I'm Watching my Minitrix Glaskasten (Its an 0-4-0 steamer with no tender) pull 7 2 axle cars at 4 or 5 scale mph and it is smoooooth. It is also well detailed. No one is making a good small US steamer. Is it because BIG is in? Or we won't pay (the European tiny locos are a bit pricey)? Are they from a boring era? Or none of the above?
I do not understand it, either. The big ones sell well, even though most of us do not have the large pikes that these things need. The smaller locomotives are better suited to our smaller pikes. In the past, I suspect the excuse for the larger power was that it could accomodate all of the buzzers and bells (literally and figuratively) that the smaller power could not, but since miniaturisation has progressed in such a few years, all of that stuff will now fit into a USRA switcher tender. People even have managed to fit a decoder and sound into Athearn/MDC consolidateds and moguls. The small power does seem to sell; B--mann would not keep producing its 2-8-0 if it did not sell. The MP eight wheeler and mogul are not that easy to find. The MPs are not that bad, if you swap out the stock tender for one of the B-mann USRA tenders. I will buy even a not bad eight wheeler. B-mann had just issued its eight wheeler in a new B&O scheme. As soon as the matching passenger cars appear, I will buy the whole business. The Bachpersonn eight wheeler is not as bad a locomotive as many say that it is. I have several that I operate regullarly. While it does not run as smoothly as the Atlas/MicroAce 2-6-0, it does match its pulling power and does not stall as much as does the 2-6-0. If you are willing to spend the time to break in the Bachmann, it is not that bad. I would like to see both a 'modern' ten wheeler and an 1880s/1890s ten wheeler.
I second the ten-wheeler motion and I still don't understand why B-mann cancelled their N scale Spectrum 4-6-0 project.
Considering that the 4-4-0 was the mainstay for years and lasted until the 1950s in branchline service it is notable that the manufacturers have ignored this and other smaller wheel arrangements. As passenger cars got larger and heavier the 4-4-0 was still found at the head often assisted by a 2-6-0 or 4-6-0. The first real improvement on the 2 axle design was the 4-4-2, another design that made it into the 1950s and another design that has been basically ignored. And then there is the 4-6-0, long promised and awaited but still not here. While the Bmann 4-4-0 is not a bad loco, I have several, it is a bear to convert to something that dates back to the 1910 era or later. Its feasible since I have managed to retro some MT pilots onto the Bmanns. Model Powers entry into the 4-4-0 was frought with enough problems that I choose to ignore purchasing it. We all seem to be enamored of the large engines and then face the issues of having to design curvature that accomodates those engines. The bulk of my roster is smaller steam and the diesels are mostly 4 axle. Thus I can get most of my stuff through a 9 3/4 curvature opening up a bigger window of design possibilities in a smaller space. So will I belly up to the counter, wallet in hand, for a good running modern 4-4-0 and a 4-6-0? Certainly will.
No. Only because they are out of my era. Now- an 0-6-0 or 4-6-0! That would would get a big-YES! I could use a few of each of those wheel arrangements. Especially the 0-6-0's. A few SP S-12's would be heaven! Have fun! Wolf
I will in the future and have in the past. Three problems for many people- 1. The misconception that bigger is better. 2. The mysterious desire to run trains that are 20 cars long. 3. Electrical pickup. Traction tires work well to enable pulling longer trains and to get shorter ones up grade, but you will lose a good part of your contact with the rails by taking away half of 4.
I concur with John Moore - the 4-4-0 was THE mainstay of all RRs for decades, in some cases almost 100 years. Model Power could cash in on this by revamping/back-dating their 4-4-0. For those of us with small (anything less than a 4'x8') N scale layouts the smaller steam locos like 4-4-0 are a must, espeically those of us who model early rail 1880-1890s. John Bartolotto
I would buy one if it ran well. I would prefer one that was pre-1900 so I can use it on a short line. But would love a 4-6-0 even more.
Probably not a 0-4-0.....maybe a 4-4-0....definitely a 4-4-2 or the 4-6-0 that's been mentioned. I'm hoping the FVM 4-4-2 streamlined engine for the Milwaukee 1935 Hiawatha will be good, and will turn into a non-streamlined version down the road someplace. Too bad the Bachmann 4-6-0 got cancelled but the way everyone badmouths Bachmanns they may have figured if it didn't pull 50 cars up a 5% grade noone would buy it.
It costs the same amount of money to develop say a 4-6-6-4 as it does to produce say a 4-4-0 or a 4-6-0. The amount of material is almost negligible, you might double the time the draftsman has to spend drawing it, but otherwise, the cost ends up being similar. Now which can you sell for a higher price, the 4-4-0 or the 4-6-6-4? You say you'd happily buy a 4-4-0 or a 4-6-0. But with an MSRP of $200 DCC ready? And $275 for DCC? At least the 4-6-6-4 also pulls more cars than most people can set up on their tracks at once, so they never notice it's fullest potential. The 4-4-0, though...or the 4-6-0? 5-10 40 footers, because the Physics of truck weight don't scale down well. Yes, an 1865 4-4-0 could happily pull 30 or 40 boxcars on level track - but then you have to realize those cars were each 20 or 28 or 30 feet long! So you try to pull a prototypical train of 40 20 footers, and it's not going to work because the trucks, as I said before, are going to be the same weight whether it's a 40 footer or a 20 footer and that's most of the weight/friction in the first place! The USRA Boxcar is huge versus the equipment from the 1860-1880s..you could probably put one and two inside the other...one fully assembled!
I think it is too bad that we don't have a good 4-4-0 in N scale. These things were, as has been noted above, the main locomotive that built a lot of North America, lasting into the 1950s. They would also be useful in the woods, which is one of my modeling interests. I'd love to see an 0-4-0, too. For that matter, I'd love some Forneys, some Class B Climaxes, some Heislers, some smaller 2-8-2Ts, some more narrow gauge (Nn3) 2-8-2s, and so on. Failing that, I'd love some more kitbash fodder. Some of these wheel arrangements are only available as really expensive imports. I am thinking of ordering a Bachmann 2-8-0 out of the upcoming batch simply to get more non-humongous steamers.
I think there already is a great 4-4-0 in N scale in the Model power. That is if...you use a kato tender. I'll post a picture again of mine with the Kato tender. Frankly it might run at a more consistant slow speed than the kato Mike.
The Model Power one is, I think, often overlooked because of real or perceived problems with tender pickup. I would love to have an earlier prototype 4-4-0 that's better than the Bachmann one.
Good stuff guys, I wasn't thinking of other small stuff. I'm still learning about the different locos. The MP gets mentioned a lot. I have thier Mike, Pacific and as of today thier 2-6-0. I don't use them extensively, so I haven't seen a need to convert my tenders . If the tenders need conversions for long term reliability, I'd like to see MP redo the tender, then I think they could sell more units. When the right MP 4-4-0 comes along, I will grab it, but still, I'd prefer 1 that was truly awesome out of the box. Another interesting thing was that someone mentioned the size of the cars. Again, you can find a ton of nicely detailed cars in the 20 - 25' range in the european designs. They are all 2 axle units. Were the old US short cars 2 axle or 4? It sounds like another ignored market. I've bought and buy a lot of long stuff. I wish I had room to run my full Amtrak or SP daylight consist, My japanese passenger stuff or even a long freight line behind a pair of Mikes. One day I will. When my focus shifts from kids in the house to kids in college, I will have the room and I will make the time. The reality is, I'm playing in a small space for now and short trains work for me.
Yep, I'd but an 0-4-0 of good quality. I have a TOMIX Percy and it is a fantastic little loco. I like small motive power. Besides it really fits in with micro N layouts of which I am fond of doing. If I wanted sweeping curves, 100 car trains, I probably wouldn't care but small motive power hauling 4-8 cars is my idea of a nice train. Speaking of small locos, I'd like to see an N scale version of RMT's BEEP. Anybody out there second that?
I have an RMT O BEEP in Coast Guard livery. I can only run it at Christmas and I can't even do that until my 16 year old decides if she is really going to the Coast Guard Academy and if she get in..... My wife seems to think it would be inapropriate pressure, if I ran it before then . Ah well.. Of course in N, I could run it without being noticed!
4-4-0 N scale 4-4-0's only come in two sizes: way too small and way too big. The Bachmann engines scale out to be about a 25-27 ton engine; the Model power would be about an 80 ton engine. I'm sure they may have been prototype 4-4-0's that were that heavy, but I don't think they were that common, and it would be of no use to me, anyway. What I need is a 35-40 ton engine of the 1890's. A "standard" 17 x 24 x 63 Schenectady or Dickson would be ideal. Resp'y, Bob S.
I would love a nice running 4-4-0, 4-6-0 or 2-8-0. In HO, Bachmann has or had some sweet models, including a Russian Decapod. Bachmann/Walthers offered an HO Russian Iron American that I wish was available in N. The Model Power 4-4-0 is a little too modern for me. My problem with the Bachmann and Athearn/MDC locos is the tender seems too tall to me. I know that's where the motor is, but it makes the tender look short or ruins the looks for me.
