While reading Eric White's article in Feb 2016 MR i noticed something. The trailing truck appears to be the correct Delta trailing truck for MEC 617. Which brings up a different problem. I now need a new trailing truck if I am to renumber this one into the USRA series, because MECs USRA mikes didnt have Delta trailing trucks.
On a different note the headlight appears correct for the railroad, something I did not mention from my previous article. Additionally I can confirm that the locomotive does not run all that fast (I dont have a scale speedometer so I dont have a number for comparison) and the chuff rate is too high. I plan to try the reccomended CV 116 value (see FEB MR pg 73 righthand column for the value) to correct the chuff rate and report the results later.
I will also look into adding weight into the smokebox (there doesnt appear to be anything in there in the photos in MR) and into the domes on top of the boiler. I'll post pictures when I get it appart.
gatrhumpy They did do research, but applied the locomotive to as many roadnames to appeal to as many people as possible. You should detail it to how you want to and reletter/renumber it.
They did do research, but applied the locomotive to as many roadnames to appeal to as many people as possible. You should detail it to how you want to and reletter/renumber it.
I maintain that either their research was inadequate or a delibrate decision was made to number them outside of this group USRA allocation group.
BMMECNYC Even though MEC was allocated USRA orginals (621-626), Bachmann inexplicably chose to not letter them as such (at least the valve gear would have been correct).
Even though MEC was allocated USRA orginals (621-626), Bachmann inexplicably chose to not letter them as such (at least the valve gear would have been correct).
But this post is more about the operating characteristics than the detail errors. I have come to expect detail errors, but not poor operating. As a side note, I have noticed that it seems that either the tender or the drive wheels are not picking up power consistantly. I will be disecting the tender to have a look at wiring.
I too really wanted to like the new B-man light mikado, but I just didn't see anything that made me want one. Oh well, more money in my pocket for other stuff.
Trainman440 Nice review! Also, the sanddome is oversized. Charles
Nice review!
Also, the sanddome is oversized.
Charles
Actually its pretty close for the MEC non-USRA mikes, slightly too far back on the boiler, but around the right size. MEC mikes had large sand domes.
Andrew
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modeling the PRR & NYC in HO
Youtube Channel: www.youtube.com/@trainman440
Instagram (where I share projects!): https://www.instagram.com/trainman440
The new Bachmann Light Mikados (and I emphasize light) weigh in right around the Athearn Genesis Mikados (Bachmann 11.6 oz, Athearn 12 oz). The drive wheels are not sprung vertically, but do have some side to side play. Bachmann Mike will pull a 10 car train of empty accurail hoppers with metal wheelsets up a 2% grade with minimal wheelslip (to get that figure I had to hand pick my best free-rolling under NMRA specified weight 4 70 ton and 6 55ton hopper cars to shoehorn this thing up the grade). The tender power pick up is the cheap single wiper that has become standard on Bachmann steam. They did however put a washer between the truck screw and the wiper so that the wiper maintains contact with the screw. The rear coupler hangs low and I noticed that the coupler box screw is not fully driven in (flat head, I can see the bevel) and it appears to be at a slight angle. It does have working LED headlight and back up lights. In the case of the one I purchased, it apears to have the wrong valve gear for the locomotive number (MEC 617). Even though MEC was allocated USRA orginals (621-626), Bachmann inexplicably chose to not letter them as such (at least the valve gear would have been correct). The tender capacities are incorrect; Bachmann lists them at 10tons coal and 5400 gal water. MEC 617 was equipped with 20Ton coal and 8000 gal capacity tender (source: MEC locomotive register, 1947). The USRA originals carried more: 16ton, 10000gal (source see above). The preceding 2 figures are the as scrapped conditions, not as built, I chose these due to the fact that the locomotive has the late 1940s speed lettering. And continuing on that subject of speed lettering, the cab numbers are compressed. I feel this thing is slightly over priced for the amount of attention to detail and research done. I feel like I'm not asking for the world here, but maybe a slight amount of effort put into research if you are going to invest in new tooling.