Flashwave
Now, will/can the real AT&SF #1999 show itself?
Mark
FlashwaveGuys, We missed an engine, and I mislabeled it. I fo rone think this little guy is cute. And I earlier associated it with Spectrum, it's not, it's a Mantua. It's not technically a camelback, but it is around, and I've hear, a good little engine
Guys,
We missed an engine, and I mislabeled it. I fo rone think this little guy is cute. And I earlier associated it with Spectrum, it's not, it's a Mantua. It's not technically a camelback, but it is around, and I've hear, a good little engine
Morgan,
Mantua also used the exact same body on an 0-4-0 mechanism. I have one of each.
Cheers
Maurice
From the NEB&W Guide to Mantua Steam Locos:
0-6-0 Camelback - I believe this is based on a Reading prototype, class B-8a, one of 36 such locos built by Baldwin between 1906 and '12. Mantua probably followed the plans that were in Model Railroader in the 1950's. (I've also read that this being the 0-4-0 superstructure on a different mechanism, it isn't that close to a B-8a, particularly as it is too short.)
http://railroad.union.rpi.edu/article.php?article=2606
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
SteamFreak From the NEB&W Guide to Mantua Steam Locos: 0-4-0 Camelback - One of these locos (actually a class 4-2b, but similar) survived and is on display at the Strasburg Museum in Strasburg, PA. (I've also read that the loco model sits about a foot too high.) [Reading 1181, 1939 Mantua ad.] It appears their 0-6-0 camelback and this one share the same superstructure. I think that the prototypes, too, were fairly close in all matters other than the number of wheels, but if not, I'm not sure which prototype this model is closest to. (I'm pretty sure it is the 0-4-0 version.) 0-6-0 Camelback - I believe this is based on a Reading prototype, class B-8a, one of 36 such locos built by Baldwin between 1906 and '12. Mantua probably followed the plans that were in Model Railroader in the 1950's. (I've also read that this being the 0-4-0 superstructure on a different mechanism, it isn't that close to a B-8a, particularly as it is too shor
Indeed, the Mantua 0-4-0's shell sits very noticably too high on the mechanism as compared to the prototype. And the actual Reading 0-6-0s don't look at all like the Mantua example (although both are fun little HO engines to run).
CNJ831
Way back in the day, many of Mantua's models were based on Reading prototypes. The A5 IS too high - that comes from having to cram their standard motor in there. If they used a smaller motor it could have been made right. It's not too bad as long as you avoid a side view.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
CNJ831 A post on the thread concerning the lack of small steam brought up what I've long considered a rather long standing, puzzling situation. Now, of course, we all have our favorite locomotives but I think it worthwhile to point out what I regard as an oddity. In recent years we've seen quite a number of locomotive models commercially produced that were fairly rare in the prototype, or were largely limited to use on just one, or maybe a couple of railroads. On the other hand, quite a significant number of well known and modeled eastern railroads employed camelbacks in a large number of sizes and wheel arrangements. Thousands were built and their operating lifetimes spanned the late 19th through the mid 20th centuries, longer than most any other locomotive and with their general appearance altering very little over that entire span. Yet, over the course of the past 50 years of the hobby, reasonably credible examples of these engines have only been offered three times: by AHM around 1960, Mantua in the early 1980's and most recently a rather questionable example from IHC. Admittedly, camelbacks were a bit unusual looking but so have been more than a few rear-cab engines over the years. Why are there no good models of camelbacks today? There has to be at least several thousand hobbyists today who model (or wish to model if the equipment were available) steam, or transition era railroads, that employed engines of this type in large numbers. Thus, it has always struct me as particularly odd that this class of motive power has been so neglected by the manufacturers down through the years. Incidentally, the number and diversity of brass camelbacks imported over the same 50 year interval has been surprisingly large and broad in wheel arrangement (varying from 0-4-0 to 0-8-8-0) as compared to plastic examples. Likewise, these usually do quite well on the re-sale market, indicating that there unquestionably is a continuing demand for these engines among hobbyists. CNJ831
A post on the thread concerning the lack of small steam brought up what I've long considered a rather long standing, puzzling situation.
Now, of course, we all have our favorite locomotives but I think it worthwhile to point out what I regard as an oddity. In recent years we've seen quite a number of locomotive models commercially produced that were fairly rare in the prototype, or were largely limited to use on just one, or maybe a couple of railroads. On the other hand, quite a significant number of well known and modeled eastern railroads employed camelbacks in a large number of sizes and wheel arrangements. Thousands were built and their operating lifetimes spanned the late 19th through the mid 20th centuries, longer than most any other locomotive and with their general appearance altering very little over that entire span.
Yet, over the course of the past 50 years of the hobby, reasonably credible examples of these engines have only been offered three times: by AHM around 1960, Mantua in the early 1980's and most recently a rather questionable example from IHC. Admittedly, camelbacks were a bit unusual looking but so have been more than a few rear-cab engines over the years. Why are there no good models of camelbacks today?
There has to be at least several thousand hobbyists today who model (or wish to model if the equipment were available) steam, or transition era railroads, that employed engines of this type in large numbers. Thus, it has always struct me as particularly odd that this class of motive power has been so neglected by the manufacturers down through the years.
Incidentally, the number and diversity of brass camelbacks imported over the same 50 year interval has been surprisingly large and broad in wheel arrangement (varying from 0-4-0 to 0-8-8-0) as compared to plastic examples. Likewise, these usually do quite well on the re-sale market, indicating that there unquestionably is a continuing demand for these engines among hobbyists.
A good deal of information is available here http://www.eddystonelocomotives.com/products.htm at Dave Grover's website. Although not mass produced, and certainly not low cost, it is a source for camelbacks. You'll see a lot of documentation about each prototype and the model itself. Dave built the RDG G2sa Pacific shown in my avatar. I can attest to the quality of his work although there is usually a long waiting period.
I agree, some mass-produced, low cost models would probably be a decent seller and would help a lot of us modeling eastern railroads of that era.
I haven't been able to find mine yet, but there's one on ebay right now (June 15th) and it's even got the original box. It was just listed at 99 cents and looks like no reserve. They are listing it as HO Train co.
1948PRRI haven't been able to find mine yet, but there's one on ebay right now (June 15th) and it's even got the original box. It was just listed at 99 cents and looks like no reserve. They are listing it as HO Train co.
The dealer claims there isn't any visible rot except a broken sideframe on a tender truck. The boiler and frame look good.
First - ATSF #1999:
Translation - there aint no such animal.
As for camelbacks, I remember the 'beautiful as a bulldog' appearance of the CNJ 4-6-0s that survived into the '50s in commuter service. However, while I love the look, it wouldn't blend in well with the theme I'm modeling - and I don't buy locomotives to sit on display.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with steam that didn't burn anthracite)
I have found the following loco by Mantua on my German supplier´s web page:
It´s a 4-6-2 of whatever prototype, to be released in fall.
IMHO it is so ugly that it is starting to be cute!
I guess it's a matter of perspective. There may well have been thousands of camelbacks of different types over the years, but of all engines produced, what percentage were camelbacks?? Maybe 1%??
I do agree with the overall premise though, it's curious that manufacturers (or sometimes several manufacturers) will produce a model of some real oddball engine (UP steam turbines) while overlooking more common or numerous ones.
Sir Madog I have found the following loco by Mantua on my German supplier´s web page: It´s a 4-6-2 of whatever prototype, to be released in fall. IMHO it is so ugly that it is starting to be cute!
The Model Power reis of this Mantua engine and other seems to have been imminent for several years, but maybe now it's actually going to happen. This engine was originally made by Mantua maybe 15 years ago or so.
This is a shot of my IHC premier series 2-6-0. I got this a few years back. She is sporting a new weathering job.
-Barry S
bcfan1064 This is a shot of my IHC premier series 2-6-0. I got this a few years back. She is sporting a new weathering job. -Barry S
alco's forever!!!!! Majoring in HO scale Minorig in O scale:)
She is DCC i put a NCE decoder in the tender. No sound yet but possible mod in the future. The tender is only put together with molded on plastic clips. The engine had to be taken apart to seperate the LED light and motor from the power pickups. I just ran new wires from the loco to the tender and wired them to the decoder. All in all I think i had the decoder installed and the engine reassembled in 2 hrs. I still have decoder light function outputs to use so i think i am going to add lanterns to the tender.
Raised on the Erie Lackawanna Mainline- Supt. of the Black River Transfer & Terminal R.R.
In my mind, having seen them as a kid, Camelbacks are so ungainly they are kool-looking.
And now, to your questions. The cab "wraps" around the boiler, with the engineer on the right side. The fireman is all by his lonesome out in the weather back at the firebox, stoking from the tender, most often through two fire doors. (Wooten fireboxes were very wide because hard anthracite coal required a lot of whole lot of grate area.) They were rather dangerous a high speed (Atlantics had been known to throw a side rod, which would consequently cut a swath through the cab, exiting through the roof, taking the engineer with it. They were eventually discontinued.
I love the beasts, though, and my Lehigh, Susquehanna & Western (a "freelanced prototype" based in NE Pennsylvania) has them in pairs (numbered several units apart in an effort to indicate a larger motive power roster.) We have two A5's (0-4-0), two B8's (0-6-0), two L7's (4-6-0), two I5's (2-10-0), two I8's (2-10-0), two P5's (4-4-2) and they are all Reading Company prototype brass imports. In interchange, an occasional visit from a NYO&W U Class 2-6-0 (brass) exchange run plus through freight behind a big, fat Reading I10sa (2-10-0, conventional cab) and a passenger run behind a superdetailed, re-motored '50's vintage brass Mantua brass G2sa (4-6-2, conventional cab, received as "parts in a box" in a trade for an Santa Fe AHM brass Pacific.)
Yeah, but Camelbacks? Oh, Buddy! Gotta love 'em!!
Bil
BiL Marsland (P5se Camelback) Lehigh Susquehanna & Western Northeastern Pennsylvania Coal Hauler All Camelback Steam Roster!! "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" -- George Orwell, Animal Farm, Chpt. 10
This particular Camelback is a total "imagineered" contraption! It is a Reading Company A5a 0-4-0 switcher boiler, cab and firebox mounted over some sort of six-coupled drive, NOT a B8! The REAL Reading 0-6-0 (the B8, I believe) had a much fatter boiler, a bigger cab, a bigger tender, and was just much more fat, squatty-looking.
BiL
Largest Camelbacks ever built:
http://www.mrmuffinstrains.com/TrainPictures/Prototype%20Erie2601.jpg
Erie 0-8-8-0, they had three of them, they were designed as used as pushers.
Smallest camelbacks ever built:
http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/rdg/rdg-s1159o.jpg
One is preserved at Strasburg.
Scot
scottychaos Largest Camelbacks ever built: http://www.mrmuffinstrains.com/TrainPictures/Prototype%20Erie2601.jpg Erie 0-8-8-0, they had three of them, they were designed as used as pushers. Smallest camelbacks ever built: http://www.rr-fallenflags.org/rdg/rdg-s1159o.jpg One is preserved at Strasburg. Scot
The Erie 0-8-8-0c was done in HO brass first by NJ Custom Brass in the 1980's and later by OMI, in each case becoming close to being the most expensive brass models of their respective eras. Both still command extremely high prices at re-sale. Incidentally, as I recall, the actual big Erie machines required two firemen, who had to shovel coal as fast as they could to keep the engines going and even then, as pushers, they couldn't move very fast!
The little Reading 0-4-0c, on the other hand, has been one of the most reproduced prototypes in HO's history...although most of the examples were offered to hobbyists decades ago. In fact, after Athearn's F-7 and the Varney Docksider, the original Mantua camelback "Goat" was said to be the best selling HO locomotive of all time and a staple of most HO layouts in the late 30's and throughout the 40's and 50's.
Those Camelbacks are the oddest looking locos to me - so ugly, that they start to look nice! What I wonder about is how fireman and engineer communicated.
CNJ831 The little Reading 0-4-0c, on the other hand, has been one of the most reproduced prototypes in HO's history...
The little Reading 0-4-0c, on the other hand, has been one of the most reproduced prototypes in HO's history...
My very first locomotive, received for Christmas long ago, was a painted all-brass model of the little Reading Camelback.
Canadian Pacific had one camelback, a 4-6-0. After it was tested the results were such that it was rebuilt into a conventional engines.
http://www8.cpr.ca/cms/English/General+Public/Heritage/Photo+Gallery/Locomotives/Profiles/NS25.htm
It did have a full cab for the fireman as well as the mid cab for the engineer.
I am currently rebuilding an MDC old timer boiler into a camelback. I eventually want to make a couple camelback 2-8-0's, a 4-6-0 and a 4-4-0. I am also rebuilding the cab of a Mantua 040 to take the high arch out and lower the overall line.
I have cut the smokebox front off and cut the front foot or so off the smokebox, the gaps in the running boards have been filled with styrene and the cab windows and rear wall removed. They will be replaced with more appropriate windows and new rear wall. Right now I am working on how best to build the Wooten Firebox. I will probably have to extend the drawbar a 1/4 in or so.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
If you take a mantua camelback Pacific, Atlantic or Mikado boiler, and cut appropriate pieces out of the boiler and smokebox, then mate it to reasonable underframe you can make anything from a RDG I-5 to an I-8 2-8-0 or several classes of 4-6-0 or 4-4-2.