Anyone think Bachmann should make the 4004 Union Pacific Big Boy?
Aren't there already two other Big Boy offerings? (Rivarossi for sure, Athearn?) Seems like they would be better off avoiding direct competition and offering something else.
I think they should make the Allegheny and sell it for the price of their new Yellowstone
Not much difference in size and detail
The Rivarossi price is obscene
Absolutely not!! there already is such a glut of those on the market that it would make no sense whatsoever...on the other hand that never stopped them before did it. :D
I have to agree with GN. Just check ebay; I'll bet there are 100 Challengers from a dozen builders on any given day. Plus, new tooling and mechanicals could easily push a plastic loco into the price range of very nice brass models. I think Bachmann could spend their new product budget much more productively on any of a number of other locomotives.
-- D
Quote from: GN.2-6-8-0 on January 14, 2012, 09:22:06 PM
Absolutely not!! there already is such a glut of those on the market that it would make no sense whatsoever...on the other hand that never stopped them before did it. :D
Ain't much of a glut when the Rivarossi models go for $499 and check what the go for on EBAY
Glut would mean prices are low
Quote from: Doneldon on January 14, 2012, 09:39:51 PM
I have to agree with GN. Just check ebay; I'll bet there are 100 Challengers from a dozen builders on any given day. Plus, new tooling and mechanicals could easily push a plastic loco into the price range of very nice brass models. I think Bachmann could spend their new product budget much more productively on any of a number of other locomotives.
-- D
Allegheny Not Challenger
I think Bachmann is smart enough not to make a bigboy or the Challenger. Just to clear things up the Bigboy is a 4-8-8-4 while the Challenger is a 4-6-6-4
I too would say that a Big Boy or Challenger would not be a good choice for Bachmann because others do make these locomotives, and they are reported to be fine products.
At the same time, I think it should be considered a compliment to Bachmann that there are some people who think what Bachmann offers in terms of a total package of running characteristics, detail, sound options, and price would make them want a Big Boy or Challenger from this company. I would be inclined to agree with them that this combination is currently tops from Bachmann, too. . .
I would like to see Bachmann do an N&W A 2-6-6-4,either spectrum or standard,with soundtraxx.The only ones I've seen are the ones BLI did.
I actually think a Challenger might not be a bad idea, especially if they offered it with appropriate details for the different roads that operated them - Western Maryland, D&H, Clinchfield, D&RGW, SP&S among others, along with the UP.
Quote from: ebtnut on January 17, 2012, 03:50:38 PM
I actually think a Challenger might not be a bad idea, especially if they offered it with appropriate details for the different roads that operated them - Western Maryland, D&H, Clinchfield, D&RGW, SP&S among others, along with the UP.
The situation with the Challenger is pretty much the same as the Big Boy: Too many companies have been making them for too long to leave much market unsatisfied. Sure, the Challenger was used by a number of railroads, not just the UP as was the case with the Big Boy, which broadens the potential market, but are there enough modelers who both want a Challenger and are able to run this monster on their layouts who don't already have one or more? I'm guessing no. And I feel pretty confident of that guess.
-- D
Back in 98 I picked up a Rivarossi 4-8-4 at a train show
$150
Vendor had a box full of about 20 of them that he said he picked up as a special buy
Real bargain as they were about $250 on the market
What small engines are left
Consolidation-- Mogul-- American-- Ten wheeler are all out there
Next step up Mikado and Mountain are all out there
For 4X8s The Mikado and Consolidation are good bets and served well into the end of steam
What small engines are left? How about atsf 2-6-2.
Bachmann already has a 2-6-2 out
All they would have to do is add sound like they did for the Mogul
QuoteAll they would have to do is add sound like they did for the Mogul
In Bachmann's defense, they did more then "just add sound". Take a photo of there old 2-6-0 next to the new and you'll see it's different.
I would like to see more small+ mid sized steam models as well.
-Brad
Quote from: NWsteam on January 21, 2012, 09:59:30 PM
QuoteAll they would have to do is add sound like they did for the Mogul
In Bachmann's defense, they did more then "just add sound". Take a photo of there old 2-6-0 next to the new and you'll see it's different.
I would like to see more small+ mid sized steam models as well.
-Brad
Thanks I thought all they did was add sound
Still wish they had an unlettered version
Quote from: uncbob on January 21, 2012, 09:32:20 PM
Bachmann already has a 2-6-2 out
All they would have to do is add sound like they did for the Mogul
Most Class 1 railroads 2-6-2's were fairly large engines in comparison to the 2-6-0's. They had fairly large drivers and were a bit smaller than a 4-6-2. The smaller versions used by industry and smaller railroads with the smaller drivers were the main users.
I would only be interested in 2-6-2's as used by the Class 1 Railroads and not those used by secondary roads and industry.
http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m620/northern10/2-6-2/BalboaATSF2-6-2.jpg
I do remember the Tyco/Mantua/Bachmann versions which were the small driver versions and those released by Roundhouse/MDC which had the larger drivers and were representative of those used by the Class 01 Railroads.
Quote from: florynow on January 22, 2012, 12:29:11 PM
The Santa Fe (and the NP) had some big 2-6-2's. But you need to look at some other engines before you pronounce the 2-6-2 to be a generically large main line prototype.
Look at the Reader No. 11 on this site:
http://www.steamlocomotive.info/fstate.cfm?which=Kentucky
That to my knowledge is a little more representative of what typified the relatively rare 2-6-2 wheel arrangement.
I think that Lionel has produced more 0-27 2-6-2's than ever actually existed on prototype railroads.
/quote]
You are right that most 2-6-2's went to the smaller railroads and logging and mining companies.
However, if you are modeling a Class 1 railroad you will find, if you bother to check, that they had larger versions with significantly larger drivers.
I model a couple class 1 railroads so I will opt to have the larger 2-6-2's on my layout. If I was modeling a small class 2 railroad then I would opt for the smaller driver versions.
Note GN upgraded a number of their 2-6-2's into 4-6-2's.
All I am really saying is, what IF Bachmann made it?
Checking the web, there were 1,500 Prairie engines in total made for the US Railroads, perhaps someone could confirm the number of Yellowstone locomotives were manufactured, gee the number is less than the 2-6-2's.
Bachmann could do two versions as they did their Spectrum 4-6-0's. A large driver version for the Class 01 railroads and a smaller driver version for the various industrial and class 02 carriers.
Quote from: florynow on January 22, 2012, 12:29:11 PM
The Santa Fe (and the NP) had some big 2-6-2's. But you need to look at some other engines before you pronounce the 2-6-2 to be a generically large main line prototype.
Look at the Reader No. 11 on this site:
http://www.steamlocomotive.info/fstate.cfm?which=Kentucky
That to my knowledge is a little more representative of what typified the relatively rare 2-6-2 wheel arrangement.
I think that Lionel has produced more 0-27 2-6-2's than ever actually existed on prototype railroads.
PF
for a life lesson, perhaps you should tell us how many 2-8-8-4's or Yelowstones were produced? Is that number significantly less thaqn 1,500?????
Quote from: florynow on January 28, 2012, 05:58:56 PM
I'll let the young people who are good at the internet get those numbers for you. All I am doing is alluding to a 1951 or so TRAINS magazine (yes I had it before The Hurricane and yes I am that old) photo-article about NP steam engines that said that the 2-6-2 was not a very popular wheel arrangement..... especially compared to the 2-6-0 and 2-8-0 who were its main competition. Again .... young people .... please post the scores for us.
Editor David P. Morgan is no longer with us to back anything up and that article will be very hard to come by anymore. Incidentally, the NP Yellowstones were in it too, good looking engines, better looking to my eye than the more famous UP articulateds. The photos in the article were by NP employee R.V. Nixon and mayb some of them are available on the web, including the NP 2-6-2.
PF
So you just make broad statements and hope some one else will dig out the facts that hopefully might support you, that is if you even remembered it correctly?
72 Yellowstones were made per Wikipedia
Google 2-8-8-4
The biggest 2-6-2 by weight were the AT&SF ones
CB&Q had the most 429
Last Mainline version was built in 1909
Quote from: uncbob on January 28, 2012, 10:21:20 PM
The biggest 2-6-2 by weight were the AT&SF ones
CB&Q had the most 429
Last Mainline version was built in 1909
Great Northern had 150 and later converted some into 4-6-2's.
The book I have said 1000 2-6-2 were built for the US market. The Santa Fe, Great Northern,,and CB&Q had the most. N.P. Milw. and Wabash also had them. SF had 238. One had 44 inch drivers. Two had 63 inch drivers. The rest had 69 inch drivers.