Does anyone know or remember if there was ever an article written for one of the model magazines about converting an AHM / Rivarossi 4-8-8-2 Cab Forward to a more conventional 2-8-8-4? A while ago on this forum, we had a discussion about the 2-8-8-4 wheel arrangement and one of our members posted photos of two different "bashed" 2-8-8-4s. Last night, on Ebay, there was a very similar looking, third engine that was up for auction as well.
I fully realize that if one were to undertake such a venture, the Riv engine would be a logical place to start but it does seem more than a bit coincidental that without some general plan, three engines would appear to be very similar. So that leads to my original question.
Thanks.
dlm
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
Dan--
Just some random thoughts:
It would probably depend on which Yellowstone you were trying to duplicate. If you were thinking of duplicating an actual prototype, the Cab-Forward would probably work better for a B&O EM series than it would a Missabe M3/4. Though the locomotives look similar (and the prototypes for all were built by Baldwin), there are a lot of differences in boiler length, diameter and fireboxes.
The Missabe Yellowstones were not based on the SP cab-forwards, despite their cosmetic similarities. Missabe 2-8-8-4's were actually based upon the Western Pacific 251 series 2-8-8-2', only with an added 4-wheel trailing truck to support a long and heavy all-weather cab. In fact, the Missabe's actually had a smaller firebox than the WP oil-burning articulateds, but it was more efficient. As far as the Missabe's and the B&O EM's, the EM's were built with the same specs and mechanism by Baldwin, but with lighter alloys, that gave them the same tractive effort of the SP Cab-forwards, 123,000 pounds, versus the 145,000 pounds of the heavier Missabe's.
But if you wanted to turn the Cab-Forward around to a 2-8-8-4 that resembled a Missabe loco, you could probably turn up with a relatively good representation--IF--you're not that concerned with prototype dimensions. For either the Missabe or the EM, you'd have to replace the Cab-Forward 'lead' truck with an actual 4-wheel 'trailing' truck, though. SP used their 4-wheel lead truck for tracking at speed as much as it was used for supporting the firebox and cab.
Of course, with the Rivarossi, you'll end up with smaller drivers to begin with--about 60", if I remember correctly, but what the Hey, LOL! If you want an 'approximation' instead of a prototype kitbash, you could do far worse, IMO. And believe me, I'm not saying this as a 'rivet counter'. Just giving you some thoughts on the matter.
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!
twhite Dan-- Just some random thoughts: It would probably depend on which Yellowstone you were trying to duplicate. If you were thinking of duplicating an actual prototype, the Cab-Forward would probably work better for a B&O EM series than it would a Missabe M3/4. Though the locomotives look similar (and the prototypes for all were built by Baldwin), there are a lot of differences in boiler length, diameter and fireboxes. The Missabe Yellowstones were not based on the SP cab-forwards, despite their cosmetic similarities. Missabe 2-8-8-4's were actually based upon the Western Pacific 251 series 2-8-8-2', only with an added 4-wheel trailing truck to support a long and heavy all-weather cab. In fact, the Missabe's actually had a smaller firebox than the WP oil-burning articulateds, but it was more efficient. As far as the Missabe's and the B&O EM's, the EM's were built with the same specs and mechanism by Baldwin, but with lighter alloys, that gave them the same tractive effort of the SP Cab-forwards, 123,000 pounds, versus the 145,000 pounds of the heavier Missabe's. But if you wanted to turn the Cab-Forward around to a 2-8-8-4 that resembled a Missabe loco, you could probably turn up with a relatively good representation--IF--you're not that concerned with prototype dimensions. For either the Missabe or the EM, you'd have to replace the Cab-Forward 'lead' truck with an actual 4-wheel 'trailing' truck, though. SP used their 4-wheel lead truck for tracking at speed as much as it was used for supporting the firebox and cab. Of course, with the Rivarossi, you'll end up with smaller drivers to begin with--about 60", if I remember correctly, but what the Hey, LOL! If you want an 'approximation' instead of a prototype kitbash, you could do far worse, IMO. And believe me, I'm not saying this as a 'rivet counter'. Just giving you some thoughts on the matter. Tom
Why bother with a Missabe M-3 or M-4? The closest candidate for a kitbash would be the 12 SP AC-9's that were outshopped by Lima in 1939.
Andre
While a kitbash may be the only way for me to get something that resembles ANY 2-8-8-4 (that I can afford), my post was prompted by the similarity of the kitbashed engines. I just figured that someone planted a common seed somewhere and the similar locos "just growed..."
Actually, Andre has a good point--the Cab-forward could be turned around to give a pretty good representation of the SP AC-9 Lima-built 2-8-8-4, since both locos had basically the same dimensions and the same Tractive Effort. And the tenders could be kitbashed to resemble the Lima tenders (if you model them converted to oil, not the original coal that the 3900's used). Only tricky thing I can think of would be duplicating the 'skyline casing' that the Lima's had on the boiler top.
I also think I get your point--if you wanted to 'freelance' a Yellowstone design, then the cab-forward would make a really good start.
My main problem, and it's mine, not anyone elses, is that when I hear the word "Yellowstone", I IMMEDIATELY think Missabe. But several other roads had them too. They were really fascinating brutes, IMO.
According to the mag index, there were no articles in RMC about 2-8-8-4 locomotives.
I also could not see a kit bashing article, except for a three part series in MR in 1949 - long before the Rivarossi model was introduced.
The obvious 2-8-8-4 to bash from the cab forward is the SP AC-9......edit Tom was faster on this than me. For the Skyline casing, get a couple of Bachmann GS4 shells as doners, for the casing and the smoke box.
With a little bit of filing (okay a lot of filing), you could bash a 2-8-8-4 from Bowser parts.
twhite My main problem, and it's mine, not anyone elses, is that when I hear the word "Yellowstone", I IMMEDIATELY think Missabe. But several other roads had them too. They were really fascinating brutes, IMO. Tom
Well I don't think you're the only one !! Still, it's true Yellowstones were created for (and named by) the Northern Pacific. Interestingly, with all the 4-8-4's that have been available over the years - you can get them now for UP, N&W, NYC, SP and others - there's never (outside of brass) been a model of the first Northerns, which again go back to the NP.
Anyway, I don't recall any articles about kitbashing a 2-8-8-4 but I too have wondered how close you could get by turning around a cab-forward. I know maybe 20 years the Missabe Road Historical Society had an article or series of articles on converting a Rivarossi 2-8-8-2 into a DMIR 2-8-8-2.
It's too bad Bill Schopp (have I misspelled his name?) is no longer with us. He had a great talent for locomotive "bashing." I imagine he'd get a body from a derelict brass model and marry it with a modern model for the running gear. Seems like he had several such articles (often combining parts from two brass locomotives to create one) a year in RMC during the 60s and 70s.
Mark
I only have one Cab-forward right now and that one won't get cut up. But my first step might be to figure out which motor I could use to repower it. It has the old round one and doesn't seem to do all that well.
As I've mentioned in another thread, probably my first choice would be an EM-1 since they ran in Bellaire, Ohio, near my hometown just up the river. I never saw them but... My next choice would be a DM&IR model because I have about 45-50 ore hoppers which would make the perfect load for that one.
If I break the bank and get a brass one, the one thing I can count on will be that someone will come out with a "high end" plastic one. That was my experience with the first brass loco I bought. : (
I've enjoyed the responses from those of you who have posted and am looking forward for more "food for thought." Thank you very much.
markpierce It's too bad Bill Schopp (have I misspelled his name?) is no longer with us. He had a great talent for locomotive "bashing." I imagine he'd get a body from a derelict brass model and marry it with a modern model for the running gear. Seems like he had several such articles (often combining parts from two brass locomotives to create one) a year in RMC during the 60s and 70s. Mark
Mark--
I LOVED those Bill Schopp (yes, you spelled it correctly) articles in RMC. He's the one that finally gave me the courage to kitbash a brass ATSF 2-10-2 'junker' into a kinda/sorta Rio Grande F-81 some years back (before I got my PSC version) and it kinda/sorta worked. In fact it kinda/sorta worked so well that I can doublehead those two hunkers and except for little details, they look like the same class. He was absolutely fearless, and his stuff really worked. I remember when he kitbashed two ATSF 2-8-0's into one of the early ATSF 2-8-8-2's, with double motors. Whoa, that puppy must have been able to move HOUSES, LOL!
He was imaginative and fearless. We could use another Bill Schopp these days!