Forney ?

[#94]

Not trying to beat a dead horse. The Forney was wonderful aside from the operating troubles on corners.
Just daydreaming, what if a person replaced the rear drivers with blind drivers and eliminated the side to side movement of the rear truck? This would bother some people looking directly at wheels on track around corners. From most peoples perspective though it would ok and in fact may look better too most since there would not be the rear overhang on curves. These locos are too fun to put on the shelf. Of course if someone could figure out a Mason Bogie that would be fun also.

[jkemp]

Sounds like a neat idea.

Are you proposing installing a different wheel set?  If so, do you have one in mind?

Or, are you planning to remove the existing wheels and turn down the flanges on your lathe?

Something else?

[2foot6]

I have three Forney's that I have cut off the rear portion to reduce over hang and replaced with tenders.They now look better (to me) and operate superbly. I guess this would not be liked by the purist,but i'm not modelling any particular railroad or rolling stock(and I'm not a purist)............Peter  

[jkemp]

thank you for the feedback, and, same here.

I am very much a 1970's / 1980's freelance modeler.

Nothing wrong with counting rivets, but I prefer to operate & build stuff out to my own likes.

To each their own.

[#94]

I do like the looks of the cut apart ones but do want a Forney to remain Fornyish. One could turn down the rear set of drivers but I am wondering if maybe a little investication might find a good swap.

[dutchbuilder]

I bought a Forney a few years ago and it didn't agree with my layout.
What i tried it refused to comply.
So i took the easy way out in the end and cut off the back-end and made it into a separate tender.
Problem solved.

Ton

[jkemp]

I bought a Forney a few years ago and it didn't agree with my layout.
What i tried it refused to comply.
So i took the easy way out in the end and cut off the back-end and made it into a separate tender.
Problem solved.

Ton

That sounds pretty slick too!

Can you share a couple of pics please?

[dutchbuilder]

The attachment on this site doesn't work and i don't and won't have photobucket.
What i can do is make a youtube movie.
See what i can do.

Ton

[railexpert]

Hi,

there are made alredy many topics for the Forney rear coupler. Go to "search" on top of this page an search for "Forney coupler", "Forney rear coupler" or "Forney derail". You will find a lot of answers for a solution of this problem.


Railexpert

[#94]

I wish you would have read this/understood railexpert. I am not talking about any of the ideas you suggest I "search" for. I am not talking about "dealing" with the rear overhang or extra long coupler. I am working on making this "not" overhang so bad on curves. Do you have a reference you can point me toward?

[railexpert]

Hello #94,

due to the construction and the design of the Bachmann Forney you can avoid the overhang at the rear only if you use curves with larger radii. A modification at the rear bogie will not bring success, except the running behavior in curves becomes worse.

Apparently similar to the Forneys is another design, the Mason Bogie. Like the Forney, the Mason Bogie has powered axles under the boiler and a trailing  truck under the rear bunker and tank behind the cab. But the Forney's driving wheels are fixed in the frame, rather than the articulated (swiveling) driving wheelsets of the Mason Bogie. So the Mason Bogie has two bogies (trucks), the Forney only one rear truck.

The conversion of the Forney into a Mason Bogie is likely to be difficult. Compare this with the construction of the first driving bogie of the articulated Bachmann 2-4-4-2.


Railexpert


PS: I never wrote "dealing", I wrote "derailing". If you read in this "derail" topics in the board, you will understand the Forney overhang problem better.