This is a pic of Bachmanns HO Spectrum H-4 2-6-6-2 articulated steam loco with DCC and sound. Engine list for $525.00, I’ve found a web site to buy it for $309.00.
I have a 4’ X 8’ DCC layout with two 18 degree curves, others have been modified to about 20 degrees using flex track. All track is nickel silver code 83 track.
I’ve looked all over and can not seem to find the running specs of this model, knowing I’ve some sharp radius curves and their are two single tunnel portals with 18 radius curves entering them. Other two portals have at least 20 inches of straight track either side of the portal.
This ones is not only sharp at 18 radius but also is a 3 1/2 degree climb and inside portal track has been modified to more than 20 degrees with flex track, then straightens out at least 20 inches before coming out of tunnel at upper right of pic.
Although advertising says “Articulated”, does it really do a good job of articulating around curves?
Yeah I know about overhang, but I’m counting on the tender not being much over 40 scale feet so maybe the cars behind will ease into the curves. I’ve tested the curves into the tunnels using a modified 85’ passenger car ( which I do not use ) and the overhang is terrible but does not collide with the portal edges nor my signals of those on a curve. In fact the 85’ pass car clears everything on the track, so I’m using that for a reference but I do need some feedback on the engines turning capabilities , how is the sound, DCC decoder, etc.
Good ole Bachmann fails to tell you much so that’s why I’m knocking on your guys doors. [B]
This is where I may be able to use my Modelers license for this model RR. [:D]
You mention 18 and 20 “degree” curves. I suspect you mean 18-20 inch radius (as your layout is 4x8). Assuming that to be the case, I seriously doubt you could run that articulated around the layout (which from the photo looks really nice by the way).
A lot of times manufacturers will tout that their large locos or cars will take this or that minimum radius. Trust me, that usually is an exaggeration, or true for a very explicit situation. Even though that particular loco is (I believe) articulated, I don’t think its enough to do what you want it to do.
All that being said, IMHO, your layout - which appears to be in the '50s-'60s, would probably do better with a steam or diesel switcher, or a smaller steamer like a 2-8-0. They would look much better on your given space, and I think you would be happier with them.
I am skeptical that it would make it successfully around 18" radius curves in spite of that one post to the contrary. But, maybe the better question than Will it Work? is Why Bother?
As others have said, you have a great looking layout, but it hardly looks like a scene in which you would expect to find such a monster as you propose.
Oops, I thought I edited that all out? Yes I did mean “radius”. Degrees, jeez I think I may need some CA cement for the loose nuts rattling around in my head. [banghead]
The eight wheel steamers are a no-no but six wheel will turn just fine. I was just hoping that being articulated I could just “double” up on the six and have a nice looking steam for my freights.
I’m slowly going back in time as this layout is nine years old and started out in the 70’s, now in the 50’s, maybe will go back another 15 or so later.
Yes, the 2-6-6-2 by Bachmann will handle 18" radius curves. The review by Model Railroader mentions this in their review.
So, if you are determined you want this engine, it will work. Also not there is surpsisingly little overhang as well.
I agree with the other posters that on a 4’ x 8’ layout a smaller engine would look better. Both of the Spectrum steam engines the 2-8-0 and the 4-6-0 run well on 18" curves and would look much better that the mallet.
Yes it will handle 18" radius curves, but I bet the pilot is going to hit that tunnel portal on the left because it will be hanging WAY out on 18" radius curves. The overhang issue with a large articulated liek that isn’t the tender and the cars coupled to it, it’s the pilot and the front of the boiler, and also the inside side of the boiler between the engines, which will hang well over the inside rail on a sharp curve.
Believe it or not, My big artics will negotiate curves better than my rigid 2-10-4 or 4-8-2 and even my 2-10-0 steamers. I have a yard lead that rises up on a curve into a turnout to the main line and even a small 2-8-0 will leave the rails sometimes if it is not crawling but those big 2-8-8-2s will climb with out a hitch. Yes overhang is terrible looking even on broad curves but this is what we have to deal with in the modeling world.
I have purchased several different steamers from different manufacturers, and every one of them, to an engine, has given me some work to do, and that was after some surprises. It’s part of learning. But, for me, getting the engine was a must. I desired them, bought them, and then did what I had to to make 'em work. I think you may be headed down the same path; something gets under your skin and that’s it…there’s no undoing it, no itching powder that works, except unwrapping the beastie for the first time and trying it out.
I suspect you will have some clearance issues as some of the other gentlemen predict. But my understanding is that this engine is meant to run on smaller layouts with tight curves. I agree…watch that tunnel carefully the first time…no paint scraping or detail detaching!!!
You might be ok. The new mallets being made don’t truly articulate. Both sets of drivers rotate…just like the trucks on a diesel loco. This allows them to go around a sharper curve and not look as bad. To bad there wasn’t a way for you to take it on a test drive. ( another reason to like the LHS).
You have gotten a lot of good advice from the posts and I would have to agree that if you want a particular locomotive, even if it may be out of place, go for it and satisfy your your inner self. I model the NYC (mostly!) but have UP Big Boys, Challengers and a N&W Y6b just because I like them. If you aren’t modelling a specific railroad and time if shouldn’t make any difference to you. I love to watch the big articulateds run around my layout (although I have 30" radius mainline curves!) even though the NYC didn’t have any. “Model railroading is fun” as the MR magazine states1
Now that we’ve resolved the difference between 18 degrees (43 7/8" radius) and 18" radius let me add my humble opinion into the mix: this engine is entirely too big for 18" radius curves I don’t care whether it has been designed to operate on curves that tight or not. A quarter of a century ago I bolted HO-Scale for N-Scale because my available space allowed only 18" radius curves and I couldn’t stand looking at my stable of Cary/Mantua Mikes on those tight curves. I’m not advocating that you charge off in that direction especially since the photo accompanying your posting indicates that you are well on your way to becoming an accomplished modeler . . . . . . . . . . I would, however, advocate that you allot your iron men to an iron horse of somewhat more conservative dimensions.
You know I’m not even sure I would run one of Bachmann’s N-Scale 2-6-6-2s on 18" radius curves; this is a (HO-Scale) 44" radius engine.
I don’t think you will have a problem with the engine and your turns. I do not have the engine you are looking at (I would have, but my Lawnmower died[banghead]) but I do run big steam and diesel’s and still have a 18 inch turn left on the layout.
These pictures are of 4 of my steam engines going around the hidden 18 inch turn. I took them for a other post for a member that was told a BLI Y6 b would not take a 18" turn.
First is a Hudson 4-6-4
Next is a M1 a 4-8-2
Now a Y6b 2-8-8-2
Finally the Big Boy 4-8-8-4
I see time and time again people posting that these engines and 6 wheel Diesel will not handle tight turns, but they have on my layout for years? Far as looks, well they can look a little odd, but if you want the Steamer I would not let that stop you from getting it.
Ken’s post and related photos made me think of something.
It would be an interesting experiment if someone could set up a test track consisting of a perfect circle of 18" radius curved sectional track. Then, run a series of larger engines, both steam and diesel, to determine, once and for all, which ones have performance issues on such a tight radius.
Well, I have four of these locos, and while I don’t have any 18" radius curves, at least not on any part of the layout where this size loco runs, they will run on 18" radius.
They don’t look so good doing it, but neither does a Mikado. Actually, the boiler of the 2-6-6-2 is only a few scale feet longer than the boiler of a USRA Heavy 4-8-2 or a NKP Berk.
Everyone should keep in mind that the real controling factor with steam locos and curves is the RIGID wheelbase. With an articulated loco, that is the seperate wheelbase of each set of drivers. And with these modern models with both driver sets that swivel, overhang is balanced front, rear and sides.
A 2-6-6-2 has a rigid wheelbase no bigger than a 0-6-0 switcher! No one would thing twice about running an 0-6-0 on 18" radius, they would just do it. There is a reason all those logging locos were 2-6-6-2’s or 2-6-6-0’s - for sharp curves. OK, this is not a logger, but it is an early and relatively small articulated loco. From that standpoint it is way better for sharp curves than a 2-8-2.
I would not recommend it for such a small layout or such small curves strictly from an appearence standpoint, but it will work.
My largest steam recommendation for such sharp curves would be a 2-8-0, because of the reduced rear overhang compared with anything with a trailing truck.
You had a lot of good responses, and I guess the concensus is that the loco would work, but would probably look out of place.
In looking closely at your picture, its obvious you (or whoever built it) have some good modeling skills and have done a nice job given a 4x8 space. My thought is, if there was anyway to build a bigger layout and/or add to the existing one, that would be time/money/effort well spent.
One other comment… If you do get that loco, I wonder if the overhang will cause a problem when it is connected to rolling stock (as it navigates the 18 inch curves)?
That would be interesting to do. But who among us has one of every kind of loco to do that with? ANd at what speed would they be tested? Some may have some locos to build a small list. MAybe our esteemed publisher could come up with an article on just this feature…they have better resources than most of us do. Then there is still the issue of overhang even IF they navigate the 18r circle at a good speed well.
As Cuda Ken’s photos show, the tight-radius-capable locos are actually fully articulated, since both engines pivot - Meyer system, not semi-articulated like their prototypes. (Note the rear engine cylinders poking out from under the running boards.)
There is no law that says that every loco on your roster has to be able to run on your layout right now. I have locos that have yet to turn a driver on my home rails, but accumulated considerable mileage on the layouts of clubs I belonged to. Others, purchased as kits awaiting the day when I could build a layout large enough to justify a big roster, are just now finding the way to the erecting floor (my worktop.)
Bottom line? If you really want that 2-6-6-2, get it now. It won’t be less expensive later.
