IIRC the boxcar was described as a C & K prototype to 1:22.5 which was 1:20fied by the use of 1:20 details such as ladders and grab irons.  I seem to remember that the drawing appears in a Carstens book?

Of limited appeal train guy.  Judging from the lack of comments the 2ft stretch Forney may not have gone down too well so I doubt the 2 footer you propose will do any better.  The others would have, I suspect, limited appeal.  In truth the best sellers are likely  to be Colorado prototypes followed by White Pass or EBT, or loggers of the type we have had already.

If you want a loco like the 2 footer then look for the Indy mogul in the pre-owned ads.  That ia about largeish plantation size.

Sam E

Quote from: glennk28 on July 12, 2009, 08:56:30 PM
I believe that the Florence & Cripple Creek had a 3' gauge Forney, that wound up on a Central California line. Two possible prototypes for Bachmann to make, or for an aftermarket supplier to do a conversion for.  gj

I think it would be a stretch to do an aftermarket conversion in 1:20.3..  The July/Aug NG&SLG carries drawings of the loco in its FCC and Pajaro states.  It is significantly larger than the Maine 2-4-4s.  What folk tend to forget is that unless you have VERY good track, 2ft ga limits the overall size of a loco, especially with regard to centre of gravity issues.  The three ft allows a larger oa size.  That is not to say that small locos were not built for 3 ft but they tended to be for lightly laid industrial or plantation trackage.

The Maine Forneys I suspect would be too big and heavy for typical plantation and small industrial work for 3 ft as for 2ft.  The Maine Forneys  and the FCC loco were built for relative speed which suggests passenger or perishable cargo work.  We know the FCCloco was intended for 'suburban' services.

The literature suggests that the outside framed Maine 2-4-4 s were capable of steady running at a fast speed for the smaller gauge.  The inside framed version was said to be less steady and illustrated the center of gravity issue (think about it)

I have to say that for 3 ft 'mainline' use the FCC loco or a BRBL Mason or similar would have been better.  For plantation etc use a small industrial  Baldwin or Porter Forney would have been a better choice.

At least if the SR&RL is going to be used make the loco regaugeable to 30-32mmga

Sam e

Quote from: tac on July 09, 2009, 01:26:21 PM

Quote from: samevans on July 09, 2009, 10:39:24 AM
Oh yes we would notice a 15mm disparity even here in the UK. 

Sigh.

Please read what I wrote, Sir.  I wrote that 'one in a million of the population' - that means you and me, and sixty-one others who would notice.  My comment was not aimed at you personally.

tac

Ah, you were being ironic?  Does not show up well in a forum posting.  Not sure if they do a smiley for irony.

I did not assume it was personal.

I have to say that I suspect that the majority of real NG nuts in the UK know full well that the SRRL was a 2 ft line.  The ordinary 'G' nut, even in the US, probably doesn't know and cares even less, hence my remark about the K27.  The howls of outrage would not be about a 3 ft loco being run on 2 ft gauge, but that as a 32mm gauge model it would not run on 45mm gauge. 

Sam E

PS assuming that the loco is built almost consistently to 1:20.3, its loading gauge is going to be rather small when compared with non industrial 3 footers.  I also suspect that as an industrial loco it would be rather too heavy for most industrial tracks.

Quote from: Kevin Strong on July 10, 2009, 02:02:58 AM

Quote from: StanAmes on July 09, 2009, 10:24:44 PM
...Are you sure of your comment that this is a scaled up 2 ft forney...

One would assume that had Bachmann used a 3' gauge forney as a prototype for this, we'd see it lettered for the Boston, Revere Beach & Lynn, or other 3' gauge railroad that ran forneys. This particular loco is lettered for the SR&RL, and looks nearly identical to SR&RL #10, so its pretty easy to connect the dots in that regard.
Later,
K

The Boston, Revere Beach, & Lynn did not use Forneys.  Most of its locos were Masons (single Fairlies) where the engine unit  was articulated as well as the carrying bogie (truck). 

Forneys were rigid framed tank locos, the novel feature being that both coal and water were carried in a bunker to the rear of the cab, and the locos were designed originally to run bunker forward (ie as 4-4-0 s)

Sam E

Oh yes we would notice a 15mm disparity even here in the UK.  Why can't Bachman make a model of a proper 3ft ga Forney instead of distorting a 2 footer?  I don't suppose it will be regaugeable so that it could be run on something approaching the correct track gauge?  Sheesh.  PS I bet if Bachmann made a 1:20.3 K 27 to run on 32mm or 30mm gauge there would be howls of outrage from the Garden Rail Community.

Sam E

Quote from: Larry Green on June 03, 2009, 11:59:26 AM
Sam, did you get my email?

Larry

Yes, I sent you a reply yesterday at 18.16 local UK time.

Best

Sam E

Quote from: Larry Green on June 01, 2009, 06:16:38 PM
Sam, the book is not worth buying just for the photo. Also, the specification sheets do not show specifics of this particular model locomotive.

I can send you an enlargement of the photo, but it will not tell you much as it is very dark.

Larry

Please.  sam.c.evans@lineone.net

It is possible the gauge is correct.  I believe some of the US copper mine railways were less thatn 2 ft, and in France 500mm (50cm) ga was used as a sub 60cm industrial railway gauge.  It does seem a mite small for a sugar railway - Australia had many miles of 60cm cane railways.

Sam E

Quote from: Loco Bill on June 01, 2009, 03:12:39 PM
There may be some good stuff on the internet.

I got lots of hits when I googled them.  Here is one sample:
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/diesel97.html

Good luck & have fun!!

Alas but not the loco I am looking for.  Have seen this page several times before.

Sam E

Quote from: Larry Green on May 31, 2009, 01:43:14 PM
I got my set of the Critters books from Ron's Books.

Larry

I can get them OK here in the UK but at a price and in these austere times I want to know what I am paying for!  I believe that the Davenport was built for the Carmen Centrale sugar mill, Costa Rica.  The mill closed in 1945.

Sam e

Quote from: the Bach-man on May 30, 2009, 10:45:34 PM
Hi, Sam,
The pictures are in Volume 2 of a series of softbound books called _Critters__.
Have fun!
the Bach-man

Thank you very much

Sam E

Quote from: samevans on May 21, 2009, 10:28:27 AM
Thanks.  I was hoping for pix plans so that I could do a little detailing?  Any ideas Mr Bachmann?

Sam E

Oh Mr Bachman, yoohoo, any ideas on plans/pix of actual Davenport modelled ? 

Ta

Sam E

Quote from: Joe Satnik on May 22, 2009, 07:25:14 AM
Dear Sam,

How long ago is recent?  The post you are quoting is almost 2 years old.

Sincerely,

Joe Satnik 

Er yes I did post it....two years ago.  It showed up yesterday as a recent reply to a posting.  Have no idea why, hence confusion.  I did not recognise it as 'recent'.  My recent posting has been about the Davenport Gas Mechanical and whether any prototype info is available, hence my confusion!!!!

Sam E

Quote from: samevans on August 01, 2007, 01:32:56 PM

Quote from: new G on July 19, 2007, 07:51:00 PM
lrparks & others
jeese guys I certainly didn't mean to insult anyone or ruffle your feathers.
As I said before I have never modeled in G scale RR and after some of the nasty and mundane remarks  from some of you guys I don't think that I will continue  participating in a forum where new ideas seem to make certain people  threatened

This seems to relate to the thread " Topic: Question for Tony or anyone else on RCS"  on the Large Forum.  Mr Parks asked after RC systems & New G reckoned he was going to make a system which ran the onboard (RX) part  from track power.  As it happens Mr Parks was enquiring in the context of battery power; others did raise questions about the proposal New G had aired.  New G seems to be affronted that his Big Idea was not greeted with rapture.  IIRC something like his system has been proposed before but AFAIK it has never made it into commercial production, possibly because of the success of DCC?

Sam E

Someone seems to have hijacked my ID.  I did not write this post.  The only topic I have posted on in recent times is the Davenport ic loco.

Sam E

Thanks.  I was hoping for pix plans so that I could do a little detailing?  Any ideas Mr Bachmann?

Sam E