The new (2015) 4-6-0s

[Searsport]

Hmmm. I am pleased to see the 4-6-0 back, but....

The opportunity fumbled - Texas & Pacific #316 - This is a preserved loco and so a welcome addition. The problem? Bachmann have two 4-6-0 models in their stable, one with 52" drivers, the other with 63" drivers. The real #316 has 63" drivers. So Bachmann use the model with 52" drivers - why? Its not as if the real loco is not there to check. Texas State Railroad confirm their #316 as being built by Cooke in 1901. In fact from a batch of 42 delivered by Cooke in 1901-2, to T&P class D9 built between 1900-6 by Rogers and Cooke, and the most numerous single class of 4-6-0 on the T&P. Driver Dia 63". And there are plenty of photos of #316 online.

There is one good point - it comes DCC ready so we don't have to pay for then throw away a limited spec chip to replace it with the real deal. Does it come with a speaker pre-fitted? That was something Bachmann promised for all new high-end DCC ready locos some years ago.

And the opportunity missed. I see a range of schemes for major RRs which may or may not have had Baldwin 4-6-0s with 52" drivers. But sadly none for the SAL, which really did have some Baldwin 4-6-0s with small drivers, e.g. SAL #689 from a class of four built 1907-10 for the Charlotte Harbor & Northern (56" drivers), and several others built by Burnham Williams for the Georgia Florida & Alabama, variously with 50" or 56" drivers, e.g. SAL #684 (50") or #686 (56"), and by various ALCo constituents for other small lines absorbed into the SAL.

This miss seems especially strange considering the extensive coverage of the SAL on the Baldwin and Richmond 4-4-0 series.

And there are no undecorated models.

I have mentioned these SAL small-wheeled 4-6-0s several times before in these pages in the context of future runs of the 4-6-0. Maybe next time? Or maybe we will see a "high-boiler" 4-6-0 for the SAL next year? They had several of those too - even some with spot-on 63" drivers and built by Burnham Williams / Baldwin.

One can but wish!
Bill.

[electrical whiz kid]

Searsport;
It would be my understanding (I could be wrong...) but didn't Bachmann say they were not going to produce the "Spectrum" line any more?  That 4-6-0 with the small drivers would not be the favourite locomotive on the roster.  It always reminded me of my big-mouthed runt brother...(he reads this stuff too...)  I have toyed with the idea of doing a boiler swap with a Roundhouse 2-8-0 HOn3.  This was somewhat of a "one size fits all" proposition with MDC.
Enter Bachmann's "parts" catalogue.  I shall experiment around with the parts I have so far, accrued.  I still may go back to toying with that MDC boiler swap.

Rich C.
 

[Trainman203]

The return of the HO scale ten wheeler is the best news I've heard from the Bach Man in years.  It is a beautifully proportioned locomotive, ostensibly a Ma and Pa engine but it really is a catalog locomotive that many roads bought off the shelf, so to speak ....... even though this one was originally a slide valve engine with aftermarket later applied Walschaerts gear.  The Mississippi Central  and the Y&MV had engines almost spot-on to this one.  If you, like me, model steam powered shortlines (and particularly, like me , short Deep South roads), this engine is a must-have.  I already have four of the earlier ones but a couple more will find their way to my rail.

I see it is apparently no longer a Spectrum engine, and some detail of the past may be diminished but I don't care.  Even if it bears only superficial resemblance  to a TP engine I don't care either. If the colors are anywhere near prototypical I'm getting  one and thrilled to have the TP noticed at all. I'm not a sound-value fan but if you get it you get a factory installed speaker with adequate sound to serve until you get a better decoder.

Thanks to the Bach Man for listening to us.   A lot of us cried long, hard, and loud when this engine went away 5 years ago, and he apparently heard.

[richardl]

I have both versions. The boiler is lower, only because of the smaller drivers. Not really lower in the frame like older prototypical low boiler locos.
Saw this mention in Ton's Trains website few years ago but both still nice locos. The illusion works.

http://tonysdcc.com/tonystips/2003/032703.htm

Rich

[Trainman203]

Yes I have both versions too.  The low driver version is prototypical, the 63" driver version is generic .  It is the same running gear but with  bigger drivers and the boiler raised, it is generic but really close to a lot of ten wheelers.

I hope this version is eventually re-offered but for now I'm thrilled with the 52" driver engine.

[richardl]

Yes I have both versions too.  The low driver version is prototypical, the 63" driver version is generic .  It is the same running gear but with  bigger drivers and the boiler raised, it is generic but really close to a lot of ten wheelers.

I hope this version is eventually re-offered but for now I'm thrilled with the 52" driver engine.

The only reason I mentioned prototypical is from a series of railroad books by George Abdill, former locomotive driver, that shows some low boiler that are really lower into the frame than normal and yes they could be a maintenance issue. Don't remember why they were built that way.

Rich

[Trainman203]

I had a couple of those Abdill books a long time ago, very cool.  I love the old time low boilered engines.  None of them had trailing trucks.

[ebtnut]

The boilers were set low because the firebox was set down between the frame rails.  As locomotive and boiler design technology advanced, the firebox later was widened some and set on top of the frame rails.  This raised the boiler center line up about a foot or so.  Around 1900, designs advanced further to where the firebox was raised above the drivers, allowing it to get wider with more grate area.  This really raised the overall height of the locos.  Bigger fireboxes also meant much bigger boilers.   Trailing trucks allowed the fireboxes to be both wider and deeper, to maybe 100 square feet or more. 

[Trainman203]

I thought there would be a lot more excitement about the return of this engine.

[BaltoOhioRRfan]

I thought there would be a lot more excitement about the return of this engine.

I'm happy they're back, as I'm trying to get the correct tender for one of the two high boilers i have(tender at one time was considered damage beyond use, but now is used behind a 2-8-0)

And I'm somewhat happy to see some newer roadnames, but the one i'm most interested in comes only with DCC & Sound (the C&O one) The B&O one, I already have 4 of those, 2 low boiler, 2 high boiler.

[Trainman203]

Not much excitement .... Hope they don't cancel the run.........

[austrian]

Not much excitement .... Hope they don't cancel the run.........

It is hard for me to get excited after comparing the $257.00 price of the ALCO 2-6-0 - DCC Sound Value with the $399.00 price of the BALDWIN 52" DRIVER 4-6-0 STEAM LOCOMOTIVE (DCC SOUND VALUE-EQUIPPED).
$142 for a leading axle more? I doubt that the real Santa Fe would have ordered a tenwheeler instead of mogul for that much money more!
I would have bought both a UP and a Santa Fe one but will probably buy only one. Or I could do as the prototype did -
save money by buying diesels.

Thomas

[Trainman203]

It's probably got a lot better detail.  Like Spectrum  used to have.  It used to be a Spectrum engine, like the 2-8-0.

Plus, not affecting the price, but in my opinion, it is a much more graceful engine than the what I believe to be ungainly looking 2-6-0, with its incomplete detail and a lot of molded on stuff.

I have two of those moguls and that's all I need.  I cannot get enough of the 4-6-0s.

[NevinW]

I'll definitely grab a couple.  I hope the lettering is easy to remove.