DRGW D&RGW L-76 (2-6-6-2)... got pix??

Calzephyr Oct 22, 2004

  1. Calzephyr

    Calzephyr TrainBoard Supporter

    4,153
    1,149
    74
    Trying to justify a Bachmann Spectrum 2-6-6-2 in my stable of steamers. I came across some info that D&RGW had a few standard gauge 2-6-6-2 engines but they were mostly L-62's which had a much shorter boiler. D&RWG got a couple of N&W 2-6-6-2 and classified them as L-76's. They seem to be close enough to the Bachmann USRA 2-6-6-2 to be worth the purchase.

    The steam/sand domes are not correct... boiler looks about the right size... tender is totally wrong (nothing new there for most models) Don't have a pic of D&RGW 2-6-6-2 L-76 as a reference so all I got was a 2-6-6-2 of N&W which may or may not be the same.

    Your thoughts... or additional information if you know more about these engines.

    Pic of N&W 2-6-6-2
    [​IMG]

    Bachmann USRA 2-6-6-2:
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Fotheringill

    Fotheringill TrainBoard Member

    5,982
    0
    74
    How exacting are you on prototypes? personally, I am more concerned on running and pulling abilities. To me, a little cheat here and there from the prototype is not important. The LL 2-6-6-2 looks great but will not pull up a grade.
     
  3. JASON

    JASON TrainBoard Supporter

    1,876
    8
    38
    Not the best shot,but a start,will look deeper as I was thinking the same thing,thanks for giving me the incentive [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The two pumps on the side will have to be changed also the domes abit,bell other small items etc,tender looks a problem,depends how isoteric one is! :D

    [ 22. October 2004, 14:24: Message edited by: JASON ]
     
  4. Calzephyr

    Calzephyr TrainBoard Supporter

    4,153
    1,149
    74
    Great picture Jason!!!!

    It appears that the photo I posted is an different version of a 2-6-6-2 than was sold to D&RGW. The domes still are wrong and there definately needs to be some work done along the sides with the piping and other accessories (I haven't got a clue) attached midway along the boiler. It's a lot more work than I would like to undertake... but it would be a nice conversion.
     
  5. William Cowie

    William Cowie TrainBoard Member

    2,113
    22
    38
    Didn't John Widmar do a loco like this?
     
  6. Calzephyr

    Calzephyr TrainBoard Supporter

    4,153
    1,149
    74
    I think John used a Micro-Ace 0-6-6-0 and added front trucks only for a 2-6-6-0 logging mallet. The Micro-Ace has a shorter boiler and would probably be a good candidate for an L-62 (2-6-6-2) conversion.

    Here's John's mallet... very nice BTW!

    [​IMG]

    [ 23. October 2004, 03:26: Message edited by: Calzephyr ]
     
  7. Tony Burzio

    Tony Burzio TrainBoard Supporter

    2,467
    144
    41
    The fix for the LL is to fill up every crevise inside the shell with tungsten putty, available at fishing stores. Tungsten putty is 50% heavier than lead but is not toxic.

    In real life, on a 3% grade and loaded cars a 2-8-8-2 was good for ~17 cars on the D&RGW. A 50 car train was assigned a lead (middle), swing and helper 2-8-8-2, and later there was a F7A- F7B- F7- F7B- F7A set (Perlmann Mallet) leading, with a swing and helper 2-8-8-2. These steam engines were big, but at low speeds a steamer has very little horsepower (in fact, a steamer has 0 horsepower from rest)

    Tony Burzio
    San Diego, CA
     
  8. Josh Hulbert

    Josh Hulbert E-Mail Bounces

    7
    0
    13
    Considering that HP = RPM * Tq /5252, everything has zero horsepower at rest. [​IMG]

    Steamers have tons or torque at startup though, since the thrust on the main rod is the cylinder pressure times the piston area.

    Electric motors have maximum torque at stall, too. Pretty cool when you're doing dynamic braking or you have a stall motor machine.

    This, of course, has very little to do with an L-76. Sorry.
     

Share This Page