Hello everybody,
I´m a big lover of the Southern Pacific 4-10-2 engines, and I just wondered how big are the chances that manufacturers like MTH, BLI or Athearn Genesis may produce this interesting locomotive in future. I mean these manufacturers were and are producing some great HO scale steam locos in metal, so in my eyes a SP 4-10-2 from these manufacturers would be truly a very nice model. Too bad that there are only brass models of that wheel arrangement available, which I cannot afford. Metal would be some nice thing between cheap plastic and expensive brass, what do you think? And what do you think may be the reason why this wheel arrangement is only produced in brass until now? Is it because this wheel arrangement is very rare or because many railfans just think that 4-10-2´s are ugly?
By the way:
I also wonder why the Texas & Pacific 2-10-4´s (also one of my favorites) have also never been produced in metal. The only Texas types you find in metal are those from PRR and C&O (BLI), all others are brass (I´m not counting the cheap Bachmann AT&SF Texas type).
BLI did do the ATSF 'conversion' 2-10-4, #3829 - IIRC. The UP/SP '3 Barrels of Steam' 4-10-2 engines are interesting. With the present economy, I suspect we are going to see lots of 'cancelled' projects in the future. I think we have been darn lucky with all of the nice 'plastic' brass that has been available over the past 10 years.
I would love to see the T&P engine with it's small 63" drivers. The CGW engines are similar, if not built to the same specs.
Jim
Modeling BNSF and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin
I used to would say "About as much chance as the Cardinals going to the Super Bowl!"; I'm going to have to come up with a new line! Even though Espee has a fair sized modeling community I don't think I would bet money on a manufacturer investing precious assets in designing such a unique locomotive.
. . . . . and please, no comments about MTH's Matt Shay; I don't have the silightest idea how that thing is selling anyway!
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
Hey Jim,
can you explain me what you mean with plastic brass??
What I really wonder about that is MTH produced the Erie Triplex Mallet 2-8-8-8-2 type. I mean this loco is even much more rare than the 4-10-2 type, so I see no reason why there shouldn´t be a metal 4-10-2 on the HO market...
Deluxe:
Count me in as a big fan of the 4-10-2, especially the SP version, which I think is one handsome hunk of loco! I've seen several HO brass consignment models in the last several years at my LHS, and believe me, I've been tempted. And I've got the radii (34"-36") that could handle their ultra-long fixed wheelbase.
And hence, comes the Rub, at least IMO: making that four-wheel leading truck and the ten drivers work to fit around the radii that most large plastic steamer Mfgrs are aiming for in the market, which is generally 22" to 24" radius. I know that BLI, Spectrum and Proto have managed to do it with their 2-10-2's, and even BLI to a degree with their 2-10-4's, but adding that extra wheel to the leading truck could cause quite a few problems for clearance, at least to my thinking. They could possibly blank the flanges on one or two sets of the middle drivers, but that can also lead to losing pulling power on curves.
This is only my opinion, understand. If the mfgrs. could somehow overcome the long fixed wheelbase (and those puppies are LONG locos) without either blanking out drivers or causing so much sideplay that it would affect smooth rod action, then I'd be the first to stand up and cheer at seeing one of those beauties in plastic. But it seems to me that mfgrs. are really aiming for the mass market in these locos, and that means a lot of model railroads with necessarily tight radii. That's why articulateds swivel in the middle instead of only the front set of drivers, and large fixed-wheel based locos have such enormous side-play in the drivers that sometimes on the straightaway they tend to 'waddle'.
But as I said, if those problems could be overcome in a 4-10-2 in HO from someone like Genesis or Spectrum, I'd be first in line.
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!
I think Athearn has the ONLY chance of making a SP 4-10-2.
- Luke
Modeling the Southern Pacific in the 1960's-1980's
Hey Tom,
I think that the radius issue shouldn´t be a problem nowadays. I live in Germany and I have a Big Boy from Märklin that takes 15" radius with no problems, and my MTH GS-4 handles the 18" radius without difficulties. The biggest german steam loco, a 2-10-2 from the 45 Class, that was also produced by Märklin, handles the 15" radius perfectly. I mean if german manufacturers get all their steam locos (no matter which wheel arrangement) through the sharpest curves, then I see no reason why american manufacturers shouldn´t be able to create a 4-10-2 that handles at least 18" radius. But lucky you! You will get anything through your large 36" curves. But not many people have the place for such big curves, especially in Europe it´s not the case, but you might know that already.
Cheers,
Daniel
Hey Luke, what makes you think that Athearn is the ONLY one??
I won't say much because I don't want to sound like Tom's parrot.
Guys, we need to think more than one step ahead at a time. Once Athearn makes the Southern Pacific 4-10-2, then let's start crying out for a Union Pacific 4-12-2. First In HO-scale, of course.
One thing that really has me puzzled is that mass producers haven't yet brought out a Denver and Salt Lake 2-6-6-0 Mallet. It is quite an attractive and compact prototype, and could easily go around most modeler's curves without articulating the rear set of drivers. There is a strong demand for the old brass models of this prototype on the used brass market. I've got an extra whaleback tender (obviously I'm an SP fan) that is reserved to put behind a modern-built, detailed, and reasonably-priced DSL 2-6-6-0. I'm awaitin'.
Mark
De Luxe Hey Luke, what makes you think that Athearn is the ONLY one??
markpierce One thing that really has me puzzled is that mass producers haven't yet brought out a Denver and Salt Lake 2-6-6-0 Mallet. It is quite an attractive and compact prototype, and could easily go around most modeler's curves without articulating the rear set of drivers. There is a strong demand for the old brass models of this prototype on the used brass market. I've got an extra whaleback tender (obviously I'm an SP fan) that is reserved to put behind a modern-built, detailed, and reasonably-priced DSL 2-6-6-0. I'm awaitin'. Mark
Mark:
Me too. It's perfect. Just perfect. And it can handle an 18" radius NON-DOUBLE ARTICULATED with ease and grace. Here's mine--of course, it's the brass PFM--but it's a little dream of a loco. Frankly, when I run it, it 'grins' at me. It's a sweetheart, and it would make a perfect candidate for a small mass-produced Mallet. I sure love mine.
Tom, I just knew you had to have at least one of those darling DSL 2-6-6-0s!
De Luxe Hey Tom, I think that the radius issue shouldn´t be a problem nowadays. I live in Germany and I have a Big Boy from Märklin that takes 15" radius with no problems, and my MTH GS-4 handles the 18" radius without difficulties. The biggest german steam loco, a 2-10-2 from the 45 Class, that was also produced by Märklin, handles the 15" radius perfectly. I mean if german manufacturers get all their steam locos (no matter which wheel arrangement) through the sharpest curves, then I see no reason why american manufacturers shouldn´t be able to create a 4-10-2 that handles at least 18" radius. But lucky you! You will get anything through your large 36" curves. But not many people have the place for such big curves, especially in Europe it´s not the case, but you might know that already. Cheers, Daniel
Daniel:
Believe me, my 34"36" curves are the result of about three prior model railroads with very tight radii and a lot of planning as I abandoned and rebuilt them. Only when I was able to take over my entire 2-car garage (out here in California, we refer to them as "California Basements") was I able to finally realize that kind of generous radius that would fit my large roster of long-wheelbased steam locos. And I know that kind of space is at a premium for a lot of 'solo' modelers not only in Europe but also here in the States.
As I said, if a mfgr either here in the States or elsewhere (maybe Marklin or Trix, perhaps?) could come up with a long-wheelbased 4-10-2 that could handle smaller radii, I'd be first in line.
One thing, Articulated American locomotives, because of their 'double-swivel' can always handle a smaller radii than a fixed-wheelbased eight or ten-coupled locomotive. I have several brass 2-8-8-4 articulateds that are 'prototypically' articulated (only the front set of drivers swivel) that on my older layouts with 24-26" radius could smoothly round curves that several of my brass 4-8-4's and 2-10-2's could only manipulate at vastly reduced speeds and VERY careful watching. Of course, we're talking brass locomotives, which have a much more 'close to scale' tolerance than current plastic models.
I've seen those German steamers that you describe at a couple of Model Railroad shows here in Roseville. You're right--how they handle those tight radii is a marvel to watch.
German ingenuity--as a satisfied owner of an Audi, I know it's some of the best in the world!
Best,
markpierce Tom, I just knew you had to have at least one of those darling DSL 2-6-6-0s! Mark
I think the Rio Grande inherited 16 of the little gems from the D&SL. I'm not gonna go THAT far!
Tom,
How about a GN M2 Class 2-6-8-0? I think I could be convinced to take home a few of those...
Don Z.
Research; it's not just for geeks.
Don:
Me too!
'Plastic Brass' is a term Model Railroader coined to describe the new highly detailed plastic engines that are available from BLI/Spectrum/Life-Like.
I think the 'Triplex' was produced because the owner of MTH wanted to do the project. The 'tinplate' market is far different than the 'scale' market at times. MTH had already done the up front research for the O Scale engine, and decide to do HO copies. If this was just an HO Scale decision, I suspect the 4-10-2 might win out(but then there are a lot of 'other' steamers that could be done as well).
You keep mentioning 'metal' engines. The current crop of a thin plastic shell over a heavy metal chassis seems to me to be the best compromise of detail vs pulling power. At one time I had a lot of 'brass' steam - Adding weight/tuning them was just part of the accepted work one had to do. I remember talking to a Balboa Models rep in 1969 - He was not concerned about 'pulling' a train. The model was 'correct' and it did run smooth on a peice of flex track - What more could you ask!
jrbernier At one time I had a lot of 'brass' steam - Adding weight/tuning them was just part of the accepted work one had to do. I remember talking to a Balboa Models rep in 1969 - He was not concerned about 'pulling' a train. The model was 'correct' and it did run smooth on a peice of flex track - What more could you ask! Jim
At one time I had a lot of 'brass' steam - Adding weight/tuning them was just part of the accepted work one had to do. I remember talking to a Balboa Models rep in 1969 - He was not concerned about 'pulling' a train. The model was 'correct' and it did run smooth on a peice of flex track - What more could you ask!
Jim:
Not to take us too far off track of the topic, but you're absolutely right in your assessment. Out of my large brass fleet, I've only had one locomotive that was 'perfect' out of the box. Everything else has had to be 'tinkered' with, re-weighted, re-balanced and in a few cases, completely re-motored. It's a part of owning and RUNNING brass.
If I were Athearn and were thinking about another SP engine, it wouldn't be a 4-10-2, but rather a Pacific, Mikado or 2-10-2 (SP called 'em "Dec's" ) which could prototypically use the 120C-3 tender that has already been tooled for production. When I first saw the pics of the Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0, it occurred to me that the next engine would be a USRA Mike, Pacific, or a light Mountain since the proper tender had already been done. From a business standpoint, it makes sense to build on what you already have.
While some of the SP 4-10-2's were delivered with 12,000 gallon tenders, they spent most of their service lives with the the larger 16000 gallon tenders. There's a lot bigger variety of locos that could be produced using the current tender tooling.
Candidates: SP P-8 4-6-2 (P-10's were similar): http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2464.JPG
MK-5 2-8-2 (note, tender in pic is not a 120C-3, but that tender class was used on Mikes): http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP3232.JPG
F-4 2-10-2 on Horsehoe Curve (with P10 #2487): http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP3671X2.JPG
Athearn could legitimately get away with manufacturing 4 separate wheel arrangements of SP power using the tooling for a single tender class.
If Bachmann were to go into the SP steam business, they could legitimately manufacture the the following non-articulated SP steamers using their 16,000 so-called "Hicken" (it's not) tender:
SP Pacific Lines: 4-8-2 (MT-1, 3, 4, 5), 4-8-4 (GS-1), 2-10-2 (F3,4,5), 4-10-2 (SP-1, 2, 3). NOTE: The 2-10-2's generally didn't get the 16,000 gallon tenders until very late in their service lives.
SP (T&NO): 4-6-2 (P-9, 13), 4-8-4 (GS-1).
Just to add fuel to the fire, the oil version of the Spectrum "medium" Vanderbilt is one of the subclasses (I'm not sure which) of a 90C class tender. It could be used on 2-6-0's, 2-8-0's, 2-8-2's, 4-4-2's, 4-6-0's and probably at one time or another a Pacific or two.
Andre
andrechapelon If I were Athearn and were thinking about another SP engine, it wouldn't be a 4-10-2, but rather a Pacific, Mikado or 2-10-2 (SP called 'em "Decks" )
If I were Athearn and were thinking about another SP engine, it wouldn't be a 4-10-2, but rather a Pacific, Mikado or 2-10-2 (SP called 'em "Decks" )
Andre, I totally agree with you. My only regret if they do is that I'll need to kick myself for spending $$$$$ for my stable of brass SP locomotives, including M's (2), C's (4), Mk's (2), P's (1) and F's (2) which I've yet to tune up for my non-existent layout.
Well if Athearn makes it then plan on it not having sound but costing as much as an engine with sound because horizon hobby needs its profits to reach the horizon.
If MTH makes then it will have lots of options and neat sounds that unless you have a system that will play 28 sounds and you have DCS then you paid $450 for an item you cant fully utilize.
Then my favorite BLI, if they make it as a PCM or a Paragon than it will very detailed but pricy. Also you will wait a while after they annouce it. Then if its a blueline than it will be cheaper but may not have all the gems the PCM has.
Multiple forums have asked for more SP engines including the Yellowstone. Though reality says its doubtful, there are products that have been annouced and some have been waiting years. They should complete what they have annouced before moving on to new models. I do agree more SP steam is needed.
Though the way this economy is going i doubt the consumer will increase spending on trains and the MRR companies also know this. So yes we want more but again you might be waiting awhile.
Hey GTX765,
which loco did you mean with Yellowstone? The AC-9 2-8-8-4? (In my eyes the only true SP Yellowstone)
The AC-9 was what i was thinking, I would like to have one but no one seems to be making it at this point in time. I am not interested in brass so I will have to wait for someone to make it.There was only 12 made so it should not be hard to choose road numbers for production. It also gives you a SP engine that is large and not a cab forward but I like them both. The AC-12 is my favorite but I will wait for PCM to release it, if ever.
Sean
Yes, I´m also waiting for that loco. It´s my most favorite articulated locomotive, not because I´m a big SP fan, but because they look so unique and have been the only semi streamlined articulateds ever and I think the only SP articulateds that were coal fired during most of their time. And they were the best looking articulated steamers in front of passenger trains, recalling one photo where I´ve seen an AC-9 pulling the streamlined Golden State.
Which version do you prefer? The first version with small Southern Pacific Lines lettering on the coal tender, the second version with the big Southern Pacific lettering on the coal tender or the third version with the oil tender and totally silver painted pilot? I prefer the second, and no matter who produces it, Athearn, MTH, BLI or PCM, I´ll buy it.
I'd certainly chime in on an AC-9, it was a particularly handsome Yellowstone IMO, and certainly a versatile one. I had the chance to view several working the Modoc Line when they were transferred there in the early 'fifties and converted to oil. They worked head-end during the summer, but as helpers during the winter due to restricted vision during the VERY cold winters in that part of Northern California.
I do have a model of one, but it's an early Akane brass model with limited detail. It is a smooth, powerful locomotive, but it would be interesting to see a non-brass model put out by someone like Genesis or BLI.
I always wondered about BLI's original choice of the 'flat-faced' AC-4-5 models when they chose to produce an SP Cab-forward. Thought I'm glad they're on the market, I personally would have liked to see them put out the AC-6, which though still a 'flat-faced' model, was also the true 'transitional' model to the more 'modern' AC-7-12 locos. The AC-6 was the first with the 'talking pumps' mounted on the boiler front, and also the increased tractive effort from 116,000 lbs. to the 123,000 pounds of the later cab-forwards. And it still kept the semi-Vanderbuilt tender of the two earlier classes. For me, at least, it was certainly the most interesting of the Cab-Forwards (though I like them all).
I've just come back from the Amherst Train Show and what do you think I ran onto. I seems the MTH folks are going to bring out a UP 4-12-2. That's right, 4-12-2! I saw the pre-production model of it and asked the sales rep how they planned to get it around our layout curves. He said that the drivers will be "articulated" and that the engine should be able to negotiate 22" radius curves with no trouble. The model he had looked great with lots of detail and an excellent paint job. I suspect that they are out to get the jump on BLI and Athern with this brute. Anyhow, keep a lookout for it.
JimValle I've just come back from the Amherst Train Show and what do you think I ran onto. I seems the MTH folks are going to bring out a UP 4-12-2. That's right, 4-12-2! I saw the pre-production model of it and asked the sales rep how they planned to get it around our layout curves. He said that the drivers will be "articulated" and that the engine should be able to negotiate 22" radius curves with no trouble. The model he had looked great with lots of detail and an excellent paint job. I suspect that they are out to get the jump on BLI and Athern with this brute. Anyhow, keep a lookout for it.
22" curves? And what kind of center to center track separation do you need on such a curve to avoid sideswiping another train? That's going to look awful.
The technology for making more limber engines has been around for a long time. ROCO, Fleischmann, et. al. have been doing it for a long time. However, getting a 2-10-0 with scale 55" drivers around a 17" curve is a lot different than getting a 4-12-2 with 67" drivers around a 22" curve. The 2-10-0 doesn't look too bad in part because there's no trailing truck and German tenders are significantly shorter than their American counterparts.
I've got to walk away shaking my head at the lunacy of it all. A 4-12-2 doesn't start looking halfway decent on curves until you're at least at a minimum of 36" radius and preferably 42" or better.
Just my opinion. Once again, MTH has lost a chance to sell me an engine. Now, if they'd have done a Harriman heavy 4-6-2, I'd be all over it like a cheap suit.
Anyway, an UP Overland 4-10-2 (only 10 were built) in both versions (with 3 cylinders and with 2 cylinders after 1942 I think) would be more interesting since it is so rare.
Hi guys! I'm new here and actually I've just introduced my 12 year old grandson to model railroading. I took him to a local train show here in Louisville, KY a few weeks ago and he went nuts.
I built a layout almost 25 years ago in my dad's garage and at some point the layout got torn apart and engines, rolling stock, buildings, etc. got stuffed in boxes and got stored away in Pasadena, CA where we used to live. I haven't seen any of it since then but it will be sent to me soon since my grandson is chomping at the bit to see what he will inherit. I remember some plastic cab forwards by Rivarossi, a Balboa brass (unpainted), a 4449, and a few others but I'm not sure now.
Now, at the show, I noticed several Bachmann Spectrum HO SP steam engines for sale. One was a GS-4 and the other I can't remember. Unfortunately, I didn't buy either one at the time but now I'm thinking I should have. Now, I can't find any SP steam engines anywhere on the Internet. All the engines you've been discussing sound great but...Who makes engines these days, if anyone, and where can I find them?
aileron44 Hi guys! I'm new here and actually I've just introduced my 12 year old grandson to model railroading. I took him to a local train show here in Louisville, KY a few weeks ago and he went nuts. I built a layout almost 25 years ago in my dad's garage and at some point the layout got torn apart and engines, rolling stock, buildings, etc. got stuffed in boxes and got stored away in Pasadena, CA where we used to live. I haven't seen any of it since then but it will be sent to me soon since my grandson is chomping at the bit to see what he will inherit. I remember some plastic cab forwards by Rivarossi, a Balboa brass (unpainted), a 4449, and a few others but I'm not sure now. Now, at the show, I noticed several Bachmann Spectrum HO SP steam engines for sale. One was a GS-4 and the other I can't remember. Unfortunately, I didn't buy either one at the time but now I'm thinking I should have. Now, I can't find any SP steam engines anywhere on the Internet. All the engines you've been discussing sound great but...Who makes engines these days, if anyone, and where can I find them?
That's strange. I can find them all over the place.
Athearn makes an SP MT-4 4-8-2. The current release is the MT-4 in as-built condition. Later releases are supposed to be detailed for later variants (including skyline casing). Athearn: http://www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATHG97050
Intermountain makes an HO AC-12 4-8-8-2 http://www.imrcmodels.com/ho/html/59006.htm
MTH (Mike's Train House) had gone into HO and now makes an SP GS-4. I'm having trouble with their website, but here's YouTube video of the engine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM22cF8YM-g
BLI/PCM makes an SP AC-4/5 in their Blueline line (sound, DCC ready) http://www.broadway-limited.com/catalog/SP_Cab_Forward_AC4_5_HO-1851-1.html
These locos run into some serious bucks. The Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0 can be had from various dealers below MSRP and without DCC or sound for under 100 bucks. While not strictly speaking SP engines, they are close to SP classes C-26 and C-28/29. Here's a pic of how one modeler created a C-26 with just a few details. It's about 1/3 down of the way down the page.
http://homepage.mac.com/rbowdidge/railroad/dcc.html
Hope this helps.