SP 4-10-2 in HO from MTH/BLI/Athearn Genesis?

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

Hello everybody,

I´m a big lover of the Southern Pacific 4-10-2 engines, and I just wondered how big are the chances that manufacturers like MTH, BLI or Athearn Genesis may produce this interesting locomotive in future. I mean these manufacturers were and are producing some great HO scale steam locos in metal, so in my eyes a SP 4-10-2 from these manufacturers would be truly a very nice model. Too bad that there are only brass models of that wheel arrangement available, which I cannot afford. Metal would be some nice thing between cheap plastic and expensive brass, what do you think? And what do you think may be the reason why this wheel arrangement is only produced in brass until now? Is it because this wheel arrangement is very rare or because many railfans just think that 4-10-2´s are ugly?

By the way:

I also wonder why the Texas & Pacific 2-10-4´s (also one of my favorites) have also never been produced in metal. The only Texas types you find in metal are those from PRR and C&O (BLI), all others are brass (I´m not counting the cheap Bachmann AT&SF Texas type).

2

BLI did do the ATSF ‘conversion’ 2-10-4, #3829 - IIRC. The UP/SP ‘3 Barrels of Steam’ 4-10-2 engines are interesting. With the present economy, I suspect we are going to see lots of ‘cancelled’ projects in the future. I think we have been darn lucky with all of the nice ‘plastic’ brass that has been available over the past 10 years.

I would love to see the T&P engine with it’s small 63" drivers. The CGW engines are similar, if not built to the same specs.

Jim

3

I used to would say “About as much chance as the Cardinals going to the Super Bowl!”; I’m going to have to come up with a new line! Even though Espee has a fair sized modeling community I don’t think I would bet money on a manufacturer investing precious assets in designing such a unique locomotive.

. . . . . and please, no comments about MTH’s Matt Shay; I don’t have the silightest idea how that thing is selling anyway!

4

Hey Jim,

can you explain me what you mean with plastic brass??

What I really wonder about that is MTH produced the Erie Triplex Mallet 2-8-8-8-2 type. I mean this loco is even much more rare than the 4-10-2 type, so I see no reason why there shouldn´t be a metal 4-10-2 on the HO market…

5

Deluxe:

Count me in as a big fan of the 4-10-2, especially the SP version, which I think is one handsome hunk of loco! I’ve seen several HO brass consignment models in the last several years at my LHS, and believe me, I’ve been tempted. And I’ve got the radii (34"-36") that could handle their ultra-long fixed wheelbase.

And hence, comes the Rub, at least IMO: making that four-wheel leading truck and the ten drivers work to fit around the radii that most large plastic steamer Mfgrs are aiming for in the market, which is generally 22" to 24" radius. I know that BLI, Spectrum and Proto have managed to do it with their 2-10-2’s, and even BLI to a degree with their 2-10-4’s, but adding that extra wheel to the leading truck could cause quite a few problems for clearance, at least to my thinking. They could possibly blank the flanges on one or two sets of the middle drivers, but that can also lead to losing pulling power on curves.

This is only my opinion, understand. If the mfgrs. could somehow overcome the long fixed wheelbase (and those puppies are LONG locos) without either blanking out drivers or causing so much sideplay that it would affect smooth rod action, then I’d be the first to stand up and cheer at seeing one of those beauties in plastic. But it seems to me that mfgrs. are really aiming for the mass market in these locos, and that means a lot of model railroads with necessarily tight radii. That’s why articulateds swivel in the middle instead of only the front set of drivers, and large fixed-wheel based locos have such enormous side-play in the drivers that sometimes on the straightaway they tend to ‘waddle’.

But as I said, if those problems could be overcome in a 4-10-2 in HO from someone like Genesis or Spectrum, I’d be first in line. [:P]

Tom [:D]

6

I think Athearn has the ONLY chance of making a SP 4-10-2.

7

Hey Tom,

I think that the radius issue shouldn´t be a problem nowadays. I live in Germany and I have a Big Boy from Märklin that takes 15" radius with no problems, and my MTH GS-4 handles the 18" radius without difficulties. The biggest german steam loco, a 2-10-2 from the 45 Class, that was also produced by Märklin, handles the 15" radius perfectly. I mean if german manufacturers get all their steam locos (no matter which wheel arrangement) through the sharpest curves, then I see no reason why american manufacturers shouldn´t be able to create a 4-10-2 that handles at least 18" radius. But lucky you! You will get anything through your large 36" curves. But not many people have the place for such big curves, especially in Europe it´s not the case, but you might know that already.

Cheers,

Daniel

8

Hey Luke, what makes you think that Athearn is the ONLY one??

9

I won’t say much because I don’t want to sound like Tom’s parrot.

Guys, we need to think more than one step ahead at a time. Once Athearn makes the Southern Pacific 4-10-2, then let’s start crying out for a Union Pacific 4-12-2. First In HO-scale, of course. [swg]

One thing that really has me puzzled is that mass producers haven’t yet brought out a Denver and Salt Lake 2-6-6-0 Mallet. It is quite an attractive and compact prototype, and could easily go around most modeler’s curves without articulating the rear set of drivers. There is a strong demand for the old brass models of this prototype on the used brass market. I’ve got an extra whaleback tender (obviously I’m an SP fan) that is reserved to put behind a modern-built, detailed, and reasonably-priced DSL 2-6-6-0. I’m awaitin’.

Mark

10

Because they have recently produced a SP MT 4-8-2 loco, and BLI, Bachmann, and MTH haven’t made or never produced a SP model in a while.

11

Mark:

Me too. It’s perfect. Just perfect. And it can handle an 18" radius NON-DOUBLE ARTICULATED with ease and grace. Here’s mine–of course, it’s the brass PFM–but it’s a little dream of a loco. Frankly, when I run it, it ‘grins’ at me. It’s a sweetheart, and it would make a perfect candidate for a small mass-produced Mallet. I sure love mine. [:P]

Tom [:)]

12

Tom, I just knew you had to have at least one of those darling DSL 2-6-6-0s!

Mark

13

Daniel:

Believe me, my 34"36" curves are the result of about three prior model railroads with very tight radii and a lot of planning as I abandoned and rebuilt them. Only when I was able to take over my entire 2-car garage (out here in California, we refer to them as “California Basements”) was I able to finally realize that kind of generous radius that would fit my large roster of long-wheelbased steam locos. And I know that kind of space is at a premium for a lot of ‘solo’ modelers not only in Europe but also here in the States.

As I said, if a mfgr either here in the States or elsewhere (maybe Marklin or Trix, perhaps?) could come up with a long-wheelbased 4-10-2 that could handle smaller radii, I’d be first in line.

One thing, Articulated American locomotives, because of their ‘double-swivel’ can always handle a smaller radii than a fixed-wheelbased eight or ten-coupled locomotive. I have several brass 2-8-8-4 articulateds that are ‘prototypically’ articulated (only the front set of drivers swivel) that on my older layouts with 24-26" radius coul

14

Mark:

I think the Rio Grande inherited 16 of the little gems from the D&SL. I’m not gonna go THAT far![:P]

Tom

15

Tom,

How about a GN M2 Class 2-6-8-0? I think I could be convinced to take home a few of those…

Don Z.

16

Don:

Me too! [:P]

Tom [:D]

17

‘Plastic Brass’ is a term Model Railroader coined to describe the new highly detailed plastic engines that are available from BLI/Spectrum/Life-Like.

I think the ‘Triplex’ was produced because the owner of MTH wanted to do the project. The ‘tinplate’ market is far different than the ‘scale’ market at times. MTH had already done the up front research for the O Scale engine, and decide to do HO copies. If this was just an HO Scale decision, I suspect the 4-10-2 might win out(but then there are a lot of ‘other’ steamers that could be done as well).

You keep mentioning ‘metal’ engines. The current crop of a thin plastic shell over a heavy metal chassis seems to me to be the best compromise of detail vs pulling power. At one time I had a lot of ‘brass’ steam - Adding weight/tuning them was just part of the accepted work one had to do. I remember talking to a Balboa Models rep in 1969 - He was not concerned about ‘pulling’ a train. The model was ‘correct’ and it did run smooth on a peice of flex track - What more could you ask!

Jim

18

Jim:

Not to take us too far off track of the topic, but you’re absolutely right in your assessment. Out of my large brass fleet, I’ve only had one locomotive that was ‘perfect’ out of the box. Everything else has had to be ‘tinkered’ with, re-weighted, re-balanced and in a few cases, completely re-motored. It’s a part of owning and RUNNING brass.

Tom [:)]

19

If I were Athearn and were thinking about another SP engine, it wouldn’t be a 4-10-2, but rather a Pacific, Mikado or 2-10-2 (SP called 'em “Dec’s” ) which could prototypically use the 120C-3 tender that has already been tooled for production. When I first saw the pics of the Bachmann Spectrum 2-8-0, it occurred to me that the next engine would be a USRA Mike, Pacific, or a light Mountain since the proper tender had already been done. From a business standpoint, it makes sense to build on what you already have.

While some of the SP 4-10-2’s were delivered with 12,000 gallon tenders, they spent most of their service lives with the the larger 16000 gallon tenders. There’s a lot bigger variety of locos that could be produced using the current tender tooling.

Candidates: SP P-8 4-6-2 (P-10’s were similar): http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP2464.JPG

MK-5 2-8-2 (note, tender in pic is not a 120C-3, but that tender class was used on Mikes): http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP3232.JPG

F-4 2-10-2 on Horsehoe Curve (with P10 #2487): http://www.yesteryeardepot.com/SP3671X2.JPG

Athearn could legitimately get away with manufacturing 4 separate wheel arrangements of SP power using the tooling for a single tender class.

If Bachmann were to go into the SP steam business, they could legitimately manufacture the the following non-articulated SP steamers using their 16,000 so-called “Hicken” (it’s not) tender:

SP Pacific Lines: 4-8-2 (MT-1, 3, 4, 5), 4-8-4 (GS-1), 2-10-2 (F3,4,5), 4-10-2 (SP-1, 2, 3). NOTE: The 2-10-2’s generally didn’t get the 16,000 gallon tenders until very late in their service lives.

SP (T&N

20

Andre, I totally agree with you. My only regret if they do is that I’ll need to kick myself for spending $$$$$ for my stable of brass SP locomotives, including M’s (2), C’s (4), Mk’s (2), P’s (1) and F’s (2) which I’ve yet to tune up for my non-existent layout.

Mark