Quote from: rogertra on August 18, 2007, 01:45:36 AM
Before a 2-6-2, which was not a popular prototype loco, we need a Spectrum 2-6-0, a much more useful loco. 

2-6-2 Not popular? Bite 'yer tongue and check out the Wabash Class G-1 Prairies at:
http://www.wabash-railroad.com/px2-6-2.htm

Then there are the CB&Q Class R1 - R5 Prairies, NYC Class J40 & J41, Milw K-1's, and don't forget those Santa Fe units mentioned by others earlier in this thread.

At least IHC has been doing a reasonable 2-6-0 for a while. There hasn't been a decent 2-6-2 made in years.

Len

Quote from: Frisco_Manny on August 15, 2007, 11:40:22 PM
Hi Len,

Did know if you meant to actually have those engines made or if you thought they were Prarie's, but Frisco 1050 is a home built 4-6-2, and the 1060 is also a home built 4-6-4. Frisco did not own any Prarie's.

Frisco 1060 is a stream liner used in passenger service. That's why she has the skirts. Her colors were blue and silver.

Just an FYI....nice to be here.

Yes, Mr. Bachmann...it would be EXTREMELY nice to see a Spectrum Prarie roll off the lines.

Frisco_Manny

Manny,

The 'Fallen Flags' web page labels both as 2-6-2's, which is why I included them. The pilot truck is in shadow on the pic of 1050 and behind a steam cloud on the pic of 1060, so I just went with the picture labels.

And they have the look of the 2-6-2's I remember from my youth.

Len

Quote from: SteamGene on August 15, 2007, 03:50:58 PM
Who would have thought of a semi-streamlined Prarie?
Gene

The 'Frisco' had class! 

Len

Wabash 2005 would be nice:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/wab/wab-s2005ark.jpg

Or Frisco 1050:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/slsf/slsf-s1050abw.jpg

And for a small loco, Frisco 1060 is kind of pretty:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/slsf/slsf-s1060abw.jpg

There's even NYC 4658:

http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/nyc/nyc-s4658.jpg

I'd even settle for an 'Undec' at this point.

Len

The 9" length is the rails. It was designed to replace a 9" straight section of Snap-Track.

Len

Enough already with those big locos!

They're nice, but isn't it about time for a Spectrum level 2-6-2 "Prairie" for us folks with smaller layouts? The IHC 2-6-0 "Moguls" are okay, but they just don't have that 'hauling the freight' look "Prairie's"  have.

The prototypes had a ton of them. But, without getting into brass, the only HO 'Prairie' out there any more seems to be Bachmann's 20 year old technology "lights and smokes" toy in the white box. And the 'smoker' usually ends up melting the boiler after a while.

What does it take to get Bachmann interested in these smaller steamers?

Or Model Power for that matter. If Bachmann won't do a decent "Prairie" maybe MP can be convinced to bring out an updated version of the old Mantua 'Prairie'. I wish somebody would.

Bob,

You're right. IHC calls them "Magic-Mates". They look clunky, but they do what them claim to do. I used them on a couple of 'transition cars' when I first started switching from horn-hook to Kadee's. They also work okay with the Kadee #212 Talgo Adaptors for truck mounted coupler boxes.

Len

Stephen,

I agree totally that body mounting the couplers is best. But the talgo conversion works for those in a hurry, or that don't feel up to the body mount conversion.

Even with the talgo conversion, backing and switching moves are much more reliable than with horn-hook couplers.

One caveat I forgot to mention in my original answer. DO NOT couple longer cars with body mounted couplers to cars with truck mounted couplers. Even after the conversion, when the end of the long car swings out on curves the body mount coupler will pull the talgo mounted one with it. Result = derailment.

Len

As others have said, it partially depended on the type of sand and the industry it was used for.

The bottling plant near where I grew up received a very fine sand in covered hoppers. They'd hook up a compressed air hose and pressurize the car some to get it out easier. They didn't want it wet, period.

On the flip side, the sand, gravel, and concrete company received what I called "beach sand" in open hoppers, regular gondolas, and drop side gondolas.

So I believe the answer depends in part on what you're trying to model. If it's for through trains, use them all!

Converting those cars to knuckle couplers is very simple, and the only tool actually required is a sharp X-Acto knife. A small needle file and Kadee Talgo Adaptor Pic tool can be handy if your doing a bunch of them.

I like Kadee couplers, but don't like messing with the bronze springs for these truck mounted talgo conversions. So I normally use the medium length center shank Bachmann EZ-Mate Mk-II couplers with the built in centering springs. If you don't mind messing with the springs, Kadee's are fine for this also.

What you will need:

1. A pack of Kadee #28 couplers, even if you will be using the EZ-Mate MK-II's. You can always use the Kadee couplers in a car with body mounted coupler pockets.

You need a pack of these to get the instruction sheet. It explains how to install the #212 Talgo Adaptors, and which bits need to be trimmer off different vendors coupler boxes in order to install knuckls couplers. Most of these coupler boxes have stops/blocks in them to make the horn-hooks work correctly. They aren't needed for, and get in the way of, knuckle couplers.

2. However many 12- packs of Kadee #212 Talgo Truck Adaptors you need to convert your cars.

3. A #1 X-Acto knife (or equivelant) with a sharp #11 blade for trimming those bits out of the coupler boxes.

The process:

1. The pin that holds the horn-hook coupler in place is usually on a short tab extending back from the front of the coupler box. Use a fingernail to pull it down slightly while twisting the coupler towards the side with the plastic spring on it. It should pop off the pin, and with a bit more twisting, slide out the front of the coupler box. Or you can take the direct approach, and once the coupler is off the pin just snip it in half with a pair of nippers. The pieces will just fall out.

2. Using the information and diagrams provided by the Kadee #28 instruction sheet, trim the unneeded bits off the coupler pocket with the X-Acto knife.

3. Take an EZ-Mate MK-II (or Kadee #5 and spring) and use one hand to insert the shank into the coupler pocket until the hole is centered on the pivot pin.

4. Use the other hand to press a #212 Talgo Adaptor through the hole in the coupler shank, and down over the pivot pin. Those Kadee #28 instructions show the correct position of the adaptor for this. You may have to rotate the adaptor just a bit to get it through the coupler shank hole.

5. Place the bottom of the coupler box against a firm surface, e.g., table or work bench top. Rotate the #212 Adaptor 90 degrees and press down firmly until the adaptor snaps in place. It should now fill the H-shaped opening in the top of the coupler box.

6. Verify the coupler recenters when pushed to either side, then do the other end.

7. Adjust the trip pin height so it doesn't snag on switches, etc.

8. On to the next car.

On paper it looks a lot more complicated than it really is to do. And once you've done a couple, if it takes more than 2 minutes per car your paying too much attention to the TV instead of your railroad.

Len

Sid,

I think you're on to something. I never looked in the Plasticville Forum, as I didn't think there'd by anything on DCC there. I also think there's a major disparity in interest between Plasticville and DCC.

So why does Plasticville have a Forum, and EZC/DCC doesn't?

It makes no sense at all.

Len

Quote from: Hunt on March 27, 2007, 01:51:03 AM
This issue has been covered in a couple of topics.

Bach-man’s decision to date has been to leave DCC at the Topic level. So unless there is an epiphany; you will need to use the Bachmann Board Search feature to group (or find) the DCC posts.

I'm not that energetic!

The way it's growing, it doesn't make sense to me that DCC doesn't have it's own Forum. Oh, well.

Sid,

In a word, both!

The majority of the DCC questions I found related to installing decoders in specific locomotives and programming them. And in many cases the answer will not be an EZC decoder. There were also questions specific to the EZC system, and a few related to other systems.

Since the questions are already being asked, just spread out all over the place, I don't see any reason they can't coexist in the same forum.

Len

I've been poking through the various Discussion Forums on this Message Board, and see DCC questions scattered all over the place. In many cases they are the same questions, but asked for different scales or interests, e.g., HO, On30, Thomas.

A question may get answered in the HO Forum, while basically the same question in another Forum, e.g., Thomas, may not. This may be because no one there knows the answer, and the HO person with the answer doesn't look at the other Forums.

I believe it would make more sense to create a "DCC" specific Forum, and get those questions in one location. Regardless of scale or interest, it would give those interested in DCC a single place to exchange information and learn from each other.

How about it Mr. Bach-Man??

Len

I think Dave Osment, founder of Osment Models Inc., might be a bit surprised to find out Osment Models Inc. dba Woodland Scenics, DPM, etc. belong to Bachmann.

Len