44 Tonner Review

I'm glad you like it Dave. But for the exact reasons you mentioned I would hardly call it great. But that's just me. I still can't believe they made a newly tooled engine without Proto 3/2. If there was ever a model that cried out to be 2R convertible it is this one. Plenty of people could be enticed to build a small 2R switching pike to try a 44 tonner. That was the whole intent of Proto 3/2. That's what makes me think the are throwing in the towel on it going forward.

Just my 2 cents.

Thanks for posting this info. Now I'm really looking forward to taking delivery of mine!

-Greg

WOW!  Thanks for the demo, Dave......It's a beast! Did I count about 10 hoppers!

Peter

David Minarik posted:

jonnyspeed posted:

I'm glad you like it Dave. But for the exact reasons you mentioned I would hardly call it great. But that's just me. I still can't believe they made a newly tooled engine without Proto 3/2. If there was ever a model that cried out to be 2R convertible it is this one. Plenty of people could be enticed to build a small 2R switching pike to try a 44 tonner. That was the whole intent of Proto 3/2. That's what makes me think the are throwing in the towel on it going forward.

Just my 2 cents.

John.  It IS 2/3 rail. I must have deleted the truck photo   Trust me it is both 2 and 3 rail   

The pilot not being fixed is the only downfall but we have dealt with that forever  It would be very easy to fix  

Dave

 

Ok. I stand corrected. There wasn't any info stating that that I saw since it was announced. That makes it a bit more palatable. Still a lot of work, and it doesn't look like it likes to creep very well. I think I'll stick with a brass model with a LokSound decoder.

Thanks.

From my experience around several 44 tonners, they did not get the start-up sound correct. Sounds more like an Alco diesel, than a Cat or a Cummins diesel.

 Nice little engine though.

Jeff

Very cool locomotive Dave!  Thanks for posting!

John,

It creeps very well.  The pilot will be one of the easiest to fix that I have done. 

Jeff,

i cannot comment on that. I never heard a live one. 

Dave

Now you make me want one dave. Will wait for the next batch with different road names though. Maybe a santa fe in the black and silver stripes like WBB. If mth does one. Did the UP ever own one of these? Anyone know. Adding update to my post. Just now looked at the new catalog. I want the UP one even if its not prototipical. Way to read my mind mth. 

Yes, UP did have a few.

Thanks for the review Dave.

I think MTH should have gone with one motor, which would have been sufficient and added a smoke unit in the available room.

Dave

The sounds were recorded from a real operating 44 tonner owned by Jamie Haislip, which I think is housed at the Strasburg RR.  I doubt they got the startup sequence "wrong".

Great videos.  It looks like MTH did their homework on this one.  

Now we just need the GE demo version.

Chuck Sartor posted:

Yes, UP did have a few.

One. 

It is preserved at the Danbury CT museum. I've driven it in thier operation program. 

Pat Marinari posted:

The sounds were recorded from a real operating 44 tonner owned by Jamie Haislip, which I think is housed at the Strasburg RR.  I doubt they got the startup sequence "wrong".

Per MTH, the sounds were recorded from Jamie's two 44 ton switchers, both ex-PRR (one being the Strasburg engine) that are now on the Walkersville Southern, Walkersville, MD

Thanks for the review and video! Makes me more excited to order the new O&W ones. I have a couple of the brass Yoder models unfinished and wondered if MTH had narrowed the hoods.

cmscanuck posted:

Thanks for the review and video! Makes me more excited to order the new O&W ones. I have a couple of the brass Yoder models unfinished and wondered if MTH had narrowed the hoods.

Chris,

The MTH hoods are narrowed.  That was one of the complaints about the Yoder and Bauchman models.  The green one in the above photos is a Yoder brass model.

Dave

Thanks! I remember the green one from your build thread! The model looks much better with the narrow hoods. Glad they were able to shrink the hoods and still fit the electronics in. 

Great revue Dave. Nice layout too!

How about a side-by-side with the Bachmann.

Dave

645 posted: 

Quick Google search found an image of it:  

 

Quite a big number for such a small locomotive - LOL!

Yow!! That must be the "Really Useful" group

I notice the MR is phase 1 while the UP is phase 3.  Anyone in the know care to point out the visual difference between a phase 1 and phase 3  body style of a 44 tonner?  

Joe

Looks like few details missing to me!

Dtrainmaster posted:

How about a side-by-side with the Bachmann.

Dave

Dave,

Here is a Bauchman that I did some time ago.  It is closer to the Yoder model dimension wise but made of plastic. (still very nice)

The motors are in the trucks so there is no way to install PS3.  You can install ERR but after the cost of the unit and the ERR boards, you are up past the price of the MTH.  

The light green unit is the Bauchman.  It is also a very strong puller.  The Yoder (dark green with PS3) can only pull 2-4 cars.

Thanks for the Video... your right. This is a GREAT little engine! I will have to get one.

jhz563 posted:

Looks like few details missing to me!

This is not a 44 tonner like the prototype MTH  modeled. The last of the original style 44 tonners were built in about 1956.

 Extra 2200 South did a whole series on the 44 tonners, and explained all the phases. If you can find the old issues with that article, it would be worth a read.

This is not a 44 tonner like the prototype MTH  modeled. The last of the original style 44 tonners were built in about 1956.

 Extra 2200 South did a whole series on the 44 tonners, and explained all the phases. If you can find the old issues with that article, it would be worth a read.

Thanks for the tip - I didn't know that! Anyway I was just poking fun at the various mods and remote operation lights hanging off these two lokies.  They are still in occasional service, unloading limestone and moving empties around.

Phooey - I don't want to want this loco (and I have the Bachmann issue), but I do. It seems sufficiently creepy to me - and that will only improve with use, cruise control notwithstanding.

Let's see - it's not cheap; I don't buy new, much; I don't buy diesels, much; I don't buy MTH, much...but the LI and NH versions appeal to me a whole lot, so if I can find....wish there was an Engineering version or a black/no lettering version.

I like.

Dave:  I love your backdrop shown in the video. Simply outstanding!

I have some pictures of a 44 tonner from a steel plant (now retired). 

You can compare them to your model, however it looks pretty close to the prototype to me.

Creeping at 2mph with Kadees and fixed pilots. 

David Minarik posted:

Creeping at 2mph with Kadees and fixed pilots. 

 

VERY NICE!!!!

Now, please show us all over on the 3RS Forum, how you fixed the pilots.

Dave, thanks for the post, pics, and videos.  Your Kadee and pilot upgrade look great.

David Minarik posted:

Creeping at 2mph with Kadees and fixed pilots. 

You work unbelievable fast Dave. You are making it more palatable for sure. I was not aware of the fact that some of the prototypes had short handrails like the model so give MTH credit for that. Did you use screws or adhesive to fix the pilots?

You've almost changed my mind on this model. The slow speed is still too high for me. My Atlas SW8 with a TCS WowSound decoder will creep at .3 mph. It makes a difference if you enjoy slow speed operations. That's my preference though. I'm sure most 3R modelers won't care. They cost and effort to replace DCS with DCC to get the model I want is probably still too high for me, but it is tempting. I love these little engines.

Thanks for sharing.

David Minarik posted:
"Creeping at 2mph with Kadees and fixed pilot"

Hi Dave, is the Pennsy engine in the video an MTH loco, or is it the Williams? If MTH, you accomplished the Kadee conversion and rigid pilot modification very quickly! Please give us as much info here as as you can about this.

I visited my LHS today, and saw one of the MTH locos in person. Appearance wise, the model looked pretty good, and while there wasn't time for a running demo, I did hold it in my hands, and made a few observations; one, it is very heavy (that's a good thing). Two, it has only two axles powered, and all of the powered wheels (4 of them) have traction tires, leaving the four unpowered wheels to provide contact to the ground wires. Three, there doesn't appear to be any smoke unit, and Four, there is a 3-rail/2-rail selector slide switch mounted in the bottom of the fuel tank, although there doesn't appear to be any obvious insulation between the two wheels on each axle, so I'm not sure how it can run on two rail track. There would still be the problem of the pizza cutter flanges running on scale sized rail, even if it could run on two rails. There is also a DCS/DCC slide switch between one of the trucks and the fuel tank. My recent MTH RS1 had the mounting hole for this feature but no switch, in spite of what the catalog stated.

I must say that I am a bit disappointed to discover that only two axles on this loco are powered, as well as the fact that there are 4 traction tires, since I strongly dislike having any traction tires at all.

Bill in FtL

I have spent some time running a real 44 tonner and they do not creep.  In the first throttle position, which energizes the traction motors but leaves the engine at idle, unloaded on level track, the locomotive runs along at 6 to 8 mph. When switching the operator is constantly applying the independent brake in the first notch to get the speed down to make reasonable couplings. The loco I ran is set up for MU, so it is the version with the electro pneumatic, not manual, throttle.  

Thanks for all the reviews and comments. I like it and received my shipping notice. We get to see this on Monday in the New Haven livery.

jhz563 posted:

Looks like few details missing to me!

Look at the builders' plate. That is an 80 tonner.

B-B 160/160 4GE763

B-B (Wheel arrangement) 160/160 (Weight in thousands of pounds/ weight on drivers) 4 (Number of) GE763 (Type traction motors)