Using the smiley format started earlier, here's how I would rate them from my own experiences. (Since manufacturer quality can change - even from model-to-model - I've included both in my ratings.):
Steam
Diesel
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
blownout cylinder Dang----where'd I put that popcorn?
Dang----where'd I put that popcorn?
It is fun, isn't it?
Back in the day when men were men, sheep were nervous and kits ruled, the end user was part of the last step in the manufacturing process (i.e. you had to assemble the thing), if things didn't work quite right, YOU were at fault. Examples follows from the June, 1959, issue of MR review of the then new MDC kit for a 2-6-2:
.... Only 1 problem was encountered in getting the mechanism to to run smoothly. We had to elongate the two holes in the siderods considerably to relieve a bind.
The drivers have a red dot on the insulated side, but check this as we found the center pair of drivers improperly marked......
The 12 v. DC permanent magnet motor meshed the worm gear a little too tight against the gear and a shim of about .010" was required between the frame and the motor to adjust this.
The pilot and trailing trucks are fastened rather securely to the frame. A little vertical motion is desireable here and this can be accomplished by filing about 1/64" from the top surface of the truck mounting plate.
There's also a comment about the valve gear being mounted in an unorthodox and unrealistic manner and being rather bulky, but we'll let that pass.
So what you see is that final QC was left up to the modeler. If it didn't perform quite up to expectations when assembled, it was your problem, not the manufacturer's.
Things are much better now. If a RTR item gives you fits, you can now blame the manufacturer rather than feeling like a dunce for your own shortcomings. Ain't it great that now the weight of responsibility has shifted to the one who supplied you with that lemon rather than resting on your own shoulders? It gets even better. You can now return that lemon and get a new model. MDC in 1959 would have laughed its corporate head off if you assembled their engine per instructions (and without taking into account the caveats in the MR review) and tried to get another when it didn't work. Even if they gave you a new engine, it would be a kit and you'd still have to put it together and you'd still face the same issues.
Sheep aren't so nervous anymore. They're busy drinking coffee and shooting the breeze because men are now totally occupied with complaining about things that don't involve sheep.
Hmm. I sense a conspiracy here. Sheep are responsible for the proliferation of RTR. Their evil master plan has finally produced the results they wanted when they first hatched it oh so long ago. Strangely, however, I've suddenly developed a hankering for a nice rack of lamb. That'll learn 'em
EDIT: In the realm of the unintentially hilarious, comes this gem from the same review:
When fully assembled, our model ran smoothly and quietly without any undue fiddling and adjusting.
Er, uh, excuse me. Maybe that was because you did all the fiddling and adjusting in the process of assembling the bloody thing. That would be my guess anyway, BWDIK?
Andre
----------------
Andre my friend, That was the secrete in having smooth running locomotives from kits back then..Of course that beautiful brass locomotives from PFM,United,Sunset,Balboa,Tenshodo required no tweaking to get a smooth runner..This was the being of the end for steam locomotive kits as we knew 'em back then.
Of course those blasted brass RTR locomotives will do nothing but,hurt the hobby!!!
Sound familiar?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
I asked my friend about communication in China. Communication in China is not a problem for Bowser as the factory manager is a Canadian who has been living in China for many years and is pretty fluent.
Also, Bowser's unwritten policy for many years was that if a modeler made even a reasonable attempt at assembling a kit steam locomotive, but could not get it to run properly--all they had to do was call or write and send it in and Bowser would finish the assembly (but not painting) for the customer. In the end the customer got a fine running engine that had been test run and broken-in a bit. Many times during my tenure working there I saw engines breaking in for 50 hours or so running on the store layout prior to being sent back to the customer.
So even in the "good old days" of the late 1980's the customer was not as responsible for the end result as the above posts would lead one to believe. Ultimately the manufacturer bent over backwards to assure the customer received a fine running locomotive. It was hoped that the repeat sales would make the customer service effort worthwhile--and it did apparently play out that way for many years.
Fast forward to today when many folks don't have the time, skills, or patience to build such an item and prefer to buy fully assembled. Though I did plenty of casting, milling and drilling, etc. of or on Bowser metal steam loco boilers back in the day, I too prefer to buy assembled locomotives now.
Oh yeah. No brass RTR (yeah, right) locomotive EVER required tweaking. The sun always shone, kids were respectful of their elders and did their chores without being asked. Unlike today, you never had to take your car in for service, airliners never crashed, no train was ever late and our leaders never lied.
You are right about one thing, it was the beginning of the end for steam loco kits although the end was a long time coming. The Brits, who suffered mightily from WWII couldn't afford brass beautiies early on and instead developed loco kits far beyond what was ever available here. To this day, brass RTR models of British outline steam locomotives are extremely rare. 'Course their kits are expensive and generally don't come with motors, gears and wheels. You have to get those separately mostly do to the strange British custom of having 3 separate gauges for OO scale models, 16.5 mm, 18 MM (EM gauge) and 18.83 mm (Scale 4). The basic DJH kit for an ex-LMS Dutchess class Pacific is $197 at current exchange rates. The recommended motor/gearbox combo is an additional $69. Finding the prices for all the required wheels would be a complicated task due to the odd scale/gauge combos and the fact that you can get them to RP25 specs or otherwise. Naturally, you have to paint and line the engines as the Brits didn't go for basic black generally, but prefered their engines tarted up. Naturally, if you want DCC and sound, that's an additional expense, not to mention more work.
I checked Bachmann Branch Line to see if DCC and sound equipped RTR locos were available. There's one, a Jubilee class 4-6-0. It's $362 at current rates. However, if you want anything other than 16.5mm gauge (IOW, you want a better scale/gauge relationship), you're back to aftermarket wheelsets, some work and some additional expense.
DJH did bring out some US prototype HO kits in the 80's, USRA light 2-8-2 and 4-6-2, Santa Fe 3160 class 2-8-2 and the ever popular NYC J1 4-6-4. The response was underwhelming and DJH had to give it up as a bad job. Well, they were a bit pricey and all.
Just as a side note, and just for comparison, that MDC kit mentioned sold for the equivalent of just under $242 in 1959. It wasn't even prototypical as all 2-6-2's built expressly for the Santa Fe had the main rod connected to the #2 driver set and not the #3. Most had 69" drivers, not 63". They also used different boilers, not the 1480 class Atlantic boiler used on the MDC model. The tender's all wrong too, but at this point, who cares? Even back in the 50's, British outline kits at least attempted to model prototype engines and not some free-lance flight of fancy.
One more thing. Some day, I'm going to have to find the Joe Collias rant against plastic shake the box rolling stock kits (Athearn BB, anyone?) because they were also ruining the hobby.
------------------
How about the outcry against the early RTR cars from Athearn,Cox,Varney,Mantua,Lindbergh,Lionel,AHM? LOL!
Nothing changed..
I guess I was lucky..My United Santa Fe 1950 class 2-8-0,U.P 0-6-0 and Class B 2 truck Shay ran smooth from the box.As did my Dad's PRR collection.
In some ways things was better back then in the hobby.
andrechapelonOne more thing. Some day, I'm going to have to find the Joe Collias rant against plastic shake the box rolling stock kits (Athearn BB, anyone?) because they were also ruining the hobby.
IIRC there may hae been quite a few rants of his and a few others as well----I came across a slew of them---and the editors left it going for a while-----gee, must have got a lot of attention then!!
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/
That's all well and good, but we were taking about the late 50's. You know, the "Golden Age", when..., well the lyrics to "Camelot" say it better: http://www.allthelyrics.com/lyrics/camelot_soundtrack/camelot-lyrics-75446.html
It must have been a double secret policy, kinda like the double secret probation in "Animal House".
You'd have to be pretty desparate to contact the manufacturer if you couldn't get your kit locomotive to run right, especially if the policy were unwritten. OTOH, if it were a written policy, Bowser would have been deluged with requests from modelers who ran into a minor hiccup.
BTW, what happened when the customer got the loco back and painted it only to find it wouldn't run? It's general practice to disassemble an unpainted locomotive to paint it. Ya gotta put it back together. Paint's an insulator. But that's not the complete picture. If you assemble the engine differently than it was assembled by Bowser, you can introduce new problems. One of my favorites is putting one of the driver sets on with the insulated side opposite the other drivers. Another one is putting the live side of the drivers on the same side as the live side of the tender. Of course, it's entirely possiblle to assemble an engine so that it runs, but in the opposite direction of the rest of your fleet. One would assume, however, that if you can fix the problems named above, you could actually assemble the engine in the way God and the manufacturer intended.
A friendly reminder: Let's keep to the topic at hand, gentlemen. Many of you know where the "good 'ol days" and "ruining the hobby" threads eventually end up - facetious or not. Thanks.
Tom
Like Atlantic Central, I'm strictly DC, so I can't comment on current 'sound' DCC steam. And since the railroad I model only has one current DC plastic steamer available, I can only comment on it. That would be the Proto 2000 Heritage Rio Grande "USRA" 2-8-8-2.
It's a beautiful model with very smooth control all the way through the speed range, and unlike a lot of Proto Heritage steam is a rather hefty puller for a plastic locomotive with no traction tires (I do not allow traction tires on my Yuba River Sub, LOL!). It appears well-weighted and nicely balanced. The tender is a little 'light', but I've fixed that with some additional weight.
I do have one diesel set, a Genesis F-3 A/B set painted in Rio Grande, that I use for my "Prospector" streamliner, and it's extremely powerful and smooth running. And I like the detail, even though I'm not a real diesel fan.
I have 5 Bachmann Spectrum locomotives that are off-road 'loaners' (my layout is set during WWII), two 4-8-2's, a 2-8-0, a 2-10-0 and a 2-6-6-2 and have had no trouble with any of them. I've heard issues with Spectrum QC, but their straight DC locos seem to be pretty bullet-proof.
As for the rest of my rather large steam fleet, it's all brass. Which means that at one time or another, almost every locomotive has had to be 'tweaked', and in one case, completely disassembled and rebuilt. But I'm used to that. Besides, brass--I've found--is rather easy and forgiving to work on.
But as far as the quality of current steam models from Heritage and Spectrum, I've got no complaints. So far.
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!
So did my first run Santa Fe 3751 class 4-8-4 from BLI and my 5 Spectrum engines of various wheel arrangements, to name a few. They were all bought at an LHS and test run before money changed hands. I did have to replace the sound chip for the BLI engine as it didn't have the proper 4 exhausts per driver revolution. BLI provided the replacement sound chip free of charge. I did have to install it, however. Should have sent them a bill for my labor (all 5 minutes of it). Aw, maybe not. It was a lot cheaper than mailing it back to BLI to "fix" it.
My guess is that a lot of people complaining about various locos ordered them over the net. I'd rather see 'em run first and reject 'em before I pay for them. If they run right at the shop, they run right when you get them home. If they don't run right at the shop, you ask to see another one.
Yup, been there, seen that. Interesting isn't it, that Athearn's the only one left?
BTW, are you old enough to remember when the first Athearn plastic kits were equipped with trucks that you had to assemble and that they had these funny little rubber inserts that were supposed to mimic truck springs? IIRC, they rolled like they had flat wheels once assembled.
It must be nostalgia day as I just flashed on the Athearn Hustler I had in my early teens. It essentially had two speeds, stop and high subsonic. I remember cranking the thing up and watching it go so fast that the inside wheels lifted on an 18" radius curve, dropped down, the thing started rocketing again and the wheels lifted again. The only reason my HiF F7 wouldn't do that is that it was heavy enough not to attain such breathtaking speeds.
And then there was that abomination from Atlas which looked somewhat like a race car and had a propeller in the back to make it go. It took a while to build up speed, but would eventually get going fast enough to leave a curve and make a beautiful arc towards the floor. I vaguely remember that it used the Hustler chassis and the propeller was mounted on one of the motor shafts.
Good times. Things will never be the same. Model railroading WAS fun.
tstage A friendly reminder: Let's keep to the topic at hand, gentlemen. Many of you know where the "good 'ol days" and "ruining the hobby" threads eventually end up - facetious or not. Thanks. Tom
Party pooper.
So far it's all been fun and reminiscing. I can't speak for others, but I'm having too much fun to get nasty if a grinch or two shows up.
God, I miss my Athearn Hustler and that propeller driven thingy from Atlas. I wonder if they could be converted to DCC and sound. That thing from Atlas would need to have a sound chip that reproduces a Rolls Royce Merlin engine at full throttle, however.
andrechapelonGod, I miss my Athearn Hustler and that propeller driven thingy from Atlas. I wonder if they could be converted to DCC and sound. That thing from Atlas would need to have a sound chip that reproduces a Rolls Royce Merlin engine at full throttle, however.
One of the best from the "old days" was the Lindberg SW900 that had a spring band drive and a top speed of 600 smph - they sounded like a sewing machine!
And the wonderful Varney F3's with the motor on one truck and a drive shaft to the other - how can we complain about anything we have today?
Sheldon
What about that feeble attempt at an EMD "bulldog" nose?
At least those were better than the brass F9's and FT's from Tenshodo.
As others have stated, the quality of a product ends up being a personal opinion based on ones interactions with a product & company. I'm only commenting of items I have bought brand new except for my Dad's AHM/Rivarossi loco's, as a lot of my stuff has been bought second hand
I don't hesitate to buy anything Athearn BB as I know they are bullet proof. Company & product
Athearn RTR, almost bullet proof, I've had a few minor issues with RTR, nothing that wasn't fixed by Athearn
Proto, again, almost bullet proof. Again, a few minor issues, easily fixed.
Atlas, I've only bought second hand items from Atlas so I can't comment on the company, but the products are nice, so far
Rivarossi/AHM, I have a few small steamers of my Dad's from the 60's & 70's. They still run, all origional including the motors.
IHC, inexpensive but reliable, that's all I care about!!!
Kato, only a business car here, nice!
Stewart, NOT happy with these guys. Have a C628, the driveshaft broke after I got it home, waited a week for a response via email. Love the loco, not the company.
Walthers, I've yet to have an issue from anything from these guys.
Roundhouse, only have bought freight cars, no issues at all
Accurail, love the kits!!
Gordon
Brought to you by the letters C.P.R. as well as D&H!
K1a - all the way
80% of my models are from Märklin. All I can say is that I´m very satisfied with all my Märklin stuff and never had any problems with it.
I have 7 passenger cars from Fleischmann. Also never had any issues with it.
I have 13 heavyweight passenger cars by Walthers. After snipping off some plastic from the underbody on the area around the trucks, the cars can handle my 18 inch curves, and I didn´t have any issues with them yet, they roll well on my Märklin tack.
I have some freight cars from Bachmann and Life Like, and I also did never have any issues with them. But there is weak point: never run a freight train backwards, especially when the Bachmann and Life Like freight cars are mingled in between die cast metal Märklin freight cars, because then the Bachmann and Life Like cars will derail in the curves. Otherwise they run well on my Märklin track.
I have a single MTH steam locomotive. It´s a black SP GS-4. I´m very dissapointed by that engine, because the first problem is that it doesn´t handle 22 inch curves without derailing already at middle-high speed (and MTH says that it does handle 22 inch without problems --> lie!), and then the decoder went broke after a short time and I had to send it back to MTH, and when the engine finally came back to me after a long time, the cab light wasn´t working! I never ever had any such issues with my Märklin locomotives, and never had to send it back for something. I really threw out 450 Euros for nothing on that engine! Lost money :-(
When I compare models from german manufacturers to US-american manufacturers, it seems to me that there is more quality control on the germany models. And I also have the feeling that for plastic cars, german manufacturers use a better quality plastic than american manufacturers. For example when I compare small Märklin plastic freight cars with Walthers heavyweights, the small 2 wheel flat car seems to be more solid than the Walthers heavyweight car when you touch it.
And what I find interesting is the fact that die cast metal locomotives are so rare in the USA. You mostly have plastic or brass, the only manufacturers of which I know that produce die cast metal locomotives in Ho scale are BLI and MTH. Die cast metal is the best for me, it´s not too expensive like brass, but the engines are so much better looking than plastic models and are more solid, and pull 100% more than plastic engines.
Another interesting thing for me to observe is, that in the USA manufacturers don´t seem to able to produce large steam locomotives that can also handle 14 inch (360 degrees) curves. Märklins Big Boy can handle 14 inch curves, and still looks very good and has all the details that a brass Big Boy that only handles 36 inch or bigger, has got.
My dream would be to purchase a T&P 2-10-4 or a SP 4-10-2, but I know I will never have it because Märklin will never produce it and if other american manufacturers do these engines in die cast, it surely won´t be able to handle 18 inch curves. So I must keep on dreaming.
Greetings from Germany
Daniel
Daniel,
I mostly agree to your statement that the stuff made in Germany appears to be of better quality than the US stuff, which is mainly made in China. But both Marklin/Trix and Fleischmann are also outsourcing their production into countries with cheaper labor, with the effect, that Marklin has started to get quality issues as well. The others we have yet to observe. I know from Brawa, that they have their locos made in China as well. Looking at the prices they are charging us for their models, the US locos are a bargain!
As to the ability to negotiate sharp curves, I would not call this a quality issue. Although Marklin has reduced the size of the flanges over the years, their are still huge in comparison with the RP 25 flanges common in the US market. These smaller and more prototypical flanges require a much better track work and, of course, wider curves for safe operation. As space is not that much of an issue in the US, there is not much a need to be able to go around 14" curves.
A final issue is certainly price. If you check the cost of a Marklin Big Boy in the German market, you can get two of BLI´s UP TTT´s as brass hybrids for it. With a sticker price of $1100 that dang thing be better of superior quality! For that price, you enter the market of hand-made brass locos.
It is difficult to compare the US market with the German market. US model railroaders don´t mind a little tinkering and tweaking, if they get a good bargain, whereas we Germans rather pay those outrageous prices, but expect the loco to perform like a Swiss watch, right out of the box.
De LuxeI have some freight cars from Bachmann and Life Like, and I also did never have any issues with them. But there is weak point: never run a freight train backwards, especially when the Bachmann and Life Like freight cars are mingled in between die cast metal Märklin freight cars, because then the Bachmann and Life Like cars will derail in the curves. Otherwise they run well on my Märklin track.
It has long ago been determined that freight cars need to be similar in weight to perform well when backing, and, sharp curves and/or truck mounted couplers add to such problems - this are not quality issues but rather compatiblity issues.
De LuxeAnd what I find interesting is the fact that die cast metal locomotives are so rare in the USA. You mostly have plastic or brass, the only manufacturers of which I know that produce die cast metal locomotives in Ho scale are BLI and MTH. Die cast metal is the best for me, it´s not too expensive like brass, but the engines are so much better looking than plastic models and are more solid, and pull 100% more than plastic engines.
A number of locos in the Bachmann Spectrum line have die cast boilers - the USRA 4-8-2 Heavy, USRA 2-10-2 Light, 4-6-0, 4-4-0.
De LuxeAnother interesting thing for me to observe is, that in the USA manufacturers don´t seem to able to produce large steam locomotives that can also handle 14 inch (360 degrees) curves. Märklins Big Boy can handle 14 inch curves, and still looks very good and has all the details that a brass Big Boy that only handles 36 inch or bigger, has got.
And this is fine with most American modelers, in general we have no interest in running such big power around such sharp curves - it looks ridiculous and unrealistic. My minimum radius is 36" and I won'trun a 2-10-2.
Marklin is very high quality and very nice, but in my case I have no interest in European prototypes, so it is not of interest to me. And the few US items from TRIX are of interest either. Many of us in the US have very narrow interests in what is a very large selection of prototypes. Example - I model the east and have no interest in a Big Boy - it never ran anywhere near the region I model.
The quality of most all the American brands is just fine for me and I like the low prices. I am a model builder, so minor ajustments and fine tuning are not seen as a problem.
Yes, you´re right, after more and more production is going to the far east, the quality also started to suffer at Märklin. Thanks god almost all my Märklin models are from an era where most (or all?) production was still in Germany, so they are really superb. But yes, the prices in the last years rose so high that it became difficult for normal people to maintain that hobby, and I absolutely don´t like that process.
About curves: yes, in America everything is bigger and has more space, but still I don´t know why the models are not able to handle smaller curves. I mean most people in the USA run them on bigger curves, so it will be ok anyway, but for people that love US models like me it´s very dissappointing that they can´t buy and run their favorite models just because of space issues.
And maybe you are right about US people don´t minding a little tinkering and tweaking. For me a locomotive must definetly perform 100% perfect when I buy her, because for that much money I expect that everything is alright and that the loco runs and functions without any problems, of course right out of the box.
But what I really worry about is the fact, that we pay more and more for the models, and prices are constantly rising, but in the same time quality is getting worse and worse, because they are produced in those cheap countries where good quality is a rare thing to find. But why? It´s just frustrating on both sides. I wonder where this all will end up one day...
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd this is fine with most American modelers, in general we have no interest in running such big power around such sharp curves - it looks ridiculous and unrealistic. My minimum radius is 36" and I won'trun a 2-10-2.
It may look unrealistic and ridiculous to you, because you are a modeler and you know in what area and structures the Big Boys have been in service. But most people I think they don´t care (like me too), because they simply buy some trains because they like their looks and just want to play with them and run them and enjoy them in action, no matter what radius they go through.
Responses to a couple issues raised above:
MTH 4-8-4's will indeed negotiate 22" radius but being such a rigid, long wheelbase engine, even with sprung drivers, they absolutely DO NOT like any irregularities in the track curvature--a slight horizontal kink can actually derail them as well as a slight vertical kink--or superelevation in the wrong direction. I have 26" radius curves, and I had to fix my track because it had no superelevation as originally built (all Kato track). In a couple areas, I had to adjust it to provide minimal superelevation and to smooth out the kinks. One other fix for the MTH 4-8-4 would be to add weight to the front of the boiler, as it was usually the front driver that lifted off on my curves.
Apparently BLI designs more lateral motion into their valve gear.
Regarding Bowser kit locomotives of the past: They were considered advanced kits that took a minimum of 40 hours for the simplest steam engine and sometimes much more. That's also why they sold separately assembled sets of valve gear--for those customers who couldn't or didn't like to rivet the valve gear together.
Where painting of Bowser or older brass imports was concerned, some customers opted to only paint boilers (drive wheels eventually came blackened) and many people would apply power to the mechanism and paint it while the drivers were moving. I have seen plenty of older Bowser engines and some brass models that were painted in this manner.
Though I would disassemble a mechanism to paint it, there are folks who won't do that for the disadvantages cited above--even today.
John
Well, for one thing, there are differences in the way models are constructed. I have a number of Roco and Fleischmann locos. All the engines with tenders have the drive components in the tenders, all of which are smaller than tenders of US locos of the same wheel arrangement. The Roco and Fleischmann locomotives, being free-wheeling, are designed with a lot of lateral motion so they can negotiate smaller curves. US practice has always been to have the motor and gearing in the locomotive itself. There have been a few exceptions, but these have all been imported engines and those often had the motor was in the tender with a long shaft through the cab to a gearbox in the locomotive.
Then there's the issue of sheer size, not just of the loco, but the loco and tender combination. The German BR44, while it wasn't the largest steam locomotive ever built in Germany, was the standard heavy freight engine in post WWII Germany. Compare it to a Pennsylvania RR I1sa. The only thing the BR44 and the I1sa have in common is the wheel arrangement. The Pennsylvania railroad used tenders on many of its 2-10-0's that were as long or longer than the locomotive.
From what I recall, the largest German turntable I ever heard of was 29 meters in length (about 95 feet) and most were 26 meters or less
Edit: sorry, I inadvertantly hit the post button. Continuing;;;;
which is 85 feet and a few inches. Those are not large turntables by US standards. A Big Boy required a 135 ft (41.15 meters) turntable. 120 ft turntables were quite common and any railroad that ran engines larger than 2-8-2's and 4-6-2's required turntables in the 90 to100 foot range.
Sheer size is an issue when it comes to curve radius, especially when you take into account the length of the rigid wheelbase. In another post, you mentioned a T&P 2-10-4 and an SP 4-10-2. Even though these engines have the same number of drive wheels as a BR44 2-10-0, the rigid wheel base is longer mostly because the drive wheels on both are significantly larger than those on the BR44. If I recall correctly, the drivers on a BR44 are 1400 mm in diameter. On the 2-10-4 and 4-10-2, the drive wheels are 1600 mm in diameter. The 4-10-2 also was built with greater spacing between the first and second drive axles to accommodate the drive rod from the center cylinder. In any case, these locos are not the largest rigid wheel base loco to run on US rails. That honor goes to the Santa Fe 5001 and 5011 class 2-10-4's which had drive wheel diameters of 74" (1880 mm). There's no way on God's green earth to make an engine that size go around 14" curves, especially not with a 52 foot long tender.
In any case, as I recall, even Roco recommends curves of greater than 14" radius on its larger engines. IIRC, it's 415 mm (about 17") on both the BR01 4-6-2 and BR44 2-10-0.
UP 4-12-2MTH 4-8-4's will indeed negotiate 22" radius but being such a rigid, long wheelbase engine, even with sprung drivers, they absolutely DO NOT like any irregularities in the track curvature--a slight horizontal kink can actually derail them as well as a slight vertical kink--or superelevation in the wrong direction. I have 26" radius curves, and I had to fix my track because it had no superelevation as originally built (all Kato track). In a couple areas, I had to adjust it to provide minimal superelevation and to smooth out the kinks. One other fix for the MTH 4-8-4 would be to add weight to the front of the boiler, as it was usually the front driver that lifted off on my curves.
Hey John,
I absolutely agree with you on that. And I really see that I can forget the idea of ever running my GS-4 properly, especially now when I read that even with your 26 inch curves, you had to fix your track and stuff like that. I really don´t understand why MTH then made an engine which is so sensitive to such small irregularities. On my layout I have 18 inch and 22 inch curves. To be honest the MTH GS-4 can also handle the 18 inch curves, but only at pretty low speed. The 22 inch curves my GS-4 can handle a bit faster, but only up to speed step 45 out of 128. At anything over step 45 it will derail when reaching the curves or a switch. I also added weight into the engine boiler. Actually I added so much weight into the GS-4 boiler that it filled out every free place possible! The boiler is now packed to the maximum, but it didn´t help not even a little bit! The GS-4 is still derailing as if there wouldn´t be so much additional weight inside it.
@ Andre
Thanks for your info but it was nothing that I didn´t know before, since I´m also pretty much informed about my favorite engines. Of course you cannot compare a german BR 44 2-10-0 with a PRR I1sa 2-10-0, the american engines are bigger in every aspect. And I know that the SP 4-10-2 and T&P 2-10-4 are a lot bigger than the german BR 44 2-10-0, and I know it´s not just because of the additional pilot truck or trailing truck wheels. I own a german BR 45 2-10-2, which was Germany´s biggest steam engine, and even this one looks like a dwarf in comparison to a SP GS-4 4-8-4.
But I definetly know that if Märklin would ever produce a SP 4-10-2 or a T&P 2-10-4, they would produce it in a way that it could handle even 14 inch curves, even if they got a longer rigid wheelbase than a Big Boy which is articulated of course and therefore can handle curves probably easier than a 2-10-4/4-10-2.
By the way: I never owned and never will own a steam loco with tender drive! All my Märklin steamers have their motor also in the loco, not the tender. I think tender drives are really $h!+
And I also don´t have any 14 inch curves on my layout. Only 18 and 22 inch, but obviously it´s still far to small for US standards...
Ok, I think we talked a lot around the actual topic...
Andre,
Thank you for being at least the one other person who understands the issues of rigid wheel base on steam locomotives and its effect on their ability to go around curves, real and model.
I have explained this at length in the past, often to no good end, thanks for taking a turn at it.
And, thank you for addressing the issue of how much larger, in general, North American steam was compaired to Europe.
Everything you explained even applies to different regions of the US and differrent opperating conditions found on different lines, let alone those in different countries.
The B&O or the PRR would have had no good use for a Big Boy or a GS4. I guess this is often too technical for many to be interested in or take the time to understand.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Andre, Thank you for being at least the one other person who understands the issues of rigid wheel base on steam locomotives and its effect on their ability to go around curves, real and model. I have explained this at length in the past, often to no good end, thanks for taking a turn at it. And, thank you for addressing the issue of how much larger, in general, North American steam was compaired to Europe. Everything you explained even applies to different regions of the US and differrent opperating conditions found on different lines, let alone those in different countries. The B&O or the PRR would have had no good use for a Big Boy or a GS4. I guess this is often too technical for many to be interested in or take the time to understand. Sheldon
You're welcome, Sheldon, but I have a feeling that we're both attempting to empty our bladders into the teeth of an F5 hurricane (that's about as politely as I can say it).
I think one of the problems with some (though certainly not all) of our overseas friends is that they're used to state run railways that had a high degree of standardization even in the steam era. The Pennsy may have billed themselves rather arrogantly as The Standard Railroad Of The World, but they were the only ones adhering to those standards. Every one else had their own standards. As late as 1950, there were 127 class 1 railroads as defined by the ICC. http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/44889.aspx
One could probably make a compelling argument that US railroads would have been better off with some standard locomotive designs, but that's not the way things happened. I think USRA designed locomotives are among the best ever built given the limitations of early 20th Century technology. Unfortunately, my favorite railroad, the SP, would have nothing to do with them. Neither would the Santa Fe. Oh well.
It isn't just the US, either. North American locomotives were larger than their counterparts elsewhere. It's just a fact of life. Perhaps if South Africa had used 56 1/2" gauge instead of 42", there might have been some competition. Even so, a lot of SAR "narrow" gauge engines were certainly larger than their British counterparts and rivalled some on the Continent.
Atlas Ohhh, if you only made steam in HO. You too, Kato.
Kato Never had an Atlas or Kato give problems right out of the box.
BLI They seem to be a bit more 'iffy' to me than those above.
Proto 2K Really can't remember a mechanical problem with any of mine.
Athearn RTR Some have good luck with these. I've never owned a good one. That's bad when you can't even give ONE smilie. OH... the detail is pretty good.
Bachmann Spectrum A bit light weight but I love my Consolidated.
Jarrell
andrechapelon...The 4-10-2 also was built with greater spacing between the first and second drive axles to accommodate the drive rod from the center cylinder. In any case, these locos are not the largest rigid wheel base loco to run on US rails. That honor goes to the Santa Fe 5001 and 5011 class 2-10-4's which had drive wheel diameters of 74" (1880 mm)...
Andre, steamlocomotive.com lists the driver base of the AT&SF Texas Types in the 5001 series as 26' 20". That same site says the UP 9000's had a driver wheelbase of over 30'.
-Crandell
selector andrechapelon...The 4-10-2 also was built with greater spacing between the first and second drive axles to accommodate the drive rod from the center cylinder. In any case, these locos are not the largest rigid wheel base loco to run on US rails. That honor goes to the Santa Fe 5001 and 5011 class 2-10-4's which had drive wheel diameters of 74" (1880 mm)... Andre, steamlocomotive.com lists the driver base of the AT&SF Texas Types in the 5001 series as 26' 20". That same site says the UP 9000's had a driver wheelbase of over 30'. -Crandell
I forgot about the 4-12-2's. I should have said longest rigid wheelbase 10 coupled engine.
My bad. OTOH, you've just made an even more compelling argument why long rigid wheelbase engines can't go around tight radius curves. Or at least shouldn't be engineered in an attempt to do so as with the MTH UP 9000.
Sharp curves and long rigid wheelbases don't go together. SP's 4-10-2's, which were designed for Donner Pass, had to be moved to other divisions with easier curves as they would do nasty things to the rails.
"Shouldn't be engineered in an attempt to do so as with the MTH UP 9000"
Why not?? Some of us always wanted an affordable 4-12-2 that could do "moderately" sized curves.
Actually, my MTH 4-12-2's are the best running steamers I've had in many years. Yes, on my 26.375" minimum radius Kato track they overhang and look much like a "bull moose" UP 2-8-8-0 articulated--but on the long straight portions they look fantastic--and they run as well or better than ANY engine I've ever owned.