I purchased a 2-10-10 Spectrum locomotive, DCC & sound, a couple of years ago from Smitty’s Hobbies in Kettering, Ohio. It was unlettered when I bought it so I had it decaled for the Denver & Rio Grande, (after determining that this particular locomotive was correct for that railroad). It ran fine for a while, but then would not move anymore, forwards or backwards, just a couple of inches. The sound contined to operate fine.
I sent it back to Bachmann last February for repair. I waited and waited. Earlier this month I contacted the service department about the status of my locomotive repair. THEY LOST IT! I find it extremely hard to believe that they lost my property. Has anyone else had this kind of experince - what can you tell me.
They did replace it with an unlettered Spectrum 2-6-6-2, DCC and sound of course.
When you consider that they are likely the largest manufacturer, and they have a potentially large volume of returns, it seems possible.
Sorry to say that Spectrum 2-10-2 is really not correct at all for Denver and Rio Grande Western. Their F-81 Class 2-10-2, a very unique, large and impressive beast is nowhere close to the Spectrum USRA 2-10-2. It was a very different animal, with two sets of round split sand domes (one alongside the other) that appear from above as being similar to a part of female anatomy. Erie also had one group of generally similar 2-10-2’s with the paired sand domes (4 total on each engine). The Rio Grande F-81 2-10-2 has only ever been available in brass.
Seems to me, with a new 2-6-6-2, you made out quite well on this deal other than the misfortune of them losing your model! Other Spectrum 2-10-2’s are still available at very affordable prices from some dealers.
If you just want to letter it for a road that had them, go to www.steamlocomotive.com to learn all about the 2-6-6-2’s (under articulated wheel arrangements) of the various railroads (but you likely received the C&O version).
When I bought the 2-10-2 at Smitty’s Hobbies, Jene looked in his reference manual and said the 2-10-2 would be correct for D&RG, so I had him decal it accordingly. Thanks for the correction and clarification. Now I don’t feel so bad loosing my 2-10-2.
Indeed, I’m grateful to get a $500+ locomotive in exchange for the 2-10-2 that I paid $400 for.
Yes, my Spectrum 2-6-6-2 is the C&O version. Is it correct for D&RG?
No, the C&O 2-6-6-2 is not correct for Rio Grande. Perhaps generally “close” but you should look at actual photos to determine just how close is close enough for you. The Rio Grande 2-6-6-2’s were ex-Norfolk and Western Class Z1a or Z1b (I forget exactly which subclass) purchased during WWII.
Steam locomotives, excepting the USRA engines which went to many roads (but definitely not Santa Fe, excepting 8 secondhand 2-8-8-2’s during WWII) were generally unique to the railroad that ordered them. It wasn’t like today when diesels are generally standard catalog models with some road specific details–especially during the steam era, even if a competitor’s engine might have done the job quite well–each railroad felt the need to be “unique” with their own motive power.
Even very similar engines, say Challengers based on the UP design, would have been different, because excepting the 4-6-6-4’s that went to Rio Grande, which were tacked onto an actual UP order by the War Production Board during WWII, the other Challengers are all different.
The WP Challenger is based upon the UP version but different. The NP Challenger was designed by Alco concurrently with the first group of UP Challengers, and looks very similar, but is different. The Challengers that went to D&H and Western Maryland, similar overall, are each unique to their road.
Hope this helps.
John
P.S. In steam, the PRR J-1 2-10-4 was copied from the C&O T-1, but they changed the cab, pilot, and other details such that it is different.
Likewise the Nickel Plate Road 2-8-4 is slightly different from the Pere Marquette version and more different from the C&O version–the order of sand and steam domes is different. Just because MTH offer
In my case, Bachmann has never lost an engine that I sent in for repair. I have sent three engines over the last few years. Bachmann repaired two, but the third could not be repaired, they said, because parts were no longer available. So, they let me choose a replacement because that particular engine was no longer in stock.
I grew up between Mad River (PRR Clement yard) and East Dayton (B&O etc Stanly) ave. I used to ride my bike from 3rd st to Smitty’s (kind of a long ride). I’m currently proto-lancing PRR Xenia-Springfield -ish.
Used to ride the trolley busses to school downtown. When mom drove, we’d go down Monument st past all that rail activity B&O/C&O/Chessie, PC/EL, DT&I/GTW etc. VERY industrial.
Kettering- the man who made manual crank starting cars obsolete. DELCO Dayton ELectric Co.
I have a lot of Bachmann locos, about 33 I think, and have had to send a few back (3-4 IIRC).
They have never lost any and have always made good on the warranty.
May I suggest that you may want to shop around some before buying your next Bachmann loco, 2-10-2 or otherwise.
Bachmann products are heavily discounted by many fully ligitimate dealers at prices typically about 40% below retail. Making a 2-10-2 with DCC/sound about $250.00
I just recently purchased the new H4 2-6-6-2 wihout sound for only $221 from Peach Creek Shops.
Bachmann is a large company as model train companies go, but keep in mind they are very small compaired to any national brand name you think of in other types of products. Their service department is small and over worked for the most part. Having o many of their locos, having personally known some folks who work/worked there, and having bought a number of parts for kitbashing, I know they have small staff working very hard to get people’s trains fixed or replaced. But things do go wrong from time to time - while sometimes slow, they always make it good in the end.
Funny you should ask. I have posted here several times regarding the pitfalls of trying not to smash my Spectrum N&W J class 4-8-4. If your at all familiar with this poor excuse for a locomotive that Bachmann has out you’ll know that it is the only locomotive in their product line that has that close coupling draw bar system that is nothing but a joke from an engineering standpoint. It keeps the tender and the locomotive predominantly coupled together and unlike a standard drawbar that everyone else in the world uses including Bachman on all their other steam locomotives this thing pivots within two slots and the only thing it does is lift the tender wheels and the trailing truck off the rails when going through a turn. I am not alone with having this problem, even on their own website you can read about numerous complaints. So like everyone else I call and email customer service and send the thing back. So now approx. a month goes by and the replacement never comes but I have been assured by Laura the customer service manager that it’s been sent out. So being one you usually give people the benefit of the doubt we give it another week. She tells me if the mailman comes before 1:00pm and it’s not there call me and I will personally send you one out via UPS or FedEx this way you’ll have it by no later then Monday or Tuesday. Now one little tidbit of information I live with in 50 miles of Philly where they are located. Well i call her at 1:03pm and I tell her no replacement engine and say I hope you get this message and I’ll be looking forward to getting the new one. Well guess what another week goes by and still no replacement engine. Another piece of information is I call and leave messages at least once a day as soon as the mail comes and no packages from Bachmann.So I finally get through to her the following week and she says oh you never got it, i thought i sent it out but there were two going out that day I guess I must have forgotten to send yours. I guess she also forgot the access code for her
Funny you should ask, as I have advised before, YES the N&W J drawbar can be problemmatic - BUT, the exact same drawbar system works fine on the BLI/PCM Reading T-1. So it is not the design or the idea that is flawed, it is the execution on the Bachmann model.
The problem is not the drawbar itself, it is the lack of weight in the loco and tender to hold the the loco/tender on the track and make the drawbar work and move correctly through ALL types of track situations and configurations.
BUT, there is plenty of room in the J for more weight and, as you mention the Bachmann board, EVERYONE on there knows the solution to the problem is to add weight to the loco. True, some have replaced the drawbar with good results, but the added weight also increases pulling power quite a bit.
YES, I will agree this is a problem, but not one Bachmann is actually going to fix - their solution is going to be to discontinue the loco when sales slow down - not to ever “recall” the locos and add wieght to them.
So if you want a “J” for less than those other companies, add some weight to a Bachmann. If not, pay the higher prices.
And what kind/size of curves, grades, and turnouts are we trying to run it through anyway? It’s a big loco and really needs roomy trackwork to look/run its best.
My minimum radius is radius is 32" I tried adding weight to the first one I had but when I stated reaching 6 oz. in the tender I thought that was enough, perhaps even more weight? I will have to look in to the drawbar that BLI uses on the T1 but non of mine have that type of drawbar only the standard dog-bone style. If in fact the addition of more weight would solve the problem wouldn’t you agree that it would be in Bachmann’s best interest if they had customer service in mind to do a little research and find out exactly how much weight is needed and where best to put it and if a disgruntled customer such as myself contacts them they could send out a fix kit if you will of some lead weights with a simple instruction sheet, place weights here and affix with silicone adhesive or what ever. Instead they try and pawn the problem off on the customer by saying it’s your track work bla bla bla. Sorry for sounding like sour grapes but they gladly took all of the money used to purchase the engine so I have a reasonable expectation to expect 100% service and satisfaction wouldn’t you agree?
I have since picked up a used MTH J from a friend at the club and yes it was a little more money then the Spectrum even used but i took it out of the box placed it on the rails and it works without and issue. I think everyone has the right to at least that. Making it run better or pull more is strictly up to the individual if you want more, but these things are static displays at best.
One of you is talking about adding weight to the tender while the other is talking about adding weight to the engine to increase tractive effort…? Was this originally about a towbar problem?
I never could get my Spectrum J to run smoothly, not with any amount of break-in or inspection by my fix-it friend who builds and repairs engines. It was listed honestly as a project and sold in that other place. So far, it’s my only foray into Bachmann. I’d like to try again, maybe with a 4-8-2. Never again with a J.
I am suggesting that weight be added to BOTH the loco and tender to improve the drawbar function and as a side benifit improve tractive effort.
Yes, the “J” is Bachmann’s “problem” loco - you will get no argument from me about that, and I understand the view of those who do not want to fool around with them to make them run. Just understand that the service department cannot fix it.
The BLI/PCM Reading T-1 is the only BLI/PCM piece that has a close couple drawbar system, just like the “J” is the only Bachmann piece with it.
On the BLI/PCM T-1, there is only one “cam end” on the loco with a conventional post on the tender, rather than the two cam ends like the “J” - but the effect is the same, the loco stays close coupled but spreads out just enough as it goes around a sharper curve.
On the T-1, which I have two of, it works fine but did require grinding the tender frame to allow the tender to be positioned in the closer hole without causing the drawbar to bind and derail the loco.
On the “J” the cams need to be checked for mold flash an lubed lightly. The tender and loco need more weight. Than it will work. OR, with curves that big, just build your own conventional drawbar with a piece of brass - but still ad the weight.
I pull (and back up) long trains, tenders need to weight about 3x what a freight car their size weighs for good operation with long trains.
Crandell - Do not judge all Bachmann locos based on the “J”. The “J” is a bit of a stinker. The Heavy Mountain, Berkshire, 2-8-0, 2-6-6-2 and 4-6-0 are all great locos. The 2-10-2 is nice as well although some have complained it does not pull as well as it should. The Berk too can benifit from a little weight but there is plenty of room to ad some.
If your at all familiar with this poor excuse for a locomotive that Bachmann has out you’ll know that it is the only locomotive in their product line that has that close coupling draw bar system that is nothing but a joke from an engineering standpoint. It keeps the tender and the locomotive predominantly coupled together and unlike a standard drawbar that everyone else in the world uses including Bachman on all their other steam locomotives this thing pivots within two slots and the only thing it does is lift the tender wheels and the trailing truck off the rails when going through a turn.
Be careful when you say everybody else in the world, because it’s not true… Roco and Fleischmann steam locos also use a close coupling drawbar and have for a significant number of years. They operate very reliably. My guess is that Maerklin, Trix and Piko also use a close-coupling drawbar although I don’t own any of their locos so I don’t know for sure.
I’ve never owned or even looked at the underside of a ‘J’, so I can’t comment on Bachmann’s design or execution. However, I would take Sheldon’s word for it that the problem can be resolved with a little work. Given the street price of a Spectrum ‘J’, it’s certainly cheaper than the alternative.
Thanks, Sheldon, for the encouragement. BTW, I thought the drawbar a bit convoluted, but I must say that I had no complaints in that department. Mine seemed to work well on the J. I did lube it, of course, because it seemed to want it.
thats the really frustrating part is that Bachmann thought better of using that drawbar on any of their other locomotives. I have three 4-8-2 Mountains, three 4-6-2 K4 Pacific’s, two 2-10-0 Decapods and they all run well and are nicely detailed to some extend.not comparable to a BLI or a MTH but a nice locomotive for the money. If the J was the first Spectrum I ever owned I would never have bought another Bachman locomotives, so don’t let the J sour you totally.
Be careful when you say everybody else in the world, because it’s not true… Roco and Fleischmann steam locos also use a close coupling drawbar and have for a significant number of years. They operate very reliably. My guess is that Maerklin, Trix and Piko also use a close-coupling drawbar although I don’t own any of their locos so I don’t know for sure.
I think you should check into these engines a little fauther non of them have the same double camed draw bar that Bachmann used on the J class 4-8-4 it’s completely unique to them and that locomotive.
I have a Trix Big boy sitting here staring me in the face and trust me it would be an insult to German engineering to compare it to Bachmann’s Chinese poor excuse of a locomotive. I firmly believe that what they did was attempt to copy a close coupling drawbar such as BLI’s design but made a few changes of their own so they could not be sued for copyright infringement. I can’t comment on on any of the other manufactures you’ve mentioned as they are European manufacturers which if I am not mistaken do not offer any US prototypes.
If you notice it’s a standard dog bone style drawbar and the tender can be separated from the locomotive by just unplugging the two connectors at the back of the locomotive.
This is only part of the Spectrum J’s drawbar there are tow corresponding pieces that this fits into one mounted on the tender and the other on the locomotive.As Sheldon mentions a good idea is to remove the extra flash left on the part which is clearly evident in the photo
The K4 is one of the best locomotives they make as far as I’m concerned.
I have one of those J’s myself-- bachmann for sure. Did they make more than one edition of it? I’ll have to pull it out and take a look. I haven’t had it out of the box in probably 10 years. I wasn’t really thrilled with its looks (level of detail), etc. So its just sat in the box all this time.
