Sunset AC-9

Sounds great but it Means nothing without pictures and video. 

It's a great looking engine And I hope you enjoy it. Good luck with it.

Robert's opinion has value to me - he's actually run the locomotive.

Ed Rappe

I have wanted a brass AC-9 for almost 40 years, after seeing the KTM Max Gray version at Hill's Hobby Shop. I could never afford one because it was either priced too high, and fairly hard to find.  I wish they would re-issue an updated bow front Cab Forward (AC-7 to AC-12).  I have a 1993 2-rail AC-7, and this is pretty decent, but not like their current AC-9 model.  The KTM AC-9 was good for its day, but this puts that to shame. The PSC AC-9s from what I've heard are not great in the reliability dept., but has great detail (break rigging under the frames, all opening hatches, chains, etc.). If you are a fan of this engine, get one from a hobby shop while you still can! 

I wish the blackened tires became the standard for ALL import locomotives. It is hard to match the different hues for a seemless image, when touching up. Can't quite figure out why they don't paint the tires - it makes the models look toy-like. 

       AC9 - great prototype and nice model. That engine had to be in the top 10 in horsepower for all steam locomotives. And "semi-streamlined" - what fun!

Virtually all steam locomotives builder's photos featured white tires. Of course, steam locomotives were from the white wall tire era, and heck, maybe even the white  "spats era"! But not too many retained white tires in service, although some did maintain them, such as Canadian National.

I have photos of SP locomotives with white tires in service.  There is a prototype for everything.  The one SP locomotive I never cared much about is the AC-9.  I never cared for the all weather cab, and had a hard time getting used to the cab's taper.  I suppose if it had had an open cab, I would have liked it.  I am very happy that it is now available as a model for all my SP modeler friends.  

The AC-9 is in the words of a friend "a GS-4 on steroids". Did the GS-4 have a tapered cab? This is one of my favorite locomotives (any large 16-drivered articulated is a favorite of mine). It had 4 different tender designs, which can be confusing. The coal burners had 1 consistent tender (class 222 R-1), while as an oil burner, there were 3 different tenders (classes 224-R-1,245-R-1, and 252-R-1). I can find very few video/DVDs on AC-9's running, just Pentrex's Cab Forward DVD has a few poor shots of it along the Modoc line, and sitting dead in a scrap yard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPGdvdVzSoI

This is worth a look.

Really dark.  It is a beautiful model, and in those shots one cannot even see the cab.  I like that.  If the AC-9 had had the GS-4 cab I would probably class it as one of my favorites, even though I personally like open cabs such as the GS 2 and 3.

My prejudices extend to my favorite 2-10-2.  I do not care for the coal cab found on the SP 2-10-2s found near Dawson NM.  I do like the coal tender.  Good thing this is just a hobby.

So, are any of the current owners of a 2 rails AC-9 going to post good pictures of their latest acquisitions? That video (by 3rd rail) was pathetic in quality.

Thanks

Yves

I'll post some pix of mine once it arrives, BUT it's a 3 rail version.

Thanks Ferroequinologist. Bob2-what is a coal cab for the 2-10-2's?I saw pictures of this engine with 2 types of tenders, but I couldn't tell the cabs apart. Did the GS-4 cab have a taper? I am not that familiar with the 2-10-2's since I usually concentrate on AC's on the Espee and nothing else.

I posted pix of my 3 rail version in the 3RS Forum HERE

EDIT 3/18/14--- Theres now a video on that link as well.

Laidoffsick,

Thank you so much for taking the burden to post these beautiful pictures.

Yves

Beautiful engine.  One of my favorites.

Is there a weight over the front set of drivers with a mechanism to transmit the weight to these drivers or does the boiler just float over the front set of drivers?

Thanks,

Ed

Similar to a real articulated, there is a friction pad near the front of the front engine the supports the weight of the forward portion of the boiler. As the front engine moves left and right under that weigh bearing device, weight is naturally applied to the from engine. All the Sunset/3rd Rail articulated model have the same feature.

Mine needs some type of adjustment as the front set of drivers (as well as the pilot truck) is bouncing all over the place and derailing after it comes out of a curve. It seems that mine has all the pressure towards the back portion of that front set of drivers. I can see it as it sits there on the track that the pilot truck wants to float as well as that leading drive axle. Not a big deal, just some tinkering. Mine is a 3 rail model and I'm running a combination of 072 & 080 curves.

Bob2-what is a coal cab for the 2-10-2's?I saw pictures of this engine with 2 types of tenders, but I couldn't tell the cabs apart. Did the GS-4 cab have a taper? I am not that familiar with the 2-10-2's since I usually concentrate on AC's on the Espee and nothing else.

Sorry - it was a good response. I'll try again later.

The photos of the Sunset SP AC-9 look absolutely terrific. Scott has produced and imported another winner and I obviously made a very big mistake not pre-ordering a 2-rail version of this engine, but in all honesty, the price was just a little too steep for my wallet.

Yeah, they really do look good, as does the model.  These are show- stoppers.  I gave up on trying to resurrect the above posts, so i will try again with new words:

Cabs on coal burning Decks were longer - extra sheet metal behind the cab windows.  See Church's excellent new book.

Daylight GS-4 had no taper in the cab - from the photos, I guess I was wrong - the AC-9 had no taper either.

Sunset has done spectacular work transferring boiler weight to the front engine.  I suggest that any Sunset owners having trouble with pilot trucks look for an anomaly - a bent articulating connection or a constrained drive shaft.  Most Sunset articulateds run perfectly right out of the box, even on my rough superelevated hand- laid ugly track.

All AC-9s had a taper on the sides of the cab.  The taper starts around the door on each side.

Photos can be deceiving but SP line drawings are not.

Jay

I have an AC1 and AC5 from Scott at 3rd Rail Sunset, they are both awesome, my AC1

is flawless on my layout with 47-56" radius curves and steep grades, the AC5 runs well on it, but needs a little more work by me to be a good runner. All due to my layout and its radius and grades. I also have Pacifics, Mountains, Moguls, FP7s, E8s, M-1000

and I am sure more from Scott, wish I was in the position to get his AC9, IMO- "SCOTT MANN AND HIS COMPANY 3RD RAIL ARE THE BEST THING THAT HAS HAPPENED TO
2 RAIL O SCALE IN THE LAST 20 YEARS."

ncng

Thanks bob2. The AC-9 is the heaviest model sunset had produced so far. Mine runs flawlessly,  and my track is not the best laid. This thing will pull well over 100 cars easily. The construction is fantastic, and I am extremely happy with the detail. I examined the cab, and compared it to the cab picture in Church's Cab Forward.  It is well done. the pumps on the smokebox have a lot of detail. It doesn't have the stoker under the cab, or tender (the Lionel, and PSC does) and the crossbars on the inside of the tender doorway are not there. These are small nitpicky details, but considering the cost, and the very solid construction, I am very happy. As far as running these big engines on O-72, although they are supposed to run, there can be problems. My 3-rail Allegheny will run in only one direction on O-72. In the other direction, the front articulating pipe above the front cylinder gets in the way and it can't make it.  On my Sunset 3-rail N.P. Z-5, the front delivery pipe snapped in two and I had to construct a hollow pipe sleave so they can slide back and forth on O-72. All of these big engines run better on larger radius tracks.  I now have a O-144 Atlas flex-track laid down that is wired for 2 and 3 rail so I can run the big steamers.  all of these problems vanished.

For those who are concerned about weight to the front drivers, I saw an article on how somebody added weight to the front drivers of an Akane HO cab forward, and added weight inside the front boiler directly above where the spring pin hits the plate on the front drivers. This increased traction on this engine. I think Sunset solved this problem and the AC-9 is extremely heavy as is.

I received my AC9, but to my disappointment there was a 3R model in the 2R labeled box! Scott sent a return UPS label via email and its been shipped back to 3rd Rail. I'm patiently waiting for the correct model. The brief minute or two that I had the wrapping open it did look like a wonderful model!

CN_Hogger

I hope somebody does a review on the Sunset Jawn Henry and AC-9. Sunset is at the top of its game: good detail, excellent construction and running. Brass doesn't get any better than this. They are not as expensive as the "high end" products, and you get a bigger bang for your buck. They are definitely worth it.

I finally received my AC-9 this week and all I can say is well done! Gorgeous model and it runs great out of the box! Here's a couple quick grab shots that I took with my cell phone.

 CN_Hogger

Robert Bradley,

"For those who are concerned about weight to the front drivers, I saw an article on how somebody added weight to the front drivers of an Akane HO cab forward, and added weight inside the front boiler directly above where the spring pin hits the plate on the front drivers. This increased traction on this engine. I think Sunset solved this problem and the AC-9 is extremely heavy as is."

How did Sunset do it?  Is there a weight over the front drivers?

Thanks,

Ed

To Ed Kelly: I asked Scott this question and I haven't received an answer yet, but the AC-9 is heavier than the  Sunset Jawn Henry (over 12 pounds). The front drivers do have a roller on a plate which puts some of the boiler weight on them. This engine effortlessly pulled 35 mixed freight cars up a 2% grade.  I don't think weight is an issue here because this engine is very heavy.  It is heavier than all of my other Sunset articulateds (DM&IR, N.P. Z-5, B&O EM-1 Yellowstones, AC-5 and AC-7 Cab Forwards, Allegheny, Y6b, Z-6 Challenger, Va. 2-10-10-2 and the Big Boy).

beautiful!!!   Sunset keeps rolling it in with great models.  

Regarding weight, weight isn't everything, it's also about putting that weight in the right places for best tractive effort.

 The only disappointing model to date in recent memory in that regard was the Sunset GG1.  Weak motors and heavy as heck but could barely pull itself around NYSME.  When I first ran it, after a few minutes it was hot, after more runtime the motors burnt out.  I installed two new powerful Pittman motors and rebalanced weight with springs to push down on the powered axles but it still did not pull well and the idle wheels drove me nuts.  I have mine all in pieces, ready to be worked on.  New all ball bearing 0.6mod 23:1 NWSL gear boxes for all SIX axles. Going to mill out the journals for ball bearings to take all that weight.  Now that my daughter is a bit older, less maintenance, I've wee bit of time for some hobby related relief.

BTW when I took the old gearboxes off, I saw they are nicely constructed, pretty beefy with a big brass worm gear and steel worm?  I decided with my ball bearing spree, I would even upgrade them with pressed on ball bearings on the high speed input shaft replacing the original brass thrust washers and bearings.  I can probably use these four boxes in some other project, maybe steam or a four axle diesel.

To Pitogo: What you said is true. The weight has to be where it counts, above the drivers, and a lot of other factors come into play; gear ratio, motor torque, tire tread material etc. I have a 2-rail Sunset GG-1. It runs ok, but noisy. Since it runs on my small layout and handles my freight trains, I will leave it alone. I wish I had the where-with-all to take it apart and improve the mechanism. It is constructed well, but the weight is not where it should be. Bob Turner did a nice article in O Scale Trains a few years ago. What Pittman motors will you use? I think the model comes with Mabuchi motors. Good luck with your project. I think somebody else on another forum did the same thing sand was satisfied with the results.

I would start out by linking the center and unpowered axles with Delrin chain.  I believe that would cure the pulling power problem.  Some of these Chinese motors are better than they look, and often the noise is out-of-balance flywheels.

I have a pair of Sunset FFs that will get the chain some day.  Right now both of them can easily pull all of my Empire Builder cars.

Thanks bob2. I thought of that this morning and that would be a cheaper and easier way to do it, than take apart and replace the whole mechanism.  What about those Mabuchi motors? Should they be replaced or left alone?

I already replaced the factory mabuchi with the Pittman.  The fact that they heated up to the point where the model was hot was an issue.  Eventually I think it burned through the enamel on the windings.  The pittman I i put in are a pair of very long 8000 series motors with the same 5/32" input shaft which pressed onto the pulley for the belt drive without needing a shaft adaptor (the mabuchi had a brass adaptor).

Bob2 I went with the new gearbox because with the Mabuchi to Pittman swap I lost some top end speed.   I'll supplement the loss with a 23:1 ratio instead of the factory 25:1, minor gain but it also will give me a chance to work on something new.  Its a beater project for me old rivets is expendable.  If I screw it up oh well.  I'm already $400 in the hole with all the parts upgrades might as well do it right.  Once new gearboxes are in the fun will be fabricating a new truck mount, to clear the new gearboxes.   Thankfully I have access to a lathe and mill at NYSME shops. 

Cheers

I think you are doing the right thing - I probably could not justify the expense of six gearboxes.  The Pittmans are superior motors, and Sunset uses them.  My experience with the Chinese motors is on the club equipment at the San Diego Museum, and all I can tell you is, hot or not, we get literally decades out of the ones on MTH and Atlas/Weaver.  They amaze me - they have such small solid bearings, and yet, even when they wear out they still sort of work.  When I buy new motors, they are 8000 series Pittmans.

Something to think about - if you order the 7 1/2 Volt motors, they will spin faster at track voltage, and you can use the higher ratio gearboxes.