Most every large railroad had its own number and classification system.  The Santa Fe, for instance, simply used the number from the lead unit of a particular design series, such as the 3776 class of 4-8-4's.  The Pennsy used the letter-number system, with the letter indicating the wheel arrangement (K for 4-6-2's) and the number being the particular design (a K-4 being the fourth in the Pacific design series).  With the B&O, the alphabet letter denoted the wheel arrangement.  An E class was a 2-8-0 and the following number the particular design series (E-27).  An L class was an 0-8-0.  Articulateds used the letter designations for each engine set wheel arrangement.  Thus, an EL-3 was a 2-8-8-0.  The EM-1 was a 2-8-8-4. 

At least one of the K-5's spent a lot of time on the Northern Central line from Baltimore to Harrisburg.  I suspect that part of the decision on whether to build more of them or not was determined when the great Depression hit.  A lot of locos went in dead storage in the 1930's, so there was no real need for any more passenger locos.  When the economy started perking up in the late '30's the Pennsy was well into dual drive designs - T-1's, the Q-1 and the Q-2's, plus the S-1 turbine. 

I have periodically brought the Lawndale locos up as good candidates to model.  Lots of character, small, and NOT Colorado!  Glad to have the reminder posted once again.

Must be some ancient Roundhouse kits for that reference.  Means stuff like Walthers "Goo" or Pliobond in that context.  CA had just about replaced all of those for modeling these days.

If the track has been stored away, it might be a good idea to wipe down the rail heads with some denatured alcohol to clean off any accumulated "stuff".  You don't "lube" track.  I know some people use Whal clipper oil on their railheads but that is supposed to slow down oxidation. 

On being nit-picky,  the DeWitt Clinton ran on a predecessor of the New York Central.  The Lafaytte was/is a B&O engine.  Of course, the B&O's first steamer was the"Tom Thumb".  The 1927 reproduction of the Tom Thumb at the B&O museum has almost no resemblance to the actual engine.  The Lafayette came a few years later. 

I would opt for the early Richmond 4-4-0.  The prototypes were built in 1901 with wood cabs and slide valves.  They are typical of the 1890-1905 era.  The Alco Mogul is too modern with its piston valves and Walschearts valve gear.  The "modern" Richmond 4-4-0 (Ma and Pa 6) represents the engine as rebuilt by the railroad in the 1920's, also with piston valves and a steel cab.

Hey Jonathon - I scored a Rivarossi Big Six at the show, and found an IHC heavy 2-10-2 on evil-bay.  Have you done/considered mating the Rivarossi shell to the IHC mech?  If so, any guidance/pitfalls I should look for?  I've gotten the boilers off both, but haven't yet begun work on the mechanism(s).  My hope is to take the cylinder block and valve gear set off the Rivarossi and mount it on the IHC.  I thought about keeping the IHC as is, but the crossheads are wrong and that bothers me.  I plan to swap out the tender trucks and replace the wheelset in the trailing truck so as to have all NMRA wheels. 

Articulated locomotives have two separate engines under one boiler.  The back engine is rigid, the front engine is hinged to go around curves.  Early articulateds were compound engines, where the steam was initially sent to the rear cylinders.  Since the steam still has some energy left, the steam was exhausted into the front cylinders, which are larger to compensate for the lower pressure.  Later, with advances in boiler design, articulateds were built "simple" - high pressure steam going to both sets of cylinders which were the same size.  Since the simple engines did not have to depend on the steam from one set of cylinders going to another, they tended to get out of sync more often.  If one engine set was a bit "slippy", the engines would go in and out of sync over time.  You can hear this on some recordings/movies of engines like N&W 1218 or UP 3985. 

Very similar to Eureka Nevada No. 7, which still survives today on a tourist operation in Idaho.

Bachmann's On30 line has been straddling the boundary between "scale" and "toy" from the beginning.  I'm not casting aspersions here, it's marketing.  They already had a big investment in HO, including the EZTrack.  This worked fine for train sets aimed at the youngsters opening presents on Christmas and hopefully getting interested enough to go buy more train stuff.  Essentially all of the On30 equipment has been intended to operate on the 18" EZTrack curves, which limits the design of motive power to short wheelbase steamers, or diesels.  The 8-18d Mogul has a driver wheelbase that's just about as long as a 2-8-0.  My On3 NWSL brass version doesn't like curves less than about 36", and that's after I removed the flanges on the center driver.  I just don't see them going down this path. 

When I was at the Timonium train show the other weekend I found a loco I had been after for a good while at a fair price.  After I bought it, I then found two more for even less, but I was OK with what I had since it is going to be a kit-bashing project.  What I also saw but passed by was an American OO scale ten-wheeler kit.  It didn't register with me until I got home that U.S. OO uses a track gauge of 3/4 inch which is three feet in O scale, or On3.  In fact, the NMRA standards gauge for On3 is labeled On3/OO.  OO scale uses the same wheel and flange standards as HO, so they are essentially to scale in O.  I principally model in On3, and that kit could have been the basis for a free-lance On3 loco, maybe using parts from a Bachmann On30 loco.  I can hope that, since OO is long out of favor, I might see the kit again at the next show. 

I suspect that the Shelby Brown started out as a saddle-tank loco.

I'm pretty much with Jonathon on it being old Lionel from the early '60's.  My other thought is that it could be an import, like from Fleishmann.

If you have bumps at rail joints big enough to need filing down, then better check to make sure both rail ends are inserted into the rail joiner.  Especially if you are using a product like EZTrack, the joints don't always line up precisely and one rail will ride up over top of the joiner, leaving a mis-match between the rails.