I searched online for opinions but only saw a similar question asked many years back to very little response. Wondering what you guys think about older DC Rivarossi locos, like Connies, Mikes and Decapods. Mainly I’m interested in two things: do they run well on code 83 track and how noisy are they compared to other locos of the day.
Extra credit: if consensus is stay away, and if I wanted a Mikado or Decapod or Consolidation in DC, what would be a better option, in production or out?
"All of the Atlas versions (identified by their clear plastic boxes with blue plastic inserts) have somewhat iffy frames (constructed out of something called “Zamac”), which has a reputation for being quite brittle (especially where the motor screws to the chassis), as well as being prone to heat-related warping and out and out crumbling. No, they don’t all have these problems, but enough of them do to merit the reputation (I’ve certainly run into plenty of warped/cracked frames on these myself over the years).
The Atlas versions also have a very poor quality can motor which was prone to melting down (depending on the year it was made, the motor housing might be black or silver, but regardless of the color the quality is suspect). Right-rail current comes from the right-side tender wheels (via axle wipers), and left-rail current comes from the pilot truck and left-side drivers on the locomotive. All of the rest of the wheels are electrically neutral. Unfortunately, tender current is routed to the locomotive by way of a notoriously unreliable stiff metal wire on the tender drawbar -
All four driver axles are geared and all of the gearing is metal. Two of the right-side drivers are equipped with traction tires. A non-directional headlight is mounted to the front of the chassis. The pilot coupler is a dummy (fixed/non-opertational) knuckle. The tender coupler is a truck-mounted Rapido. The wheel flanges are oversized, so these models will not operate on Code-55 rails."
Doesn’t sound like I really want to pursue older Rivarossi steam.
That would be a good choice unless you want to tinker and repower. I have one remaining Rivarossi* locomotive that I bought back in 1971 or '72 from Woolworths the day after Christmas for about $20.
There was a late-in-the-game “upgrade” to some of the Rivarossi locos that had a better motor and, I believe, slightly smaller but still oversized flanges. If you could see the motor sticking out of the back of the cab it was the older variety.
*edit: I retract that statement. I did buy a pair of the very recent Rivarossi U25Cs that are excellent locomotives. These were made after the Hornby acquisition of the Rivarossi name.
Excellent runners for their day but not on code 83 track. Flanges are too big. They will run on code 83 but sound like they are going over a washboard.
Code 83 started to become widely available in the late 1980s and it was sometime in the 1990s that Rivarossi retooled to make smaller flanges.
I have around 10 of steamers with the pizza cutter flanges on my shelf. None has an operational front coupler. Someday I plan to get around to selling them on ebay. Most are large UP steamers and the typical price I see them go for on ebay are $150-200.
crossthedog
Doesn’t sound like I really want to pursue older Rivarossi steam.
That would be a good choice unless you want to tinker and repower. I have one remaining Rivarossi* locomotive that I bought back in 1971 or '72 from Woolworths the day after Christmas for about $20.
There was a late-in-the-game “upgrade” to some of the Rivarossi locos that had a better motor and, I believe, slightly smaller but still oversized flanges. If you could see the motor sticking out of the back of the cab it was the older variety.
*edit: I retract that statement. I did buy a pair of the very recent
I am a Rivarossi articulated fan, I simply love them. The only problem with the Rivarossi articulateds are the Pizza cutter flanges and even then I’ve never had a single problem with the over size flanges on Atlas or Pico code 83 track.
I have 20 Rivarossi articulateds that I’ll put up against any manufactures equal for running or pulling power. I have remotored all of them as the original motor is a Rivarossi weak point, the original motors draw way too much current.
A single Mabuchi SF266 (less than $4) works very good, dual Mabuchi SF266 motors and additional weight triples the draw bar at half the current of the original motor.
I belonged to a club when I was a teenager and my first locomotives were the Rivarossi IHB U4a 0-8-0 - seemed like it was produced in the millions - and B&O S1a 2-10-2. One of the older club members instructed me how to remove the wheel sets, turn them down using the club drill press, a file and a sanding block and then how to reassemble the running gear and quarter the drivers. Then I used a file and sandpaper to open up the pilots and installed couplers. Yes, it took time, but it taught me a lot, particularly not to be impatient and rush the job.
After that surgery, they’ve done me proud and I still have them. I’ve done some upgrades - I replaced the X2f couplers with Kadees and later, installed a can motor when I added DCC - so they’re better than new and I’m still happy with them. The only thing is, some people think the turned down drivers look too small, but considering what a brass S1a costs on Ebay, I’ll put up with it.
So you can do what I did using something like a Dremel motor tool, try to pick up the later offering with smaller flanges or shell out the bux. If I was in your shoes, I’d probably go with option two, then invest in some modeling tools and fix the front coupler.
Why the big flanges? Rivarossi was an Italian manufacturer and the flanges complied with the European standard set by NEM, their version of the NMRA
And, geeze Louise, I’m old enough to remember when RP25 came out…
Back in the day (and this was a VERY long time ago, longer than I care to really contemplate, let alone state) I turned down Rivarossi flanges and did a little tread reshaping. This was done by fixing the axle to be free to turn and directing a flat grinding wheel at an angle to the tread, using very tiny feed and liberal cooling. Too much force and too much heat and the tires can move or the plastic driver centers melt. I was intentionally overcautious and so avoided any problem.
I have seen a number of discussions about making replacement driver tires that have the ‘correct’ flange and also make up at least some of the correct driver diameter for better appearance. As I recall, at least one person went ahead and machined them to ‘spec’ – I think it was for a Cab-Forward similar to Mel’s – and discovered that the axle spacing had been jiggered for the smaller driver centers and the “corrected” drivers wouldn’t fit. So be careful to measure the center-to-center distance and cut your tires and flanges to fit properly…
I have a suspicion this task is now much easier with 3M lapping film and a glass disk on a mandrel…
Rivarossi gave the modeler inexpensive yet supereb models starting in the mid-1960s. They offered models of Big Boys, Cab Forwards, Challeners, and other steam icons that were only available in high priced brass models. The early Rivarossi locos had the deep European flanges that did fine on code 100 but sat on the ties of code 83. In the late 1970s they adopted a smaller flange for the US market and those are those models best suited for today. Unfortunately the motors were not the best and they hade pick up problems on many of the models especially the articulated models. Rivarossi underwent and major shift moving its assembly from Itadly to Spain and due to storing the dies in an out door shed most were all ruined. Now owned by Hornby, the Big Boy is back in limited production and they have a Shay that I think is China made. Some parts are available from the US representaive, Ray Markle based in the Dallas area. His number is 972-272-0074 . Ebay is also a good source for parts. Just beware of the deep flanges and that installing decoders in them can be challenging .
Before turning down the Rivarossi flanges measure the wheel tire size. The articulated wheels are measured outside flange to flange for prototype wheel size. Removing the large flange makes the wheels look too small, the 63” Cab Forward driver wheel becomes a 55” wheel. With the large flanges the wheel size looks OK.
As Overmod said trying to install the correct size drivers won’t work as the flanges will touch each other.
Like I said the large flange Rivarossi wheels clear OK using Atlas and Peco code 83 track and turnouts. The flanges bottom out using code 83 Shinohara turnouts.
Alternatives will depend a bit on how deep is your wallet. Bachmann’s are a good buy if you are buying new (2-8-0s, 2-8-2 and 2-10-0). Good solid runners, if you don’t mind the molded details. Older Bachmann’s (pre-90s) were toy train quality, so avoid these (I see them regularly on Ebay…). On the used market, the 2-8-2 Mantuas can be found at reasonable prices, but they are not DCC ready. Good runners in most cases. I would recommend that you save up the money and get a Bachmann. Avoid the Athearn Mikado (and Pacifics). Their gears are fragile. At the higher end, the BLI Mike is a superb engine with DCC sound. Trix also made an excellent one a few years ago.
There is also brass on the used market, but most are not DCC ready. The Oriental Powerhouse Mike is excellent, if you can find one. It has a metal boiler with brass details. The tender has a problematic truck arrangement - most modelers replace them. It’s one of my favorites:
Going back to Rivarossi, according to Darth Santa Fe (in an old thread) the Rivarossi’s changed their flanges in the mid 90s to conform to NMRA standards. I have a Big Boy from the later period that runs very well. In my opinion, only some of the unique models produced by Rivarossi in the earlier years are of interest. The Heisler (I don’t think they ever produced Shays) is one of them. I have two and they run well for their age. I also have an older 0-8-0 that runs OK. I shaved off the flanges a bit with a dremel. The old can motors, while superb in their time, do consume a lot of amps. They are also a bit quick on startup compared to a modern can motor.
I bought all my Rivarossi engines from 1980 until the early 1990s and they all still had the oversized flanges. They will run on code 83 but they graze the ties as they do making for a bumpy ride. If these are the smaller flanges, I’d hate to see the bigger ones.
Lots of great info here, and thanks Simon for the recommendations on alternatives. I will be doing NONE of these flange surgeries, thank you. Don’t have the tools, don’t have the skill, and the time I have available to learn new skills needs to go toward other aspects of modelling. I can afford to buy quality if I’m deliberate about it, but I don’t want any more DCC (I have a nice DCC Connie and a DCC RS-3 – that’s plenty for one operator with a small layout.) That’s why I’m looking around at older models, to find something of quality in DC. There seems to be a sweet spot for used locos, maybe after the mid-nineties, when flanges became more suitable to Code 83 and locos got a little more detailed. I’ve been reading old posts about IHC locos being quiet and strong, for all their lack of exterior detail.
I have bought Rivarossi in AHM boxes, IHC boxes, and Rivarossi’s own red boxes. I think a majority of my buys was the red boxes. All were bought after 1980 and all were suited for code 100 but scraped the top of the ties on code 83.
That’s what I keep hearing – strong pullers, quieter than the average older DC locos. Is there an easy way to tell later IHC from earlier IHC in photos, for example on eBay? Box color? Product number series? Often a seller doesn’t know when the product was made but they’ll show the box, and the underside of the loco.
Some were labeled IHC Premier Series. These had slight improvements over the basic line. Several I had included additional tender wheel pickups. I don’t ever recall any kind of DCC plug installed. I think they were produced by Mehano but I may be wrong on that point. The flanges while slightly reduced in height were still not to RP-25 contours.
I think just before they went belly-up they released something called a “Command XXV 2-10-2 Premier Gold” which, I believe had a DCC 8 pin plug.
