Well we now know who still owns the Hudson tooling.

I am interested to know if any of the modern-made Hudson's have rounded boilers on the underside, and Melgar hinted that this MTH Premier J1-e model may have that awesome feature. I passed on the Lionel Legacy Hudson a year or so back because like so many of their models they used the U-shaped monolith boiler.

I also like the catalog picture of the 2015 Premier dark green boiler jacket on the B&A version - very nice. Does anyone have the previous release of this, and can you share a picture of the production version's color and a trackside view of the boiler, above the suspension?

I actually don't own a regular Hudson, though I have the fantastic streamlined NYC Empire State Express and MW Hiawatha versions.

I cant imaging hand bombing a K4 at speed on the Broadway Limited.  It was a work out doing that with NKP 587 when the stoker failed on a practice run to the fairgrounds just before the state fair many many years ago.  And that was under 25mph track speed with a mostly empty train.   Both are handsome engines in their own right, but the NYC J1e wins hands down in my little world!   AD

@Paul Kallus posted:

I am interested to know if any of the modern-made Hudson's have rounded boilers on the underside, and Melgar hinted that this MTH Premier J1-e model may have that awesome feature. I passed on the Lionel Legacy Hudson a year or so back because like so many of their models they used the U-shaped monolith boiler.

I also like the catalog picture of the 2015 Premier dark green boiler jacket on the B&A version - very nice. Does anyone have the previous release of this, and can you share a picture of the production version's color and a trackside view of the boiler, above the suspension?

I actually don't own a regular Hudson, though I have the fantastic streamlined NYC Empire State Express and MW Hiawatha versions.

No die cast Hudsons have that feature, …..only 3rd Rail offers that in brass steam locomotives,….I pointed that out to MELGAR on the other thread,…..with a picture of the MTH J1e,….

Pat

They are going to run one with the PT Tender again I see. Didn't look to see the number on the cab, but I have seen the prior one on eBay and other sites for quite a while. I think that one was #5344?

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

They are going to run one with the PT Tender again I see. Didn't look to see the number on the cab, but I have seen the prior one on eBay and other sites for quite a while. I think that one was #5344?

Hopefully not another 5344. There were quite a few J1s that got PT tenders and MTH has been pretty good at not using cab numbers used before.

Pete

@Norton posted:

Hopefully not another 5344. There were quite a few J1s that got PT tenders and MTH has been pretty good at not using cab numbers used before.

Pete

Yeah, I have noticed that from them. I know that #5344 is all over the place from manufacturers, these guys, those guys, And then guys have all made #5344 in their productions, guess it was very popular when in service. MTH won't mess up the numbers as far as what they didn't run sort of like how Big L had done in the past. "They didn't have that water heater, valve gear" you know what I mean.

The ones being issued with the PT tenders, are cab numbers 5342, & 5401, …..5401 was renumbered in 36 and is a big four territory engine,…..so class lights ok,….don’t know if 5401 received a PT at some point in its career or not, but I am looking, ….interesting enough, I don’t have a whole lot of info on 5342,…..I need help from all things NYC knowledge broker Mario,…..

Pat

@harmonyards posted:

The ones being issued with the PT tenders, are cab numbers 5342, & 5401, …..5401 was renumbered in 36 and is a big four territory engine,…..so class lights ok,….don’t know if 5401 received a PT at some point in its career or not, but I am looking, ….interesting enough, I don’t have a whole lot of info on 5342,…..I need help from all things NYC knowledge broker Mario,…..

Pat

As far as I could tell, through my research, 5342 was not equipped with a PT-style tender from any of the builders.  Although, there is evidence that 5333 did receive at least one, if not two different PT tenders. It seems that 5333 was officially equipped with one built by Lima and should have the Lima builders plates to be correct… although there is a photograph that exists with her trailing a PT tender without builders plates and having the road name higher on tender side, which means it came off a Niagara. Now, the tender she received was rebuilt from a wreck so did they leave off the builder’s plates when out back into service, but that doesn’t explain why the lettering would still be higher… hmm.

As for the 5401, officially, she received a one-off PT tender (PT-2) which has greater water capacity for her work in Indiana where there’s no track pans, and that is significantly different in appearance to the other PT tenders that carried only 18,000 gallons. But… there’s a grainy photograph that I am studying that allegedly catches 5401 at Little Falls, and clearly has a PT3,4 or 5. Stand by. I’ve ordered a hi-res digital image to prove it is indeed the 5401.

Thanks!

- Mario

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned already:

NYC Hudsons #5331 and #5340 never had a tender that said New York Central LINES.  Nor did #5374 after it received that number.  Regarding the versions with PT tenders, I've never seen a photo of a Hudson in which the numbers on the engine were Roman but the lettering on the tender was Gothic.  (BTW, my records agree with what Mario reported: 5342 never had a PT tender, and 5401 had a unique "PT-2" that looked nothing like the other PT-types.)

I hope that some dealers are planning to do custom runs that are accurate.

@CentralFan1976 posted:

As far as I could tell, through my research, 5342 was not equipped with a PT-style tender from any of the builders.  Although, there is evidence that 5333 did receive at least one, if not two different PT tenders. It seems that 5333 was officially equipped with one built by Lima and should have the Lima builders plates to be correct… although there is a photograph that exists with her trailing a PT tender without builders plates and having the road name higher on tender side, which means it came off a Niagara. Now, the tender she received was rebuilt from a wreck so did they leave off the builder’s plates when out back into service, but that doesn’t explain why the lettering would still be higher… hmm.

As for the 5401, officially, she received a one-off PT tender (PT-2) which has greater water capacity for her work in Indiana where there’s no track pans, and that is significantly different in appearance to the other PT tenders that carried only 18,000 gallons. But… there’s a grainy photograph that I am studying that allegedly catches 5401 at Little Falls, and clearly has a PT3,4 or 5. Stand by. I’ve ordered a hi-res digital image to prove it is indeed the 5401.

Thanks!

- Mario

Bad news sports fans… the alleged picture of 5401 with a PT-3 tender was not 5401. Most probably was 5406, as 5401 carried spoked drivers and the pictures shows different.

thanks,

Mario

5401 was a J-1.  5406 was a J-3.  I've got a photo of 5401 in Bellefontaine with a PT-2 and class lights that is dated August, 1955.

@700E posted:

5401 was a J-1.  5406 was a J-3.  I've got a photo of 5401 in Bellefontaine with a PT-2 and class lights that is dated August, 1955.

I think they could leave 5401 alone and call it good, ….at least it has a PT tender, albeit slightly off, …I wouldn’t call it grossly off …they ain’t gonna make new tooling for a tender, so there’s that ,……5342 needs to be changed, and Mario & I discussed this all morning off line that 5264 ( even though it’s a J1c) would be a better choice than 5342 ……J1c & J1e in a model would darn near 100% identical no how…….the other thing we found interesting, we could not find a picture of 5340 with Scullins…..HOWEVER, never put it past the Central proper to play musical drivers and a full set of Scullins is plausible if they had them available at any given time, ….grandad said the Boxpok and spoke drivers suffered from chronic crank pin failures,….

Pat

I agree, that the J-1c and J-1e looked enough alike that using J-1e tooling for a J-1c doesn't bother me.  A reason I would opt for 5266, instead of 5342 or 5264, is that I have a photo of it with a PT-4 tender and class lights, probably on the Big Four. 

@700E posted:

I agree, that the J-1c and J-1e looked enough alike that using J-1e tooling for a J-1c doesn't bother me.  A reason I would opt for 5266, instead of 5342 or 5264, is that I have a photo of it with a PT-4 tender and class lights, probably on the Big Four.

We have the same for both 5333 and 5264… PT-3/5 tender (non-Lima built) with class lights. As for the 5401, the PT-2 tenders isn’t even close enough to the others for me.

Can’t be 5266, as it has a Lima-built PT-4.  Unless MTH is going to add the builders plates. Which is possible; hey! You never know.

Well, let’s get the facts straight, and compile a list of what’s wrong, and the scenario that works with the given model options that are being made ( the 6 listed ) and I’ll see about getting a hold of Rich Foster and see IF changes are possible,…..that’s a big IF, ….it’s not like I have any pull, but I can certainly ask Rich if he’ll entertain our thoughts, ……700E said something about tender lettering and what not, so let’s start a list, and see what’s wrong, and offer the remedy …..can’t hurt to ask??…..no??..

Pat

@harmonyards and @CentralFan1976, I do recall Pat saying on some occasions drivers were swapped for whatever was available in the shops, I think this was said one the Lionel release back in 2017 or such. I think we had a lengthy discussion on how all that worked out. Of course this is the J3's, not the J1's like here, so not sure how exactly it would apply. Almost sounds like how Mohawk 3001(the real thing) doesn't have its correct tender behind it at the museum, because that got warped in a fire in Altoona(if memory from the video serves me correctly). The real tender is behind the one that is directly behind 3001. I forget which engine it belonged to.

Regardless, MTH would probably fix these things I would imagine, right? They are pretty good on their research into history on what they build?

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

@harmonyards and @CentralFan1976, I do recall Pat saying on some occasions drivers were swapped for whatever was available in the shops, I think this was said one the Lionel release back in 2017 or such. I think we had a lengthy discussion on how all that worked out. Of course this is the J3's, not the J1's like here, so not sure how exactly it would apply. Almost sounds like how Mohawk 3001(the real thing) doesn't have its correct tender behind it at the museum, because that got warped in a fire in Altoona(if memory from the video serves me correctly). The real tender is behind the one that is directly behind 3001. I forget which engine it belonged to.

Regardless, MTH would probably fix these things I would imagine, right? They are pretty good on their research into history on what they build?

Hopefully over the weekend, everyone will chime in and make suggestions Dave,…I know it’s a short window, but if we’re gonna ask MTH’s Rich Foster to make number & font changes, we’d better get to him before things get set in concrete……sounds like we need yet another list going old buddy old pal!….(hint) ….

as far as driver swaps, all of the Hudsons ( and many other locomotives) were not immune from musical drivers…….many J1’s received odd combinations of drivers….there’s even a pic of a J1c with what looks like one pair of  LFM drivers……most notable reason why as I’ve said before, was chronic crank pin failures that sometimes plagued the shops,……therefore, what ever was on hand that was already rebuilt, and ready to use, could be swapped in at a moment’s notice to get the appliance back on the road,…..the engine ain’t making no money with a busted wing, sitting there looking at ya!…🤣🤣🤣

Pat

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Almost sounds like how Mohawk 3001(the real thing) doesn't have its correct tender behind it at the museum, because that got warped in a fire in Altoona(if memory from the video serves me correctly). The real tender is behind the one that is directly behind 3001. I forget which engine it belonged to.

An NYC Mohawk in the capital of PRR country? Do tell!

Regarding what Hudson I'd like MTH to produce, any J-1c or J-1e that is lettered and numbered appropriately for the steam-to-diesel transition era (and, of course, has the correct tender) would be okay with me.  I'm not sure, but I think that the only one of several Premier Hudsons made by MTH that satisfies this criterion is the 20-3059 Hudson, road number 5274. 

Regarding Mohawk #3001, I worked on this engine 40 years ago, while it was still in Dallas.  (If you can find a copy of the third quarter 1982 issue of Central Headlight, I was the photographer of the picture of 3001 that's on the cover.)  What I recall is that the engine had its original tender, but sheet metal had been welded over the coal bunker to make the engine look a bit more like the T&P oil-burning 4-8-2 it was pretending to be.  I am certain that Mohawk 3001 was never in Altoona and was never in a fire. 

@700E posted:

Regarding what Hudson I'd like MTH to produce, any J-1c or J-1e that is lettered and numbered appropriately for the steam-to-diesel transition era (and, of course, has the correct tender) would be okay with me.  I'm not sure, but I think that the only one of several Premier Hudsons made by MTH that satisfies this criterion is the 20-3059 Hudson, road number 5274.

Regarding Mohawk #3001, I worked on this engine 40 years ago, while it was still in Dallas.  (If you can find a copy of the third quarter 1982 issue of Central Headlight, I was the photographer of the picture of 3001 that's on the cover.)  What I recall is that the engine had its original tender, but sheet metal had been welded over the coal bunker to make the engine look a bit more like the T&P oil-burning 4-8-2 it was pretending to be.  I am certain that Mohawk 3001 was never in Altoona and was never in a fire.

MTH made alot more than 1 that were corect,…..both the big four Hudsons with pre 36 numbering are pretty much on the mark, and of course, 5344 is right ( with the 12 wheel tender) ….that being said, ….steam to diesel transition era is a mighty vague and broad area, …..the object of this exercise is to fix the six offerings of this release to make them more appealing to a broader market than just the “ I wanna Hudson crowd” ….

Pat

@rplst8 posted:

An NYC Mohawk in the capital of PRR country? Do tell!

@700E posted:

Regarding what Hudson I'd like MTH to produce, any J-1c or J-1e that is lettered and numbered appropriately for the steam-to-diesel transition era (and, of course, has the correct tender) would be okay with me.  I'm not sure, but I think that the only one of several Premier Hudsons made by MTH that satisfies this criterion is the 20-3059 Hudson, road number 5274.

Regarding Mohawk #3001, I worked on this engine 40 years ago, while it was still in Dallas.  (If you can find a copy of the third quarter 1982 issue of Central Headlight, I was the photographer of the picture of 3001 that's on the cover.)  What I recall is that the engine had its original tender, but sheet metal had been welded over the coal bunker to make the engine look a bit more like the T&P oil-burning 4-8-2 it was pretending to be.  I am certain that Mohawk 3001 was never in Altoona and was never in a fire.

Yeah, sorry, a bit of an error on memory. I just rewatched the video of the guy at the museum looking at #3001. Yes it was in Dallas, and according to what the guy says yes it was standing in for T&P. The original tender he says was behind the Reading T1 Freedom Train. Hagerstown not Altoona, my apologies there. I don't know why Altoona was on the brain. According to what the guy was told by whomever his source is, he was told that the T1 was in the roundhouse, which there was a fire. The tender became warped per what he says he clearly sees in the video. He said you can't see it unless your up close. I'll have to pop back and see what his handle is on YouTube as I forgot as soon as I was replying. Video is 10 years old. Let me snag that. BRB

Trainman4602 is his video handle, video title is NYC Mohawk 3001

@harmonyards posted:

Hopefully over the weekend, everyone will chime in and make suggestions Dave,…I know it’s a short window, but if we’re gonna ask MTH’s Rich Foster to make number & font changes, we’d better get to him before things get set in concrete……sounds like we need yet another list going old buddy old pal!….(hint) ….

as far as driver swaps, all of the Hudsons ( and many other locomotives) were not immune from musical drivers…….many J1’s received odd combinations of drivers….there’s even a pic of a J1c with what looks like one pair of  LFM drivers……most notable reason why as I’ve said before, was chronic crank pin failures that sometimes plagued the shops,……therefore, what ever was on hand that was already rebuilt, and ready to use, could be swapped in at a moment’s notice to get the appliance back on the road,…..the engine ain’t making no money with a busted wing, sitting there looking at ya!…🤣🤣🤣

Pat

A list? What sort of list to work on? Hudson's obviously, but what sort? MTH lost on what they've made? Or all encompassing by all the manufacturers? I'd need some Intel as I don't have any MTH Hudson's. Maybe, I know, we have the compiled Hudson List made several years ago. I'd have to look that up as that has every single Hudson produced whether it was Lionel, MTH, Weaver, K-Line, etc., etc. I can find that after dinner.

I agree, that the MTH models of pre-1936 Hudsons are reasonably accurate.  I'd like an accurate model of a Hudson from the early 1950's.  If you need a specific suggestion, I'd like to see J-1e 5331 produced with post-1940 NYC-style Gothic sans-serif lettering, with "New York Central" (not "New York Central Lines") on the tender.

Attached is a snapshot I took of Mohawk 3001 in 1982, just as it was starting its transition from a T&P engine back to NYC.  (Note that she still has a T&P diamond on the front of the smokebox.)  Without the smoke deflectors, and from the right angle, she looked remarkably like a Hudson.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

A list? What sort of list to work on? Hudson's obviously, but what sort? MTH lost on what they've made? Or all encompassing by all the manufacturers? I'd need some Intel as I don't have any MTH Hudson's. Maybe, I know, we have the compiled Hudson List made several years ago. I'd have to look that up as that has every single Hudson produced whether it was Lionel, MTH, Weaver, K-Line, etc., etc. I can find that after dinner.

No, no Dave, ….just a simple short list of the latest 6 renditions being offered by MTH this week,……this way, we can offer corrections to the cab numberings, and or lettering,….

Pat  

MTH 20-3863-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "Boston & Albany" #609 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3864-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #5331 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3865-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #5340 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3866-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #5374 w/ PS3 (Michigan Central)

MTH 20-3867-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e PT Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central" #5401 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3868-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e PT Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central" #5342 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3871-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #TBD w/ PS3 (CCC&StL) - Custom Run for MrMuffin'sTrains (#6618 suggested by Pat)

I don't like "Lines" on the tender either, but heck if I know if that is right for where these were running.

O Scale Locomotive Guide:Hudsons

This link is to a topic started by Ted Hikel from February 2015. There is a wealth of Hudson information over there, but covering all railroads, starts off with New York Central though.

The third quarter 1985 issue of Central Headlight has an excellent article about PT tenders, including a list of the J-1 Hudsons that received them and when.

Dave …..perfection as usual,….😁……we’re at it again, makin’ a list & checking it twice,….

Pat

@harmonyards posted:

Dave …..perfection as usual,….😁……we’re at it again, makin’ a list & checking it twice,….

Pat

Yeah, cheated a bit. Mr. Muffin helped with his post. Now just need to get with Mr. Foster to say, "this engine didn't have that tender, not that font, no 'lines' during the time period it ran if that is what year you want to say". I do like the idea of having a J1-d Pat, never see that.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Yeah, cheated a bit. Mr. Muffin helped with his post. Now just need to get with Mr. Foster to say, "this engine didn't have that tender, not that font, no 'lines' during the time period it ran if that is what year you want to say". I do like the idea of having a J1-d Pat, never see that.

Dave, FYI 3rd Rail did two J1ds. They pop up every so often. I believe they have non cruise TMCC.

Pete

@Norton posted:

Dave, FYI 3rd Rail did two J1ds. They pop up every so often. I believe they have non cruise TMCC.

Pete

Pete, somehow I knew I was wrong. I should have looked through the Hudson list that I posted above, I think they are there. Cooking drumsticks, so that is my excuse for not looking closer and thinking they've not been made, lol.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

MTH 20-3863-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "Boston & Albany" #609 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3864-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #5331 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3865-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #5340 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3866-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #5374 w/ PS3 (Michigan Central)

MTH 20-3867-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e PT Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central" #5401 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3868-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e PT Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central" #5342 w/ PS3

MTH 20-3871-1 - 4-6-4 J-1e Hudson Steam Engine "New York Central Lines" #TBD w/ PS3 (CCC&StL) - Custom Run for MrMuffin'sTrains (#6618 suggested by Pat)

I don't like "Lines" on the tender either, but heck if I know if that is right for where these were running.

Dave, New York Central Lines was applied to subsidiary roads that were invaded by,….oops, I mean “ acquired by” the parent New York Central …..”proper” ……you’ll often see me reply with “ the Central proper” as I’m referring to the “parent company “ …..in the steam era, the subsidiary roads under control of the Central proper were allowed to put their initials only at the top of the coal bunker P&LE, LS & MC, CCC & St.L ( the big four )  etc, …..so New York Central Lines could be applied to the tender sides, ….after the 1940 font change to gothic, the sides of the tenders wore New York Central System …..again, a way to say ‘ who’s  your daddy?” ……😁

Pat

@harmonyards posted:

Dave, New York Central Lines was applied to subsidiary roads that were invaded by,….oops, I mean “ acquired by” the parent New York Central …..”proper” ……you’ll often see me reply with “ the Central proper” as I’m referring to the “parent company “ …..in the steam era, the subsidiary roads under control of the Central proper were allowed to put their initials only at the top of the coal bunker P&LE, LS & MC, CCC & St.L ( the big four )  etc, …..so New York Central Lines could be applied to the tender sides, ….after the 1940 font change to gothic, the sides of the tenders wore New York Central System …..again, a way to say ‘ who’s  your daddy?” ……😁

Pat

Yeah, I think I've seen you say that on other posts where folks have argued, I mean disagreed with your perfectly valid point as it is accurate. Yeah, not a fan of lines, but if I had to have the engine with it, I guess I'd take it.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Yeah, I think I've seen you say that on other posts where folks have argued, I mean disagreed with your perfectly valid point as it is accurate. Yeah, not a fan of lines, but if I had to have the engine with it, I guess I'd take it.

That would only really matter if you were modeling a specific area of the Central. They tended to keep engines in their districts. sometimes things would get shifted around as more modern steam was developed, and power was needed elsewhere,…but typically when you see NYC Lines or NYC System, we’re discussing west enders, on those roads acquired after the parent was formed, ……I model just north of the city, in Croton, which the yards and shops were named Harmon. So no NYC Lines or System would show up on that district unless it was moved for a power redistribution…..when a new engine arrived on the scene, the next in line got bumped, repeat, repeat, repeat,…

Pat

@harmonyards posted:

That would only really matter if you were modeling a specific area of the Central. They tended to keep engines in their districts. sometimes things would get shifted around as more modern steam was developed, and power was needed elsewhere,…but typically when you see NYC Lines or NYC System, we’re discussing west enders, on those roads acquired after the parent was formed, ……I model just north of the city, in Croton, which the yards and shops were named Harmon. So no NYC Lines or System would show up on that district unless it was moved for a power redistribution…..when a new engine arrived on the scene, the next in line got bumped, repeat, repeat, repeat,…

Pat

Yeah, I like to run what I buy/or want to have. I do know that there have been mistakes, I believe the Ten Wheeler, forgot the number but it has New York Central Lines on the tender. I think someone may have also said that either it was quite the right tender, but definitely shouldn't have had lines on it.

I know that some engines were never on the NYC proper, like the Berkshire A2 that lovely engine MTH made, but it is one heck of a beaute or beast depending on how you look at it. Beast I mean as an imposing look to it. Ah, but Hudson's will always be my favorite.

@Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Yeah, I like to run what I buy/or want to have. I do know that there have been mistakes, I believe the Ten Wheeler, forgot the number but it has New York Central Lines on the tender. I think someone may have also said that either it was quite the right tender, but definitely shouldn't have had lines on it.

I know that some engines were never on the NYC proper, like the Berkshire A2 that lovely engine MTH made, but it is one heck of a beaute or beast depending on how you look at it. Beast I mean as an imposing look to it. Ah, but Hudson's will always be my favorite.

Correct, ….engines such as the A2 on the P&LE were purpose built for a specific job, …get coal from the mines, to the docks, repeat, repeat, repeat, ….I’m sure they did other jobs, but for the P&LE coal was the gold, ….so you’d never see an A2 picking up passengers at LaSalle St. station…..😁

Pat

Here's my 6-28072 J3a. Just beautiful, and I don't care whats right or wrong with the detail. I added the PT tender to give it the props it had.

@harmonyards posted:

Well, let’s get the facts straight, and compile a list of what’s wrong, and the scenario that works with the given model options that are being made ( the 6 listed ) and I’ll see about getting a hold of Rich Foster and see IF changes are possible,…..that’s a big IF, ….it’s not like I have any pull, but I can certainly ask Rich if he’ll entertain our thoughts, ……700E said something about tender lettering and what not, so let’s start a list, and see what’s wrong, and offer the remedy …..can’t hurt to ask??…..no??..

Pat

Well.... then.....

Wrong post. But....

ho bout a ..... 2 rail Mohawk? PS3 with smoking whistle....

I mean if you get his attention here, why not? Can't hurt to ask......

Back to your regular programming now.

Should I shove a PT tender behind one or both of my NYC Dreyfus Hudsons?

I will if I can get my hands on one. I just don't know if it's correct.