MTH Railking Streamliners must live on!

I like the RailKing streamliners too and think they are a good value.  I have only one but have run it for years without issue.

Good luck,

Scott

I never heard of a CNW Crusader, is that a fantasy piece?

Great locos, OP!  I agree, I've got a couple MTH RK steamers and I love them.

Why is it that steam engines are metal by default but diesels are plastic by default?  There has to be some manufacturing consideration where steam engines make more financial sense cast in zinc versus plastic.  Is it because there aren't discrete places to mount "trucks" and there are frequently a series of wheels in line?  Or is it just cause MTH / Lionel feel like the market would reject plastic steam shells?

(Yes, I know Lionel MPC did plastic steam for a while, maybe they still do.  But it still seems like vast majority of steam is zinc).

Why not metal diesels?

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I never heard of a CNW Crusader, is that a fantasy piece?

Yes, though I like to think of it as poetic license.  I've always like the CNW Hudson streamliner but MTH released it with PS1 and the radius was 0-54.  I run 0-42.  So my Crusader is the 0-42 version in my mind.  I looked for real photos online and couldn't find any.  As you have confirmed, thank you, it never existed.  BTW I do not think the Hudson streamlined CBQ that I purchased existed, either.  There was a look a like streamliner but not the same engine.  Perhaps you can shed some like on that.

Thanks, John!

@IRON HORSE posted:

Yes, though I like to think of it as poetic license.  I've always like the CNW Hudson streamliner but MTH released it with PS1 and the radius was 0-54.  I run 0-42.  So my Crusader is the 0-42 version in my mind.  I looked for real photos online and couldn't find any.  As you have confirmed, thank you, it never existed.  BTW I do not think the Hudson streamlined CBQ that I purchased existed, either.  There was a look a like streamliner but not the same engine.  Perhaps you can shed some like on that.

Thanks, John!

Actually the E4 will run on 0-36 fastrack curves I ran one and it ran fine. O-42 should not be an issue either. 

@Trainlover9943 posted:

Actually the E4 will run on 0-36 fastrack curves I ran one and it ran fine. O-42 should not be an issue either. 

No way!  Had I known that I might have gone in a different direction.  But the E4 was PS1 only, right?  MTH never reissued.  If that is the case, then I stand by my decision.  The Crusader in CNW is still a cool-looking streamliner and my layout is scale-ish but not perfectly detailed like a lot of guys on this sight.  Plus, I have a seasonal holiday layout portion that is all Lemax and Department 56 -- COMPLETE FANTASY -- it is a loop that comes through the wall into our living area.    

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I never heard of a CNW Crusader, is that a fantasy piece?

Yep.

And although the Burlington did have a streamlined Hudson at two different times, the model is a repainted C&O Hudson.

Rusty

@IRON HORSE posted:

No way!  Had I known that I might have gone in a different direction.  But the E4 was PS1 only, right?  MTH never reissued.  If that is the case, then I stand by my decision.  The Crusader in CNW is still a cool-looking streamliner and my layout is scale-ish but not perfectly detailed like a lot of guys on this sight.  Plus, I have a seasonal holiday layout portion that is all Lemax and Department 56 -- COMPLETE FANTASY -- it is a loop that comes through the wall into our living area.    

They did make a PS/2 one but it has a wireless tether instead of a wired one. The one I ran was the PS/1 that was upgraded to a PS/3. 

@Trainlover9943 posted:

They did make a PS/2 one but it has a wireless tether instead of a wired one. The one I ran was the PS/1 that was upgraded to a PS/3. 

I wonder why MTH would label it as a 0-54 minimum curve?  I have a lot of pieces that say 0-42 minimum and they pretty much just fit.  My E8, for example, hangs off on 0-42 curves and anything narrower would not work at all.  As it is, it does look a little weird when hanging off -- but it works.  I chose 0-42 when I started because  my train rooms have had limited space and a lot of stuff works on 0-42.

@IRON HORSE posted:

I wonder why MTH would label it as a 0-54 minimum curve?  I have a lot of pieces that say 0-42 minimum and they pretty much just fit.  My E8, for example, hangs off on 0-42 curves and anything narrower would not work at all.  As it is, it does look a little weird when hanging off -- but it works.  I chose 0-42 when I started because  my train rooms have had limited space and a lot of stuff works on 0-42.

This one was weird. I think the catalog said 042, the box said 054 or maybe the other way around but nonetheless it does work. Not pretty but it does work. I've often said I wish the manufacturers would have the minimum curve rating be just that, the minimum curve needed for the model to go around the track and put a recommended curve for switches, s curves ect.