I’m actually in the process of repainting a Bachmann Spectrum HO 2-8-0 in Canadian National colors (a good match for M-5-c class). Looks like there’s a lot of debate around the prototype used for this model. Anyway, it’s not the point since it is very similar to the engine I try to reproduce.
My question is: Waht are the water capacity (IMPERIAL gallons 'cause were are in Canada) and coal capacity (tons) of the tender. CNR always put these informations on their tender. A general approximation would be enough for me.
I took a few mesures and my estimate is 7000 gallons. For coal tons… I’m at lost. And CN added wood-plank coal bunker extension…
Matt, here’s a link to the CNR sig. If you click on “Cyclopedia”, then on “CNR Locomotive Diagrams”, you’ll find a listing of all CNR steam locos. Click on the proper one and you’ll get a diagram with some useful information. (Btw, the notation atop the diagram is not the info for which your looking - instead, consult the chart beneath the drawing, near the right-hand side.
While you’re perfectly free to use the Bachmann loco for that CNR loco, all CNR M-class Consolidations had 57" drivers, noticeably smaller than the 63" ones (I think) on the Bachmann loco.
An even better match would be the N-2-b class, or sister road DW&P’s N-2-a. They’re both very close on many dimensions to the Bachmann loco and the Bachmann cab is almost dead-on. I have three Bachmanns which will be converted to these two classes, although I’m planning very extensive conversions.
Sorry for the novel I’m writing, but you always shake my certitude which is a good thing to progress… Thanks for the info. And I thought I did a good research job on that one!
Effectively, the Bachmann loco has 63" drivers. I can live with a difference of 1.75mm on the drivers… Many others details are noticeably much more over scaled… But that’s my own perception of things. i tend to have much more problem if the silhouette isn’t matching (domes and cab proportions)…
“While you’re perfectly free to use the Bachmann loco for that CNR loco”
Ahahah! You know, who would continue to drive blindly into the wall when told this! OK, our newspapers are full of that! Having not known about the N-2-b, I would perfectly have lived an happy life with my approximate M-5-c.
I made a few checks and found out I had pictures of N-2-b in my consolidation project folders. I think the Elesco feedwater and other details mislead my in believing is wasn’t the good match. It is a little bit nearer to the Bachmann engine than the M-5-c. In fact, both cabs are good match, both boilers are good, domes and other fittings are better on M-5-c (it was on this aspect I made my initial choice), running boards are excellents on N-2-b (not at all on M-5-b, which annoys me now).
To model a N-2-b needs much more detailling parts to add (elesco feedwater, front box on the pilot, bell and other little things a M-5-c doesn’t need) to get the right feel about the prototype. Honestly, I wanted to skip the Elesco feedwater, do a straight forward conversion and skip the repainting process… My LHS closed recently, so I don’t feel like mail ordering one or to detailling parts at high price and waiting forever to get them. And I have already completed the tender conversion… I would just have to change my wood bunker extension for a steel one with stanchions which is quite straightforward…
Sorry, Matt, I didn’t mean to mess up your original plans, and my remarks weren’t made to disparage your choice of locos to model or your ability to do a credible job of making it “look right”.
I’ve been planning my N-2-b and N-2-a conversions for quite some time and have already done some preliminary work such as completely stripping the boilers. I’ve even made some new steam domes and have all of the other detail parts on-hand. These locos will likely have their running boards lowered, which will mean altering the boiler shells so that the running boards can be mounted directly on the boiler weights. I also intend to modify the weights to make them heavier, yet keep them balanced.
All of the photos of N-2-bs which I’ve seen have the Elesco heaters, with the air pump moved to the engineer’s side of the boiler. The Bachmann tender is a good match for both classes, and the pilot is also very close - many of these locos were originally Western Region engines, with horizontally-slatted wood pilots. While those were changed, they kept the original “Transcona” front-end treatment, which is the best-looking arrangement that CN used, in my opinion.
The N-2-as were equipped with exposed Coffin feedwater heaters (and some with tender doghouses, too) and are very brutish-looking locos - all business. Incidentally, the CNR rated the N-2s the same as their Mikes for tonnage.
For “modern” Consolidations without feedwater heaters, at least some of the N-3-b and N-4-a classes would be appropriate. The 2350, an N-3-b is shown in the book Steam at Oakville, and 2551, 2615 and 2629, all N-4-as, are also shown in the same volume, and all without feedwater heaters. There were only 16 N-3-bs, but the N-4-a class encompassed 145 locos. There may be other sub-classes that are appropriate, too. There were also some
Don’t feel bad about it! My initial goal was to model the CNR engine the closest to the Bachmann locomotive.
I shouldn’t be that much more work. I already started to strip a few details and looks like it won’t be that hard to do a N-2-b. Most of the work will include reworking handrails and the coal bunker. Only the feedwater is gonna be a challenge.
From the loco diagram, it looks like the feedater was a standard feature. I’ll try to scratchbuild something believable.
“The N-2-as were equipped with exposed Coffin feedwater heaters (and some with tender doghouses, too) and are very brutish-looking locos - all business. Incidentally, the CNR rated the N-2s the same as their Mikes for tonnage.”
That is exactly the feel that I want for this engine. I’ll probably go for the 2500 or the 2467.
It doesn’t look like anyone really answered your initial question. The Bachmann 2-8-0 uses the USRA medium tender, which has a capacity of 16 tons (of 2000 lbs) of coal and 10,000 US gallons of water. The Imperial gallon is 20% larger that the US gallon, so the water capacity is 8,000 Imp. gallons. As for coal capacity, the British long ton is 2240 lbs, which means it’s 12% more than the US ton. Going by that, the tender coal capacity would be right around 14.3 long tons. .
This morning, when I told the boys that some higher up at CNR offices decided to reclass the engine, I thought they were going to kill me! (jus kidding)
As the day progressed, the changes were easier than expected. I had to use my imagination to find alternatives for missing pieces.
The feedwater was made out of an old papermate ball-point pen and different gauge wire for insulated pipes. The new valve was a random piece in the junk box that fitted the bill. The bell was salvaged from my previous IHC 2-6-0 kitbash.
I’m quite proud of this one, it got everything that looks CNR to me: the front bell, the front and cab handrails and a feedwater. I didn’t expect this at all at first! The engine is gonna see a lot of operation, so cramping too much details wasn’t my goal. However, I’ll probably improve some details until I paint it (especially replacing the red wire for a smaller gauge).
That’s some pretty-decent improvising, Matt, and some quick work, too. [tup] I especially like the front-end treatment - you’ve really captured that “Transcona” look and I also like the job you did on the air tank cover.
Here are a couple of photos showing the components of an Elesco feedwater heater system. As you can see in the second view, the steam delivery pipes to the heater bundle and the hot water delivery pipe to the check valve were often a larger apparent diameter due to them being lagged (wrapped in insulation).
I’m on vacation now, so I was able to do an 8 hours rush on the loco. I don’t regret the extra work to do a N-2-b, like you said it got the Transcona feel.
I used your pictures and prototype pictures for the feedwater. I guess I’ll just have to rewire the cold water pipe from the pump. That’s a good thing, I didn’t like the clamps I made. I’ll redo them wire finer brass wire.
I’m a little bit curious, on your brass engine, a large insulated pipe runs from the feedwater to the cab. What is its purpose? I didn’t see any on my prototype (engine 2500).
An other question about the tender. I redone the brass handrail and I’m now ready to build a new coal bunker. The only pictures I got are all 3/4 view from the front so it’s hard to tell how it was made. From what I see, the sides seem to be tapered. Is it an optical illusion. Or maybe just the back side is tapered (as often seen on other classes of locomotive). On top, I can see a handrail which looks to be U-shaped (running on both sides and front of the bunker but not behind). If you have any information, pictures or diagram about this, it would be helpful.
Matt, most of my pictures are also 3/4 views, but if you can get a copy of Ian Wilson’s “Steam to the Niagara Frontier” there are several good shots of N-2-b locos: 2506 on pages 6 and 17, 2470 on page 8 (a good fireman’s side view) and page 174 (an elevated view of the coal bunker as seen from the rear), and 2469 on pages 104 and 106.
The bumped-up area on the Bachmann tender needs to be altered somewhat with a well-defined step-down at its front corners. The lower bunker extension appears to taper slightly inward on its sides, but is vertical on the rear, while the uppermost add-on is straight on some locos, tapered on others, and non-existent on still others. The handrail on the bunker extensions is higher than the lower extension and slightly below the top of the upper extension, so it appears that the higher bunker extension was added after the handrails were in place. In all examples which I’ve seen, the handrails are along both sides and the rear of the bunker, but not at the front.
As for your loco, don’t forget that the pump on the Bachmann loco is a cross compound air pump. The water pump for an Elesco heater looks somewhat similar - it’s the one closest to the cab in my first photo, above.
On the brass loco in my second photo above, that lagged pipe actual runs from a valve on the steam dome to the smokebox front, where it terminates in a flexible extension fitted with a plug. This was used to supply steam to a Barber-Greene Sno-Loader, a device which scooped-up snow, elevating it on conveyors which then deposited it a modified surplus tender where it was melted by the steam. I think these devices were used mainly in yards and built-up areas where there was no place to which the snow could be pushed.
“The bumped-up area on the Bachmann tender needs to be altered somewhat with a well-defined step-down at its front corners. The lower bunker extension appears to taper slightly inward on its sides, but is vertical on the rear, while the uppermost add-on is straight on some locos, tapered on others, and non-existent on still others. The handrail on the bunker extensions is higher than the lower extension and slightly below the top of the upper extension, so it appears that the higher bunker extension was added after the handrails were in place. In all examples which I’ve seen, the handrails are along both sides and the rear of the bunker, but not at the front.”
It confirms my first impression. I’ve seen bunker extensions which were just wood plank on each sides (excepts front and rear) that were supported by the handrail. On the right side of the tender, I’ve also seen two grab iron beside the CNR herald. To be more prototypical, front tender steps should be reworked and extended… Lots of work to do on the tender front as I see. An other day, an other challenge!
Thanks for the tip about the air pump… My knowledge of steam power is merely cosmetic! I’ll check what I can do when I’ll redo the water pump piping. Looks like I will have to move the air pump on the other side… and eliminate an air tank and move the the device on the ash tray (?) near the cylinders… I think I’ve just opened Pandora box!!! At this point, I think I’ll have to make some compromises…
Since I have no pretense to follow perfectly the prototype on this one, but get the feeling of a CNR freight engine, here’s my alternative. Strip the air tank, invert the reversing rod (build a new support for it under the boiler), install the air pump in the right place and shorten the piping under the running board. Sure, things wouldn’t be pototypical, but at least all the wo
I completely rebuilt the tender today. Almost all original features are now visibles. The only unprototypical thing is the rear ladder which I suspect to be on the right instead of left.
This morning, I built the new water pump from wire, styrene, sprue, diesel sideframe parts and infamous Accurail tuck pins. I would like to verify the piping with you since N-2-b have strange little things near the cab. I’ve got a lot of questions for you. I preer to check up twice instead of redoing at this stuff again.
Here are the 2 pictures I use for my model and to locate pipes. For specific details, 2500 is the definitive choice (the feedwater and its pipe connections were modelled according to it since they differs between each engines).
What is the cylindrical feature near the cab? A small pipe also enter the cab at its right.
From the water pump, a pipe run horizontally to the right, just below the lagged pipe connecting with the feedwater. Could it be the Exhaust Steam going to the feedwater (according to your pictures)? I’m asking because it doesn’t connect to the feedwater but is plugged into the boiler were a small check valve (circular thing) is located on the Bachmann boiler.
A large pipe runs horizontally under the water pump and connects to the tender. What is it? M guess would be that it returns condensed vapor from the cylinder back to the tender… I remember reading something about this but maybe I wrong.
Very imaginative use of materials for your water pump, Matt. [tup]
I’m uncertain as to the function of that cylindrical part ahead of the cab. My PSC cataloge shows a somewhat similar part as a separator with muffler, but gives no indication of what’s being separated or muffled. [*-)]
The outlined item which you correctly identified as a whistle is next to the steam dome. The sand dome is the one ahead of that, with the rounded top. The pipes coming from it are the sand delivery pipes. The pipe in the outline below that of the whistle is most likely the steam delivery pipe to the water pump. I don’t think that the pipe ahead of that, which you’ve indicated with an arrow, is the exhaust pipe from the pump, though. More likely it’s a continuation of the diagonal pipe coming from the cab, and is a supply line for steam to the blower - you’ll note that it enters the smokebox. The blower was used to create draught for the fire when the loco is standing. The exhaust steam pipe for the water pump is likely under the boiler lagging, and wouldn’t be visible until it’s somewhere near to the heater bundle.
The water pump itself has two distinct sections: the upper part encloses a pair of 8" steam-powered pistons which activate a pair of 5 1/2" pistons in the lower section - these are the ones which move the water. The steam in this type of pump does not mix with the water, hence the exhaust line to the fwh, where it helps in the heating process. The air pump on the opposite side of the loco operates in a similar manner, with steam pistons in the upper area driving compressor pistons in the lower section. Again, the exhaust steam is routed in a pipe, usually, but not always, under the lagging to the fwh.
Those circular things on the boiler casting are washout plugs, used to remove sediment from the boiler, and no pipes should be connected to them.
I think that you’re correct about the pipe passing b
Thank you very much Wayne, I didn’t expect a fast answer after so much questions.
You know, building parts out of nothing is quite a funny process. Each time I do it, I draw a CAD drawing of the object in scale to get the proportion right, then I try to reproduce it with parts available. It’s full of flaws I must admit, but it feels already good to have the right parts in the right place. I wouldn’t put my finished engine beside yours, but I feel it will be at home on the layout. Consolidation have always been one of my favorite steam engine (including Mikado’s). I see it as the smallest large steam locomotive. Smaller wheel arrangement doesn’t have the heavy-duty looks.
Honestly, I have a lot of respect for folks that built up engine from almost nothing back in the 30’s and the 40’s.
Good to know that the engineer side pictures I used as reference shown incomplete piping. I felt like the boiler was a little bit nude… I removed completely the Bachmann piping, but I’ll probably reuse the valves. BTW, I’m quite happy to see the reversing mecanism will be easier to do than first expected. That’s a relief.
I’ve found out that depending the locomotive, some pipes have or haven’t lagging. Or could it be lagging was removed during the scrapping process in some pictures.
When painting the laggeg pipes, I will try to do some “faux-fini” with different shades of black.
I’ll take take to digest and redraw a pipe diagram tomorrow. Modifications should be straight forward from this point. I’ll probably remove the ugly Bachmann whistle. I’m happy to have some spare brass parts from Cal-Scale.
I hope I don’t bother you with all those questions. It’s easier to do modifications when you know the purpose of every parts. It my first extensive redetailling (which wasn’t supposed to be 4 days ago!) and I find it much more entertaining than I first thought.
I’ll keep you updated. Your comments are always welcome. They force me to push the
