DRGW Moffat Road Steam:

Okay:

I'm HO scale, model D&RGW steam, which we all know has to be brass, at least 95% of it. Got most of what I need in Rio Grande steam, I'm now looking at Denver and Salt Lake.

I've acquired an older PFM Moffat 2-6-6-0, which I like a lot, and have a Sunset Moffat 2-8-2 (unfortunately w/o the Coffin FWH) on order from Caboose Hobbies in Denver, which ought to arrive Monday.

Question: Does anyone know if the D&SL 2-8-0 or 4-6-0 locos were ever offered in brass, and if so, what importers?

I'd sure like to get hold of models of THOSE handsome puppies, LOL. Don't much care what condition, I'm one of those bonafide brass 'tinkerers.' If I can get them, I'll make them run.
Tom :tb-biggrin:

 

Thanks for the offer, I really appreciate it. However, I did some checking on some brass sites, googling D&SL brass locos, and it looks as if the Moffat 2-8-0 and 4-6-0 locos never made it into models. Or if they did, nobody seems to know about it.

After researching, it looks as if the single Moffat 4-6-0 that made it into the Rio Grande numbering system was scrapped before it was ever assigned a number, and only two of the 2-8-0's got in (in the Rio Grande 1000 series). The Rio Grande seemed more interested in absorbing the 2-6-6-0 and 2-8-2 Moffat locos.

So I'll be happy with that.

Actually, I was going to re-decal the two locos into their original D&SL markings, but neither Microscale or Champ offers that road.

So I'll just 'absorb' them into my Rio Grande roster. The Sunset 2-8-2 should arrive tomorrow. I'll be interested to see she's like. The photo from Caboose Hobbies showned a real charmer of a little 2-8-2. Can't wait to see what she runs like.

Thanks again.
Tom :tb-biggrin:

 

Well, the 2-8-2 arrived today from Caboose Hobbies, decalled for Rio Grande #1225, which is correct for the particular loco (it's the only one without the Coffin feed-water heater), and it looks kind of nice.

Actually, I think I'll keep it in the Rio Grande format and do a little 'touching' up on it. It's a Sunset, and it's a little 'grindy', but it's nice and heavy and well-balanced, and runs very smoothly through the speed ranges. I think it just needs to go into my 'shop' for a little TLC.

Anyway, here's a photo of her. I posted also on The Inspection Pit.
I think she's really cute. Can't wait to pair her up with my PFM Moffat 2-6-6-0.


Tom

 

Hemi:

I kinda/sorta wish that the Sunset model had the Coffin FWH--they were unusual and pretty striking.

I think that #1225 might work okay with the 2-6-6-0. If she does, after she's been in 'the shop', I'll post some photos. I agree with you, a Moffat Road lashup would look extremely cool!

Tom

 

Yes, you are right. Neither the Moffat 100 series 2-8-0's or the 300 series 4-6-0's were ever produced in brass or any other form for that matter. Sunset ran a couple of ads many years ago (1980's?) regarding the 100 series 2-8-0's but the run never materialized. More recently, Division Point has listed both models as future runs models. If insufficient interest is shown, they may never be produced. The new line of thinking in brass is much smaller unit runs of a particular model which drives the price up like we've seen in the past 10 to 15 years.

Rob Gardner

 

Running Rio Grande steam would be nice, but I can't afford a roster full of brass steamers. Its challenging enough to roster a representative fleet of diesels. I have a friend in Indiana and he commented that he could afford to model the Rio Grande in 1953 because he was in the top either 1 or 3% earning category in the US. Nice pictures.

 

Jim: That's the problem with modeling some railroads--steam locomotives specific to them are very seldom offered in plastic, and most have to be purchased as brass. I know of only two plastic Rio Grande steamers offered, the L-97 4-6-6-4 and the 3500 series 2-8-8-2. Rio Grande didn't like the UP-clone L-97's and got rid of them as fast as they could.

My brass Rio Grande steam fleet has been collected over the past 30 or so years, and most of it is 'consignment' brass, which of course often has to be either 'tinkered' with or in a couple of cases, completely re-built and re-motored. I guess in my case, it's either a labor of Love or sheer stubbornness, LOL!

But believe me, as a choral teacher in a high school, I am NOT among the top 1-3% wage earners, LOL! I just have to be patient and look for 'bargains'.

Oh, BTW, the 1225 managed to match very well with my Moffat 2-6-6-0, as long as I use the 2-8-2 as the helper and not the lead loco. Here's a photo.


Tom :tb-biggrin:

 

What happens the other way around? Without digging around in your posts are you running DCC? If you are speedmatching in surely an option.

Josh

 

Josh:

No, I'm strictly DC. Running the 1225 as road loco tends to buck against the 2-6-6-0's tender on the straightaways. Running them in reverse, they team up just perfectly. I've found that running double-head in DC, it's always best to lash the slightly faster-geared loco in front.

Oddly enough, I have enough of my brass steamers geared close enough that I can also run end of train pushers if I choose the locos carefully. I've been able to run a pair of my 2-8-2's as ahead-of-caboose helpers with most of my 4-8-2's as road locos. I have a pretty large roster of Rio Grande brass locos (98% of my motive power), and DCC conversion just doesn't seem necessary.

Here's a couple of photos of a run-by to prove my point: This was a 23-car freight headed by one of my 3-cylinder mountains heading up the 2.2% grade in South Yuba Canyon.

Bringing up the rear are two of my 2-8-2's running ahead of the caboose. I was able to run the freight clear through around the layout without any stringling or derailments on DC.


DC actually works well for me.

Tom

 

Very nice!

I am in a slow process of starting over... until 2001 I had a DC operated HOn3 Durango to Silverton layout and now in my new house I am starting an 60s/70s era HO standard gauge (selected scenic points: Tennessee Pass, Moffat Tunnel, Royal Gorge etc) and having to install decoders in my increasing diesel roster (50+ locomotives) is a HUGE PAIN!

Josh

 

Josh:

You're obviously very serious about our favorite railroad. I had thought about DCC for my brass roster (very little of which isn't frequently used), but I decided to stick with DC after hearing about how DCC conversion with brass often doesn't work very well.
Plus, though I have a rather large (24x24' garage layout) 'empire', I am also a 'lone wolf' operator, and generally work my operating sessions on 'real' time, which means that there are not usually more than two or three trains on the layout at any given time during a maximum (4 hour) session. So for me, DC handles it pretty well. Plus, my block system and ControlMaster 20 power system has more than enough voltage for anwhere from one to three trains at a time.
Perhaps if I were going diesel, I'd re-consider, but I'm stuck in the 'steam' era, and pretty comfortable with what I've got.
But the best of luck on your DCC conversion. And the projected layout sounds pretty darned fascinating.
Quite a railroad, the Rio Grande. Really the "Little Giant" of western railroads, IMO.
Tom

 

I am battling with the "lone wolf" operator syndrome as well. I have my dad who lives 20 miles away and a couple railroad buddies about the same distance away as well, but for the most part I would be running the railroad solo. I wanted DCC more for the no hassle aspect for a reverse loop in staging, a wye in my version of Tabernash and easy switching for a condensed Denver North Yard.

I have a set of FT and a set of F7 diesels in Brass. Very easy to convert to DCC, the easiest I have done next to several Athearn BB locos.

All, but one (MDC C-19) of my HOn3 locos were brass. Very simple set-up with the boiler picking up power on one track and the tender picking up the other. And with the tender shell there is lot's of room, even a narrow gauge tender.

I am rather spoiled being raised and living in Colorado and being able to see most of the D&RGW landmarks in person... have you had a chance to check it out in Colorado?

Josh

 

Josh:

Yes, I've been in Colorado several times. Back in the '60's when I was in the Air Force in Texas, we'd come up on extended leaves and do some skiiing. That's when I first started falling in love with Rio Grande. I've been to Durango a couple of times to ride the D&S, and rode the original Burlington/Rio Grande/WP "California Zephyr" between Denver and Sacramento when I got out of the Air Force.

I grew up around Donner Pass here in California, so I was very familiar with SP's mountain operations, and Rio Grande just seemed a natural to my railroading interests. And I thought their steam was especially handsome, so I incorporated Rio Grande into my 'fictional' trans-Sierra mainline when I built the Yuba River Sub. It's not 'authentic' Rio Grande, but it's as close as I can get it considering the setting, LOL!

But Colorado is one BEAUTIFUL state, and the Rio Grande was one BEAUTIFUL railroad, IMO. I've been collecting my running roster of Rio Grande brass steam since the mid 1960's. Still some of the handsomest steamers I've ever seen.

Tom

 

I've just come across this thread as I'm trying to work out which D&SL/DRGW K-63s had the FWH so I can number 2 of my units correctly. I've got 3 Sunset models, two with and one without the FWH. One FWH-equipped one is painted and numbered, as 1226, while the other two are unpainted.
The problem is that photographs of 1222, 1227 and 1228 all lack FWHs while 1229 either has or has not got an FWH depending on whose research I look at. Photographs show it with the FWH but I read somewhere that it lacked this feature. I'm minded to use the photographs as proof, unless it turn out that the device was removed during the loco's operation - can anyone shed light on the matter for me?