I’m planning to purchase a 90’ turntable, but before I do I want to make sure the steam locomotives I plan to run on my layout will fit on it. I plan to use medium size engines like 2-8-2 mikados and 4-6-2 pacifics. Nothing giant. Will a typical mikado or pacific (like the Broadway Limited models) fit on a 90’ turntable? Most manufacturers don’t include model length in their specs. Thanks!
The engines you mention will be too big for a 90 ft table . The table is just a little over 12 inches long and a 4-8-4 Reading t-1 I have measures over 15 inches with tender. A small 0-4-0 may work but the road engines will probably be too big.
I have 2 consolidations that fit on mine, Mikados and Pacifics do not fit.
Mike
They might. I did a quick lookup of NYC Pacifics and Mikes. The longest Mike looks to have been about 88’ over the couplers and about 77’ from pilot wheel to rear tender wheel (These had the 6-axle long haul tenders). The longest Pacifics (also with long-haul tenders) were just over 80’ long over the wheels. (Note that these were 1:1 lengths, models might be longer or shorter depending on the MFG’s method of making them work on the min radius curves)
Both of these engines were over 90’ long after taking the couplers and overhang int effect, however, since the wheels are what matter on the TT, they’ll be fine (and prototypical) to turn on 90’ turntables. Would be prototypical as well, because the locos were designed so that they could fit on the shorter TT’s that many railroads had.
Now, if you’re looking toward Hudsons, Niagaras/Northerns, and bigger steam, you will more likely than not need the 130’ TT to turn them.
I am impatiently waiting for the 130 footer for just that reason. If I am going to lay out that kind of money, I don’t want to be frustrated later when I get an even larger engine that I thought I ever wanted.
FP:
A lot of that depends on the length of the tender, I think.
Bowser’s site lists lengths. Their USRA Pacific, light Mike, K4, L1, K-11, and USRA Mountain would fit. The Consolidations, Atlantics, and Ten-Wheelers would certainly fit. The I1 and M1 would probably fit with their original smaller tenders, but not with the long-haul tender Bowser supplies. The N2/USRA 2-10-2 might squeeze on with some overhang of the tender at the back, which is allegedly why the N_ _ Niagaras had that rear overhang.
The prototype railroads certainly had a lot of 90 footers in the steam era. The Port Morris yard article showed one, which replaced an earlier 60 footer in the 1920s. I think the 90 footer had extension rails added at some point. I will have to go back and check the article.
It doesn’t sound like floridaflyer has direct experience on this matter, and I didn’t think you planned on running 4-8-4s. I possess a Division Point model of a S.P. Mk-6 4-6-2 with a large six-wheeled tender. Its wheelbase is less than 87 feet, so it fits on a 90’ turntable. It is similar in size to my S.P. 2-8-2. So, unless your models will have extraordinarily large tenders, such locomotives should fit on a 90’ turntable. Both these locomotives are considered “medium-sized.” (Note: prototype railroads used extra-short tenders on locomotives if necessary to fit on smaller turntables.)
Don’t get a turntable larger than you need. A 130’ turntable (13,270 square feet) needs more than twice the space required by a 90’ (6360 square foot) turntable. Also, Pacific and Mikado locomotives generally need about 24" radius to operate reliably. Are your track radii large enough for larger locomotives?
Of course, the real answer is for you or someone to measure the actual wheelbase of the particular models you are interested in and determine whether it is under 90’.
Mark
Let me put it this way…the New Haven RR’s biggest table was 110’ at Cedar Hill (CT). The rest of the RR got by with 95’ tables, including Southampton St. in Boston and Charles St. in Providence, or less.
The NH’s steam roster included 2-10-2’s and 4-8-2’s, as well as 4-6-4’s, 4-6-2’s, etc. Some of the 4-8-2’s were of the USRA type (like the Bachmann Spectrum model), and some of them got Vandy tenders bringing them to almost 100’ in overall length (wheelbase was, obviously, 95’ or less). If a 95’ table could handle Mountains and Santa Fes, a 90’ table should be able to handle most Mikes and Pacifics. If you have a Pacific that doesn’t fit on a 90’ table, it must have a centipede tender…or two. [:)]
Paul A. Cutler III
Weather Or No Go New Haven
I grabbed my hot smokin’ Kalmbach Model Railroader Cyclopedia-Volume 1 STEAM LOCOMOTIVES and an equally hot smokin’ calculator and did some arbitrary checking of Mikados, Pacifics, and Mountains - all USRA locomotives I might mention. All would fit on a 90’ turntable with the as-built USRA tenders; 2-10-2s were just a hair too long. Although there was some leeway in the allowable tender length of the Mikados and Pacifics you would probably have trouble fitting (USRA) Mountains on your specified length turntable if your tender exceeds the specifications for the USRA tenders. You could probably squeeze a 2-10-2 if you fitted it with a ping-pong length tender such as might have been used on a 2-8-0, etc; such practice would, I believe, be prototypical. Because most superpower steam - 2-8-4s, 2-10-4s, 4-8-4s, etc - ran with longer tenders you can pretty well discount them UNLESS you were to fit them with shorter tenders. My modeling gauge is N Scale so someone else is going to have to provide info on the Broadway lokes.
In the waning days of steam some Mikados and Pacifics survived on branchlines because the length of the turntables available were too short to accomodate their much newer superpower brothers.
Most HO 2-8-2 & 4-6-2 steamers will fit on a 90’ turntable. I have a Model Power USRA light Pacific and a BLI USRA heavy Mikado and they both fit on the Walthers 90’ TT. Some engines of this class will not fit if they have extra long tenders. Most 4-8-4 engines will require at least a 100’ TT.
Jim
As-built, the USRA Pacifics and Mikados should fit a 90 foot turntable - it depends on how closely the manufacturer adhered to prototype length dimensions. (I am looking at prototype plans, not actual models.) Locomotives without trailing trucks and most with two wheels under the firebox should fit unless they are hauling humongous tenders. Locos with four-wheel trailing trucks will probably NOT fit - mainly because most of them have longer tenders to feed the higher-capacity boilers and fireboxes. Ditto for PRR prototypes with ‘Lines West’ tenders - which were longer than the locomotives!
The NYC had standardized on 100 foot turntables, which the Niagara was designed to fit. Because of model design compromises, the model won’t - unless it has prototype-correct cab/tender spacing.
For me, a 90 foot HO turntable would be overkill. My prototypes ran 20 meters over coupler faces - just under 10 inches. A 20 scale meter table gives lots of wiggle room, even with wider-than-prototype cab-tender spacing.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - in HOj, 1:80 scale)
Isn’t a Mikado longer than a Hudson??
Also in your planning, don’t forget how much space the roundhouse will take. We just finished laying out the turntable and roundhouse on our Boothbay club layout. We are using the Walthers 90’ table and roundhouse. The space they take up is HUGE. I did not put a ruler to it, but the radius from the TT center to the back of the roundhouse (without the extended stall) has to be 2 to 2-1/2 feet! That’s a lot of real estate for a home layout.
From the NYC Dimensions & classification booklet I have, no - a Mike isn’t longer than a Hudson.
The longest “H” - series Mikes were 89’ 3.75" over the couplers, with the 6-axle 15,000 gal tenders; or 81’ 7.125" over teh couplers with the 4-axle 12,000 gal tenders (though there were shorter versions in the series – the shortest being 80’ 11.25" over the couplers).
The shortest “J” - series Hudson (in the booklet) was 95’ 11" over the couplers, the longest was the J3a with the Dreyfus streamlining at 106’ 5.0625" over the couplers.
Edit: The J1c & J1e were also 106’ 5 1/16" long over the couplers.
A Mike or a Pacific (2-8-2, 4-6-2) should do just fine on a 90’ table. I just measured the longest Mike I have (a brass Midland Valley USRA copy with a very long “doghouse” tender) and the wheelbase falls well short of the 87’ on my scale rule. Pacifics are considerably shorter, even the Bowser PRR K-4s). A Reading 4-8-4 wouldn’t fit, of course, but then you never mentioned anything about 4-8-4s in your post, did you? [:)]
There weren’t a lot of prototype turntables in the 130-135-foot range, since there weren’t all that many locos that long (contrary to recent hobby manufacturers’ excesses, not everybody had Big Boys.)
My BLI Hudson, a considerably bigger (longer) engine than the Pacific or the Mike, fits comfortably on my Walthers 90’er. So, contrary to what was stated several posts above, you will enjoy the use of a scale 90’ turntable if you elect to purchase either engine.
This very issue has me ticked off at Walther’s, correct me if I’m wrong, but the most common turntable length in the US during the late steam era was 100’.
90’ is too short for most and 130’ is entirely too large for most.
Hmmm…Hudsons with tender as built were 95’11" long. With the long distance tender PT-4 they exceeded 100’.
Maybe the Walther’s 90’ is bigger than 90’?
Except in the case where items are near the turntable, what counts is the distance between the two axles most far apart on the engine and tender. On the J1d, that would be the lead pilot truck axle and the last tender axle. The distance between the couplers is only relevant in the context that is in my opening statement. So, the BLI J1d fits quite nicely on the Walters 90’er, but not as if there’s three scale feet to spare. It takes some throttle control and BEMF to get it to stop balanced fully on the bridge. But fit it does, and only because the outer axles are within the 90’ rail length on that model bridge.
Thanks everyone for your replies! Sounds like the 90’ will probably work, and I seriously doubt I’ll have room for the 130’ anyway.