I’m looking for a UP Challenger w/tender and perferbly with smoke. anyone know who makes one thats reasonbly priced and isnt articulated?
Seems to me that a challenger is an articulated engine by design. You may need to refine your question, or there is no answer. Also you could help us understand what “reasonable” means for some are buying the new Big Boy for 3 grand and thinking its reasonable.
I’m looking for a challenger that is the same as the orignal not articulated like the rivirossi Big boy is i’m plaing on making my curves quite wide so i dont need one thats articulated. As far as Reasonbly priced id like to stay under 500 or so
They are articulated, thats just how the challenger is. Athearn makes a nice looking one that runs well but you might want to replace the electronics in it for reliability’s sake.
http://www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATHG9132
There is no smoke and that is a good thing. HO smoke doesnt look realistic, but worst of all it leaves a messy, oily coating on everything. Its just not worth it for the tiny whisp that comes out of the stack.
This engine does have sound in it although it doesnt sound all that good. Athearn just uses cheap decoders in thier engines, a decoder swap will make this sound great especially if you use DCC.
Okay, clear enough on reasonably priced, but we need to clarify what you mean by ‘articulated’
A Challenger is articulated. The real loco was articulated. All Challenger models are articulated, or they’re not Challengers. Articulated simply means that there is more than one sets of drivers (i.e. the two 6’s in the in the loco’s 4-6-6-4 designation rather tha something like a 4-6-4 non-articulated loco) The page at http://www.steamlocomotive.com/articulated/ may explain it better.
What I suspect you are actually getting at is not articulation, but rather that the rear driver set is rigid: it doesn’t swivel. On the real loco, the front set of 6 drivers did pivot while the rear set of 6 were fixed - no pivoting or swiveling.
If that’s what you mean, I don’t know that you’ll find a model built that way - especially in the <$500 range. Articulated loco models <$500 are typically going to be more targeted at a “mass market” audience and designed so that people with lower radis curves can still run them… Many ads for articulated locos (the 2-8-8-2 on the back cover of the recently-sent Walther’s Christmas catalog for instance) will make a point of saying that it can negotiate XX" radius (usually 18" or 22") curves.
If that’s not what you meant, then I’m not sure there’s an answer. Unless we’re dealing with confusion over what “articulated” means, you’re asking for something that doesn’t exist. Asking for a “Non-Articulated Challenger” is like saying you want a tricycle with only one wheel… Contradiction in terms.
almost… “Articulated” means it’s hinged in the middle, not that it has two sets of drivers - the PRR T1 (4-4-4-4) was not articulated and has two sets of drivers…
Actually, kc, I believe that articulated means not that there are two engines under the one boiler, but that one of th
Well, it’s more likely I’ve been misinformed all this time, Selector. [oops] My apologies for taking us down a semantical spur…
If what we’re talking about is a Challenger model with a non-articulated (i.e.non-swiveling) rear engine, I do still think it likely that most models, especially at lower price points, will be fully “articulated” in both engines, not merely in the front as with the prototype, which seems to be the originator’s primary concern.
If that’s still not what a non-articulated Challenger means, I’m still at a loss.
Cheers.
Articulated means that a vehicle (bus, locomotive, etc.) is jointed so it can go around a tighter curve. Based on this definition, there is no such thing as a non-articulated Challenger locomotive. Any model of a Challenger must be articulated or it will not be anywhere near accurate. If a model had a rigid frame and were not articulated, it would require larger radius curves than what is found on any of our layouts.
Good morning, everybody.
I’ve been reading, and enjoying, all of these posts - every one of which has missed a key point:
A Challenger (Big Boy, Y-6b, Uintah 2-6-6-2, B&O EM-1…) is *semi-*articulated; i.e., one engine swivels and the other is fixed to the frame in the manner designed by Anatole Mallet. Garratts and Fairlies are true articulated locomotives in that both engines swivel in relation to the frame carrying the boiler. There were many other systems for getting a long locomotive with a lot of drivers around sharp curves, ranging from somewhat strange (DuBosquet, Meyer-Kitson) to weird (Deutsche Kriegsbahn 0-10-0, only the center axles rigid, outer axles geared internally. Looked like an outside-frame 2-6-2, but wasn’t.) And, yes, the Shay, Heisler and Climax are, technically, fully-articulated locomotives.
Robert LaMassena (Sp??) devoted an entire hardcover book to the myriad permutations of articulation in steam locomotives. I own(ed?) a copy of his Articulated Locomotives, but haven’t yet unpacked it after my (not so) recent move.
All is not either black or white, most are shades of grey.
Chuck (running one compound Mallet, and considering a DuBosquet)
Check out Bowser trains. You will have to buy the smoke unit and tender separately, not to mention putting it together yourself.
Yes, I can see that “semi-articulated” would be more accurate. As for the models, you are all correct; I have the Lionel version, and I don’t see how any long-boilered model would have a hope on our typical curves unless the manufacturers articulated both engines. Even the BLI PRR T1 model is fully articulated for just that purpose.
Regards, all,
-Crandell
Thats exactly what i’m looking for 
hmm that will have to do i guess. i must have missed that one when i went thru a week ago the only one i found was one with out the tender. thx very much for finding that for me
Now i can continue on my colection of UP trains Next is the 191 witch i belive is an american