Harriman Steamers

Hoople · January 12, 2008, 07:22:36 PM

It was talked about awhile ago.... But come on, we need some.

HO scale harriman steam. Preferably 2-8-2s, 4-6-2s, 0-6-0s, and others.

There aren't enough mikes and pacifics out there... We need a nice pacific and mike that will suit more than one railroad.

Who's with me?

rogertra · January 12, 2008, 08:40:13 PM

Me.

You forgot a 2-6-0.

Dunno if there was a Harriman 2-6-0 but we still need one.

Pacific Northern · January 12, 2008, 09:42:37 PM

My vote would be for a Harriman 2-6-0 or a 2-6-2.

TonyD · January 12, 2008, 10:07:44 PM

I don't know if I am on the same page here, but- why is a Harriman steamer called a Harriman? Seems the boilers- which is what I notice 1st, is more a vanderbilt line design, sand dome, taper to the steam dome, then a turret infront of the cab. I know the real vanderbilt had some weird firebox, but- a Vanderbilt tender, -I don't know of a Vanderbilt line that used them- but all Harriman lines used them....am I the only one confused about this? I KNOW someone out here can set me straight....as for the thread, yeah I had to kitbash alco or MLW pacifics out of a k-4 chassis and whatever else I had to use as a boiler.... that's why you can't thro anything away.....

Jake · January 12, 2008, 11:18:23 PM

Quote from: TonyD on January 12, 2008, 10:07:44 PM
I don't know if I am on the same page here, but- why is a Harriman steamer called a Harriman? Seems the boilers- which is what I notice 1st, is more a vanderbilt line design, sand dome, taper to the steam dome, then a turret infront of the cab. I know the real vanderbilt had some weird firebox, but- a Vanderbilt tender, -I don't know of a Vanderbilt line that used them- but all Harriman lines used them....am I the only one confused about this? I KNOW someone out here can set me straight....as for the thread, yeah I had to kitbash alco or MLW pacifics out of a k-4 chassis and whatever else I had to use as a boiler.... that's why you can't thro anything away.....

...Because that is the name of the company that manufactured them... $:-\$

Paducah Style · January 13, 2008, 12:02:26 AM

Harriman 2-8-2's? Whoever releases them can't do it fast enough. This subject has been hashed out many times before on this forum; hopefully one of these days some of this mud we're throwing will stick! Hoople is absolutely correct in requesting Harriman-style steam locos. The USRAs have been done to death. If a manufacturer wants to be unique, then do something different from eveyone else. Bachmann Spectrum had the foresight and intiative to offer something revolutionary: affordable, plastic, quality steam. It's time for them to lead the industry again!

BTW, Harriman refers to Mr. E.H. Harriman, and, generally speaking, refers to the sort/design of locos built for and operated by those roads in his sphere of influence like UP, SP, IC, et al.

Brad
Modeling the IC in 1950

Yukonsam · January 13, 2008, 08:13:00 AM

Hi

During the Harriman administration several different types of locomotives were built to Common Standard plans for all Harriman roads.

As for SP, they had 2-6-0 class M-9, M-10 and M-11.

Also 4-4-2 Atlantic, 0-6-0 Switcher, 4-6-0 Ten-wheeler, 4-6-2 Pacific, 2-8-0 Consolidation, 2-8-2 Mikado and 2-6-6-2 and 2-8-8-2 Mallets were built to Common Standard plans.

Regards, Yukonsam

japasha · January 13, 2008, 10:30:53 AM

When E. H. Harriamn took control of the IC, SP and UP the design team at SP and Up was combined to give Common Standard designs for cars, locomotives and facilities. The common features were wagon-top boilers, Vanderbilt tenders and wheel arrangements. Driver sizes, boiler tube sizes and other features were incorporated. Most railroads of that day had their own engineering staff to deal with the specific requirements of the railroad. Many of the features used by the Harriaman railroads were later used in the design of some USRA locomotives.

The common standard designs were good enough to last until the end of steam.The designs greatly reduced maintenance costs and improved on line service. Aftr the split of the Harriaman roads due to anti-trust action, the railroads still shared many design ideas.

kenp · January 13, 2008, 04:26:35 PM

YES...YES...YES on the main topic of the need for Harrimans of all arrangements! Also we sure could use a few AT&SF Mikes, Pacifics ets as well. Not every train west of the Mississippi ran Big Boys and Challangers! ( how many Challangers do we need? Good Grief! And Big Boys? weren't there only 25 of the prototypes ever made?)

Dallas.............Super bowl? We'll see. I just watched San Diego beat the Colts!!!!!!! The Giants may have the Cowboys number, We'll all know in a few hours. How about a Chargers / Cowboys Super Bowl?

SteamGene · January 13, 2008, 05:01:49 PM

Yes, there were only 25 Big Boys. Approximately 1/3 the number of Alleghenys. Also, only the UP had the Big Boy. At least three railroads had Challengers and they were similar in appearance to the UP original, IIRC.
Gene

wade · January 14, 2008, 11:18:37 AM

Yes. Harrimans would be well recieved. I would particularly like to see Atlantics, Pacifics and 0-6-0s.
Wade

Hoople · January 17, 2008, 11:03:09 AM

KenP... Sorry about the superbowl thing. Die hard cowboys fan. Totally peeved at the giants. I never got around to changing it.

Frankford el car · January 17, 2008, 01:29:52 PM

But the SP's Cab-forward articulateds didn't share in a lot of the Harriman roads' features. Most (or almost none) didn't have Vanderbilt tenders, and some actually had a "turtleback" tender. I don't think the ICRR was big on Vanderbilt tenders either. Passenger cars seemed to be the most common equipment between them. IE: coaches, diners, baggage cars, etc.

News:

Harriman Steamers