In 1891, I’m pretty much stuck with Roundhouse 4-4-0, 2-6-0, and 2-8-0. Okay, I could do a Bachmann or IHC old-time 4-4-0, but I haven’t met one I’d throw a Tsunami into.
Now I can go as high as 1908 without changing my design concept. But what have I gained? What other locos now fit this time frame? I have a 3-truck shay and a Heisler I could bash a bit. Other than that…
The only other plastic engine I can think of off the top of my head would be the Bachmann Ten wheeler.
I’m not sure of the prototype for the Bachmann Consolidation, but maybe it could be back dated a bit. (it looks a little modern to me) There were 2-8-0’s running around back then. Also there are plenty of small brass steamers going on Ebay for decent prices lately.
John
Howdy, Chip. Welcome back.
By 1908 the earliest locos with trailing trucks were showing up - 4-6-2s, 2-8-2s, 2-10-2s, often with inside-bearing trailers. 2-8-0s were becoming bigger (I think the Bachmann spectrum 2-8-0 dates from that period.)
If you’re really adventurous, you could doctor up the superstructure of a Russian Decapod - larger diameter boiler, lower domes, different or modified tender. The design is pre-WWI, but the ‘real deal’ didn’t hit American rails until the USRA stopped delivery to the Bolsheviks.
If you don’t object to Pennsy power, the H-8 Consolidations were already in service in 1908 - and are visually identical to the Bowser kit (if you can still get one.) The lookalike G-5 class 4-6-0s are out of your era (built in 1923.)
I believe the prototypes of your two red engines were running in 1908, but I could be wrong.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with a few 19th century locomotives)
Chip, I can’t remember what RR you were basing your layout on. I think it may have been SP. The Spectrum 4-6-0 and 2-8-0 can be back dated and I am doing this now. In some cases the valve gear needs modification and in others the boiler. My guess is that you are looking for DCC/sound and decent running characteristics for locomotives not offered for the 1891 era to justify the change. Peter Smith, Memphis
Chip,
Don’t forget the various 0-4-0 and 0-6-0’s that were around back then. I’d think you’d want saturated steam, and Walthers has some Mantua Metal Products 0-6-0’s (camelback) and 0-6-0T’s with saturated steam.
Personally, I’d try to hang around 20th Century if at all possible because the RR’s had knuckle couplers and air brakes by 1900 or so. That makes operations and modeling a whole lot easier, IMHO, while still being realistic.
Paul A. Cutler III
Weather Or No Go New Haven
Thanks John,
I know there are two versions of the 4-6-0. I’ll have to check to see how close the earlier version is to what the SP had.
Chuck,
I noticed that Roundhouse came out with an 4-6-2. I’ve always been partial to the Pacific. One of my limitations is that I have many 18" curves through the mountains. I have to stay small. My son’s Bachman 2-8-0 seems to do fine though. Here’s a shots of the red engines
You are right and right. I am looking to run SP along the Overland route. And you are right I’m looking for more variety as to what is possible. I don’t have any real qualms with the Roundhouse engines, except that only the 2-6-0 is configured for SP. And no one makes SP lettering for engines that old. I would have to order a special run. But I’ve never seen the Bachman 4-6-0 or 2-8-0 in SP either, but I’ve never thought to look.
Oh yeah, by 1908 SP had converted everything to oil. So there is that added piece of labor. In 1891. the engines were wood fired and that is pretty easy to model.
Paul
I’ll check Mantua out.
Chip,
The Bachmann 2-8-0 is a 19xx era engine. At the turn of the centrury, superheaters were getting popular, and the higher boiler pressures needed ‘piston’ valves as lubrication of a ‘slide’ valve was an issue with the higher temp steam.
The Bachmann 4-6-0(either low or high driver versions) is a ‘slide valve’ engine and will work fine for you.
The Bachmann ‘modern’ 4-4-0 is another good engine that will fit your 1908 time frame.
Your ‘geared’ engines should be ‘good to go’…
Jim Bernier
I just checked and of the Bachmann 2-8-0, 4-4-0, and 4-6-0 and the Roundhouse 4-6-2, none of them come in SP lettering. I’m thinking they are concerned that they would have to produce an oil tender and it’s not worth the effort.
Chip,
Spectrum is your friend. As an SP/YV/Sierra RWY/West Side/HHR modeler, I find very little non-brass in the small steam category and even less that fits West coast… Spectrum does make a short vandy tender lettered for SP (they call it a medium) that can be run behind the consolidation. The Spectrum consolidation is quite a bit bigger than most of the SP consolidations but it will pass quite nicely.
As for Oil tender conversion of the 4-6-0 it is as simple as removing one screw that holds in the coal load, cutting a square of plastic to fill the space, adding a PSC oil filler casting ($2,50) and painting. Spectrum offers unlettered versions of the 4-4-0, 2-8-0 and the 4-6-0. I have bottom fed these locos on Ebay and painted over the lettering and re-decaled. Spectrum makes an oil burning version of the shay (narrow stack). Other options include Mantua, Roundhouse etc… I like Spectrum’s detail, availability, running capabilities and value over these other brands. I would like to see more Spectrum quality small west coast steam or small steam in general.
If you want more specific models then you are looking at brass. I mention this because if you get the bug bad enough this is where it will lead. There are lots of brass SP consolidations around including recent releases by PSC and Sunset of the SP consolidations. I find them expensive but that is a subjective judgment. I am very thrifty but I eventually bit the bullet and saved up enough to buy some brass. Ultimately you might end up there some day as well. Older brass can be had for less but unless you get lucky, expect to work on it to make it run well.
The Westside Sierra #24 2-8-0 is a good bet as they came with a can motor, ran very well (I can send you the tweaks), and were West Coast small steam… These can
Thanks Guy. This is encouraging.
And also thanks for the Kudos. Believe it or not, you are the only person ever to mention it online other than on Joe’s site. (Just finished a second.)
Guy makes some good points. A high boiler 4-6-0 can provide a reasonable representation of an SP T-1 ( The boiler shape is slightly different). You can use the tender mentioned by Guy. I plan to replace the boiler on mine with a Mantua 4-8-0 style boiler. I converted my 4-4-0 to represent C&NE ( SP Sub) No 1. I replaced the boiler with Model Power but I believe SP had enough 4-4-0’s to go with the existing boiler perhaps slightly modified. I also bashed a Mantua 4-8-0 remotored. This one was a little more difficult. The Spectrum 2-8-0 could be used as a C-9 with a slight modification of the valve gear or a C-4 with a little further work. In both cases relocation of the domes and/or bell might be considered. The bottom line is that Spectrum steam offers a lot of great advantages even without modification and these advantages might be worth further consideration. Peter Smith, Memphis
While they may have started using larger engines like the Bachmann 2-8-0 by 1908, the question would be would they have them on a short line or a SP branch line? I model an east coast branch and even though by the 1930’s the parent road had 2-8-8-2’s, 2-10-2’s, 2-8-2’s, 4-6-2’s and classes of large 2-8-0’s, only the smaller 2-8-0’s and 4-6-0’s, some dating from the 1890s, were used on the branch. Why would the SP use its biggest, most modern, most powerful engines on a small branch line? Would a shortline be able to afford a big new engine?
You may be able to come up with a particular service to justify the new engine (a new mine, a new mill, new through traffic, a new operation). For example my prototype bought a (for the era) large 2-8-0 (roughly the size of the Model Power 2-8-0) to haul cars up the ruling grade and drop them at a yard at the crest, about 15 miles from the north end. Then the regular smaller engines would carry a smaller train up the hill and fill to tonnage that they could handle on the lighter grades over the rest of the 50 miles of the southern end of the branch. So may you have a particular train or service that needs the 2-8-0 and your shortline bought 1, tacked onto a larger order for SP engines (they built 25 for the SP and 1 more copy for you, or you cut a deal with the SP to order 26 and then you got the extra one at the volume price (plus a small fee to the SP for tagging on their order).
PS : 5 years after it was purchased the boiler exploded on the 2-8-0 killing the engine crew. There was/is debate whether it was caused by a failure of maintenance, failure of the crew or a defect in the metal of the boiler.
Dave,
Thanks for the perspective. In this case, it is very encouraging because what I am modeling is the Overland Route from Rocklin to Colfax (and later beyond in both directions.) So where else would the new big powerful engines go than to pull the loads over the Donner Pass. Rocklin is responsible for engine changes on all locos in both directions and Colfax provides the helpers up the steep grade.
Why not take a paradigm shift and work backwards instead of forward. I know an excellent PRR modeler who chose 1920 to be different but all major classes through 2-10-0 and 4-8-2 were built and in service by then. This means all he had to do was some minor modification like headlights and still be prototypical. By researching when engines were puit in service and what ones are must haves a time frame can be determined fairly easily.
An interesting thought. When doing research, I have found that a time line is a basic and essential part of the exercise. With regard to the SP, a great reference is Guy Dunscomb’s book, " A Century of Southern Pacific Steam Locomotives". It provides a time line of when certain changes were introduced such as lettering, fuel conversions, stacks, headlights, etc. This provides a great guide but if further accuracy is desired, it must be remembered that these changes were introduced over time and photographs become a big factor if you really want to get it right. On the other hand, no one can ever get it completely right and in the end, each modeler should set there own standards in this regard depending what is important and acceptable to them. For example, on one locomotive I did 14 years of research before I thought I got it right and could bash it. Shortly thereafter, I found out that the time period I model does not fit the prototype. At that point I decided, who cares. Peter Smith, Memphis
Peter,
If I was modeling the PRR in 1950 (like I was), I can choose to be picky because there is a lot of support.
However, in order to run the SP 1891 or 1908 railroad, as oppose to just model it, I have to get many engines operationally functional quickly. In this case, I choose to get hand-grenade close with the engines and choose to have something for pards to run.
All things being equal, it would be cool to identify individual engines known to be in service and model them. But I have to make a choice and as you see I did.
Now if anyone out there has a beef with that, I’m sure we can work out a time when you work on my engines to bring them up to snuff–as long as you maintain certain standards (to be discussed later.)
PS–I do have Dunscomb’s book. I just have less awareness of what is commercially available as it has never been important.
Chip,
The MDC 4-6-0 you have fits into the 1908 time frame with a few changes. The headlight would would look like Cal-Scale (Bowser) part 190-212 http://www.bowser-trains.com/hoother/calscale/Cal%20Scale%20Steam%20Loco%20Parts2.jpg and the headlight bracket would be at the top of the smokebox front (not on top of the smokebox). They were lit with acetylene gas, the tank for which would probably be along the fireman’s side walkway and there would be no generator. There would be small vertical windows ahead of the main cabside windows (should be pictures in Dunscomb’s book). In 1908, there probably wouldn’t be the train indicators ahead of the stack. The 7,000 gallon MDC tender is correct for the period with leaf spring equipped arch-bar trucks.
The MDC 2-8-0 (the Harriman one) is not actually correct, al
Here is the 1909 Locomotive cyclopedia:
http://books.google.com/books?id=quZSAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=locomotive+cyclopedia#PPA20,M1
Google books has many, many reference books from the turn of the century
Harold
One thing I don’t think anyone mentioned is that to model 1891 accurately you really should be using link and pin couplers. By c.1908 modern knuckle couplers were standard.
