Bachmann has produced umpteen versions of the N&W Js, including several that never existed, and BLI has also produced it, and there were a whopping 14 originals.  BLI has produced the N&W A (38 prototypes), and are now coming out with the roller bearing equipped As (5 prototypes).  PCM and Rivarossi have both had N&W Y6bs, 30 prototypes.
Proto produced a beautiful VGN specific Berk, which had 5 prototypes.  They also produced the excellent N&W Y3, with enuf parts on the undec versions that one had a lot of flexibility to basically model a lot of different locomotives, but most of the six or eight lettered versions were pretty loco specific, with seven or eight prototypes in non-N&W livery.
Why do all the manufacturers think an N&W M, which has a LOT shorter rigid wheelbase than a J, and had more prototypes (especially if you count M-1s), and which could also serve in a modern excursion setting as well as a pre-60s layout, would NOT be popular?  Or is it that are more afraid of a riot by the non-N&W guys?  I have completely given up on trying to understand their thinking.  Like B'mann coming out with a Berk just like the Proto ones, right on the heels of Proto's.  Color me mystified.

So why did Bachmann offer the N&W J in about 10 different guises, and the auxiliary tenders in four different guises no less?  Or the SP GS-4?  Or the very Pennsy specific K-4?  There were a LOT more 4-8-0's, even N&W specific, than there ever were Js.
How did BLI decide to start their business off with the N&W Class A, and even more specifically the 38 pre-roller bearing version examples only?  Again with auxiliary tender(s), in DC and DCC guise this time?
Why did Bachmann offer the N&W 4-8-2 in pre-war guise, when post war is 10 times more popular?
How did LL Proto manage to offer the VIRGINIAN 2-8-4 (although I will be FOREVER grateful), when there were FIVE (5) prototypes?
The truth is, whoever holds the power to make THE decision in ALL the model manufacturing/distributing companies; they make exactly what they want, when they want, and they BARELY give a you know what, what we as a group think.
I am not raisng TOO much hell, being as how I am a VGN/N&W guy, but some of you have to be getting frustrated?  And yeah, I still want a good N&W Class M from somebody.
There is no LOGICAL answer, other than the Golden Rule.  Them that's got the gold, makes the rules.

How about a PRR K-4?  That's much more in line with past manufacturer's thinking as to what is needed in the marketplace.
RETCH !

I am not going to say anything further, and they better get it right !

RAM - Darned right, it better negotiate 22" curves and #4 switches And keep the tender tucked close, and no crabwalking out of the turns.  And it better pull 200 cars up a 2% grade too !

I want a Virginian 2-10-10-2, and I want it perfectly accurate, and I want it by March, 2008.  The N&W Class M, M-1, and M-2s would be nice too, and I don't absolutely have to have one before June.
Get the lead out Bach Man !

Check the track.  Get yourself a small level, and make sure it is level both side to side and along both rails.  Steam engines do not take kindly to any abrupt changes in elevation or plumb.

I do use traction tires wherever I can.  Mine are quite well mannered; hardly nasty. 
I clean my track maybe once every 9 or 10 months with laquer thinner or acetone.  I do not get either on my traction tires.  I clean metal wheels with the same stuff, when I have to, and any plastic wheels with alcohol.

It combines with any dust and/or dirt in the environment and forms a nasty gray ooze that is not conductive.  It spreads to everything.  It is not conducive to better traction in my opinion.  Oil is a lubricant.  Real locomotives used sand.  That tells me a lot.  I do use Wahl's.  On my clippers.

Note to all -
    Put any oil, of any type, on the rails at your own hazard, and if you decide later on your own that it is a complete fiasco, remember some people here warned you.
    If you decide you like it, you can thank Jack.

I don't remember the numbers, but I also lube each axle where it goes into the frame with one small drop of Labelle light oil every couple of months or so.  Also, both ends og the motor shaft.
If you ever hear a screeching sound, no matter how faint, it's telling you it needs lube.

DCC is a form of alternating current.  The polarity switching back and forth makes the DC motor buzz.  My opinion is that can not be good for anything, and I would take them off the track, or kill the power to the section where they are sitting.  Old and/or new DC locomotives work EXACTLY the same way they have for 40 years.

I think you better pick up the phone and call the sevice department.  You will need all your loco Bachmann part numbers for the easiest solution.

Don't get me wrong, I like "Live free or die", but hasn't that been on either New Hampshire or Vermont license plates for eons ?

I like traction tires because they make a model steam loco more able to replicate the feats of the prototype.  I do not need an excuse to double head when I want to.  I just do it.  A Y6b leading a Class A with a string of hoppers just looks good occassionally, even though either could handle the entire train alone.
Unfortunately many models that come with traction tires experience difficulties if the owners do not take precautionary steps, and traction tires in general end up with a bad rap.  Also, if you are in the Wahl clipper oil fraternity, you will not like traction tires.  However, I fit them closely and glue them in the grooves and have very very few issues, ever.  I learned on a Riv 2-8-8-2; the OLD model.  It threw a tire 25 years ago, and I bought three packages of Stewart assorted replacements to be ready for long term issues.  I figured out how to eliminate issues with that Riv, and have only used one more tire in the interveneing years.
I certainly do not care whether you like them or hate them, and whether you use them or not is also assuredly your choice, but please do not categorically blame traction tires for ills that are not their fault.  Whatever you do, enjoy, and good luck.

  I am not aware of any models built with anything approaching prototypical type suspension on trucks, for all the reasons already noted, the primary one being money and lack of demand I am almost certain.  If it took 100" curves some collectors would want it if it was available.
  To vastly improve the traction on a multi-axled, fully sprung, HO scale model steam locomotive, get a lot softer springs.  I have not done any comparisons with sprung and unsprung combinations or such, but I can vouch for this change on many brass locos in years past.  As delivered, most sprung axles are sprung so stiff they may as well be fixed.