0n 30 forney vale gear

[pistolpete]

Dear mr. bach man ,
          I have purcharsed a outside frame forney.  The question is how come is does not have the right vale gear? The 2 8 0 has the right vale gear why does the forney not have the right gear. why does it not come with the opitons to make it close to the  protype. I have 11 of your 0n 30 i think they are terrific products to buy. I am uspet with the fact that the forney does not come with the right vaule gear.
                                                 Yours truly                                           
                                                           pistol pete

[scottychaos]

There is no such thing as "vale gear" or "vaule gear"..
so im not really sure what you are talking about..

IF you are trying to say "valve gear", the valve gear looks fine to me..
what valve gear do you think its supposed to have?

and what prototype are you comparing it to?
technically, the bachmann forney has no specific prototype,
they (bachmann) say its based on a "baldwin catalog engine"..
but most of us believe it is actually based on SR&RL #8 (inside frame) and SR&RL #9 (outside frame)..

comparing the bachmann outside frame forney to photos of the prototype #9, the valve gear looks perfect..I see no problems.

Scot

[Woody Elmore]

There are all sorts of valve gear - Stephenson, Walshaerts, Baker and Southern to name a few. The forney probably has Stephenson valve gear where most of the moving parts are inside the frame. All you see is the exterior rod to the sliding valve inside the steam chest.

[ebtnut]

The Forney represents a loco with Stephenson valve gear, the most common type of gear for mid-to-late 19th Century steam locos.  The eccentric cranks are mounted on a driver axle between the frames, so all that is visible is the rocker arm and valve rod.  The Consol has, I believe, Baker gear, which became popular after about 1910, along with Walschearts.  The issue wasn't so much the quality of the valve gear (Stehpenson was quite good) but with the large increase in loco sizes, access to the gear became a maintenance issue.  Walschearts probably was the most common gear post-1900.  Baker-Pilloid second, possibly because it was patented and use of it involved a royalty payment.  Southern was maybe a distant third, followed by Young, Joy, and other odds and ends.  Poppet valves (like in your car engine) were used late in the steam era, but maintenance was a problem. 

[scottychaos]

The Forney represents a loco with Stephenson valve gear, the most common type of gear for mid-to-late 19th Century steam locos.  The eccentric cranks are mounted on a driver axle between the frames, so all that is visible is the rocker arm and valve rod.  The Consol has, I believe, Baker gear, which became popular after about 1910, along with Walschearts.  The issue wasn't so much the quality of the valve gear (Stehpenson was quite good) but with the large increase in loco sizes, access to the gear became a maintenance issue.  Walschearts probably was the most common gear post-1900.  Baker-Pilloid second, possibly because it was patented and use of it involved a royalty payment.  Southern was maybe a distant third, followed by Young, Joy, and other odds and ends.  Poppet valves (like in your car engine) were used late in the steam era, but maintenance was a problem. 

thanks EBTnut.
then the Bachmann forney has Stephenson valve gear.
and so did the prototype.
thus..the model is correct.

Scot

[Spule 4]

I think I see the first poster's point.

SR&RL Baldwins 10 (and maybe 9?) did have outside Walschaerts valve gear:

http://www.narrowgauge.iform.com.au/srrl-10.html

http://www.argyleloco.com.au/images/srrl10.gif

...but as many have pointed out, the models do have inside Stephenson valve gear:

http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/gallery/album10/aae

But, the (Bachmann) locos are also "supposedly" Baldwin catalogue locos, and probably was what was on those offerings. 

Maybe why Bachmann chose non extant for SR&RL #s 11 and 12 for their offerenings?

Food for thought......

[scottychaos]

I think I see the first poster's point.

SR&RL Baldwins 10 (and maybe 9?) did have outside Walschaerts valve gear:

http://www.narrowgauge.iform.com.au/srrl-10.html

http://www.argyleloco.com.au/images/srrl10.gif

...but as many have pointed out, the models do have inside Stephenson valve gear:

http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/gallery/album10/aae

But, the (Bachmann) locos are also "supposedly" Baldwin catalogue locos, and probably was what was on those offerings. 

Maybe why Bachmann chose non extant for SR&RL #s 11 and 12 for their offerenings?

Food for thought......

yes, #10 had Walschaerts , but #9 did not..
and #9 is the prototype for the bachmann engine, not #10.

(#10 was a very different engine from the bachmann engines and SR&RL #8 and #9. much larger..its so different in fact that the bachmann engine cant really be used as a basis to kitbash #10..I have already checked it out!) 

as has already been established, several times:

the Bachmann forney has Stephenson valve gear.
and so did the prototype.
thus..the model is correct.

there is nothing in doubt about this.
the model is correct..really..seriously.
100%, no question.

the first poster was simply confused about something, not sure what,
and made a statement that is simply wrong.

the model is correct, the first poster is incorrect.

Scot

[Spule 4]

yes, #10 had Walschaerts , but #9 did not..
and #9 is the prototype for the bachmann engine, not #10.

the model is correct, the first poster is incorrect.

Scot

Scot:

Thanks for the info on #9.  It also negates the info I saw (forget where, possibly on the net) that the engines were catalogue designs.

[scottychaos]

yes, #10 had Walschaerts , but #9 did not..
and #9 is the prototype for the bachmann engine, not #10.

the model is correct, the first poster is incorrect.

Scot

Scot:

Thanks for the info on #9.  It also negates the info I saw (forget where, possibly on the net) that the engines were catalogue designs.

you're welcome!
but no, it doesnt negate the info that the engines are catalog designs!

its a bit confusing, but here is the story as I understand it.

Bachmann's official stance is that the Bachmann forneys are based on Baldwin catalog designs, not specific prototypes that exist or once existed.
this is fine, and quite plausable,

BUT! 

much comparing of the Bachmann models with photos and drawing of the actual SR&RL #8 and SR&RL #9 indicate that the Bachmann engines are VERY VERY close in all respects to those two engines.
(#8 for inside frame, #9 for outside frame)

so close in fact, that some believe the models are in fact based on those two prototype engines..but we dont know for sure.

the "catalog engine" idea makes sense, because the Bachmann models are 30" not 24" gauge like the prototype #8 and #9, so maybe bachmann chose to call them "catalog engines" to get around people complaining that the models are "incorrect" when compared to the actual #8 and #9.
(neither of which exist anymore by the way..scrapped long ago)

So..what this all boils down to is *officially* the bachmann forney models are based on Baldwin catalogn designs, not specific prototypes.
but *UNofficially* they sure do seem to be based on SR&RL #8 and #9!
which is great for me! because I want to actualyl model #8 and #9! 

and..the real #8 and #9 could have been close to standard catalog designs anyway..probably were.

In my OPINION, based only on viewing the models, and not based on anything Bachmann has ever said, I believe that Bachmann did actually choose the real SR&RL #8 and #9 as the basis for their models, then because they need to be 30" gauge, they changed some details enough to be able call them "generic catalog engines"..

another thing I base this opinion on is the "tender two" design,
which happens to be the "late" tender tank that was applied to the real #9,
and was built by the SR&RL shop..
just a coincidence that the Bachmann model tank looks identical to the real #9's rebuilt tank?? I think not..


So officially - catalog engines.
but IMO - totally based on the real #8 and #9.

and when it comes to this thread, concerning the valve gear..even if they ARE catalog engines, the "catalog design" they were based on would have had stephensons valve gear..so..the models are still correct even with the catalog design theory.

Scot

[ebtnut]

Let me go a little further on "catalog designs".  Most steam builders issued catalogs showing sample locomotive designs, from tiny 0-4-0Ts up to big road power.  Within these samples, a buyer could desigante what features he would like--slide valves or piston; superheated, or not; valve gear choice, and so on.  So, a 2-4-4T Forney would be a Baldwin "catalog" engine, but the actual prototype became a Sandy River 8 or 9.  The NMRA publishes a copy of a Porter catalog which illustrates how this works (and also gives you some other ideas for small loco designs).  Note that major railroads, that would order maybe dozens of on loco model, usually provided the builder with the specs for their locos, though even then they may well have used an existing design as a basis (see, USRA).

[Spule 4]

yes, #10 had Walschaerts , but #9 did not..
and #9 is the prototype for the bachmann engine, not #10.

the model is correct, the first poster is incorrect.

Scot

Scot:

Thanks for the info on #9.  It also negates the info I saw (forget where, possibly on the net) that the engines were catalogue designs.

you're welcome!
but no, it doesnt negate the info that the engines are catalog designs!

its a bit confusing, but here is the story as I understand it.

Bachmann's official stance is that the Bachmann forneys are based on Baldwin catalog designs, not specific prototypes that exist or once existed.
this is fine, and quite plausable.....and when it comes to this thread, concerning the valve gear..even if they ARE catalog engines, the "catalog design" they were based on would have had stephensons valve gear..so..the models are still correct even with the catalog design theory.

Scot

I had noticed some issues such as the SR&RL lighting, but had not paid attention to the tender tanks.  The other issue was the numbers selected for the SR&RL locos, but I understand if they picked 8 and 9 that there could be cries to that also.

A fine mix then I guess.

And yes, as EBTnut points out, the "options" out there are amazing, not just in size but every option you could dream of, including building to other's designs.  Case in point are the well tank Porter locos that went to Canada, looking all the world like they were built by O&K or KrLi in Europe.

Honestly, I am surprised the original poster has not chimed back in to state what his thoughts were on the prototype?

[pistolpete]

to all who replied to my original post  obout valve gear
i had bought the 0n30 2-8-0 that was loosely based on the engine on display at the old edaville rr. now my reasoning was here is another engine based loosely  on the forney at edaville (no i assumed that the same detail would be applied to the Bachman 0n30 forney. I obviously was wrong to expect the same attention to detail as the 2-8-0 that was offered as another generic model
                                                        yours  truley pistol pete
                 ps.i am a quadriplegic please pardon the grammar

[scottychaos]

Pete,
im not sure what you mean by "the same attention to detail"..
both models are equally detailed..I dont think anyone would say the forney is any less detailed than the 2-8-0..
the prototype for the forney just has a simpler-looking valve gear is all..
so yes, the forney technically might have "simpler" valve gear that the 2-8-0, but this has nothing to do with the "level of detail" of the models..

Scot