Beyer Garratt O scale...

ETS makes them, although they're of a smaller prototype (2-6-0.0-6-2), and of sheet-metal construction. Fidelity to prototype is what one would expect from tinplate (although ETS is a fair bit less fanciful than traditional US prewar-style trains)

ETS Railways of South Africa Garratt

---PCJ

Thanks for that. I would like to have something with better detailing however. It is such an unusual configuration that it would be fun to see it run.

There's an ETS one for sale on the bay right now, from Australia.  Too rich for my wallet right now but I would love to have one.

I picked up ond of the ETS Garrets a few years ago at a very good price. Like all ETS locomotives a very smooth runner.

Miketg

@Miketg posted:

I picked up one of the ETS Garrets a few years ago at a very good price. Like all ETS locomotives a very smooth runner.

Miketg

I relatively recently got one of the ETS Garretts too - the green Argentine RR version - and it's the closest thing to tinplate I have. Yes, an incredibly smooth runner thanks to two very small can motors and a unique clutch mechanism.

But mine is conventional only. It does have toy-like Choo-choo sounds and lights but no command control or smoke. In 3 rail O they are not offered with command control whereas in 2 rail they can be built with DCC (although that ups the price by about a third).

I wouldn't contemplate trying to equip mine with TMCC. It's more of a display piece than anything, recalling a trip down to the Southern Hemisphere when I saw a few of the real things in a museum. Not a patch on the Big Boy mind you but very impressive. 

P.S. For good measure, here's a snapshot of mine and one of the real things I've seen:

I would suspect that the problem, with the Garrett configuration in real world operation, is that, with the fuel and water supply over the drive wheels, traction lessens as the supplies are used up. Much the problem that the Erie Triplex encountered.

Not to be repetitive, but I posted this shot the other day in another thread for a reason I forget. I scratch built this (running gear is 2 Industrial Rail PRR E-6 Atlantics) from basswood, styrene, wire and a Weaver 40' flatcar. So, if you want a Garratt you can build one.

This one is freelance, of course. I never finished re-detailing it (see PRR pilots), as I got tired of it, honestly. It was based on various locos in a Garratt book I have. The square bunker/tank were found on some - and were easier for me to build. The basswood skyline casing, though, I do believe I made up...been a while.

It does run.

The Garratts were successful designs for their environment, though they were, in effect, just the world's biggest tank engines. Some traction issues. Lots of connections to maintain. The model required more connections than a "real" articulated, too.

I'd like to have a nice model of one, but only of a later, bigger machine.

@sxe60 posted:

I would suspect that the problem, with the Garrett configuration in real world operation, is that, with the fuel and water supply over the drive wheels, traction lessens as the supplies are used up. Much the problem that the Erie Triplex encountered.

You put your finger on exactly why these locos were never produced in the US although ALCO acquired the rights to do so. A couple of things I did learn about these engines is (1) there were literally hundreds in service across the former British Empire and elsewhere and (2) they moved freight and relatively slow speeds and were re-fueled frequently. 

@Hancock52 posted:

You put your finger on exactly why these locos were never produced in the US although ALCO acquired the rights to do so.

The main reason behind the overall design of the Beyer Garratt was to offer a large locomotive with very light axle loadings, which is pretty much a requirement for all the various countries that the Garratts were used in. Such a requirement, i.e. light axle loadings, was not, and never has been, a "requirement" on the railroads in the North American Continent. Also, the vast majority of the Garratt type locomotives built were other than standard gauge track. Thus, there was no need for such a locomotive in either the U.S. nor Canada.

A couple of things I did learn about these engines is (1) there were literally hundreds in service across the former British Empire and elsewhere and (2) they moved freight and relatively slow speeds and were re-fueled frequently. 

I'd love an AD60, but doubt that one would ever be made in 3R O.

Wonderful machines to watch....which of course makes them ideal model rairoad material. 

There are some phenomenal smaller scale models of Garrats (00 in the UK and elsewhere), including as shown here with a revolving coal bunker: https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=593

That bunker would be a more interesting and probably reliable feature than depleting coal. But I wouldn't expect anything other than ETS in 3 rail O scale any time soon, if ever.