Trains.com

4-8-8-4 or Big Boy

7177 views
21 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Gateway City
  • 1,593 posts
4-8-8-4 or Big Boy
Posted by yankee flyer on Monday, May 11, 2009 9:24 AM

Smile
Good Morning All
I was wondering if 4-8-8-4s were called Big Boys, were  2-6-6-4s  like Norfolk & Westerns called Challengers? In other words what was the defining factor, could they each have been made with different pilot and trailing truck arrangements?
Thanks  Confused
Lee

 

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Colorful Colorado
  • 8,639 posts
Posted by Texas Zepher on Monday, May 11, 2009 10:02 AM

yankee flyer
I was wondering if 4-8-8-4s were called Big Boys, were  2-6-6-4s  like Norfolk & Westerns called Challengers?

No, a Challenger is a 4-6-6-4 wheel arrangement. 

In other words what was the defining factor, could they each have been made with different pilot and trailing truck arrangements?

No, by convention each different wheel arrangement, including the pilot and trailing truck, is given a different locomotive class.   The "names" given to the classes is a big more subjective.  As far as I know the 2-6-6-4 never really had a name.  To the N&W which made them famous they were simply the A Class.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Los Angeles
  • 1,619 posts
Posted by West Coast S on Monday, May 11, 2009 11:16 AM

There is evidence that UP intended to name the four thousand class "Walsatch".  Credit Alco for the Big Boy moniker, seems a shop person chalked the the name on the smokebox front of the first one constructed, UP liked it so much, they adopted it for their own.  A similar occurance is responsible for the challenger moniker, when presented with proposals for a new class of power, Alco responded that designing and building such a locomotive would indeed pose a challenge. I wonder what Western Pacific would have named their 4-8-8-4's? Guess we'll never know as the proposed ten were never built due to allocation of FT units by the War production board in 1941. 

 

Dave

SP the way it was in S scale
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Monday, May 11, 2009 11:48 AM

Most classes were given names based on some historical interest or indicent, or even because a given railroad was the first to "try 'em out".  The 4-8-4's are generally (not universally!) known as the Northern-type in N. America because the Northern Pacific was the first railroad to buy them and use them extensively.  Similarly, the Texas-type 2-10-4 was first purchased and placed on line by the Texas and Pacific.  Mikado 2-8-2 steamers were named after the Mikado, the emporer of Japan at the time the Japanese government ordered steamers from the USA in the very early 1900's.  Many of them were never shipped, and made available at fire sale prices to roads that could use them...which they did in such large numbers that the "Mikes" became the universal locomotive in general use across N. America for years.  Their numbers were legion.

The Berkshire 2-8-4 was named after the Berkshire Mountains for which they were meant to be used by the road that tested them, the Boston & Albany.

And so on...you can find more information here:

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/

-Crandell

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Gateway City
  • 1,593 posts
Posted by yankee flyer on Monday, May 11, 2009 8:18 PM

 Thanks  to all that answered my post.
It just seemed that each driver arrangement could be had in all pilot and trailing truck configuration.

Big Smile   Happy railroading

Lee

 

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Rhododendron, OR
  • 1,516 posts
Posted by challenger3980 on Monday, May 11, 2009 8:53 PM

yankee flyer

 Thanks  to all that answered my post.
It just seemed that each driver arrangement could be had in all pilot and trailing truck configuration.

Big Smile   Happy railroading

Lee

 

Hi Lee,

  The Pilot and Trailing truck configurations were as important in determing class as the driver configurations were.

To Use the 6 coupled driver configuration as an example:

0-6-0  6 wheel switcher(could also be an 0-6-0T, tenderlss, Tank switcher)

2-6-0  Mogul type

2-6-2  Prairie type

2-6-4  not common, and un-named to my knowledge.

4-6-0  Ten Wheeler type

4-6-2  Pacific type

4-6-4  Hudson type

 

ARTICULATEDS

0-6-6-0  some early  types were used for heavy yard switching  and helper service, not many used in the later Steam Era.

2-6-6-0  Some may have been built, but not a common type to the best of my  knowledge.

2-6-6-2  Probably best known as the Light USRA Articulated, may have been other versions as well. There were lighter 2-6-6-2's, both tender and Tank types used in Logging in the Pacific North West. The Sumpter Valley Ry, in Oregon even had some 36" Narrow Gauge 2-6-6-2's, which were the heaviest 36" Narrow Gauge locomotives ever used in North America.

2-6-6-4  Best known as the N&W's Class A, but there may have been others as well.

2-6-6-6  Chesapeake & Ohio Class H-8 Allegheney.

4-6-6-0 and 4-6-6-2 No known prototypes,  that I know of. I wont say none were ever built, but I don't know of any.

4-6-6-4  Challenger type, first designed and built  for Union Pacific, with many others built in several versions for other roads as well.

4, 8, 10 coupled driver types also had many variations of Pilot and Trailing truck configurations as well. Union Pacific even had a 4-12-2 type designed, built and named for it.

Doug

 

May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Monday, May 11, 2009 9:34 PM

Whoops!!!  Sign - Oops  Tilt!!!  Initiate retrofire!!!

The first 2-8-2 tender locomotives built by Baldwin were indeed named Mikado when they were delivered in 1897 - but the name was given by Baldwin and was probably influenced by the Gilbert and Sullivan operetta of the same name.  All were delivered - since, as 3'6" gauge units they would have been a lot harder to re-gauge than the Russian decapods Selector was probably thinking of...

As for 2-6-4 being little used, that might be true in the United States.  In Japan there were two classes of JNR 2-6-4T locos that numbered a total of 404 units.  C108 and five C11 class locos are still operational, occasionally used for railfan excursions and such on the private railways that own them.

Certain wheel arrangements had a single, well-recognized name.  Others were not as universal.  South of the Mason-Dixon line, 4-8-4s were known as 'Dixies.'  (Aint gonna be no 'Nawthuhns' on THIS railroad, suh!)

During WWII the UP, in a burst of patriotic fervor, tried to rename their 2-8-2s "MacArthurs.'

Sometimes naming a locomotive by letter can be deceptive.  Say 'J' and most of us think of N&W's beautiful bullet-noses (Yes, I'm biased!)  There were 15.  NYC rostered over 400 4-6-4s in several variants of classes beginning with J...

Fun, isn't it?

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with steam identified by class, not name)

  • Member since
    July 2001
  • From: Shelbyville, Kentucky
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by SSW9389 on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:41 AM

Dave: The WP decided on FT diesels on its own for the first order. There is a bit of a story in Virgil Staff's D-Day on the Western Pacific about the debate over FTs or Big Boys. The War Production Board did not exist at the time of the first WP FT deliveries. The first WP FT was delivered right after Pearl Harbor. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Production_Board for a few facts on the WPB. That agency would have been involved with WPs second and third order for FTs.  

Ed

West Coast S

There is evidence that UP intended to name the four thousand class "Walsatch".  Credit Alco for the Big Boy moniker, seems a shop person chalked the the name on the smokebox front of the first one constructed, UP liked it so much, they adopted it for their own.  A similar occurance is responsible for the challenger moniker, when presented with proposals for a new class of power, Alco responded that designing and building such a locomotive would indeed pose a challenge. I wonder what Western Pacific would have named their 4-8-8-4's? Guess we'll never know as the proposed ten were never built due to allocation of FT units by the War production board in 1941. 

 

Dave

COTTON BELT: Runs like a Blue Streak!
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:02 PM

2-6-6-4's were also operated by SAL.  They were considered by M&StL, who purchased FT's instead.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    August 2008
  • From: Calgary AB. Canada
  • 2,298 posts
Posted by AgentKid on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:03 PM

Interesting thing about this naming of steam engine types. I never heard of steam engine names until I first saw MODEL RAILROADER when I was a teenager. His whole life, my father referred to Selkirk's (CP's name for 2-10-4's) as 5900's, Santa Fe's as 5800's, Mikado's in various sizes as 5400's, 5300's, or 5200's, and all the other railroaders I ever heard him talk to seemed to do it the same way.

Even with diesels he referred to SD40's and SD40-2's as 5500's, even though they had over 400 of them and the series finished with number six thousand something. This is one thing where I've noticed that railroaders and railfans seemed to part way's.

AgentKid

 

So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.

"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere"  CP Rail Public Timetable

"O. S. Irricana"

. . . __ . ______

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:34 PM

West Coast S
There is evidence that UP intended to name the four thousand class "Walsatch". 

A minor correction: I would say that the UP intended calling the type "Wahsatch," for the Wasatch (also spelled "Wahsatch") Mountains, which form the back range of the Rockies in southeastern Idaho and northern Utah. We have a beautiful view of the Wasatch from our house.

Johnny

Johnny

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:38 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

2-6-6-4's were also operated by SAL.  They were considered by M&StL, who purchased FT's instead.

The M-St.L actually ordered the steam engines, but the WPB gave them FT's instead - ironically, many railroads that ordered diesels were given steam engines much to their chagrin. The issue was that the big steam engines would have required the upgrading or perhaps even replacement of one or more bridges on the M-St.L. The WPB decided it would use less steel to give the railroad the diesels instead - an A-B-B-A set had comparable pulling power, but less weight per axle.

p.s. generally the railroad that first introduced a new wheel arrangement had "the honors" when it came to naming the type..."Northerns" and  "Yellowstone" for 2-8-8-4s were named by Northern Pacific. "Challengers" were named by Union Pacific. (BTW "Big Boy" was supposedly scribbled on the front of one of the 4-8-8-4s while being built and the name stuck. "Big Boy" before that was a generic term for any large engine.) I think "Pacifics" came from Missouri Pacific(??). I know the Texas and Pacific had the first 2-10-4 "Texas" engines. New York Central named "Hudsons" after the river their mainline paralleled.

Stix
  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: USA
  • 1,247 posts
Posted by Ole Timer on Wednesday, May 13, 2009 9:47 AM

WOW .... you guys are so far over my head in train knowledge .... it's amazing !  It was a pleasure and an educational experience just reading these ....Bow

       LIFETIME MEMBER === DAV === DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS STEAM ENGINES RULE ++++ CAB FORWARDS and SHAYS
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Vancouver Island, BC
  • 23,330 posts
Posted by selector on Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:49 PM

tomikawaTT
All were delivered - since, as 3'6" gauge units they would have been a lot harder to re-gauge than the Russian decapods Selector was probably thinking of...

Yeah, it was the Decapods.  I dunno where I reached into for the non-deliverable Mikados, but it sure came out that way.  Thanks, Chuck.

-Crandell

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: Roanoke, VA
  • 2,019 posts
Posted by BigJim on Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:56 AM

Texas Zepher
As far as I know the 2-6-6-4 never really had a name. To the N&W which made them famous they were simply the A Class.


To the men of the N&W they were simply known as "Twelve Hunerds", owing to the fact that they were all numbered in the 1200 range ( 1200 - 1242 ).

.

  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: US
  • 261 posts
Posted by JonathanS on Friday, May 15, 2009 6:47 AM

Pittsburgh and West Virginia also had a small fleet of 2-6-6-4 locomotives.

  • Member since
    November 2008
  • 499 posts
Posted by De Luxe on Friday, May 15, 2009 7:05 AM

 SP had some 4-6-6-2 Mallets in Cab Forward style, but I don´t know if the SP ever had any other name than Cab Forward for them, no matter if it was a 4-6-6-2 or a 4-8-8-2, just as long the cab was in front.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Friday, May 15, 2009 3:08 PM

De Luxe

 SP had some 4-6-6-2 Mallets in Cab Forward style, but I don´t know if the SP ever had any other name than Cab Forward for them, no matter if it was a 4-6-6-2 or a 4-8-8-2, just as long the cab was in front.

I think they were all, no matter what wheel arrangement or even if they were simple, called "AC."

Johnny

Johnny

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Friday, May 15, 2009 5:13 PM

AgentKid

Interesting thing about this naming of steam engine types. I never heard of steam engine names until I first saw MODEL RAILROADER when I was a teenager. His whole life, my father referred to Selkirk's (CP's name for 2-10-4's) as 5900's, Santa Fe's as 5800's, Mikado's in various sizes as 5400's, 5300's, or 5200's, and all the other railroaders I ever heard him talk to seemed to do it the same way.

Even with diesels he referred to SD40's and SD40-2's as 5500's, even though they had over 400 of them and the series finished with number six thousand something. This is one thing where I've noticed that railroaders and railfans seemed to part way's.

AgentKid

That's a good point, working railroaders would generally refer to the engines as you do (by their numbers, like a "5400" type...they might not even know the nickname of the engine.

Even with diesels you get into "phases" which the builders and railroads didn't use, and even some designations (like EMD "F5's, IIRC) that are purely railfan jargon. Alco used DL for Diesel Locomotive; to them an RS-11 was a DL-701....

Stix
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Saturday, May 16, 2009 7:13 PM

Deggesty

De Luxe

 SP had some 4-6-6-2 Mallets in Cab Forward style, but I don´t know if the SP ever had any other name than Cab Forward for them, no matter if it was a 4-6-6-2 or a 4-8-8-2, just as long the cab was in front.

I think they were all, no matter what wheel arrangement or even if they were simple, called "AC."

Johnny

The SP 4-6-6-2 Mallets were classified AM (articulated mogul)  Likewise, the AC (articulated consolidation) was directly related to the x-8-8-x wheel arrangement.

Chuck

  • Member since
    July 2001
  • From: Shelbyville, Kentucky
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by SSW9389 on Sunday, May 17, 2009 4:30 AM

The term F5 was coined by EMD's Engineering Department and was used on EMD's product data cards. It has been perpetuated by railfans, but did not originate with them. The phasing thing for diesels is purely a railfan invention.  

wjstix

That's a good point, working railroaders would generally refer to the engines as you do (by their numbers, like a "5400" type...they might not even know the nickname of the engine.

Even with diesels you get into "phases" which the builders and railroads didn't use, and even some designations (like EMD "F5's, IIRC) that are purely railfan jargon. Alco used DL for Diesel Locomotive; to them an RS-11 was a DL-701....

 

COTTON BELT: Runs like a Blue Streak!
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Sunday, May 17, 2009 4:57 PM

The F-5 situation was an odd one. I was wrong in saying it was a railfan designation. Apparently it was used internally at GM, but not externally....

"David P. Morgan, writing in the September 1949 Trains suggested that for the purpose of Electro-Motive's engineering department "an interim F-5 model was created." The F5 was not an official designation, but was used to describe late-production F3s (built from the end of August 1948 to February 1949) that incorporated some improvements made standard with the F7 line."

"EMD F-Unit Locomotives" by Brian Solomon, page 50.

"GM's engineering department identified this change by internally referring to units with the D-27 motors as F5's. This designation was not used by teh marketing or accounting departments, who continued to refer to the product as an F3."

"General Motors' F-units, The Locomotives that Revolutionized Railroading" by Daniel J. Mulhearn and John R. Taibi, page 53.

Stix

SUBSCRIBER & MEMBER LOGIN

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

FREE NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

Get the Classic Trains twice-monthly newsletter