HO Articulateds

[Anonymous]

My probem is that I like all articulateds! Well, most of them. Ok, the big ones that everyone else knows and recognizes.

[AggroJones]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Texas Zepher

The NP/GN/SP&S Challengers were unique because of the enormous fire box, so it seems unlikely they will ever be done. Another one not listed is the GN 2-6-8-0.

But that one locomotive can be done and legitimately lettered for 3 roads. Plus I hear people wishing for it on every train forum I visit. There is intrest for it. I only hope BLI takes notice.

[PennsyHoosier]

GO M2!!!!!!!!!!

[Virginian]

I voted for the Y6b because that was all that was up there I want, but I'd rather have a Y6 or Y6a, or even more (drool) a VGN AE 2-10-10-2 or a Proto priced AG 2-6-6-6.

[Texas Zepher]

The NP/GN/SP&S Challengers were unique because of the enormous fire box, so it seems unlikely they will ever be done. Another one not listed is the GN 2-6-8-0.

[AggroJones]

Since there are more new members, they need a chance to vote.

[twhite]

Aggrojones: Right--Baldwin for the Cab-Forward, ALCO for the NP Yellowstone, though Baldwin ended up building the remainder of the NP 2-8-8-4 fleet. Always thought that was interesting, not the first time ALCO would come up with something and Baldwin would take it over. Guess they were better at underbidding with the railroads than ALCO on some items. I can think of two Rio Grande locos that were proposed by ALCO and ended up being built by Baldwin--the 1600 series 3-cylnder Mountains, and the 1700 Northerns. Baldwin must have had spies everywhere, bless 'em.

[AggroJones]

Borockhard and twhite, the first 4-8-8-2 Cab-forward and the NP 2-8-8-4 both came out in 1928.

[Anonymous]

Other: D&H 4-6-6-4, Reading 2-8-8-0, MEC/B&M 2-6-6-2

[twhite]

Bo: Yah, me too. I think this might have come about with the original cab-forwards, which were a 2-8-8-2 design (AC 1-2-3). Let's see--2-8-+8-2 equals two Consolidations with one wheel arrangement running backwards. Sounds like SP to me. After all, they called their 2-10-2's "Decks" because under no circumstances were they going to admit that one of their heavy freight locomotives was based upon a wheel arrangement initiated by that ol' debbil Santa Fe. But after all is said and done, I totally agree with you, Yellowstone or not, those late SP Cab-forwards (AC6 and up) were some of the most stunning locomotives I've ever seen. I grew up with them. Heck, I was almost 12 before I realized that other railroads ran their articulateds with the cab in back! I wondered what their problem was.

[Anonymous]

I thought "Articulated Consolidation" meant like a double 2-8-0. Like two 2-8-0s under one boiler.

[twhite]

True, the stats are almost the same, down to the TE (124,000lbs) on the AC-9 and the AC-6 and up Cab-Forwards. As to the firebox beginning at the 2nd driver, the same is true for the WP 2-8-8-2's and the D&RGW L-131's. What I'm getting at is that the 4-wheel truck under the firebox and cab are for TRACKING, not so much support of an enlarged firebox, as was the case on the original NP Yellowstone that burned a very low-grade coal, or the Missabe road beauties that burned better coal but needed the extended firebox for sheer pulling power (148,000lbs TE, or somethwere in there). But, hey, call them Yellowstones if you want, just not around old SP engineers or firemen. Actually, the term AC means 'Articulated Consolidation'. Now figure THAT one out--I sure haven't!

[Anonymous]

So your saying the Cab-forwards aren't backwards yellowstones? If the Cab-forward isn't a backwards yellowstone, than how come the numbers match up so well with the AC-9, a "true" yellowstone? This 2-8-8-4 has most of the same stats as our 4-8-8-2, but she's facing the opposite direction. Plus the edge of the firebox is sitting on the 2nd driver from the cab, just like all other Yellowstones. And isn't a "Yellowstone" an enlarged 2-8-8-2 with a 4 wheel truck added? Even if the ....4 was for tracking, Forwards still had a similar distance between front driver edge and tip of cab.
Sure does have a lot in common with being a backwards Yellowstone.

Backwards Yellowstone or not, they are quite the machine.

[twhite]

BoRockhard: I agree with you totally on the late Cab-forwards--they were some of the most beautiful articulateds ever built, I grew up with them on Donner Pass. However, they were NOT Yellowstones, even backward ones. They were actually designed as 2-8-8-2's, the four-wheel pilot truck was for tracking purposes, not to support an enlarged firebox (like the Missabe or NP's, both coal-burners). SP DID have a true Yellowstone, their AC-9 'Cab-backwards' which was built by Lima during WWII (Baldwin built all of the cab-forwards) and used by the SP originally as coal-burners on their Golden State line between El Paso TX and Tucumcari, NMEX. After the war, they were converted to oil and sent north where they worked the SP Modoc line as helpers between Sparks NV and Aturas, CA. I saw one working a freight out of Madeline when I was a kid, and was REALLY surprised that SP actually turned a Cab-Forward around and was running it the wrong way. Handsome devils, though, especially with their 'Daylight ' type skyline casing.

[Anonymous]

Good topic.

I voted for any of the late Cab-forwards. These are the best looking yellowstones (well technically not). Georgeous BACKWARDS yellowstones. I would find an AC-11 in brass, but money and radi restrictions stump me.

[AggroJones]

QUOTE: Originally posted by nfmisso

QUOTE: Originally posted by TEFFY

The bad thing about using SANTA FE prototype locomotive on my fictional "Almont Nothing" is the lack of 'ticks since the Santa Fe only had two classes. They had the monster 2-10-10-2 and the N&W's 2-8-8-2.

Bob;

Here are a couple classes you missed:

Too bad ATSF didn't have modern (Post WWII) articulateds. Look at their other big steamers. A Santa Fe designed big articulated, can you imagine? A challenger or yellowstone with those good looks? Cool.......

[twhite]

I read a mention that Athearn was producing a Rio Grande Challenger. Actually, this locomotive is just a duplicate of the Alco UP Challenger that was forced upon the Rio Grande during WWII when locomotive designs were frozen by the War Board. the Rio Grande didn't want them (and only leased them) because they were not as powerful as the road's own Baldwin-built L-105'S. After the War, they were all sold to the Clinchfield. So if you're looking for a Rio Grande Challenger--a REAL one built by Baldwin--you're pretty much stuck with brass, right now. That's why I sometimes get a little ticked with manufacturers. Not EVERY 4-6-6-4 was a UP prototype, just as not every 2-8-8-2 was built for the N&W.

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by aussiesteve

QUOTE: Originally posted by aussiesteve

I'd like to see an Australian AD60 garret 4-8-4+4-8-4, you yanks have way too many of your style articulateds available already.[:D]

[(-D][(-D][(-D] The Model Gods are smiling, if you want to check out a different type of articulated soon to be available in RTR form, look here http://eureka.m.bigpondhosting.com/ [:D][:D][:D]

Now I can get off my [soapbox]

Amazing what you can find out when you start looking at older posts. An AD-60 in plastic. Who'd a thunk it? And the early order price comes in about about $500 USD given that the Aussie dollar is about $.72

That is one cool looking engine.

Plus it has the advantage that both engines were designed to swivel.

Andre

[Dbcxyz123]

Norfolk Western Y6b 2-8-8-2
N&W ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-------------------------
=|===|=
=|===|= Norfolk
=|===|= And
=|===|= Western
=|===|=

[Dbcxyz123]

[:D]NORFOLK & WESTERN ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![:D]

=|===|=
=|===|= Norfolk
=|===|= And
=|===|= Western
=|===|=

[LuthierTom]

Other: N&W Z1b 2-6-6-2 ca. 1955.

[Anonymous]

HI NIGEL:

You're right I didn't know that the Santa Fe ever had any 2-6-6-2's. Just looking at the design and the class numbers they are old, like me.

DICKIEE:

Welcome back. When I got back in after a twenty year absence (had to raise kids and money was tight) I was very astounded as to what had developed. My test track was a 1X12X15' long and I used that for nine months while I designed my current layout. It gave me a chance to build cars, relearn to handlay track, find out about Digitrax, and test my ability to program decoders. The test track was no "timesaver" but it was a chance to brush up on skills that I hadn't used in a long time. When I started my current layout I gave it to my nephew and hope it fires an interest in him

Thanks for the information and remember SANTA FE ALL THE WAY
Bob

[Anonymous]

I do know, Athearn is releasing the Challenger in UP, D&RGW and Clinchfield versions with sound and DCC/DC with its own wireless remote.
Ch

[nfmisso]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TEFFY

The bad thing about using SANTA FE prototype locomotive on my fictional "Almont Nothing" is the lack of 'ticks since the Santa Fe only had two classes. They had the monster 2-10-10-2 and the N&W's 2-8-8-2.

Bob;

Here are a couple classes you missed:

[Dbcxyz123]

[:D]Norfolk Western Y6b 2-8-8-2[:D]


=|===|=
=|===|= Norfolk
=|===|= And
=|===|= Western
=|===|=

[dickiee]

TO:
teffy, Trackster, JimdeBree and twhite,

AMEN!!!!

I completely agree with you guys about the "New" articulated steam locomotives... I just recently got a Trix "Big Boy" and a Lionel "Challenger" after being out of the hobby for about 20 years and I don't even have a layout to run them on, yet. I did set up an 8 foot board with track on it to test them to see if they even ran or not. They are nothing if not just the neatest thing I believe I ever saw and heard. I am looking forward to receiving a BLI 4-8-2 "Mountain" as soon as they release them. It's all I can do to keep from mortgaging the homestead so that I could have all of them. Of course, my wife probably would put her foot down if I suggested that. That being the case I will still try to buy as many of the new offerings as the budget will allow. I can't believe my good fortune to come back into the hobby at this particular time. I hope they keep 'em coming! The more different models they make the better I like it!

dickiee

[Anonymous]

The bad thing about using SANTA FE prototype locomotive on my fictional "Almont Nothing" is the lack of 'ticks since the Santa Fe only had two classes. They had the monster 2-10-10-2 and the N&W's 2-8-8-2. I've got two of the Proto 2-8-8-2's and I'm about like cp5415, I can't justify these two locos on my 13' X 15' layout. Of course my towns are also not 35 miles apart. I don't run these locos to see how long a train they will pull. I give them 12 to 15 cars and watch them go. I also have a complete Balboa Daylight and Lark train that are pulled buy a proto E-7 A-B-B-A and spectrum SP 4-8-2. When I run the passenger trains their isn't a lot of room left over but, that's the trouble with my layout size.

It irritates me to read Tony Koster and his "no tracks parallel to the edge of the table" and then when he builds he does just that. Some of our other gurus tell us that we have to have a 50+ car train to use the big locos - BULL. I have a 2.5% grade and use locos from PFM's 2-8-0 to the proto 2-8-8-2. When the wife and I were on vacation this past Janurary, we were driving through New Mexico or Arizonia and we saw a train, I kid you not, six diesels and four cars. The only problem I see with my layout is my 2-10-4's won't fit on my turntable. The five finger turntable has to turn them around. Of course I just have some facing east and some facing west.

I have a sign in the train room that reads "If you don't like the order in which these trains are operated, please notice the mistle toe attached to the owners shirt tail". I'm in this hobby for fun, if I want stress I can go to work, I've got two employees that think that is their job.

Have a blessed day and rememberSANTA FE ALL THE WAY

Bob

[Anonymous]

I have a Trix Big Boy and a BLI cab forward. Even though I model contenporary railraoding, I love these two locos. We have a lot of fan excursions on my layout.

[Anonymous]

Rivarossi"s Challenger #3985 is my favorite Articulated of the only two that I currently have, the other one is the RIV. N&W 2-8-8-2 Mallet, the older version with deep wheel flanges, and the antiquated drive, The Challenger is the new style, with the new drive, and shallow flanges, It will pull the paper off the wall, and looks good doing it, a very smooth running, and powerful locomotive, I am ready to get my hands on one of the new cab forwards by BLI, and would also like to acquire one of the Life Like Heritage 2-8-8-2 locomotives, I love watching all the driving rods movement of the HO Scale articulateds.


Mac

[AggroJones]

QUOTE: Originally posted by AggroJones

Okay CP-Gordon, what medium sized steamers do you think have selling potential?

A few I think.......

USRA 4-6-2B
Southern Ps-4 4-6-2
CP Royal 4-6-4
Great Northern 0-8 2-8-2
NYC L4 4-8-2

Oh yeah.

Southern Pacific P-8 4-6-2 (a least 1 is still operating)
the Frisco 4-8-2 #1522 (ran recently on excursions)