Miss the 3985...I do.

Thanks for posting that. Even though I was not on that trip down to Missouri and back, she still will always look great at speed. Darned shame that poor 3985 has been relegated to the far north stall in the Cheyenne Roundhouse, without her tender, since early 2011.

Neato, look at them drivers goooooooo.  Thanks.

Meh.....its more fun watching it get up to speed. 

My absolutely, all time favorite video clip of 3985!!!!!  Her power and acceleration is unbelievable, with the right man at the throttle.

Thanks for posting THAT one.

Your welcome, can't believe she has just been sitting there collecting dust for years now.  Well post em' if ya got em'...lets see those 3985 videos and photos.

For the cost of getting 4014 to the METROLink trackage, I bet UP could have 3985 up and running, with the 15 year inspection!

Absolutely 100% correct, plus 3985 would have been "completed" back in 2011!!!! However, since the 4014 project is reportedly being funded by an "outside benefactor", the whole sordid subject of 3985 is moot.

Two of my favorite UP 3985 videos:

I have seen #3985 three times now, the first in 1981 when it doubleheaded with #8444 from Cheyenne to the California State RR Museum. The second time was in 2003? I think, when it ran as #3967 with smoke deflectors. The third time was a lucky timing on a western vacation when it ran on a Cheyenne Frontier Days train. It is a great engine...Alco certainly knew their craft.

I have a few questions for Hot Water...

-I noticed the pulsating smoke density, mostly from the 2nd stack, in the videos. Is this the result of oil firing, or do the videos predate the conversion? Is this changing smoke density a characteristic of UP Challengers?

-Dave Morgan related that, compared to a Big Boy, a Challenger was faster but trickier to fire. I know we do not have a Big Boy (yet!), but can you compare performance, speed, power, firing characteristics of UP Northern #844 with the #3985? I assume that a Challenger was more powerful and more "sure footed" at low speeds, but suspect that #844 had more power in the higher speed range. Can you confirm this? Any other comments would also be welcome.

PS. Thanks to all for the videos.

The late Dave Morgan was absolutely correct about the firing/steaming differences between the 4000s and the 3900s! From what I learned from a good number of the "Old Heads" on the UP districts west of Cheyenne, the 4000s when quite easy to fire and were VERY free steamers. More than one man told me that there really wasn't much that the Engineer could do to the Fireman, within reason, where the Fireman was unable to keep up on a 4000. However, the 3900s where a bit more temperamental, and NOT as easy to fire. I can speak from experience, the 3985 was a bit easier to fire as a coal burner than after the conversion to oil. Over the years, the UP Steam Crew Mechanical Team kept making improvements in the air intake, plus added MUCH MORE firebrick within the fireman and firebox for better heat retention.

Comparing firing characteristics of 844 to 3985 is like night and day. Firing 844 was darned near like laying off, as she is so easy to fire. There really isn't much the Engineer can do to the Fireman to the point that the Fireman can NOT keep up. The 3985 is simply NOT forgiving at all! If you get behind, you will STAY BEHIND, until you stop and then recover your proper water level in the gauge glass and 280psi working boiler pressure.

Concerning horsepower, naturally with 69" drive wheels, the 3985 has her maximum HP in the 45 to 50 MPH speed range, but is easily capable of handling a good sized train at 70 MPH. I don't recall any unusual wheel slippage with 3985 except when starting on cold wet rail conditions.

Concerning 844, she obviously has the HP capabilities to maintain continuous speeds above 90 MPH with a capacity passenger train, due to her 80" drive wheels and 300 psi working boiler pressure. I can attest from first hand experience that she will continue to accelerate past 90 MPH with a full throttle on an ascending grade! Surprisingly, 844 is not slippery when called upon to handle a VERY heavy load. On the UP video about 844, there was a time when we had to push a stalled VERY HEAVY freight train, westbound up Archer Hill, in Wyoming. Once coupled up to the reared, our Engineer simply eased into the freight and pushed in the slack until she stalled. We sat there a good 4 to 5 minutes until the headend Engineer real eased the air on the train, and we ever so slowly began to move forward, all the while with the throttle about half open and 300 psi in the cylinders. The more forward movement we got, i.e. above walking speed, the Engineer went to full throttle, and 844 still never slipped. We accelerated that freight to about 20 MPH, and in the process hit a track flange greaser, at which time 844 finally slipped pretty hard, but the recovery was quick and smooth (that is also on that video, as the photographer deliberately set up right opposite the greaser).

Hope this answers some of your questions.

Thanks for posting videos of 3985. I will never forget the day she ran through Seymour, In.

We were all so sure 611 would never make it, and everybody knew the Big Boy rumors were just silly.  I am willing to bet that 3985 and the N&W class A will see steam again in my lifetime.  I am hoping for two more decades, but there are no guarantees.

actually, I am hoping that our Harriman ten- wheeler makes it back into steam in the next decade.  So far there are no sugar daddies for that one.

This is not the real one - just my impression in 17/64 scale:

This has been posted before but it is one of my favorites.

Epic smoke shot starts at 0:45

awesome videos. thanks everyone for posting

Hot Water,

Thanks for the detailed and informative reply. The excellent adhesion of both steamers can likely be attributed to the excellent suspension systems that both engines have and the optimum selection of cylinder bore and stroke, driver size, and cut off, a tribute to both UP and Alco.

The Kratville book "The Mighty 800" contains a section on testing, including acceleration testing on grade, that included comparisons of a late 800 with a SP GS and an ATSF Northern. the 800 seems to fare pretty well!

Thank you also for your comments re oil firing. I have read that a Big Boy was converted to oil for a while as a test, and then changed back to coal. I wonder how the 4014 will do using oil? Should be interesting!

Of course this is my own opinion, but I think that the UP Challengers. with all due respect to the 800's, were the best the railroad had. This articulated is

the locomotive I'd like to see restored rather than the "Big Boy".

A go anywhere do anything locomotive. And the final version of these engines,

also only my opinion, were the best looking engines the UP had. It is a dxxxx

shame it is not being restored.

E

I agree, the 3985 is a great looking engine, well proportioned and great lines.  How about some footage out west.