After a couple of big disappointments with the performance of recently purchased HO steam products I've pretty much decided stick with diesel locomotives exclusively. I already have a bunch of them (from FT's through SD45's and almost everything in between) except for a couple accurately detailed and smooth running A and B Sharknose diesels. The closest I've ever seen were several roadnames put out by Roco a few years ago, but even they had a few problems. Wouldn't you think that manufacturers like Athearn, Walthers, and the rest of them would be better off offering motive power that would look and run right on average layouts instead of pushing Big Boys and Alleghenies (which only a small percentage of layouts can reasonably accomodate)?
And while I'm at it, I noticed in the most recent issue of MR there was a layout that featured an entire fleet of early switch engines (H-44's maybe?). They were sold under the Walthers Trainline brand years ago and were really great lookers and performers. The dies for the engine castings must still be around somewhere and I'm surpised that whoever has them hasn't reintroduced that interesting looking model (In my opinion we already have enough SW1500's and Geeps etc. to last several lifetimes).
I don't know about you, but I for one am keeping my fingers crossed.
Dave
Atlanta, GA
I have a couple of the Walthers FM H 12-44 switchers that you mentioned but they were not Trainline models. Built by Roco, they do look and run very nice. The tooling may belong to Roco and not Walthers. I also have a couple of the Roco / Model Power Sharks bought off the bay. These also run very well, although the shell is a little dated. Some detailing helps a lot. I do not know how well the later ER models version of the shark's runs.
Jim
A way I got some sweet operating Baldwin Sharks (RF-15's) takes a little work. I went on Ebay and bid on some old Mantua/Tyco die cast metal body sharks. If the mechanism is no good/burnt out/missing, contact Bear Locomotive in New Jersey about a new drive now marketed by them under the old name "Hobbytown of Boston." The body shell itself weighs just slightly over a pound, and the Hobbytown drive runs all the wheels, plus has been updated to isolate the motor frame from the loco frame for easier conversion to DCC. These have some serious pulling power. To look decent, they WILL need repainting/redecalling.
http://bearlocomo.zoovy.com/
Plus some minor redetailing work will convert them to an RF-16.
The matching B unit shells are harder to come by, I don't think there were a lot of them made as compared to the A units.
Can't help you much on the Fairbanks-Morse units, though
Like you, I too desparately wanted a GOOD running pair of Sharks. What I ended up doing was using a couple Atlas RS-11 chassis as a starting point. I removed the flywheel from one end and shortened the frame a scale 4-1/2 feet to get the correct wheel-base. Body mounts then had to be fabricated. The original Model Power shells were then extensively upgraded to bring them up to current detail standards. Now I have a pair of Sharks with the smooth running characteristics of an Atlas engine.
Sure, it was a fair bit of work - but it was a darn sight cheaper than a pair of the new Precision Scale units !!!
Mark.
¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ
That shows what can be accomplished when you put your mind to it.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
The E-R Models Sharknose now shares the same Roco drive as their FP-7.
It is a very good runner and come DCC ready.
http://www.gatewaynmra.org/dcc/engines/er-shark.htm
jimrice4449 wrote: I ran into two problems w/ the Roco drives. First the drive wheels are plastic hubs w/ metal rims. I run 40-50 car trains and those rims eventually got to where they'd slip off of the hubs.
I repaired a similar problem on my Roco / Model Power Sharks. I noticed on mine that the rear wheel set had a traction tire on it. On the same axle the wheel would slip and come out of gauge.
None of my fleet of Roco / Atlas manufactured GPs and SDs used this setup and I was sure with the weight, large can motor and low gearing it was not needed. I replaced the wheel with a spare wheel from one of my Roco / Atlas units.
I am not sure if this would have fixed your issue as I never ran that long of a consist but it worked for me.
Another interesting footnote is Model Power sold the units with 2 different drive trains that I am aware of.
One has low gearing and a large flywheel equipped motor.
The other had higher gearing without a flywheel. The body is very loose on the frame on this version. I have also seen "dummy" units with this frame. This version, from what I have heard is not as good a runner as the flywheel equipped / low gear version.
Before I replaced the entire chassis with an Atlas, I attempted to upgrade the the original drive. I replaced the original wheel-sets with some nickel-silver ones from NWSL. I don't need them anymore if anyone is interested. I have two full sets including both gears for the old and new drive. These are complete wheel / axle / gear assemblies. Contact me offline if interested.
Proto 1000 came out with some Sharks a while back that are supposed to run well. The have the Proto 2000 mechanism. The shell just isn't quite as nice.
Dave, you mentioned that you were disappointed with some recent steamer purchases. I'm just curious which ones you bought?
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
tstage wrote: Proto 1000 came out with some Sharks a while back that are supposed to run well. The have the Proto 2000 mechanism. The shell just isn't quite as nice.Tom
Are you SURE they were Sharks (RF-16) ??? I don't remember those - I would have bought a couple !!!
I never knew 12 wheel Sharks were built.
I guess they were unique to the Pennsy? No one has ever produced them in HO, unless there was a brass version.
Mark,
Sorry. I was thinking of the C-liners.
tstage wrote: Sorry. I was thinking of the C-liners. Tom
I bought an A-B set, and they're really nice. If only they would produce the Sharknose; there were more of them built than the C-Liners.
SteamFreak wrote: I never knew 12 wheel Sharks were built.I guess they were unique to the Pennsy? No one has ever produced them in HO, unless there was a brass version.
Yes, these were called "BP-20s".
I remember years ago (1990s or 1980s) a company produced a brass HO version of the BP20. Appearancewise, it was a beauty. Some of you with MRR back issues from then, might thumb through some of them and see the advertisement.
From what I have read, the prototype BP20 for Pennsy was the only passenger shark ever produced though I don't know how many Pennsy purchased. It's a shame that Baldwin had limited success with their carbodied diesels. Locomotive engineers reportedly found the cabs quite cramped. Mechanically, Baldwin diesels were "generally" less reliable than their EMD competition.
Still it's wonderful to know that the Shark is not extinct.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
AntonioFP45 wrote:Yes, these were called "BP-20s". I remember years ago (1990s or 1980s) a company produced a brass HO version of the BP20. Appearancewise, it was a beauty.
I remember years ago (1990s or 1980s) a company produced a brass HO version of the BP20. Appearancewise, it was a beauty.
Alco Models, an A-B set went for $480 on eBay about a month ago.
Miracle Castings (maybe aka Resin Unlimited ??) did resin castings for the BP20 including a resin chassis which was intended to utilize Athearn PA trucks, and lengthened driveshafts. This was before the P2K PA models came out; five years or so ago.
The BP20 was also called the BP3 as you can see in this diagram of a B unit:
http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=bp-3-b.gif&sel=die&sz=sm&fr=
And here's the BF15 or 'Freight Shark'.
http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=bf-4-a_before1950.gif&sel=die&sz=sm&fr=
And here's a BP20 A unit:
http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=bp-20-a.gif&sel=die&sz=sm&fr=
jeffrey-wimberly wrote: And here's a BP20 A unit:http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=bp-20-a.gif&sel=die&sz=sm&fr=
Wow. They were 80 feet long, 10 feet longer than the E8. That's one big loco.
The newer ER (still Roco) units have decent can motors with dual flywheels, and a DCC sockett. They run just as good as other late model offerings such as P2K, and Genesis. The paint color is good in my opinion, although they are still just a little rough in detial. They do have an issue that is difficult to correct if it bothers you as much as me. They have changed from the truck mounted couplers to body mount, proprietry units secured with serious friction pins, and they protrude very far from the body, as you can see in the pics in a previous post. Coupled together the gap was severe. It took me loads of time and "engineering" to get a marginal improvement, by fabricating new platforms for the rear and heavy filing and use of Kadee specilaty couplers on the front. My B unit is the older model with the loose shell. It has the truck mount couplers and takes up the rest of the space.
I also have a set of the older Roco units with the "large" can motor. They run very well for the period they were made. Except for the mounting, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference in the shells. In fact the older ones are very well done for the period. The trucks are not interchangeable with the new ER release, if they were I would put truck mount rear couplers on my new ones!
I picked up my old ones for $5-$15 at hobby shows and the new ones for $68 each through careful research of web vendors, ebay, and shows. I believe the older mechanisms are the same between Roco sharks, Alco FA, and F units.
Additionally I have an ABA set of BP20 resin kits they were marketed by Miracle Castings. I lucked into a deal on ebay, $150 for all three plus two powered Athearn P unit drives. It took almost three years to get that doing a search every day! I saw about 1 every four or five months and they usually went for over $100 each. I have not completed them, but I have done test fitting. I would say they are about a 6.5 skill level with "shake the box" freight cars being 1 and Bowser steam or F&C being 10 on my scale.
PRR was the only purchaser of DR 6-4-2000 passenger sharks.
1948PRR Additionally I have an ABA set of BP20 resin kits they were marketed by Miracle Castings. I lucked into a deal on ebay, $150 for all three plus two powered Athearn P unit drives. It took almost three years to get that doing a search every day! I saw about 1 every four or five months and they usually went for over $100 each. I have not completed them, but I have done test fitting. I would say they are about a 6.5 skill level with "shake the box" freight cars being 1 and Bowser steam or F&C being 10 on my scale.
I remember seeing those kits on Ebay, but I was unsure as to their quality. Did you ever complete them?
Here is a discussion I started recently on kitbashing a set of BP-20 locos utilizing a Proto 1K chassis from their DL-109 locos....with photos of my efforts thus far
http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31120
(not sure how to add a web link)
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
Sharks? 12 years ago I happened on a pair of Alco Models brass sharks, and wound up repowering them with A-Line motors , adding weights and Decoders. They've been good runners, even with the KMT Drive tower in the rear and the thru the tank driveshaft powering the front truck.
After paint and detailing, they made a pretty respectable pair..
Yeah, they may be noisy, saves me from buying Tsunami's for them!!
Someday I may retire them and go plastic, or just save them for special "excursion service".
Karl
NCE über alles!
One of the first Model Railroaders I ever purchased, back in 1961 or so had drawings and photos of the Baldwin Passenger Shark.
I was always interested in Baldwin built locomotives, because my grandfather worked for Baldwin Locomotive, Baldwin power was quite common around where i grew up, and once on the railroad, I ran them. The Sharks, both passenger an freight were gone by the time i hired on the PRR, but I do remember seeing the freight versions on occasion.
They were designed by Raymond Lowey (sp), the passenger version at 2000 HP was the competition to the EMD E7, and Alco PA/PB. The freight Sharks were competitors to the FA1/FA2 F3 and F7. Baldwins could out pull anything on the road due to the use of Westinghouse Traction motors, but were flawed, in that no two were alike internally, and they all leaked water excessively, among other things.
The BP20's last stand (like the K4 4-6-2; was the NY&LB between South Amboy and Bay Head, in NJ.
The BF15 and BF16's last satnd was in the Coal fields of Western PA, and on the Delmarva beetween Wilmington, DE and Little Creek, VA.
It is my hope that BLI will do a BP20, as well as the anounced, but not produced BF16.
Joe
Just to keep the designations clear I believe what the Pennsy classified as a BP20 is what Baldwin actually classed as a DR-6-4-2000 of which the Pennsy had the only ones with the "Sharknose" carbody. Eighteen units IIRC.
The same classification was given to the NYC "Babyface" Baldwins with essentially the same guts under the hood. Baldwin had quite a few one-of-a-kind locomotives back then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_DR-6-4-20
Pretty interesting stuff... And YES I too want to see a decent model of the RF-16! It would fill a long awaited void!
Happy modelling! Ed
Between the beginning of this thread and its resurrection, I believe Bachmann brought out a Baldlwin Shark RF-16. Don't know anything about it, but they are available.
Gary
garya Between the beginning of this thread and its resurrection, I believe Bachmann brought out a Baldlwin Shark RF-16. Don't know anything about it, but they are available.
I seen a A-B-A set of the Bachmann Sharks and they appeared to be smooth runners.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
While this post has not been commented in for well over 5 years, I just acquired 3 Pennsylvania Railroad Baldwin RF-16 Shark Nose DC Diesel engines / locomotives distributed by Model Power but made by Roco. The Model Power item numbers are as follows:
721 - Pennsylvana #5772 Powered A-Unit721 - Pennsylvana #5772 Powered A-Unit741 - Pennsylvana (Unnumbered) Powered B-Unit
I acquired these from an antique mall in my town for a reasonable fee. Individually, the engines run very well but are a bit noisy when using a Bachmann DC HO-scale power transformer. When I add a second engine to the track, the speed of both engines decreases drammatically. When I add the third engine, the 3 of them crawl even at full power and are not able to make it up any grade when all 3 are in a consist.
I did some research and discovered that PRR purchased 72 A units and 31 B units, making their purchases the majority of the 160 RF-16's that Baldwin built. I have several other types of PRR engines and rolling stock but am in a quandary as to whether or not I should keep these engines or not. So, I thought I would chime in here and propose the question to you folks and ask what you would do if you were me? Would you keep these 3 engines or get rid of them?
Additional info: I have lots of DC and DCC equipped engines and lots of PRR rolling stock including quite a few with the same hornhook couplers that are on the Shark Nose diesels and just as many upgraded items with knuckle couplers on them. My layouts can operate in DC or DCC mode. I prefer DCC but at the same time haven't rid myself over many of the non-DCC engines yet. If I could get all 3 of these engines to run simultaneously without the dramatic power loss, then I would keep them. But since all 3 will not run well together, I'm thinking of getting rid of 1 of the A units or all of 3 of them.
Any ideas or suggestions?
As I am a new member I do not think that I can upload photos or videos, but tonight I will be taking photos and videos and will probably start by posting those to my own website in case I decide to put these up for sale in the near future.
I did read one of the replies where someone else stated they ran more than one unit without very little power draw, but that is not my experience. I feel that if I attempted to convert these engines to DCC, that might be a bit too expensive and involved based on the fact that these engines are definitely not DCC ready and don't even appear to be DCC friendly.
Thanks in advance for your comments and suggestions...