants in Ireland, like the Jews and Islamics in the middle east. People, this is America, why can't we have both at the same time and learn to live with it? I, for one, would dearly love to see anew ATSF 2-10-4 come out. But I won't begrudge the little engine lovers thier desires either.
Dick
Texas Chief
Broadway Limited makes a Santa Fe 2-10-4. You're covered.
Hey Chief,
You missed the point intirely. Nobody is against big steam. BUT! A quick review of the current and recent offerings of the major HO manufacturers of steam include a long list of large, modern steam locos with dizzying numbers of wheels. Yet the most prolific wheel arangements go unrepresented.
And many of the same ones from several manufacturers?
And, there are more large steamers in the pipeline, just look at the new announcements from Bachmann and the future plans of BLI/PCM and Athearn.
Maybe not the "one" you are looking for, but I would take ANY reasonable average Pacific as long as it was not a PRR K4.
I am still convinced that somewhere, on warehouse and hobbyshop shelves, there are allready enough Big Boys for every person in the hobby to have all 25 copies. Yet there are more of them on the way too. Why?
And, I have big curves (36" minimum) and still don't want any 2-10-anythings on my layout.
If just a few more different 4-8-4 prototypes get made, the entire history of that wheel arangement will be documented in HO scale. But the most popular wheel arangements in history remain poorly represented.
2-8-0
4-6-2
2-8-2
4-6-0
4-4-2
Make me a list of spectrum/broadway/genesis/proto quality models of these wheel arangements that I can actually buy today? It would be a short list.
I have lots of big steam:
3 bachmann 2-6-6-2
2 PCM reading 4-8-4
2 proto 2-8-8-2
5 bachmann 4-8-2
1 BLI n&w 2-6-6-4
etc,etc, and they are all great.
But the hobby needs those locos I and others have taked about, long before it needs another obscure, one railroad, there was only 25 of these in the world, monster locos.
Sheldon
Here, here.
I also have a lot of big steam.
2 2-10-4
3 2-10-2
4 2-6-6-2
2 2-6-6-6
8 4-8-2 (I think)
4 2-8-4
But the common engines - 2-8-0, 2-8-2, 4-6-0, 4-4-2 are engines that the average modeler needs.
Gene
Quote from: Atlantic Central on August 09, 2007, 07:01:32 PM
Maybe not the "one" you are looking for, but I would take ANY reasonable average Pacific as long as it was not a PRR K4.
ahaha I'd take anything that wasn't PRR
Sheldon;
With respect to the inundation of the hobby with a plathora of "big steam", I think there is one thing that went unsaid: the aspect of the "new and improved" versions.
If you look at most, if not all, of the presentations that appear in duplicity, there is something new, "better: etc, than the "older stuff". This is neither to castigate the manufacturers, or the hobbyists; just to mention a point.
As an example, in the fifties, Tenshodo had marketed a 4-6-6-4 Challenger, all nice in its finger-jointed varnished oak case. This was a honey of an engine-then!
Last I saw, there were some really nice improved renditions of same engine. Same with the Rivarossi 2-6-6-6; I own one of the first production numbers of that engine. I think the engine is a supberb model in every way; but then there is a newer edition of the same engine by Rivarossi. Would I buy another? probably not; but guaranteed someone else will! There is going to be a Pacific marketed by BLI, soon. These engines, with a little work, can be made to look like a particular prototype of many roads. Didn't Rivarossi market a pacific about ten or so years ago? And, wasn't it a beauty? Hows about Athearn? Would I buy one, faced with a couple of BLIs I have reserved? Nope. I have two Athearn Pacifics and Mikes; but had I known about the BLI Mikes, I would have nixed the Athearns in a heartbeat; instead, I am like many others, having bought "duplicity"-only the BLIs are a superior model for many reasons. Underlying cause? Human nature.
That tenshodo challenger? A dog by comparison! No DCC-ready, no RP-25 standards, no NMRA standards, etc. This, to me, is part of the situation; the other, of course, is the application of the marketing strategies with some of the abovementioned as components. Do I fault the manufacturer? Nope. They have investors on their back, too.
Just for the record, I do hope that BLI, Rivarossi, Proto 2000 is taking notice and will perhaps entertain the idea of smaller steam. That would be nice.
RIch
Rich,
You have a very good argument for everything except one aspect - repitition of the same models - yes, they improve, but lord! How many 4-6-6-4s do we need? Yet that road had how many Harriman "soldiers of the working day"? And how many models of them do we have?
Everybody needs to consider the size of the average layout - 4x8. What is the maximum curve you can use on that size board - 22" - just barely. I haven't tested my 2-10-x on my 30" minimum curves yet. I know they'd do better on wider curves, but that would have meant less mainline run.
Model railroading is an essay in compromising. We all need to understand that.
Gene
Rich,
I agree with you and get your point when comparing a 1970's or 1980's Rivarossi anything or old brass to the current offerings.
That is not what I refer to. How many K4's have been offered in the last 5 years? By how many manufacturer's. How many Big Boy's are currently on the market? The quality/feature level between a BLI K4 and a MTH K4 is a zero sum game from where I sit.
And now BLI/PCM and Athearn will have a similar p***ing contest with the Big Boy.
Not to mention: N&W "J", FEF Northerns, and even though they are not steam PRR GG1's.
Cab forwards look like they might be next on the list. How many different "state of the art" examples do we need?
On the topic of the BLI/PCM 2-8-2's both light and heavy, they are nice models, but their limited offering of undecorated versions, no steath heavies, no undec stealth lights, etc, shows a lack of interest in the "modeler" half of the market. But that is the half that will still be buying this stuff when the "collector" crowd gets bored or their stock portfolio takes a hit.
You say BLI/PCM is bring out Pacifics, and so do they, but their little exercise in "preorder build meters" on their web site suggests money may be an issue and these models may be a long way off if they show up at all.
And, why should I preorder them when the prices are so all over the map. I don't pay more than I have to for ANYTHING!
You say marketing strategy? I don't own a Big Boy or a K4 or a Challenger or a GG1. Their strategy is not working to get any of my money into their pockets.
Sheldon
Rich,
One more thought, I doubt there is any difference between an orginal Rivarossi 2-6-6-6 and the current one. Just a realization that more people want one and a factory with tooling already in place.
Sheldon
Paul, BLI's 2-10-4 is small potatoes compared to the final 2-10-4's. In reallity, it was a 2-10-2 with an experimental 4 wheeled truck on the rear. Doesn't qualify. Thanks anyway.
Dick
Texas Chief
Sheldon and Gene;
My point is only that (the) manufacturers will "create" a market by the "new and improved" versions; just as Nixon's press mafia did for him in 1972...and the people who want them will flock to their respective outlets with their full purses; the strings dangling loosley in the air...Asw long as these guys smell a profit, the big engines will continue to gererously roll off the assembly tables, out of the hands of those cute little Chinese girls and onto the advertising pages and circulars.
The point remains that neither you or I need dump our hard-earned dinero into those manufacturers' trembling paws; but can certainly abstain until our discretioary ideals come rolling down the line. My thoughts are with yours: Some day (and hopefully soon), some wag from some product-savvy company, just hungry enough to do it, will tap into that "small engine" market, and, hopefully, make a killing for themselves in the production of-not one, but a series of-small engines, such as a Mogul, Ten-Wheeler, etc, all finely detailed as the "biggies" now in market glut, as well as DCC equipped, maybe even sound equipped, that indigenous to their prototype(s).
I am not concerned with the fickle and superficial wants of some person just in this for ha ha's, or a passage from childhood to girl-chasing adolescence, but those wants and desires of people like you and I, who have some sense of focus and prototypical agenda, and realize that these little gems would indeed hit the spot on our respective rosters. All things considered, they will richly deserve the profit they will ultimately realize.
My dog need to be fed; I must go.
Rich
:D Rich I agree 100% with what your saying I dont need monsters I need every day hard working branchline and mainline steam not a roundhouse of Big Boys.
Stephen
Good Afternoon , all. I agree with Texas Chief, except that I, also would like to see smaller steam engines with quality detail and quality running abilities. And I hope that they would be able to run as dc or dcc.
The model rail road market needs more generic small steam. but it wouldn't hurt if some manufacturer made ( in plastic ) a well detailed A.T.S.F. (and painted and decalled correctly) small steamer ( read 0-6-0,
0-8-0, 2-8-0, yes, I know Bachmann came out with a 2-8-0, but it is an I.C. prototype, 2-6-2, 2-8-2, 4-4-2, and even a 4-6-0) in Spectrum quality.
If Bachman did, and the price was right, I would buy three of each type that I listed above.
Hope every one has a pleasant evening.
Bob
Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific question. I am trying to determine the largest steam that the Rock Island had used. Thanks to any that can help me out on this! I have a 2-8-0 (x2), 2-6-0, 0-6-0 but am looking to add a larger steam to the fleet.
Jay,
Most of the freight power on the Rock was 2-8-0's and 2-8-2's.
They also had 4-6-2's and 4-8-2's. I don't know if the 4-8-2's did any freight work, but on many roads they dual service.
They also had a a few 4-8-4's and 2-10-2's. These where the biggest, no articulated locos.
Try www.rr-fallenflags.org for some pictures. I have not checked but more info is out there for sure.
Sheldon
Jay, The Rock Island had more 4-8-4s than any other railroads.
Jay, RAM,
Actually, the Canadian National had more, but the Rock had more than any other US road at 85 total, in two different classes, all built by ALCO.
It shoud be noted that these where some of the earliest Northerns built and where not as big as latter ones like UP FEF's, or the biggest of those on the ATSF. And while slightly bigger is some ways not as powerfull as a N&W "J".
Sheldon
The Rock had some great Northerns. See:
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/ri/ri-s5114bjg.jpg
bump~
I hate to say this, but I'm 99% sure that Bachmann won't make a 2-10-4. Bachmann likes to make smaller engines for their product line. The biggest I've ever seen Bachmann make was a Mallet 2-6-6-2.....and even with that, it was a small engine.
For bigger locomotives, your better off getting Broadway Limited/Precision Craft Models. I've mentioned large engines to Bachmann before, but I usually get millions of disagrees about how large engines won't work on a typical home-built layout.......whatever that means.
Honestly, I would rather have an Southern Pacific P-8 4-6-2:
(http://bill.srnr.arizona.edu/M&M/SP-P10.jpg)
Bachmann used to make an ATSF 4-8-4 and quit making it and swore they would NEVER make it again then later began making it again. They used to make an ATSF 2-10-4 and quit making it. Who's to say they won't make it again?
Dick
Texas Chief
Quote from: TexasChief on August 18, 2007, 10:55:24 PM
Bachmann used to make an ATSF 4-8-4 and quit making it and swore they would NEVER make it again then later began making it again. They used to make an ATSF 2-10-4 and quit making it. Who's to say they won't make it again?
Dick
Texas Chief
Bachmann never made a 2-10-4 to my knowledge. I think your confusing it with another company.
Bachmann mdid indeed make a "Texas" type steamer. It was back in the eighties that I first saw it advertised. BTW, it had a four-axle/ truck tender I knew it wouldn't run really too good on HOn3 track, so I declined at the time. I also liked that chunky little 2-8-2 that they interchanged with the 2-8-0, and had the temacity to call them "different"... Shame shame, Johann; some of us actually see.
RIch
IIRC, it was a Santa Fe Texas. ;D
Gene
That is great on the Rock Island side. My head spins from all of the imformation sent my way. Thanks for all of the great help!
HO SCALE BACKMANN 2-10-4 LOCOMOTIVE WITH TENDER 1 $10.00
$19.75 6d 07h 43m . Just to show that Bachmann did indeed make a 2-10-4. one is listed on ebay. This must have been one of the early ones because it has the correct tender. How ever the CB&Q never had anything that looked like this.
Ram, the early Bachmann 2-10-4's didn't have the right tender. They were lettered for Santa Fe but had a NYC centepede coal tender behind it. The second run came out with the correct 52' oil tender.
Dick
Texas Chief
Bye the way, a 2-10-4 is commonly called a "Texas" type steam engine.
Dick
Texas Chief
A centipede tender? You sure? I saw a pair of four-axle trucks under a Santa Fe tender.
Rich
Those might have been the later versions.
Those centipede tenders were ugly.
Those centipede tenders were ugly.
They might have been ugly, but they got the job done.
Rich
I have two 2-10-4s with the correct tenders and converted to a PMD drive. i have one waiting for another drive. The PMD repower units are very nice, precision pieces and the units walk away with long consists. The only rub is that you have to make your own weights or bug Bowser for a set of 4-8-4 weights. Painted and weathered (slightly, many people have been fooled by the inexpensive plastic shell and thought these were Tenshodo or other brass imports.. Incindentally, I converted the tender for pickup and it works very well. Use Intermountain wheelsets.
Quote from: TexasChief on August 20, 2007, 07:10:02 PM
Bye the way, a 2-10-4 is commonly called a "Texas" type steam engine.
Dick
Texas Chief
The Canadian Pacific's dual service 5900 series 2-10-4's, Classes T1a, T1b and T1c, were called "Selkirks" after the Selkirk mountain range through which they ran.
Did Central Vermont, a Canadian National subsidiary, call their smart looking 2-10-4's Texas types?
Quote from: r.cprmier on August 21, 2007, 06:45:57 AM
Those centipede tenders were ugly.
They might have been ugly, but they got the job done.
Rich
true
Did Central Vermont, a Canadian National subsidiary, call their smart looking 2-10-4's Texas types?
Ayuppp!
Rich
Why does this discussion on 2-10-4 engines ONLY contain a FEW comments about the original question??
I read a lot of stuff here about almost every other engine!! I think others should start their own posts instead of arguing and NOT discussing the ORIGINAL topic!!...?
There are those of us who have to find time to use this forum. I for one usually only read what I have time to. I also only read ones that peek my interests, or are along the same situations that I have encountered. I feel that all I have waisted my time......
I feel that all I have waisted my time......
HUH? Stop being a crab. Pay attention; you may learn more; maybe even better spelling.
Rich
Rich,
Yes I noticed the mistakes... After I posted. I am on the "Old" erganomic computer tonight... I hate having to use this one ....
It is just that I really AM interested in this subject and had to read a lot of other stuff....
YES I was frustrated..... Sorry.
hotrainlover
We up here that worked for the Central Vermont called our 2-10-4's "The 700 Class"
Red
Here's a CVR 2-10-4:
(http://www.images.technomuses.ca/images_site/CN002116_s.jpg)
"The 700 Class"
I didn't know that, Red; I always heard them being called "Texas" class.
What I always thought was a rather nice touch was the "Canadian" cabs. I bet you guys loved that in the winter!
I had seen them at Palmer a couple of times as a kid, as I had family in the Monson/Palmer area, so I remember them as being quite a sight! And loud, too!
Rich
Remember, a lot of railroaders did NOT use the given name for a locomotive, but called it by the wheel type or the Class given it by the using railroad. Thus the N&W 4-8-4s were called "Jays," not whatever the N&W called 4-8-4s, which I sure was neither Northern nor Greenbriar." In the same way crews might give a type a name, but it's different from the official one. The C&O H7, 2-8-8-2s were called "Chesapeake" in Richmond, but the hoggers called it "Simple Simon."
Gene
Simple Simon...a 2-8-8-2...Hmmmmm; interesting...Why?
Rich
I am sure that most railroads, the operation personal went by class instead of names. Like on the Santa Fe they had 2-10-2s . 900s, 1600s, and 3800-3900 class were all santa fe types, but there was a big difference in the The 900 & 1600 had small 54 (I think) drivers while the 3800-3900 class had 63inch drivers. I think the names were more for the public.
Rich, the C&O H7 was the first simple articulated on the C&O. Some engineer or fireman must have had a young child or grandchild and remembered:
Simple Simon met
A Pieman
Going to the fair....
Gene
Gene;
I had to chuckle. All I could think of was the old "Howard Johnson" logo...complete with drooling dog.
Rich
Rich,
You are showing your age! I bet you remember two lane highways, too!
Gene
Gene;
I ca nremember horses and wagons up and down the street, still soldiering on, coal furnaces, AND steam locomotive doing things other than pulling tourists around a museum. Hey Gene; routes 128, greater Boston area; and the Merritt Parkway were big deals!!
Rich
Well, shoot, Rich. I went to Hong Kong on a freighter that still had anti-pirate guards on it. I'm not sure if it still carried machine guns, but the pedastals were still there.
Gene
I use to help my dad farm with a team of horses. I liked to watch the mack trucks with solid rubber wheeles and chain drive.