I need some help from all you model RR pros. I am looking for models of New York Central 4-6-0 Class F-12 Ten Wheelers. I know GEM imported them some years ago in brass but they are very difficult to find. There was a company called Railworks which has since become Custom Crown Imports which I heard was going to make a run of these engines but I can’t find any info on CCI on the Net. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I might find a NYC 4-6-0 Class F-12? I have scoured the Net and scoured e-bay to no avail.
Which brings me to an interesting point. Why is it so hard to find models of engines like the class F-12 which were built in far greater numbers than engines like the 4-8-4 ‘Niagra’ yet you can’t find any F-12’s but there are more Niagaras than we know what to do with? This is very frustrating to me and it seems like many manufacturers miss the boat on this. Anybody else feel this way?
That’s a tough go, Surfstud. The only thing even remotely resembling the F-12, that I know of, is the generic Bachmann 63" drivered 4-6-0. To make a specific F-12 from it would be quite a task, almost like building one from scratch. Though they appear to be making more smaller engines as of late, there’s also a spotty quality problem with Bachmann, it seems. Not many other options, I don’t think. And the old Gem engines can’t hold a candle to a newer P2k or BLI product, I’ll bet.
As a model railroader for almost 40 years, I never thought I’d get tired of seeing 4-6-4s, Big Boys, Niagras, 2-8-8-2s, PRR K4’s and other big steam. I think the reason we have so many large steam engines is because they are an impressive sight, no doubt. Familiarity may be another issue, everyone knows “Big Boy” or “Hudson”, I guess. But what the heck is an F-12 or a B-10? There are likely other purely marketing issues that drive the choices of prototypes for manufacturers. Maybe it’s just easier to build a good-running, larger engine (bigger motor, etc). Whatever it is, they seem to be selling.
Make as many Niagras as they want, I still can’t fit 'em on my layout!! But I’d buy 2 or 3 B-10s (and an F-12) if BLI for example, would just build 'em.
The Bachmann Spectrum doesn’t look anything CLOSE to an F-12; it’s more of a P-series low-drivered freight 4-6-0.
Athabasca Shops made (makes?) a brass kit for an F-12 in HO: http://www.athabascashops.com/
The kit is based off of the MR article on scratchbuilding the engine, from between October 1997 and May 1998.
If you want something at least “close”, look at the old Roundhouse 4-6-0. While it’s not really close either, it’s at least a better starting point than the Bachmann engine.
Beats me why the fancy, huge and rare engines are available. But then again, I have no ide why there are twelve manufacturers making F-units either.
LOL! Yea u can get an F unit pretty easy these days. I did find someone who would build an F-12 for me but it’s BIG BUCKS. The closest thing I have found is actually the K-11 Pacific. From the front, it looks alot like an F-12 4-6-0 but the wheel arrangement is all wrong (obviously).
I know the big engines get all the attention and I’ll even have a Niagara on my layout (I like the BLI) but it’s the medium size engines that did all the work. F-12s were used primarily in local service so they do not have the national recognition that other engines have. That’s too bad. However with all the new engines coming out in the future, perhaps some F-12s and B-10s etc will be on the way. Let’s hope so.
Ray, I checked out that site. That kit looks just like what I am looking for but in brass. Perhaps I’ll make a go of it with one of those.
Thanks for the input guys. Sometimes it’s hard going if you want to be protypical
the above quote is certainly true , in addition it’s my theory that large steam engines are being produced because it’s easier to fit a good sounding sound system in a large tender than it is in a small one . could also be the reason we’re seeing lots of of F units and not so many GPs etc. then again i could be completely clueless on this one [:)]
I e-mailed Athabasca and got a reply. they still sell the main components of the kit but other components need to be ordered from other vendors. They are sending me an order form to get all the necessary parts for the kit. I think I will give it a try.
Quite honestly, there is nothing available short of the Gem model or Athabasca kit that is going to pass for a NYC F-12 ten-wheeler (I have an example of the former as reference). These were rather delicate-looking engines as steamers go and don’t in any way resemble the heavier classes of locomotives most HO manufacturers have offered down through the years.
As to the question of why so many Niagaras, Big-Boys, and Hudsons, it’s always been that way. The big locos look impressive and that’s what most hobbyist want, it seems. F-units are so popular because they are what everyone over 40 universally recognizes as a “diesel” or “streamliner” - remember reading about that train trip in Fun with *** and Jane in school? The train was pulled by an F-unit.
I think you are right CN. I am going to order the Athabasca kit and give it a go. It will be my first loco building project. I’ll build it in my new workshop which I call the Brewster Shops. I understand about the famous locos like the Hudson & Niagara. I will have them on my layout as they were an integral part of the operations for the region I am modelling. I just think they get more kudos than they deserve. I suppose I have that “little engine that could” mentality. I love the little and medium size engines that did the dirty work day in and day out with no prestige or thanks.
My layout is based roughly on the “Put” and I could use a couple of F12s.I’m using a Overland brass,Rutland F2j as a stand-in untill I can locate a couple of F12s.How much work is involved in the Athabasca kits? Skill level? Will NWSL have a motor and gear tower that will fit? Would Athabasca build the kit for a fee?Please keep us posted as to your progress
No, that’s what most collectors want. It seems to me that over the years, the brass industry has never catered to those hobbyists who wi***o build an operating layout with models representing an actual, or plausible, place and time in history. Instead, their main customer base has been collectors - guys with lots of available cash who only want to fill their display cases with models of the biggest, most well known, or most unusual locomotives ever built. That’s where the real money is made for the brass manufacturers.
Frankly, I’m not sure yet that BLI is much better in this regard. I can’t see that many of their offerings fall into the mundane, everyday, workhorse category of locomotives. (And, I’m not too happy that very few fall into the western prototype category either, but that’s a gripe for another time.)
Sure, many layout owners go out and buy the Niagaras or Big Boys and run them because that’s all that is available for their chosen prototype railroad. But, without the supporting cast of less famous locomotives, the illusion of reality or plausibility is often lost.
I think that Bachman and Proto2000 are to be commended for mass producing lines of generic (and relatively inexpensive) steamers. Of course, this doesn’t help much when we’re looking for something specific and the generic can’t be modified to our satisfaction. But, I say as long as they can avoid too many problems with quality, bring on some more of the generic, boring and mundane!
No, Tom. Go back and look through MR ads for the past 50-odd years and see what the manufacturers have offered in the way of plastic/diecast steam. It has always been mainly big and/or famous engines. Very few smaller steamers have ever been offered in standard gauge except as switchers. It hasn’t just been brass collectors who wanted these big, work horse, engines, it was the majority of hobbyists.
Occasionally, one or another of the manufacturers has indeed offered a small steamer. However, there’s never been any indication, save for the Bachmann 2-8-0, that these have ever sold well. Just look at the photos in MR, RMC, et al. and note how often smaller steamers akin to the NYC F-12 appear. Short of photos of narrow gauge, it’s rare to see something as small as a ten-wheeler, Prairie, or similar wheel arrangement loco shown in use on a layout unless one is modeling a 19th century scene.
Likewise, don’t forget that most small, light, steamers have had a history of electrical contact problems resulting in the majority being poor runners, which undoubtedly caused most modelers to avoid buying them in the first place.[;)]
This is why I like being a freelancer. Generic locomotives are just fine for us. Having said that, I would like to see a high quality 4-6-0 with DCC and sound. I need a couple for my branchline operations.
OK, I’ll go along with most of what you are saying. I guess what we’re probably seeing here is a human trait to gravitate toward the extremes of any spectrum: the big (as evidenced by too many Big Boys on the market), the small (as evidenced by the popularity of narrow gauge steam), or the unusual/esoteric/weird (as evidenced by mass produced plastic models of BL-2’s and RS-27’s). Either way, this still leaves the guy who’s looking for the common and mundane, whether it be a NYC F-12 4-6-0 or an NP W-3 2-8-2 (in my case), out in the cold.
The Putnam is quite a nice line. Granted I’m quite biased because of the great commuter opperations on it, but still.
When I was looking for a steamer as excursion power on my commuter line, I ended up settling for a USRA Heavy Northern. This wasn’t quite what I was looking for, although it works seeing as much of the commuter line was fairly mountainous.
I’d have been much happier however, with a modern 4-6-0 or (as the line is Canadain) a 4-4-4. Smaller locomotives haven’t been popular, especially the more modern ones. Granted yes, I model Canada which is famous for having very long service lives on steamers, but Canada also hosted (especially on the CP) some very late and very good designs for passenger steam. Selkirks, Jubiliees and Hudsons on the CP held right to the end of steam, and many were saved.
The two of you that have indicated that you are modeling, at least in general terms, the “Put”, have chosen a really nice branchline. Its motive power was always small and light and both its passenger and freight trains quite short and layout-sized. With several highly distinctive terrain features worth including on any such layout, which needs only to be of modest size to get it right, it should result in a really great pike.
Incidentally, while I’d probably model the steam-era, as well, if doing a model of the Put, I will note that all the locomotives it used in the diesel-era are commonly available at reasonable prices…the rolling stock too!
I live in northern westchester,close to the harlem division,but some signs of the PUT are still all around.Some of the right of way is now bike paths,many of the girder bridges are still standing as well as a beautiful,steel bridge over the resivoir at goldens bridge(which I plan to model someday).It certainly had character.
CN - you hit it on the head. I thought the Put was perfect for a medium size layout with mostly a sole operator. Great connections to the outside world at both ends and high and wide freight. Small commuter trains and local freight. My main attraction is going to be the engine facility and yard in Brewster. Summer 1951, the Put completely deiselized in 4 months so that is my time period.
I live on the Put too Mike. I drive over the croton reservoir everyday and can see the other bridge over the reservoir. My interest began in it when I was almost hit by a Penn Central diesel while sleigh riding at Dunwoodie golf course as a kid. LOL!
I will let you guys know how I make out with the Athabasca kit. They are sending me the forms in the mail so it will take a while. Perhaps I’ll get so good at it that I can open up the ‘Brewster Shops’ and build class F-12 ten wheelers in mass production for discriminating modelers
Well, yes — after a fashion. Unforutnately I missed riding most of the 12-inch scale version since I was only Jr-high school age when passenger service ended. Fortunately I did get to ride a 1967 fantrip on the lower end of the line which was then in service to East View. However my wife and I in recent years have biked most of the “North Country Trailway.” When you bike it you become quickly aware of the grades on the line! It’s also interesting the amount of “archeological” items you can notice along the ROW if you look for them — telegraph poles with crossarms and insulators intact, building foundations, and so on.
It is indeed, as others have already pointed out on this thread, an eminently modelable piece of railroad, with its single track manual block operation, interesting bridges, and so on — all the stuff modelers love. It’s also noted for what Model Railroader called “pike-size passenger trains;” pike-size freight trains too, for that matter.
If you want to model steam era you really do have to track down a few F-12s since (as I guess you already know) they were the only power that ran there in the late steam era.
The diesel era is an easier matter. Excepty for about the first year of diesel operation (1951) when they used really oddball power — a rare Lima RS that I’m pretty sure no manufacturer has ever produced a model of in any scale ---- in the rest of the diesel era they used two items: Baldwin RS-12s (Doesn’t Stewart make one?) and Also Rs-3s (commonly available from several manufacturers). Remember to use the lightning-stripe scheme as the black-with-white-cigar-band did not come into use until after passenger service ended.
By the way, I think the famous Atlas plastic passenger station which they make in 3 scales can be kitbashed into a respectable Put s
