Why is it today that no one offers a powered tender for a steam locomotive? In HO scale I know it would be easy. Would there be that much of a demand for one? I know they have them for European models and such, but why not U.S? On my freelanced layout my Bachmann 4-8-2 Heavy mountain can only handle about 12-15 cars when I usually like to run about 30 or so in a single train and takes about 2 F7s. But it would be nice to run the same train behind a solo steam locomotive. What do yall think about that?
Tyco did it some thirty years ago.
Are you talking about tender drive instead of loco drive, or in addition to loco drive? Part of the reason that most steam loco models don't pull much is that they're too light. In addition to plastic superstructures, manufacturers don't use lead for weights, and also add all the electronic gear that consumers seem to want nowadays. Any loco can be made to pull more simply by adding weight. If you're speaking of tender drive, Tyco made one that most people found unimpressive - the motor was in the tender and the tender trucks (or maybe only one) were powered - the loco was a dummy and was merely pushed along by the tender. One of the drawbacks usually associated with putting the motor in the tender is the effect of motor torque - because most tenders can rock side-to-side somewhat on their trucks, the motor, especially at starting, will cause the tender to lean to one side.
Tenshodo used to offer PDTs, which were powered trucks of different wheelbases - the motor was completely within the truck. Suggested uses were as replacement trucks for powering passenger cars that were used in long, heavy trains, to assist the loco - the modeller had to supply the sideframes and provide a suitable mounting set-up. They also touted them as useful for tender booster trucks - had DCC been available, it probably would have been useful in coordinating the motor speeds. I used one to re-power an Athearn RDC (single truck only), and it not only ran well at prototypical speeds, but was also powerful enough to pull a dummy RDC trailer.
I remotored a number of brass steamers for a friend, and two of his favourites were a pair of CPR D-10 Tenwheelers. Due to the small size of these locos, there was room in the boiler for only the smallest of can motors. Instead, I opted for two fairly large flat-sided can motors, mounting them on the flat inside the tenders, with a u-jointed driveshaft connecting to the worm through the empty frames of the old open-frame motors. The rest of the boiler and firebox was filled with lead. I also filled the available space in the tenders with more lead, then added slippery plastic bearing blocks to the tenders' sidesills, leaving just enough clearance between them and the tender trucks' sideframes to allow them to pivot. This eliminated the effect of the motor torque, and resulted in a surprisingly strong pair of Ten Wheelers.
Wayne
an option to think about would be to make a powered boxcar. a friend of mine offers one in N scale and it is very convincing. If it can be done in N then I am sure it could be done in HO as well. Here is a link to a video showing it at work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV0jJKSxui8
The kit can be seen at www.randgust.com
Dan Pikulski
www.DansResinCasting.com
If you have a large steam engine with 6 wheel trucks you can get a model of an Alco RSC2 and put that mechanism and trucks (with new sideframes under the tender.) That will really power the engine.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Traction tires on the loco will increase it's pulling power, but there are all kinds of likes/dislikes about traction tires. Their like Howard Cosell - you either like 'em or hate 'em!!!
many years ago when i was modeling in HOn2 1/2 i had several boxcars and a baggage car with Atlas N scale GPs mechanisms inside, they ran at "close enough" speeds with most of my steam conversions although my Forneys didn't agree with them. So i took the motor out of the forney and used the boxcar to power the train.
Some railroads used "booster" engines on their tenders..A small motor could power the side rods on the lead truck of the tender.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
rockymidlandrr Why is it today that no one offers a powered tender for a steam locomotive? In HO scale I know it would be easy. Would there be that much of a demand for one? I know they have them for European models and such, but why not U.S? On my freelanced layout my Bachmann 4-8-2 Heavy mountain can only handle about 12-15 cars when I usually like to run about 30 or so in a single train and takes about 2 F7s. But it would be nice to run the same train behind a solo steam locomotive. What do yall think about that?
My Bowser M1a will pull about 45 cars, and that's on a 2% grade with 30 inch radius curves. This one even has the all metal tender. Sort of supports the statement above that weight has a lot to do with it.
I picked a new Model Power 2-8-0 Consolidated (cheap) at a train show that is tender drive ( the trucks on the tender drive the loco, not the drivers on the loco) it runs surprisely well for this brand, I suspect it would run better once it's broken in , I was going to use it as a derelict loco, but I may use it, after I fix the strange angle that the boiler sits at. It seems this model is discontinued, but I would assume the 0-8-0 has a tender drive as well, it looks exactly like the one on my Conny.
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."-Albert Einstein
http://gearedsteam.blogspot.com/
Well, what I am wanting to do is to have a powered tender as well as the locomotive. I had also thought about the powered boxcar as being the more feasible of the two because if i messed up the tender I'm out a locomotive, but if I mess up a boxcar then Im just out a boxcar. And with me being in college, I would like to do this the cheapest but most reliable way possible.
I'm with Dr. Wayne on a lot of contemporary plastic steam power. It seems that the portion of the locomotive that NEEDS the weight--over the drivers--is instead often milled out to accept all of the electronics and decoders and such. Therefore, the manufacturer compensates by offering traction tires on the rear set of drivers, which is fine until the tires wear out. Then you're back to square one.
Steam locos need weight on the drivers, and more importantly, they need BALANCED weight on the drivers. Not too far forward or too far back, but evenly distributed. On several of the contemporary steamers I've seen, the weight is too far back around the motor to be of much service to the front drivers, so you end up not only with pulling problems, but also constant derailing.
On my locos, I use lead sheeting (gasp! ) balanced in the boiler for optimum weight. Yah, I know that lead is dangerous, but I always wash my hands after using it, and it's hidden in the model. Been using the stuff for years and I'm still healthy.
But the idea is to balance the locomotive so that the weight is properly balanced on all of the drivers. Unfortunately, we get back to the conundrum of how to properly add weight around all of the electronics that are taking up the space where the weight is really NEEDED.
Maybe that's why just about all of my steam locos are brass.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
Many years ago I saw some HO models of SNCF (French) locomotives with powered tenders. The tender drive was similar to a diesel drive, and the carbodies were full of weight. OTOH, the locomotives were very light plastic with freewheeling drivers, wide open spaces between boilers and frames and light plastic rods. IIRC, they had about the same rolling resistance as a six-axle flat car.
I could see somebody modeling a PRR 'Lines West' tender or one of those monstrous Santa Fe 16-wheel types, powered with something like an Athearn drive system, then putting sound, smoke, reversing valve gear... on the locomotive proper. Without a space-eating weight and drive system, a 4-8-4 would offer a lot of room for inventiveness. With a heavy, powerful tender, it would probably be able to handle a prototype-length train at prototype speeds.
Unfortunately, I can't use this idea myself. My locos (those that aren't tank engines) have relatively miniscule tenders, unsuited for anything near powerful. The largest would work out to be about the equivalent of a 44-tonner, not an SD-monster.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with small-tendered steam)
rockymidlandrr Well, what I am wanting to do is to have a powered tender as well as the locomotive. I had also thought about the powered boxcar as being the more feasible of the two because if i messed up the tender I'm out a locomotive, but if I mess up a boxcar then Im just out a boxcar. And with me being in college, I would like to do this the cheapest but most reliable way possible.
Stick a modified Bachmann 44 tonner drive in there. I remember that was an acceptable drive replacement for the crappy Tyco Power Torque tender drive.(which DID pull quite well till the cheap plastic gears broke.)Or there's this company.http://motorbogies.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1
Hornby used tender-drive for their steam locos for years and the locos 'couldnt pull the skin off a rice pudding'.
Hornby listened to what the modellers demanded and eventually started putting the motor back in the loco.
Tender drive means small wheels and no pulling power, even with rubber tyres on some of the wheels. I'd pass on any tender drive locos offered to me.
Just my two-penneth.
Jon
Sweethome Chicago is now on Facebook
Sweethome Alabama is now on Facebook
Hudson Road is now on Facebook
my videos
my Railimages
You could use something like this:
But it's very expensive. http://www.labellemodels.com/pacc.htm
Maybe you could canabalize one of these:
http://www.hobbylinc.com/htm/bac/bac46202.htm
The mind is like a parachute. It works better when it's open. www.stremy.net
This is the best tender drive loco I've come across. Roco built it like a tank, but despite the weight in the tender, it's completely dependent on traction tires, which you might as well put on the drivers. My guess is that they powered the tender to avoid having a gear tower blocking the open space between the boiler and frame. I think the large flanges are a bigger eyesore, but aside from them the detail is superb.
For better traction in steamers it comes down to building them with heavy metal frames (balanced as Tom pointed out), and/or providing optional drivers with traction tires, not a tender drive. Tires don't bother me too much, since the better ones can last many years, and replacing them is just a fact of life like any other basic maintenance. I just don't know why they don't make them from silicone -- that stuff is impervious to oil and dirt, so it lasts forever.
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
larak You could use something like this: But it's very expensive. http://www.labellemodels.com/pacc.htm Maybe you could canabalize one of these: http://www.hobbylinc.com/htm/bac/bac46202.htm
OR, you could go straight to the source http://www.hollywoodfoundry.com/
This Hollywood Foundry is an Australian company and the prices are in in Australian $. The current exchange rate is 1 Australian $ is approxomately $.66. IOW, $100 AUD = $66 USD.
They've got quite a selection. Multiple scales, different gear ratios. In short, they're built to order.
Andre
Do what the prototype railroads rarely did and create a duplex. Put a locomotive's frame, drivers, and cylinders under the tender. An example of one is shown below. The "locomotive" under the tender was from an older 2-8-0, with smaller drivers than the 2-8-2 attached to it. What's neat is that I have a model of one, but modified with an oil tender ala Dick Truesdale of the now defunct Westside Models. It has two motors.
Mark
markpierce .... What's neat is that I have a model of one, but modified with an oil tender ala Dick Truesdale of the now defunct Westside Models. It has two motors.
.... What's neat is that I have a model of one, but modified with an oil tender ala Dick Truesdale of the now defunct Westside Models. It has two motors.
I have one of the five from Truesdale's collection. He must have liked them a lot, having five of them, and I understand they were his favorites for operating on his layout.
Mark, do you have a larger version of that thumbnail? I'd like to get a better look at that.
pike-62 an option to think about would be to make a powered boxcar. a friend of mine offers one in N scale and it is very convincing. If it can be done in N then I am sure it could be done in HO as well. Here is a link to a video showing it at work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV0jJKSxui8 The kit can be seen at www.randgust.com Dan Pikulski www.DansResinCasting.com
They also make an N scale GE 70 tonner. That's cool.
SteamFreak Mark, do you have a larger version of that thumbnail? I'd like to get a better look at that.
I can do better than that.
It is a 2-8-2+2-8-0, with a "+" rather than a "-" between the two locomotive sets. Also, it isn't a booster under the tender. Booster's cut out at speeds higher than about 15 mph.
As you can see, the model is lettered for Truesdale's Halfhollow & Huntington Railroad.
Thanks for the photos. That's a gorgeous model.
Calumet makes silicone traction tires. They work quite well.http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/SearchResults.asp?Search=calumet
Folks:
One neat thing about those auxiliary engines is that they are a perfect analog of the diesel slug unit, and for the same benefit, but using surplus steam-generation capacity, rather than electricity-generation.
I seem to recall discussions about this on rmr, and the Bachmann handcar was mentioned, but dismissed pretty quick by another poster who had tried it. I think somebody did try the old GE 44 tonner drive with discrete power trucks, and it had worked well. I may be conflating a few different threads.
My friend had the TYCO Chattanooga train (based on a real train of course, yeah right) some years back and the power was in the tender. It was kinda lame and at least his didn't run too well. But I agree that an auxiliary power unit might be a good idea.
trainfan1221 My friend had the TYCO Chattanooga train (based on a real train of course, yeah right) some years back and the power was in the tender. It was kinda lame and at least his didn't run too well.
My friend had the TYCO Chattanooga train (based on a real train of course, yeah right) some years back and the power was in the tender. It was kinda lame and at least his didn't run too well.
tf1221:
John Nehrich thought Tyco took an USRA 0-8-0 and stretched it a bit, then added a pony truck. Here's a comparison of the USRA engine and IHC's 0-8-0, which is basically that old Tyco shell on a new drive:
http://railroad.union.rpi.edu/displayimage.php?i=22941
OF course the famous Chattanooga Choo Choo drive is pure Tyco bizarro engineering.