How small of steamer in HO will run on 18R curve? More specifically 2-6-0, 2-6-2, 4-6-2, 0-8-0 steamers with sepperate tenders, and possibly tenderless tank style engines like a 0-8-0T or a 2-6-2T. I’m not too worried about rolling stock as I know generally even a 50’ car can go around 18R, but the time will be an era of 40 footers, and it will be a small freelance RR that won’t have a need for bigger cars.
Any of the steam engines you mentioned will run fine on an 18" radius. If you want it to look really realistic, you probably won’t want to go much larger than an 0-8-0, but all will work perfectly fine.
I model prior to 1930 so everything I have is small steam, 36 and 40 foot rolling stock, and 50 foot passenger cars. My largest engine is a Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0. Anything up to that size will not only run on 18" track ( which I have ) but also looks good doing it. A 0-6-0, 0-8-0, 4-4-0, 4-6-0, 2-6-0, 2-8-0 will all be just fine and are easily available. Jay
MILW,
I have an Proto 2000 0-8-0, a Trix & BLI 2-8-2, and a BLI 4-8-2 that all will go through R18" curves. Both the switcher and Mikes have a R18" minimum rating, although the switcher could probably do R15" with no problems.
The Mohawk, on the other hand, has a R22" minimum rating. Although the Mohawk will go through a short section of R18" curves, it is definitely pushing it. I think it would be safe to say that anything 2-8-2 or smaller will work fine for you.
Tom
The Spectrum “Russian” 2-10-0 will do 18" R fine; people sometimes get spooked by the 10 drivers but it’s a pretty small engine with small drivers, and they have some play to go around sharp curves. I think the Spectrum 2-10-2 should do it too, in fact most all steam engines made now (except a few biggies like BLI’s 2-10-4) will do 18" curves…but you’d look better sticking to moderate sized power like 2-8-2 or 4-6-2 or smaller.
Any passenger cars with talgo couplers (couplers on the trucks) will do it too, even 80’ IHC or Rivarossi cars. They won’t look great though. A compromise in looks vs. reliability is the Athearn heavyweight line. Their RPO, Baggage and Coach are all models of shorter cars (70’ for the Coach, 60-something for the other two) and they offer 72’ “shorty” versions of a Sleeper, Diner, and Observation cars that were normally 80’ long. They run well and look pretty good, they’re based on ATSF cars.
What about something like that? It’s a Mantua HO 2-6-6-2 articulated. Not neccesarily something I would run in every session, but more like part of an operating locomotive collection. The caboose I just threw on there because, well, that going to be my caboose. I got it from another post, although a person also posted a pic of their Maine Central war caboose with a coupala on top and I think it looks better with one. Just to give everybody a better picture, the images in my head ressemble the small roughly 2 1/2 by 8 foot HO dogbone style layout done in April/08 issue of MR. I forget the modeler, but it was called the Merimac RR. Of course, mine would look more Wisconsiny, have more trees, less rock showing, and use a printed backdrop instead of a sheer rock cliff to hid the staging track and loop track. I know the 2-6-6-2 probably wouldn’t look right in a treeish, rolling hilled WI setting hauling a way freight of 40 foot boxcars, reefers, and drop-bottom gons, but that’s why I figured I wouldn’t use it as my primary engine. I looked at Broadway limited but they didn’t have too many small steamers. Which stinks because their pricing was like smack dab in the middle of my engine budget range.
I don’t know about the 2-6-6-2 with tender, but the 2-6-6-2T Logger should look fine in an area with a lot of trees. (http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/455-351603) The Mantua 2-6-6-2s are smaller than pictures make them look.
The Mantua 2-6-6-2 is a standard gauge model of a rather famous narrow gauge prototype - the Uintah Railway/Sumpter Valley 2-6-6-2s. The prototype was expressly designed to go around curves that scale out to 14" in HO! During their lives the prototypes served in both tank and tender versions (IIRC, 2 were built). I’m not sure how much the Mantua boiler and cab were enlarged beyond scale to fit on the standard gauge chassis. The model does 15" radius curves or better.
hope this helps
Fred W
This is a BLI Hudson 4-6-4 on an 18-inch curve. This model has two positions for the drawbar to the tender, and needs to be set up for wider separation to clear 18-inch curves, but other than that it works great and looks pretty good:
I’ve also got a Proto 0-6-0 that’s fine on these curves, but that’s not too surprising.
The tender version of the Mantua 2-6-6-2 is actually the logger! The tank locos hauled gilsonite, and had to round 68 degree curves to do it. My two have taken 300mm radius test curves, and routinely operate on 350mm curves. The same can be said for the Tomikawa Tani Tetsudo’s motley collection of 0-6-0Ts.
The best way to find out how tight a radius a specific locomotive can take is to lay a spiral of flex track, reducing the radius from about 30 inches by 2 inches every locomotive length or so, and check to see where the locomotive leaves the rails. I suspect that an individual engine of that 2-6-6-2 could go well below 12" radius - the center drivers are blind.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I concur with most all the observations thus far that most all of the smaller steam (Spectrum 2-8-0 and smaller) will operate fine on 18" radius track, as will 40’ freight cars. You will likely want to hold the passenger car length to 60’ or less, and there are some options out there.
Many locomotives have two different holes available in the drawbar between the locomotive and the tender. You will have to check each locomotive individually. The greater distance allows sharper curves without binding, but looks less realistic. I have been surprised that many such locomotives operate just fine through sharp curves while using the closer coupling. Test each locomotive slowly, and remember to try it in both directions through each curve.
I do have a Mantua 4-6-0 which I bought as it was lettered as Clinchfield #1. (My could-have-been HO line connects with the Clinchfield.) I think that this was the same locomotive that was once offered in the “Pettycoat Junction” livery. It is dramatically oversize in all dimensions than the actual locomotive (which I have ridden behind) - presumably to make room for the motor in the boiler. Anyway, that particular locomotive has extremely rigid drive gear and binds up even on 20" radius. It appears to require a 22" minimum radius, so it’s current home is in the box. You can comfortably plan a layout with 18" curves for smaller steam and for a branch-line or short-line where high-speed operation is not required.
Bill
There were some standard gauge 2-6-6-2 engines that were pretty close to the Mantua engine. I’m pretty sure the Rayonier Logging RR lines were std gauge?? Someone in MR back in IIRC 1989 did an cover article on upgrading the details on these to represent an early mainline mallet. I also recall an article on adding a Mantua Pacific/Mikado boiler to a 2-6-6-2 chassis to give it a chunkier look.
Look at the St. Paul and Tacoma Lumber company’s # 7 engine. It is a tank, was built as a tank and not converted.
http://loggingmallets.railfan.net/list/stpaul7/spt7.htm
Of course the Booth Kelly was the first of these tank versions of the 2-6-6-2 engine.
Most commercially made locomotives will be able to negotiate 18R curves.
I run 4 Y3 Mallets on my pike and although it says I can run them on 18" radius curves I don’t simply because it just doesn’t look right. They also say a Big Boy can negotiate an 18" radius curve with no problem but I have my doubts. What they don’t tell you is that if you run big articulated locomotives on tight curves you need to move things like switch stands and telephone poles etc.farther way from the track. I have tried it though and they will run on an 18" so you’ll have no problem.
On the real railroads just like the model they run the biggest radius curves they possible can run for ease of operation it’s when space constraints forbid nice sweeping curves they run tighter radius corves so the same should be applied to your model when ever possible.
My Big Boy has no problems with the last 18 inch turn I have, Y-6b all so does fine of the tighter turns. Far as over hang, that can be a problem to watch for. Few nights ago I was running my Class J on the inside main and and had a train parked on the outside main. Going around the 18 inch turn the Class J got hold of a box car and started to push the other train.
Cuda Ken