How about a PRR H8/9 2-8-0 as a running mate to the K4?

jdmike · November 12, 2010, 08:38:42 PM

I have always hoped that Bachmann would produce a follow up model to the PRR K4 locomotive. A nice small freight engine would be an excellent seller to the small and large layout crowd. Any one of the numerious H class 2-8-0's would be perfect and they already have the basic drive system. One of the L class Mikados would also be a welcome addition in plastic at an affordable price. All we have now are high priced brass, high priced BLI/PCM engines with sound, hard to fine blueline series engines or bidding wars for old Bowser kit engines for those willing to build and detail them. I for one would sign up for a couple H8 or H9 class consolidations if produced at an affordable price point with good detail, on par with the current K4 model and with the same running qualities. The K4 is of a lone wolf in the Bachmann product line, while Bachmann could put the PRR name on some of the other steamers, none have the proper Belpair boiler that screams PRR without ever looking at the name on the tender. How about it? How many would sign up for a PRR prototype 2-8-0 in the DCC/Onboard series with running qualities and detail on par with the K4 and NKP Berks produced currently? I need about 4-5 of them for my PRR layout personaly. Mike

ebtbob · November 13, 2010, 07:43:44 AM

Mike,

I agree 100% about the idea of a Pennsy H8 or H9 consolidation from the Spectrum line. I also think, even more strongly, that the Pennsy mikado, the L-1 should be a fine seller also.
At one time, Bachmann did a wonderful rendition of the Reading consolidation, the I10sa. I know that those molds do not exist anymore, but I think that a new body could be produced with the current chassie underneath.
Another engine that is rarely produced, are camelback engines in all wheel arrangements. Even today, the Mantua, Reading 0-4-0 camelback does not last long on the shelves of the engine case at my favorite train store.

jdmike · November 13, 2010, 08:30:34 AM

I loved that Reading 2-8-0, along with the "stubby" heavy Mikado that made using the same tooling with a vanderbilt tender in B&O. I would buy one of each if those came back with spectrum quality drives under them. I think if Bachmann went on a 2-5 year PRR kick with a new engine each year, but with all announced up front, thus giving modelers time to plan/order and save thier pennies, they would all sell well, I can see a B6 0-6-0 doing well, followed by a H class 2-8-0 and the L class 2-8-2. Keep the steam on the smaller side and let BLI/PCM do the huge monster steamers. The H8/9 class would make an excellent starter set engine, bet it would sell like gang busters on the east coast. Not everybody has 36"+ radius curves for huge steam to look and run good. Bachmann seems to have a good mind set to produce smaller steam, ie the 4-6-0 and the 2-8-0, now we need models of more greater known prototypes and the PRR definatly is one of them that has a absolutely huge following in both collectors and modelers. The K4 has been a lone wolf for to long in the Bachmann line up. Lets see a follow up PRR freight class engine Bachmann!

ebtnut · November 15, 2010, 01:27:16 PM

My suggestion - Do the PRR H-6 2-8-0. In the time period they were built, the Pennsy controlled the B&O, and B&O had a bunch of them as class E-24. You could probably take the superstructure and mate it to a 4-4-2 mech and get PRR and B&O Atlantics out the deal too.

J3a-614 · November 15, 2010, 07:56:57 PM

The H6/E-24 classes had 57" drivers--same as what's under the current 2-6-6-2s. Those two classes also had an unusual axle spacing, with a slightly long space between axles 1 and 2 (where the Stephenson valve gear links and rockers were on earlier examples), minimal spacing between axles 2 and 3, and a longer axle spacing between 3 and 4 to accomodate the firebox and ashpans. This axle spacing (or something close to it) and the 57" drivers were shared with a number of stock Alco 2-8-0s in the same general weight range, including C&O G7 and G9 classes (which may have originated the basic design at Alco), and at least one similar class on the Nickel Plate. This same design, complete with the same Alco designed cabs and valve gear on engines delivered with it, was also used on at least four shortlines. I haven't researched it, but there are likely other roads that used the design.

Two of the shortlines that rostered this design ordered the engines new, and one of those would be sold from one West Virginia shortline to another. This engine survives on the Ohio Central as its No. 13, which is the number it carried on the Buffalo Creek & Gauley. Two other roads that used this engine got them second-hand from the C&O; one was the Winifred Railroad in West Virginia, which had one each from C&O and NKP, and the other was the Bellefonte Central in Pa., which had two ex-C&O engnes on its roster. Again, it's likely there were other roads.

The H-8/9/10s variations on the PRR used the same boilers but with slightly larger cylinders on each succeeding class; all used the same 62" driver diameter as the current IC-designed 2-8-0 Bachmann currently sells, although you might want to change the valve gear to the appropriately Pennsy-designed Walscharts.

All of these suggestions entail using as many common parts as possible to help reduce tooling costs. Wonder if Bachmann will get to follow this route?

Rashputin · November 18, 2010, 01:47:15 AM

By design the Pennsylvania L1 had a great many parts in common with the K4 including the boiler. Given that Bachmann already makes a drive for a 2-8-2 in their line it seems to me that the most bang for the least buck could be had by making a Pennsy L1 maybe in several different versions (detail parts variations) to reflect the change in these engines over time. It seems to me like there would be less design and development time involved on an L1 than on any of the 2-8-0 Pennsy engines.

One thing for sure, no one has made an L1 that I can find except in brass so there's a lot of Pennsy fans who would need a couple right off the bat.

Regards

ebtnut · November 18, 2010, 01:33:28 PM

FWIW, Bowser/Penn Line did the L-1 as a kit, using the K-4 boiler. Bowser has phased out their steam line, but the models should be available on some dealer's shelves or via the net.

uncbob · November 18, 2010, 03:12:10 PM

Sounds good to me

J3a-614 · November 18, 2010, 08:26:56 PM

Bowser did offer the L1s; the big disadvantage (if you regard it as that), is that it is a metal engine, like Jonathan's Dockside and in particular the G5 4-6-0. Not everybody is intimidated by such kits, but if you are. . .

Rashputin's suggestion of an L1s 2-8-2 based on a K4s has merit, but may be somewhat more involved than a first glance would imply. The big thing, as I would see it in terms of tooling, is that the L1s had its sand dome in a different location from that of the K4s. This is not an insurmountable problem, as I understand some L1s' had the K4s' sand dome arrangement, it's just that there were very few engines like that on the roster.

The current 2-8-2 isn't quite right for a mechanism, with drivers that are much too small, and an overall size that would be way too short. However, there cure is again in the current 2-8-0, which uses 62" drivers, the same size as the L1. The primary thing that would be needed would be a new main frame. Other existing parts for the mechanism that could be used would be the K4 valve gear, crossheads, crosshead guides, main rod, trailing truck, and perhaps the cylinder block. Thank the Pennsy for being such a demon on standardization!

I don't have a diagram showing axle spacing for the 2-8-0 and the L1 (I think the L1 may have a wider than normal axle spacing), but it may be possible to use the 2-8-0 side rods between axles if the spacing is close enough. The remaining new parts might include some detail parts (i.e., the air tank that was on the pilot of a lot of L1s), a footboard pilot/pilot beam assembly, and a new, shorter tender, possibly with rear footboards and a doghouse on top. I think a version of it, minus the doghouse and footboards, may have also been used on some of the K4s.

Oh, in regard to a 4-4-2, an E6s used essentially the same boiler and cab as the H8/9/10s 2-8-0, with many mechanical components in its running gear in common with the K4s; in fact, the E6s was the design basis for the larger K4s. Still need another (different) tender, though, and preferably one with Dauphin trucks! Ironically, Bowser offered the trucks but didn't make the tender; the tank and frame, however, were available in plastic and metal from Model Die Casting (MDC)!

J3a-614 · November 21, 2010, 01:07:30 AM

PRRLEGEND · October 14, 2011, 10:37:28 PM

Bro, I totally agree. A PRR freight engine with a k4 on a layout would be sweet. Bachmann should totally take this into consideration. Bachmann Trains do you hear me?? Lol

News:

How about a PRR H8/9 2-8-0 as a running mate to the K4?