Charles, thanks for the idea. As I noted, I was interested in a directional improvement, so limited my improvements plus converted to DCC/sound.
It looks like fella in the video painted the black part of the wheels plus the outside edge of the tires a murky black. Plus, weathered the rods, which I presume start as clean metal but then get grimy with grease & dirt in real life. I take it he left the tire outer circumference (which rides the rails) and the flanges clean metal for electrical pickup and as we expect shiny tires' circumference.
I'll write myself a reminder on the To Do list (things I contemplate doing, in no particular order).
Paul
Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent
Looks great!
Just one small suggestion, if you paint the wheels and drive rods, it will make the engine look so much better. Without paint, the wheel flanges and rods look almost toy like, being so thick.
Here's a guy who weathered his IHC 4-8-2. Notice how nice it looks without the gleaming shiny wheels and drive rods.
Whether you choose to do it or not, the engine already looks great! Well done!
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling the PRR & NYC in HO
Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/@trainman440
Instagram (where I share projects!): https://www.instagram.com/trainman440
Since this 2017 thread came back to life, I'll add on a couple of photos of the completed Pacific, though I probably posted them back then (in WPF, perhaps).
IMG_0598 (2) by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
IMG_0659 (2) by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
Here is my Pacific, started out as a Mantua diecast locomotive.
I redid the pilot/pilot deck. The factory solution was a single piece very undistinquished plastic casting. I built up a better looking one from Calscale brass castings, pilot, twin air compressors, shield, and some brass bar stock. The generator is also Calscale. I picked a prototype to model, for me, a B&M fan, the prototype was the P-4. Turns out the Mantua model matched the P4's major dimensions very closely, within a few inches, which was nice. I have plans and photos of the P4 which helped. My suggestion would be to find prototype photos of an engine you want to model and do what you can. In my case, a couple of features of the P4, a racy sloped cab front and an oval shaped stack fell into the "too hard" bin and I just didn't do anything to model them. I left the Mantua 6 wheel tender trucks because I like 6 wheel trucks, even though the P4's used 4 wheel trucks.
The speed graphics lettering on the tender comes from a local decal house. The paint is Krylon or Rustoleum dark gray auto primer from a rattle can, which I think looks better under layout lighting than engine black. Little details that help, glaze the cab windows, install an engineer and a fireman, make the headlamp light up, install a working front coupler.
Good luck. Post some photos.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
7j43kI recommend running and/or sliding your Pacific through the type of track switch you use. If there is an "upwards" bump at the frog, the flange is hitting the flangeway because of clearance problems. You should decide if that's a problem.
I recall that when built 5 yrs ago I had clearance problems on my Atlas code 83 90-degree crossings and had to file them. I think it was a depth issue (or possibly narrow clearance at the guard rails). In any event, filing did the trick. It was not a problem with my Walthers-Shinohara code 83 turnouts.
I will do the push test at some turnouts but also the formerly problematic Atlas crossings. I'd like to hook up DC to one of my (power off, of course) DCC districts but want to be 100% that 12v DC feedback to the NCE or downstream circuit breaker cannot hurt the circuitry.
EDIT: I just spoke to NCE on the 12v DC application to the trackage of my DCC system. The answer is: "Never upon never do that. You will destroy everything". Apparently a good question!
peahrens That relates to item D on the RP25 chart following. But I don't know which "code" applies.
That relates to item D on the RP25 chart following. But I don't know which "code" applies.
S-4.2 shows the maximum flange depth ( D ) for HO is .028.
https://nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/S-4.2%202015.01.19.pdf
S-3.2 shows the minimum flange clearance ( H ) for HO is .025.
https://nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/s-3.2_2010.05.08.pdf
Ed
Flange depth and flange clearance has an interesting history in the NMRA standards.
The S-4 standard in 1962 was a flange depth of .035 and a clearance depth of .038.
It is now .028 for flange depth and .025 for clearance depth (theoretically, then, not allowing for backward compatability) (and also allowing for "negative clearance").
But. There is also a "hi-rail" standard of .047 flange depth (see S-4.3 and S-3.3).
How interesting.
I recommend running and/or sliding your Pacific through the type of track switch you use. If there is an "upwards" bump at the frog, the flange is hitting the flangeway because of clearance problems. You should decide if that's a problem. Or you can wait and see, later.
Likely the biggest problem would be electrical contact failure cause by the pickup wheels being lifted up and away from rail contact.
Mr. TrainiacMake sure the drivetrain is of decent quality, because detailed locomotive that won't run is a bit counter-intuitive. I have heard that Mehano had pretty good running locomotives, though, so you are probably fine. I would check the wheels, as I'm not sure the older ones had RP25 contours. If you have smaller than code 100 rail, grind down the flanges if they are oversize.
As I noted on the other post, the drivers are 0.814" rims, about 70.8" scaled up. I'm glad you mentioned the RP25 issue before I start. I thought the non-RP flanges would be noticeably huge so I had not checked that out. I just measured best I can and the flange is about 0.040". That relates to item D on the RP25 chart following. But I don't know which "code" applies. Not track code, I presume. So am I ok? I doubt I am gutsy enough to try to turn down oversize flanges.
https://www.nmra.org/sites/default/files/standards/sandrp/pdf/RP-25%202009.07.pdf
EDIT: I just measured again and confirmed my Pacific has approximately 0.040" flanges. I also measured my BLI Mountain and it has 0.041", and the IHC Mother Hubbard has 0.028" flanges, best I can measure. So I hope the Pacific is ok as the Mother Hubbard (now DCC) runs fine on my code 83 layout.
My layout is NEC DCC, so can I just leave it off and hook up my MRC DC powerpack to a district and try the loco over some turnouts? Or can the DC back into the DCC system and damage it?? Thought I'd ask rather then regret.
On the running quality, I tested the loco on my short DC track and it runs ok, not terrific. It has no flywheel. Maybe with the LokSound BEMF and the sound on it will be fine. I did an IRC Mother Hubbard a month ago and it is fine. The IHC Pacific I have, #M9411, is in a beige/tan box. I saw other versions on EBay, perhaps Premier versions. No idea the differences in their releases over time.
Mehano Steamers run quietly and smooth. I have 3 moguls and a 2-10-2, the latter I bought because of comments about it here. I have seen the Pacific run on another layout. It was amazing. All I can say is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. (the drive train) Dan
Each of the two books I mentioned has about 80 photographs of UP 4-6-2's. For $15 each.
I'd call that a good investment.
Do you know the diameter of the drivers? I just created a thread asking about this locomotive. What a coincidence that you started this one too. I am looking for a locomotive with 20mm drivers. As for your project, other guys have mentioned some good detail advice. Make sure the drivetrain is of decent quality, because detailed locomotive that won't run is a bit counter-intuitive. I have heard that Mehano had pretty good running locomotives, though, so you are probably fine. I would check the wheels, as I'm not sure the older ones had RP25 contours. If you have smaller than code 100 rail, grind down the flanges if they are oversize.
peahrens ...I like the idea of adding a real handrail. Can I just carefully file off the one cast there, file a bit carefully, smooth where needed with putty, sand and paint?...
With careful use of a suitably-sized file you should be able to remove the cast-on handrail and stanchions without too much difficulty. Another useful tool for detail removal is a #17 or #18 chisel-type X-Acto blade. Use it in a vertical motion, with the bevelled face against and following the curve of the boiler. This will help to avoid creating a long flat spot where the cast-on handrail was removed, which may occur if you use the blade horizontally, following along the length of the handrail. Unless you intend to re-route the handrail, use the point of a compass or dividers to mark the location of the centre of each cast-on handrail stanchion before scraping or filing them off. Either press the point deep enough so that an impression will remain in the boiler after the detail has been removed, or make the impression, and then drill for the new stanchions before removing the cast-on ones. If you view the boiler in an oblique light, it will better help you to see where more material needs to be removed or where you may need to add a little filler. Once the new handrail is in place, it will draw the viewer's eye much more readily than will some minor flaw.
Wayne
Thanks, all, for the teriffic info. Just what I was after.
I had forgotten about the Vandy tender being usual for the UP 4-6-2s I've seen when doing a google image search (realizing that the non-brass models ad lib a lot). I do see I can find a Bachmann short one. Would that do (vs. a mid length, which I can not seem to find in plastic). I was about to put a nifty Tang Bend speaker module, Select Micro and KA4 Keep Alive in the tender, but that will not all fit in the Vandy. So a mid size Vandy is preferable, but I won't spring for brass.
I will plan to pursue the ideas above, keeping the approach within my learning ability for a 1st project of this type. I like the idea of adding a real handrail. Can I just carefully file off the one cast there, file a bit carefully, smooth where needed with putty, sand and paint? Or am I unlikely to get it smooth enough?
I have just ordered a copy of the MR Cyclopedia Steam Vol. 1 which I see is available.
The next step is to get the engine apart, per the included diagram.
Again, thanks to all.
What appears to be a parting line atop the boiler may be there to repesent the joint in the sheet metal jacket which covered the asbestos lagging used to insulate the boiler. There would have been small fasteners at that joint on the real ones.One fairly simple-to-accomplish improvement would be to replace that cast-on handrail on the boiler to a fully-modelled one. Cal-Scale (Bowser) offers a package of 20 turned brass stanchions (Part #190-604). I prefer .015" music wire for handrails, but phosphor bronze wire from Tichy will work, too. You could use the same stanchions and wire to replace that cast-on detail on the pilot deck, too.For UP-specific details, you need to look for some prototype photos, especially regarding the style and placement of the bell, whistle, generator, and headlight, along with the class lights and numberboards - these details will make that USRA loco at least look like it's a member of the UP family. Changing only the details mentioned shouldn't be too expensive, and it avoids any really difficult modifications. To do more would require major work, not, in my opinion, worth the effort.If you want to change to a Vanderbilt tender, Bachmann offers parts to possibly build one (see pages 7, 10, and 11 for most of the major parts).The other change which I would strongly suggest is, after the detail work has been done, to repaint the entire locomotive in colours other than just black. UP did some locos in grey, but not all of them. Prototype photos should offer some possibilities, but even on a well-maintained black locomotive, very little would have been a true black.Here's an Athearn Mikado...
I replaced very little of the cast-on piping, as I didn't consider it worth the effort. The radiator piping for the compressor was redone only because I replaced the plastic air reservoirs with ones made from lead-filled brass tubing. Note that while the locomotive is black, it's not too black, so what details are there show up better.
I re-built a couple of Bachmann 10 Wheelers using Varney cast metal boilers like this...
After removing all the stuff I didn't want, I ended up with this...
...then added the details which I wanted. I wasn't trying to replicate any specific prototype, but merely trying to create a couple of plausible-looking smaller locomotives that would pull reasonably well...
The detail parts are from Cal-Scale, Precision Scale, Bachmann, and scratchbuilt.
Paint and some very light weathering gave me a couple of well-maintained locos with fairly-black cabs and tenders, not-quite-so-black boilers, greasier-black running gear, and smoke boxes and fireboxes that have turned a dull grey/brown due to the heat to which they've been subjected...
BMMECNYC Thats good to know, I could only find photos of UP's light Pacifics.
Thats good to know, I could only find photos of UP's light Pacifics.
That's 'cause they're prettier.
7j43k BMMECNYC UP used straight boilers on their 4-6-2s from what I can tell from the photos I have been able to find. Thumbing through the two books I have on UP 4-6-2's: https://uphs-store.myshopify.com/collections/uphs-prototype-steam-locomotive-photo-books/products/vol-17?variant=11141032711 and https://uphs-store.myshopify.com/collections/uphs-prototype-steam-locomotive-photo-books/products/vol-18?variant=11141039303 I see lots that don't have straight boilers. More than half, anyway. The straight boilered Pacifics were "light", with an engine weight of 230,000-240,000 pounds, the others "heavy" at 275,000-295,000. Ed
BMMECNYC UP used straight boilers on their 4-6-2s from what I can tell from the photos I have been able to find.
UP used straight boilers on their 4-6-2s from what I can tell from the photos I have been able to find.
Thumbing through the two books I have on UP 4-6-2's:
https://uphs-store.myshopify.com/collections/uphs-prototype-steam-locomotive-photo-books/products/vol-17?variant=11141032711
and
https://uphs-store.myshopify.com/collections/uphs-prototype-steam-locomotive-photo-books/products/vol-18?variant=11141039303
I see lots that don't have straight boilers. More than half, anyway.
The straight boilered Pacifics were "light", with an engine weight of 230,000-240,000 pounds, the others "heavy" at 275,000-295,000.
7j43k BMMECNYC On the topic of feedwater heaters, only some of UP's 4-6-2s appear to have been superheated. UP 3206 (OR&N 197) does not appear to have been superheated (no appliances visible on the locomotive, I would have expected at least a pump of some sort). Steam locomotives can have superheating with next to no external appliances. I expect most or all of UP's Pacifics had superheating. I found no examples of feedwater heaters on these locomotives. Feedwater heaters are not equivalent to superheaters. On tenders, I found only one "square" tender. All others were Vanderbilt. Most were 4-wheel trucked, but there were some larger 6-wheel trucked, also. Tenders came either as coal or oil equipped. Ed
BMMECNYC On the topic of feedwater heaters, only some of UP's 4-6-2s appear to have been superheated. UP 3206 (OR&N 197) does not appear to have been superheated (no appliances visible on the locomotive, I would have expected at least a pump of some sort).
On the topic of feedwater heaters, only some of UP's 4-6-2s appear to have been superheated. UP 3206 (OR&N 197) does not appear to have been superheated (no appliances visible on the locomotive, I would have expected at least a pump of some sort).
Steam locomotives can have superheating with next to no external appliances. I expect most or all of UP's Pacifics had superheating.
I found no examples of feedwater heaters on these locomotives.
Feedwater heaters are not equivalent to superheaters.
On tenders, I found only one "square" tender. All others were Vanderbilt. Most were 4-wheel trucked, but there were some larger 6-wheel trucked, also. Tenders came either as coal or oil equipped.
This is what you get when you have to stop typing mid thought to go do something else.
As to the details and source for same: Bowser (Cal Scale, Cary, Selley) has steam detail parts, as does Precison Scale Co.
https://www.precisionscaleco.com/
PSC has a downloadable catalog with images of different detail parts (they have a lot of detail parts). You can get pretty far down the rabbit hole here really quickly.
Approving the general appearance of the model will be relatively easy, a scale replica of a UP 4-6-2 would require rebuilding of the boiler. UP used straight boilers on their 4-6-2s from what I can tell from the photos I have been able to find.
I would definitely look for a 4 axel short vanderbilt tender to go along with your detail parts.
The parts I would look into adding:
-A better looking air compressor
-Angled number boards to be installed next to the smoke stack
-Smaller domes spaced further apart (or just leave them alone)
-Whistle
-Generator for headlight.
-Headlight
-Marker lights
-Bell (should be moved to top of boiler)
-Trailing truck with inside bearing, spoked wheels.
The IHC Pacific appears to be modeled after the USRA light pacific design. The blob on the left side of the locomotive is the air compressor. I would look into acquiring a Model Railroader Cyclopedia Vol 1 Steam Locomotives. It has diagrams of the various steam locomtive appliances and related piping, explains what they do and differences between the different types. Page 137 has a photo of a Harriman (common standard) UP 4-6-2. You could also look into:
http://www.steamlocomotive.com/locobase.php?country=USA&wheel=4-6-2&railroad=up
Steam locomotive dot com (the above linked site) also has links and descriptions of the different steam locomotive appliances (cant find air systems though).
These dont appear to be available online, but may be worth looking into:
http://uphs.org/resources/library/engines-locomotives/
For ideas in general, here is a master at work.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/60361449@N02/
move bell between domes move headlight up to where bell is and use a led in it ,add whistle and a vanderbilt tender for a start.
Wanting to add a Pacific to my UP fleet, I acquired an unused IHC recently that I will convert to DCC w/sound. I plan to repaint it, as the tender has ridiculous lettering and the loco shows the mold line running atop the boiler so some work is warranted.
I'm wondering what my options are to improve the detail somewhat as I go about this. I'm sure this is not a UP prototype as it exists and I am not ambitious enough to expect to make it a super-detailed & accurate model. I just would like to make it look a bit better. As an example, I could accept the molded on piping and just add some better details like whistle, superheater? or feed water pump?? (if that's what the blob on the side is), etc.
I could not find any related posts. And perhaps I'm being lazy to not do in depth research. So any suggestions on how to improve the item vs. the full blown superdetailing would be appreciated. Or sources on how to go about super-detailing and I could omit the tougher steps on my first try.
Thanks for any suggestions.
IMG_8668 by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
IMG_8669 by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
IMG_8670 by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
IMG_8671 by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
IMG_8672 by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr
IMG_8673 by Paul Ahrens, on Flickr