Challenger and Big-Boy Model Comments requested

[Anonymous]

There are several new Challenger and Big-Boy HO models on the market, from Lionel, Trix (I think that's the right maker), and Athearn. From what I've read, all of these models have pivoting driver assemblies similar to what you see on a model diesel engine. This would mean that the models don't truly track like an articulated locomotive. This is an important issue for me in considering the purchase of one or more models.

Does anyone have one of these models, or had the chance to test one out? Id' like to know how the mechanisms are put together, and whether or not you feel that the mechanical compromises in the model have reduced the realistic appearance or not.

Thanks,

Doug Hansen

[Anonymous]

I've heard only good things about these locomotives. My only critisism is in the choice of prototype. There are already several manufacturers offering these giant articulated locomotives, even though they are totally unsuitable for the vast majority of home layouts. Small to medium locomotives are far more useful to the serious layout builder, and there are still several gaps in availability.
In the hopes that manufacturers will read this, here goes:
* A decent 2-6-0 (Sorry, but I don't count the IHC offering because it won't run on code 70 or 55 rail.
* A fast, high-drivered, 4-6-0 (the Spectrum 4-6-0 is a good mixed trafic locomotive, but not ideal for fast passenger on a small railroad)
* A heavy 2-8-2
* A chunky 2-10-0
* Light and heavy 2-10-2's
I've deliberately not suggested any specific prototype for any of these. As a freelance modeller, I don't really care, so I'll leave it up to the manufacturer to determine which prototypes would have the widest appeal.

[Anonymous]

The Trix is just overrated, better for display, not operation. The Lionel Challenger seems to be good, considering the review in MR. I saw one at a train show (along with a Rivarossi Big Boy) and both could make it around 18" curves. Small curves make the boiler stick way out. The Rivarossi BB's are EXCELLENT. L-UP-O could tell you that, he has 5. Better than Trix for half the money. As for the Athearn Genesis 4-6-6-4 I've no clue.

[nfmisso]

Doug;

The only non-brass Big Boys and Challengers that do not articulate thier rear trucks are Bowser's kits. In addition, they will out pull any of the others, it is a matter of wieght.

[Anonymous]

I think it is a matter or preferences. I have 3 Rivarossi and 1 Trix Big Boy, of the two, I much prefer the Trix unit. The Trix comes in with a hefty 2 pounds of weight. With that much weight, I've found that I can pull about 25 feet of rolling stock (I ran out of rolling stock, I think this means I gotta get some more [:p]) on level track and it could handle it with no slipping. At slow speeds, this baby can creep along very nicely. My experience with the Trix BB is that it can handle the tightest of curves without derailing. It is also one nice looking engine. Although I must admit that with my model the rear tender leading truck will derail if the rails are not flat flat. I believe this to be a flaw in the design as the truck will float a little above the railhead. This has not cause the train to derail, indeed, perhaps due to the weight the train just puffs along until it hits a switch just right and cause a short which shuts down my DCC system till I correct the derail. I like my Rivarossi's but there have been times when I over shoot where I want to stop and if I try to back up, the rear tender will derail.
My impression is that I don't think Trix wants anyone digging into their model as I was unable to find any documentation on how and where to install my DCC chip. I like Rivarossi because they do give an exploded view of their BB. At the time, it took an issue of MR or Railmodel Journal on how to take the Trix BB apart to install the DCC chip. With the new release of the Trix BB, this is not a problem as it already comes DCC (and sound) equipped and can detect which power you are running, DC or DCC.
As a side note, I should mention, that the Big Boy does take up allot of room, to look right, it should pull allot of cars, and have wide turns. I would have to agree with mpeterll that making such a large engine does tend to make them unsuitable for most layouts. This has caused me some grief in designing my new layout. If I had it to do over, I think I should have stuck with the smaller stuff. But then again, it sure does my heart good to watch that BB roll down the track. I'm seriously considering buying another Trix BB to keep the other one company as I do like looking at all those BB's next to each other. This'll be my last BB purchase, I promise [angel] (does anyone know if hell froze over? [;)] [}:)])

[lupo]

Cool Hauckra,
at last someone who has both, I made some comments on the Trix Bigboys, more about looks and pricing, than performance, what do you think about the detailing as you put the Trix and Rivarossi ( the new ones) next to eachother?
wich Rivarossi bigboys do you have? old or new ?
I have some of both (3 new 2 old )
Last year on a trainshow I saw the ultimate test: they had 1 bigboy, pull a 110 car train,
due to the audience it attracted could not get close enough to see if it was Rivarossi or Trix, how many cars did yours pull? and did you compare the pulling power between the trix and the rivarossi engines?

thanks

[RRRerun]

I have 2 BBs, 1 Challenger and a Cab forward, all by Rivarossi. I am quite satified with them, but like most modelers, I like to tweak my motive power. I had the same problem with tender derailments running in reverse on all of them when pushing a long string of freight. After some playing around with weighting the tenders and distributing the weights and the amount, the problems were solved. Each type of tender was a little different. I also had problems with traction tires stretching and coming off. Stewart traction tires will not work properly because they are thicker than the originals. Try and find original traction tires!!!! When I finally did get some, I experimented. I carefully cleaned the grooves in the drivers and installed the new traction tires. I then lifted the traction tires out of the grooves with tooth picks and injected super glue in the grooves. To inject the super glue, I used an old printer ink refill bottle. I then removed the tooth picks and seated the traction tires (gotta be quick!). Cleaned off any excess glue with a hobby knife. Set the engine on the track with some 600 grit emory paper to true up the and rough them up slightly. Walla, no more problems with traction tire stretching. I also found that roughing the traction tires up made a slight improvement in pulling power and now have incorperated that in routine maintenance. I routinely pull 50 to 60 cars ( properly weighted ) with a BB up 1.5% grades with a 2% in a helix ( for about 15' )on 30"R min. curves with easments. Boiler overhang on the 30"R curves is still quite noticable, but we are modelers and can not have prototype curves. The BBs do look impressive pulling long strings of cars even so!!! My opnion - go for those big beasts, they look great on a layout and visitors really like them.

[Anonymous]

lupo,
sorry for the delay in answering your question, trying to finish a house by this weekend.
I have 1 old Rivarossi #4005 with the deep wheel flanges and the new Digital Rivarossi #4010 with the RP25 wheels. One of the most noticeable things I see when the Trix BB is rolling down the rails is that the number boards in front light up. I think this will clue off anyone who knows this detail and sees it running down the track from any reasonable distance whether it is a Trix or Rivarossi. As you may have noticed, when Rivarossi upgraded their BB they made subtle changes such as the piping on the front and the painting of the smoke box and the fire box. #4010 is more similar to the Trix #4010 than #4005. So other than the obvious with the engine numbers (but these can be changed) I will confine my comparison between the Rivarossi #4010 and the Trix #4013. The linkage on 4013 is finer and has a more tighter look to it than the 4010. The 4013 has brakes between the wheels whereas the 4010 does not. I certainly am no expert on the BB so I can not say with any authority about the wheels on the BB. But both the 4010 and the 4013 have different drive wheels and they appear prototypical. Perhaps someone out there can help out and inform us if there was indeed two different styles of drive wheels. The 4010 has wheels that appear more like spokes with egg shaped holes, and the 4013 wheels have alternating large and small egg shaped holes. Since the Trix is made mostly of metal, they have more piping and different routings for some of these piping. Under and around the cab there is much more detail including glass for the windows. The smoke stack on the 4010 looks more realistic than on the 4013 as they have a thin rim and the 4013 is thick. But I have been unable to locate any photos of the BB from the top without smoke billowing out of the top. So which is the correct dimension, I must bow down to someone who knows more than I. The coupler release on the front of 4010 has a small "U" shaped grab handle and wants to remain in the upright position (I need to glue this someday), 4013 has a longer handle that looks like it would be easier to grab for the brakeman. The superstructure on 4015 shows other details such as finer detail for hinges and doors on the top. The cab on 4010 has 5 rows of rivets running across from side to side, where 4013 has 7 rows and 2 rows running length wise. The end of 4010's cab is open where 4013's cab is covered and has doors and windows. Most of these detail differences are subtle and I know I have missed many of the details
The real obvious difference between the two tenders is 4010 lays flat and evenly distributed where 4013 is of finer texture and is humped up at one end. 4010 has large access doors (for water) on the top with running boards where 4013 has small access doors and a riveted deck.
Alas, the children are up, the wife is up and wants to go, so I will have to conclude the comparison between the two. I'm sorry if I was a little wordy or gave more detail than you wanted but I did want to try and answer your question about the detail difference. Even now I've notice some other details that I have not mentioned. I know detail can be added or changed on both these BB's but I was attempting to describe out of the box detail. For me, these differences are an asset and not a hindrance because I can have several different BB's and the all look different to some degree.
As to your question as to how many cars did the Trix pull? It was last year on an old layout (since removed to get ready for the new bigger and improved layout), I used every car I had that ranged from 35' to 60' and even the MOW's, I pulled 61 cars! It was like watching an N scale train roll on by. I tried this with the Rivarossi but the tender would derail on a turn (gotta add some weight to it someday) and I don't recall right now how many cars I could pull with it. The next layout I hope to have more rolling stock built and purchased by then. Gotta go, the boss is here again.

[lupo]

Thanks! I have to go over that a few times ! never enough details on this, because the Trix - Rivarossi bigboys came up several times in the last months, but we never had info by someone who actually OWNED a Trix bigboy, most of us only seen it.
I agree on the detailing and coloring, I have only Rivarossi BB's the old 4002 and 4005 (as you have) and the new 4006, 4013 and 4023 The pentrex video on bigboys pointed out that the piping you mention on your 4013 was prototypical as they left the factory but all of the bigboys have this cooling tubes for safety reasons moved to a covered area above the front trucks when in service . you are right about the brakepads, but with one of my BB's these brake pads were packed as an detailing part.

good luck with finishing your house!

Lupo

[farrellaa]

I just got my first Rivarossi Big Boy (through E-bay) and it didn't run. The motor ran but not the drivers. After dis-assembly I found the drive shaft from the motor was streched or worn out to where it slipped. I did a temp fix and put it back. Now the power goes to the drivers but the front and rear sets are twisting in opposites directions (side to side) and almost lifts the loco off the track. Further investigation revealed the vertical worm shaft was not seating in the drive shaft? coming up from the drivers. I opened this up and tried again. It is better but everything binds up after running about a foot. I think the shaft from the drivers up to the worm box is the problem but don't really know. Does anyone know what the problem might be. I also have a Rivarossi Challenger and it runs great. They are both very impressive looking locomotives and I assume the Challenger has the same type drive mechanism.