Bachmann Message Board

Discussion Boards => Large => Topic started by: tlnibert on July 11, 2010, 11:08:44 AM



Title: 2-6-6-2
Post by: tlnibert on July 11, 2010, 11:08:44 AM
Is it possible to run the 2-6-6-2 without the water tanks, is it heavy enough?
Tom


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: JerryB on July 11, 2010, 11:33:58 AM
I don't personally have one, so this is based on observation of one I saw on a show floor and discussions with various owners.

The 'water tanks' are hollow plastic shells, and contribute very little to the weight of the locomotive. I can't imagine their removal would noticeably affect traction.

The real problem is that the 'boiler' is not complete in the area concealed by the tanks. It will look very strange (as in not looking like a steam locomotive) without rebuilding this area. This has been discussed on various forums (perhaps look at My Large Scale) where owners were considering reworking the locomotive into a tender equipped machine. I have not heard of one that has actually been done.

The prototype had to carry water in order to work, thus the tanks. Are you planning to use a tender? I think it is doable, but is a significant task when the boiler reconstruction is included. If traction is a problem, perhaps some weight could be added as you re-build the missing boiler area.

Hope this helps.

Happy RRing,

Jerry


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: tlnibert on July 11, 2010, 12:37:05 PM
Wonder why they made that engine when they could have modeled an engine from the Little River Lumber Co., or the standard guage at Flagstaff.
"engine Arizona has links to more of that type engine. I've looked at all I could find.
I was interested in the LGB engine Unitah, but luck into a Sumpter Valley.
That's Guys
Tom


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: JerryB on July 11, 2010, 02:55:06 PM
As you know, both the Little River 2-4-4-2 and the 2-6-6-2 in Flagstaff are standard (4' 8 1/2") gauge engines. To build them in 1:20 scale would mean they would require a model track gauge of 70.6mm or 2.78". The alternate would be to produce them to run on 45mm gauge track in 1:32 scale, or to one of the 'no prototype scales' of 1:29, 1:26, 1:22.5, etc . . .

As SG prototypes running on NG trackage, they would not find acceptance with the scale modeling community. To a scale modeler, they would look pretty funny if built as 1:20 scale, but running on 3' gauge track. That would mean very limited sales, primarily to the toy train fans.

Since I have some F Scale standard gauge (hand laid) trackage, I personally would welcome such an effort, but there are not many modelers working in F scale standard gauge. BTW, I do own H0 scale brass models of both the Little River 2-4-4-2, and the Sierra Railroad's #38 2-6-6-2. These relatively small Mallets are fascinating machines.

Even the current Bachmann 2-6-6-2 tank engine is based on a 3' narrow gauge engine that was proposed, but never built. Some of the 'rivet counters' won't even consider that engine since it does not have a specific prototype.

A further objection to the 2-6-6-2 tank engine is that Bachmann, in order to accommodate sharp radius curves, took the liberty of making the mechanism with both 'engines' pivoting. That arrangement is named a Meyers, rather than a Mallet. I know at least a couple of modelers who are working on changing them to a true Mallet configuration before putting them on their railroads. Not an insignificant task, but 'scale modeling' to many folks means it should follow the prototype in all respects possible.

Not trying to start a scale / gauge war here, but we are extremely fortunate to have Bachmann as a manufacturer of accurate, affordable 1:20.3 scale locomotives rather than taking the 'if it looks like a locomotive then it is close enough' scale concept that many other manufacturers tend to use.

Happy RRing,

Jerry


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: Kevin Strong on July 11, 2010, 03:57:03 PM
As Jerry stated, the tanks aren't "separate" items as one would hope they might be. They are part of the whole boiler structure, built so to have plenty of room for a large speaker, batteries, and electronics should the modeler choose to install them. In that regard, it's a great design. For the modeler wishing to convert the loco to something like the Sumpter Valley locos by removing the tanks, it makes doing so something of a chore. You'd need to pretty much replace the entire boiler and figure out how to re-mount the two chassis underneath. Doable, yes, but not for the feint of heart.

Later,

K


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: tlnibert on July 11, 2010, 04:56:59 PM
I guess, I'll make due with K-27's.
I just returned from a long vacation and my laout is three foot high with weeds. We're starting tomorrow and hope to have it running in a few day. I had 3 K-27's and haven't seen one run yet.
Thanks guys
Tom
Huntington, Wv


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: on30gn15 on July 11, 2010, 05:29:20 PM
'if it looks like a locomotive then it is close enough'

That seems to work for these guys
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=241861 (http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=241861)
 ;) ;D


Title: Re: 2-6-6-2
Post by: JerryB on July 11, 2010, 05:41:43 PM
That seems to work for these guys
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=241861 (http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=241861)
 ;) ;D

BOY & HOW!!

That pix is definitely in the 'run what you brung' category..

Be certain that I was not in anyway denigrating anyone, nor any manufacturer who does not adhere to scale. Everyone has their own way of enjoying this great hobby!

Happy RRing,

Jerry