Quote from: J3a-614 on March 08, 2010, 12:23:44 AM
Full Steam Ahead suggested he would like to see Bachmann produce a New York Central 4-6-4 (and he took an unfortunate amount of ribbing due to his typing); the engine, as he pointed out, is a classic, but as some of the others suggested, has been or is in production by others, going back as far as an American Flyer AC version in the prewar era, in the same time period as Varney's Dockside and MDC-Roundhouse 0-6-0.  For that reason, even I would question that choice; in some ways, it would be like another Pennsy K-4.

At the same time, to produce a new 4-6-4 has a number of marketing challenges.  Not many other roads have the following of the NYC and its 275 4-6-4s, and of the others that had the type, the rosters were much smaller.  The second-largest owner of Hudsons was Canadian Pacific, with 65 engines; other owners had a dozen or less, and two, the Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo and the Maine Central, had only two each.  This is not a small consideration, especially when you consider that a new engine is supposedly a $250,000 investment in tooling and other incidentals. 


One thing that could help is the fact that most 4-6-4s had 79 or 80 inch drivers.  This is important because most modern steam locomotives--essentially anything with a trailing truck--had a driver axle spacing about 3 or 4 inches greater than the diameter of the drivers.  I suspect this is the minimum clearance that would accommodate flange clearance and brake rigging.  Some engines would have greater spacing, but this was usually due to weight distribution (USRA 0-8-0s), or to allow for other components (such as a firebox that would drop between axles in a 4-6-0 or 2-8-0).  Basically, this means a common mechanism can often be used for engines of the same driving diameter; Bachmann already does this with its 80-inch drivered 4-8-4s, based on AT&SF, NYC (Niagara), and Southern Pacific (Daylight) prototypes. 

On this basis, here are what would be my suggestions for new 4-6-4s:

My first example requires I declare a certain amount of prejudice, as I am a C&O modeler.  Still, C&O's 4-6-4s used a tender Bachmann makes that goes with the C&O 2-8-4; certain other parts, such as a trailing truck, were interchangeable, too.  Both the Baker-geared 1942 L2s and the poppet-valved postwar L2as were built by Baldwin; 78" drivers:

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-11.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-1050.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-1106.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-1158.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-1162.jpg

Another one, Chicago, Burlington & Quincy, Baker gear, 78" drivers:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/photos_by_laurence/3801376761/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thomas-merton/3918657600/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thomas-merton/3917872735/in/photostream/

http://www.llarson.com/steam/schenzinger/images/NA42.jpg

http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?//july98/07-07-98/cbxq3003.jpg

The Milwaukee's conventional 4-6-4s had 80" drivers:

http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/MIL137.JPG

http://www.oldmilwaukeeroad.com/content/progress/photopages/photo09a.htm

DL&W:

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/tr_dlw1151.jpg

Wabash, 80" drivers (home rebuild from 2-8-2):

http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?//january99/01-01-99/ns1394.jpg

http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?//january99/01-01-99/ns1395.jpg

New Haven (made elsewhere, so not necessarily a candidate here), 80":

http://abpr.railfan.net/abprphoto.cgi?//july99/07-26-99/nh1408.jpg

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/hudson/nynhh1409.jpg

There are other 4-6-4s, but they are not included here, as the change in driver size is too great, resulting in different overall proportions.

There is another bit of a hole, and that's in medium-drivered 4-8-4s with wheels in the 74-to-76 inch range.  Again, the idea is that a common mechanism can help amortize the cost of tooling.

Again, we start with the C&O J3 and J3a, the latter class including an engine numbered 614:

http://leesome1226.tripod.com/Pictures/co614erietable.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-39.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-142.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-21056.jpg

http://www.cohs.org/repository/Archives/cohs/web/cohs-1418.jpg

Burlington's burly O-5 and O-5a:

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1602802

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1312191

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=293065

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1082789

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=1082793

Full-sized "brass" Burlington 5632:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=265628

Lackawanna had several types of 4-8-4s; the Q-4 had 74" drivers:

http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php?action=post2;start=0;board=2

Southern Pacific's first daylights were GS-2s, 76" drivers:

http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP4412.JPG

Speaking of the GS-2s also brings up the GS-3s, which had 80" drivers like the currently produced GS-4.  Hmm, a change to single headlight insert, an open cab, modified tender with gangway account of open cab--could the GS-4 tooling provide a different engine?

http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php?action=post2;start=0;board=2

A recent excursion favorite, 74" drivers:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=298516&nseq=5

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=298239&nseq=6

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=293804&nseq=7

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=284738&nseq=10

2008--or 1948?

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=280515&nseq=16

There may be others; what else could you suggest?

Finally, Bachmann might even want to consider a New York Central 4-8-2, specifically an L1 or L2 of some sort, which was a freight engine with 70" drivers and Baker valve gear on the L2, like the USRA 4-8-2 currently in the line.  Note the variations in subclasses; I personally like the earlier engines with heavy, overhanging Elesco feedwater heaters that looked like H-10 2-8-2s on steroids rather than the later ones, which looked like Hudsons:

http://www.railarchive.net/nyccollection/nyc2967_rcl.htm

http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/NYC2618.JPG

http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/NYC2872.JPG

http://transportmuseumassociation.org/images/exhibits/newyorkcentral2933.jpg

Have fun.

The Santa Fe had 16.

Repainted, the Bachmann Nickel Plate Berk made an outstanding Polar Express for my grandson.  The only problem is, the sound board doesn't know "Hot Chocolate" or the Polar Express theme song.  All it wants to do is chuff and hiss and whistle.  That's fine music to my ears but my grandson wants a train that sounds like the "real" one.  Maybe I should use a recordable card which will let me put the right music in the loco.  (Actually, I did install a "Hot Chocolate" sound gizmo in the baggage car.)

You could use brass gears for a little more robust drive train and possibly use a first gear with fewer teeth so you can rev the motor without sending the loco down the track at light speed.  That's OK for a model like this as a 10-coupled locomotive would be a drag freight loco, not a passenger speedster.  You might want to rething the Varney cylinders; they could look a little lightweight for what would have been a very powerful locomotive.

Your styro tunnels will work just fine but you might want to consider using tunnels only on the turnback curves which make it so obvious that our little trains don't really go anywhere. 

DON'T cut through BOTH pieces of cork or you'll have a hole in the middle of your roadbed.  You can either cut the top piece in a straight line to match what you've already laid and then drop the cut piece right down to the top of your table or sub-roadbed, or you can cut a wedge out of the bottom piece that's shaped like the "excess" of the new piece and then drop the new piece down.  If you cut and remove both pieces you'll have a void.

Jim-

You must be on the Prairie Dog Central.  Great railroad.

D

The reversing and therefore shorting problem is the diagonal track through the middle, not the end curve.  Depending on the actual size of the various segments of rail, I'd isolate and wire that middle diagonal as the reverse loop.  If the track segments are too short, then do it as Jim says.

I just tie a loose loop of fishing line between the rear axle of one car and the front axle of the next.  They never come uncoupled unless I cut them apart.  This also helps a small train to look like a much longer one.

The Dynamis systems are identical in all three packages; the only difference is the "free" locos.  I suggest getting the Dynamis alone unless you can use the loco or think you can sell it on ebay for less then the price difference, which you probably can.  However, that's a bit of a hassle and you'll lose fees for the sale and Paypal.  I probably would just get the Dynamis unless I wanted the included loco.

Wow!  Those photos look like me trying to get into the jeans I wore a century ago when I was in college.  A tight fit if ever there was one.

If you want to use sectional track EZTrack and the Kato track seem to be the best.  Use the nickel-silver Bachmann's track, however, not the steel track.  Sectional track, especially that which has roadbed attached can get pretty expensive, though.  You can sometimes get a good buy on ebay but you may not find anything other than the most popular pieces.

Flex track and quality turnouts are less expensive, go down just a little more slowly that EZTrack, and work very well.  Also, I find a little more satisfaction when I lay out my right-of-way myself.  Too, there will be fewer joints so you won't need as many track feeders which is a consideration only if you are doing DCC or a really huge layout.

Well, I wouldn't touch the sound-or-not-dispute if you paid me.  It seems there is way to much heat there already.

However, I will comment on the smoke.  Don't do it.  The smoke fluid is basically mineral oil which is cooked off.  The smoke effect isn't so great and it condenses as a thin residue on everything it touches.  That screws up your tracks and, more importantly, will leave a dust-attracting coating on your scenery, rolling stock etc.  It's impossible to remove because it gets into everything.

The older kits from LaBelle's (same company as the one which makes the lubricants), Ambroid, Walther's (wood pasenger kits with metal sides) and Central Valley (same as the company which made the fabulous trucks and now makes bridges and stairways) are commonly available on ebay.  This is true for both passenger and freight kits.

Yes, Herkimer, Kasiner and OK all sold/sell the same kits.

Woddy - Ambroid sold many kits which weren't One-in Five-Thousand, though the 1/5000 were supposed to be something special since they had limited production.  And there were a iot more than 24 different 1/5000 kits.

You can make some small removable plexiglass "walls" to guard the straightaways.  There is information in the April MR, or maybe it's the March RMC.  Also, a 12" turntable is nominally 90' in HO, plus there's a fudge factor since the wheelbase is considerably less than the total length of a locomotive, so you should be just fine with the smaller turntable.  That will free up a surprising amount of space (and money, too).

You can also use the black powder as soot around the stack.  It's even useful as soot around the exhausts on diesels.