It's been a while since anyone asked this question, and if I'm not mistaken, the Big Boy came out as the winner last time it was. I personally prefer the Challenger because it pulled both freight and passenger service, has an interesting history and is a really "tight" looking loco...
Tracklayer
I've only seen film footage of Big Boys in action
When the Republican National Convention was held here in Houston
The party hired a Challenger pulling a passenger train for the California delegates
trip to Houston
They lived and ate meals on the train for a week
I got to see the train running on a straightaway outside of town
at about 40 mph
Awesome sight
TerryinTexas
See my Web Site Here
http://conewriversubdivision.yolasite.com/
davidmbedard wrote:What is the question? Which should you buy....or which is the better locomotive?
David,
I think Tracklayer's question is: Of the prototypes, which one do you prefer or like the best?
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
UNIONPACIFIC4018 wrote:Big boys pulled troop trains. While not official passenger service I would say that soldiers who fought for us in WWII are as official as anyone else or better
You are dang right the boys in the United States Military are offical!
Lionel collector, stuck in an N scaler's modelling space.
Many railroads had Challengers that roamed all over the west in regular service. Only the UP had Big Boys and in regular service they worked in a very limited territory.
You can choose the engine by the length of your roundhouse stalls.
I have the Challenger and like it very much. I wouldn't mind having a Big Boy, but it would be as out of place on my NYC/PRR concentrated layout as the poor ol' Challenger. If I had the space and bucks, it would be an H8 or a Y6b, anyway.
Must admit, though, you don't fool around in front of that Big Boy...it commands respect.
I'm with CAZEPHYR on this point--though the UP originated the 4-6-6-4, the design was used by many other railroads and was a pretty versatile locomotive. In fact, it might come as a surprise for some to realize that as far as Tractive Effort, the UP Challengers had less (97, 000 lbs TE) when compared to 4-6-6-4's built by Baldwin for the Rio Grande (3700 series--105,000 lbs TE) or Northern Pacific/SP&S (Z-series 104,000/106,000 lbs TE). Which of course is not a detriment, these locos were designed for different running conditions than the UP mainline through Wyoming and Utah.
And remember, as famous as the Big Boys were, there were only 25 of them, and only built for one railroad, the UP. And unlike the Challengers, the Big Boys were not used system-wide. UP was known to run their Challengers into Portland OR, and Los Angeles, CA. The Big Boys pretty much stayed on the Overland route in Wyoming and Utah.
So I'd list my preference for the 4-6-6-4 as far as general popularity and versatility. Besides, the Big Boy had only one general 'look', the 4-6-6-4 (even on the UP) had several. And of course the NP/SP&S-Rio Grande 4-6-6-4's didn't look a thing like the UP's. Except for the Rio Grande 3800's which were UP design assigned by the War Board, and sold very quickly by the D&RGW to the Clinchfield when they were no longer needed.
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!
Its likely your curves with appreciate the Challenger more. Requiring less clearence. A 4000 is an 'overkill' locomotive. Too large to be practical.
"Being misunderstood is the fate of all true geniuses"
EXPERIMENTATION TO BRING INNOVATION
http://community.webshots.com/album/288541251nntnEK?start=588
Challenger for me baby! I love my lionel (it's in the shop currently getting a new headlight!).... Go baby go!!!
Brian
Texas Zepher wrote: Many railroads had Challengers that roamed all over the west in regular service. Only the UP had Big Boys and in regular service they worked in a very limited territory.
, sort of. Then again, the D&H WAS west of the Hudson River Likewise, the Clinchfield ran in western North Carolina.
As noted, the Clinchfield locos were ex-Rio Grande of UP design - except that the Clinchfield replaced the original double stacks with a single stack only slightly smaller than a manhole. OTOH, the D&H Challengers were unique - IMHO, the most beautiful semi-articulated locos ever put on American rails.
If the use of steam hadn't imploded after WWII, I believe that many more roads would have tried 4-6-6-4's. In the meantime, the 25 Big Boys would have remained in their restricted territory, doomed to that confinement by their size.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)