Why did you order J3A Hudson with PT tender? And, did you order one with regular tender?

I went with the standard tender but, from the NYCHS :  

"Most reviewers consider the PT tenders to have been a success. Some consider applying a 420,000 lb. (loaded) tender to a 360,000 lb locomotive as questionable practice, but the NYC was happy with fewer coal stops, larger water capacity, an ability to take water at over 550 gallons per second (85 mph) or higher, and better weight distribution. This took place in a day when the passenger traffic was so dense and fast that the elimination of a coal or water (PT-2) stop was meaningful to operating personnel as well as to the accountants. These tenders were unique, and the like will not be seen again unless we somehow return to the days of coal at $3.50 per ton. "

Heres the 24 pages of info from the NYCHS regarding the use of PT Tenders that I took the quote from. You may find it inteteresting: https://nycshs.files.wordpress...14/07/pt-tenders.pdf

Who's producing a new 20th Century Limited?

Paul Kallus posted:

BTW: the Hudson was designed primarily for fast passenger service, but was it ever used to haul freight cars, perhaps during the war?

Check out this old thread Paul. Doubleheaded PT Hudsons pulling N&W hoppers:

https://ogrforum.com/...damp-w-coal-drag-huh

Thanks, Rick, good stuff there. The prototype pictures of the PT tender give the J3A an "all business" look.

With time running out on pre-orders, this is a tough call for me.

This was a tough call for me as well.   I really wanted the standard tender because it classic Hudson to me.   However I wasn’t thrilled with the offerings combinations. I applaud Lionel greatly for giving us choices though.   It’s something I think we’ll see a lot more off and I bet it sells more engines.  I really wanted the darkest possible engine.   Meaning dark smoke box and no polished parts.  I wasn’t a fan of the class lights although it wasn’t a deal breaker.   Pats trains produced exactly the engine I wanted with expection of the polished rods and cylinders.  Cylinders easy fix the rods I wasn’t sure about.   So I opted to go the mr muffin route. His offering is all dark parts, no class lights. But the big tender.   To each their own.  But it was combination that checked off the most boxes for me and I’m really excited about.  I do which they would h e capped them at 25 but if people are buying I understand.  

You can tell people are excited because there are a bunch of Hudson topics. As for me, I went with the passenger one and the one Mr. Muffin's Trains is producing.

I also went with the 5452...  i like the all black look with the disc drivers.... and PT tender for the late look...

For what it's worth, the era that you are trying to model should play some sort of roll in which model you order/purchase. Most all of the Hudsons received the PT tender, starting after WWII, so by, say 1948, your Hudson assigned to passenger service, should have the PT tender.

Contrary to various rumors, the "PT" does indeed stand for "Passenger Tender", and NOT pedestal tender. Various internal NYC documents, as listed on the New York Central Historical & Technical site, verify the "PT" name.

Hot Water posted:

For what it's worth, the era that you are trying to model should play some sort of roll in which model you order/purchase. Most all of the Hudsons received the PT tender, starting after WWII, so by, say 1948, your Hudson assigned to passenger service, should have the PT tender.

Contrary to various rumors, the "PT" does indeed stand for "Passenger Tender", and NOT pedestal tender. Various internal NYC documents, as listed on the New York Central Historical & Technical site, verify the "PT" name.

I model era is what ever I have running at any given time.  I ordered MR. Muffins 5415 with PT tender.  It will be my second J3 with a PT tender.  I have three other Hudsons J1, J2, J3 with the standard three axle truck tenders.

On another note. Pat's trains is only making 25 Hudson's with the standard as delivered tender.  Mr. Muffin's according to his last email is up to 65 orders.  Good comparison, maybe not but there's lots of us who like their Hudsons with a beast of a tender behind it and the overflow spray/smoke effect doesn't hurt either.

Why cant we have the water effects on the smaller tender ? they scooped water also. Not enough room inside ?

clem k posted:

Why cant we have the water effects on the smaller tender ? they scooped water also.

Because those many, large vent tubes, down low on both sides of the tender frame, were NOT on the standard tenders. The standard Hudson tenders were NOT capable of taking water at the high speeds that the PT equipped locomotives could.

Not enough room inside ?

Another reason.

Hot Water posted:

For what it's worth, the era that you are trying to model should play some sort of roll in which model you order/purchase. Most all of the Hudsons received the PT tender, starting after WWII, so by, say 1948, your Hudson assigned to passenger service, should have the PT tender.

Contrary to various rumors, the "PT" does indeed stand for "Passenger Tender", and NOT pedestal tender. Various internal NYC documents, as listed on the New York Central Historical & Technical site, verify the "PT" name.

I do believe that only some of the 225  J1 and J2 Hudsons ever got the PT tender; all of the 50 J3's did, to my knowledge.

To me the PT has a streamlined look, even though it was not an overtly "streamlined" piece. They also help give the non-streamlined, but smooth-limbed, Niagara a stream-styled look.

Back when I was young and innocent I thought that "PT" meant "pedestal type" tender, too. It did, indeed, mean "passenger type" on the NYC. I think that the modern 4-10-0 pedestal tender (a proper term, in general) was first used on the UP Big Boys in the early 40's. Correct? (These were similar to, but not the same design as, the NYC PT's.)

Ok, UP guys - what did the UP call them?

Hot Water posted:

clem k posted:

Why cant we have the water effects on the smaller tender ? they scooped water also.

Because those many, large vent tubes, down low on both sides of the tender frame, were NOT on the standard tenders. The standard Hudson tenders were NOT capable of taking water at the high speeds that the PT equipped locomotives could.

Not enough room inside ?

Another reason.

 

Crack open one of those pt tenders if you dare!   Very very compact in there.