MTH needs to do this locomotive in their Premier line. We O gaugers have a real need for smaller steam locos like this one that will look right at home on our smaller layouts with tighter curves. Love the big articulateds, but...
I'll take mine in Boston and Maine flavor, please.
quote:MTH needs to do this locomotive in their Premier line. We O gaugers have a real need for smaller steam locos like this one that will look right at home on our smaller layouts with tighter curves.
Amen to that. I run mostly DCS and some TMCC/Legacy; the Williams engine is kind of downscale from what I usually operate. I'd love a generic, scale-detailed turn of the century Baldwin Ten-Wheeler with an as-delivered tender. PS/3 would easily fit in the smaller tender.
I NOTICED NOBODY READ THE DESCRIPTION CAREFULLY-DIECAST BOILER AND CHASSIS-I THINK THE TENDER WILL BE MADE IN PLASTIC.
quote:Originally posted by Bob Delbridge:
.... I wasn't sure if the On30 body was smaller or not, I've never seen one or one side-by-side to a standard O-scale engine.
Bob,
Bachmann chose the smallest of narrow gauge prototypes for their On30 line. Nice models, but, like Dave said, they really wouldn't be of much use as a basis for standard gauge engines.
Some side-by-sides:
Jim
Better pictures Jim!!! Thanks
Thanks Jim! I guess On30 could be used for a mining RR, but next to standrad O it looks just like HO to me. Can't you use HO track with On30 equipment?
I like the looks of this ACL Ten-Wheeler:
And you can see the inclined steam chest on this SAL model (Baldwin unit):
I like the looks of this ACL Ten-Wheeler:
And you can see the inclined steam chest on this SAL model (Baldwin unit):
Bob,
I don't know how many times I've explained to visitors that On30 is true O (1/48) scale that runs on the same gauge track as HO.
But, some still leave shaking their heads saying, "I wonder why he has that HO stuff on a nice O gauge layout!
I have to admit though that the running qualities of the On30 have more in common with HO models than the hefty O scale we are more familiar with. Well-designed mechanisms and DCC help them run smoothly, but their light weight does make clean track and wheels a necessity for proper operation. They are not as forgiving as standard gauge O.
I keep these boxcars around to help in the comparison.
They are standard gauge O, On30, and HO:
Jim
I don't know how many times I've explained to visitors that On30 is true O (1/48) scale that runs on the same gauge track as HO.
But, some still leave shaking their heads saying, "I wonder why he has that HO stuff on a nice O gauge layout!
I have to admit though that the running qualities of the On30 have more in common with HO models than the hefty O scale we are more familiar with. Well-designed mechanisms and DCC help them run smoothly, but their light weight does make clean track and wheels a necessity for proper operation. They are not as forgiving as standard gauge O.
I keep these boxcars around to help in the comparison.
They are standard gauge O, On30, and HO:
Jim
quote:Thanks Jim! I guess On30 could be used for a mining RR, but next to standrad O it looks just like HO to me. Can't you use HO track with On30 equipment?
Yes, On30 operates on HO track, or on track made specifically for On30 (wider and more irregular tie spacing and tie length, as well as--often--a smaller code/size of rail).
And, yes, narrow gauge equipment is considerably smaller than standard gauge equipment of similar type. On30 is, nevertheless, true O scale (1:48 scale). In the real world of railroading, narrow gauge lines most often were used in the mining and lumber industries, as well as in certain other applications. A 30" track gauge was not all that common with U.S. prototypes, but it did exist. It just so happens that this track gauge, in the model world, comes out very close to matching existing HO track, which is why Bachmann and others went with On30 (30" gauge) rather than the more common (for the prototype) On3 (representing a 3' prototype gauge).
Jim, maybe you should add an HOn30 boxcar too. I think more helpfull maybe a picture of a 1/1 scale narrow gauge engine next to a standard gauge engine. The engines and cars were just smaller. If they were wider or taller and rode on the narrow track they could roll over easier.
Thanks guys!
When I was 5 we went over to the UK to visit our relatives. My mom was from Wales, so we took a trip to where she was born. I recall riding a very small train while there, but have no idea what gauge it was. Looked like a park ride like we'd see over here.
When I was 5 we went over to the UK to visit our relatives. My mom was from Wales, so we took a trip to where she was born. I recall riding a very small train while there, but have no idea what gauge it was. Looked like a park ride like we'd see over here.
Silver Lake,
That's true, an HO narrow gauge car might be a good comparison to add.
****
As Allan said, n30 is sort of an oddball in the narrow gauge world. There were more 2 ft gaugers and 3 ft gaugers by far in the US than 2-1/2 ft (30") gaugers.
Some prototype 3 ft gauge locos were on the large side. Some were even old standard gauge engines that were converted to 3 ft. narrow gauge.
On the other hand, the 2 footers generally used very small engines and rolling stock by necessity to track better on the narrower gauge rail.
When Bachmann goes looking for prototypes for their On30, they seem to gravitate toward the smaller 2 ft style equipment.
Jim
That's true, an HO narrow gauge car might be a good comparison to add.
****
As Allan said, n30 is sort of an oddball in the narrow gauge world. There were more 2 ft gaugers and 3 ft gaugers by far in the US than 2-1/2 ft (30") gaugers.
Some prototype 3 ft gauge locos were on the large side. Some were even old standard gauge engines that were converted to 3 ft. narrow gauge.
On the other hand, the 2 footers generally used very small engines and rolling stock by necessity to track better on the narrower gauge rail.
When Bachmann goes looking for prototypes for their On30, they seem to gravitate toward the smaller 2 ft style equipment.
Jim
The clunky side rods are a disappointment. The problem can be partially solved (I've done it), if they are made the
way I fear. Would it have cost any more to give us a straight main rod, a spacer and a bit longer shoulder screw?
Don't say yes; I know better. This on an otherwise apparently handsome, reasonably accurate, low-end loco.
I have the Southern on order (yes, they had green Ten-wheelers); unless it turns out to be completely lame, I'll probably get the ATSF and re-letterit for the GM&O. But those rods... (and the crosshead and guides could have been much better too, for pennies).
The tender is not a problem; nor is it inaccurate - unless it's inaccurate for your prototype. It is definitely
on the large end of the 4-6-0 tender scale, but especially if it has a plastic body, cut it up, cut it down, make it yours -
be a model railroader. But check the TMCC boards that you're going to install first.
way I fear. Would it have cost any more to give us a straight main rod, a spacer and a bit longer shoulder screw?
Don't say yes; I know better. This on an otherwise apparently handsome, reasonably accurate, low-end loco.
I have the Southern on order (yes, they had green Ten-wheelers); unless it turns out to be completely lame, I'll probably get the ATSF and re-letterit for the GM&O. But those rods... (and the crosshead and guides could have been much better too, for pennies).
The tender is not a problem; nor is it inaccurate - unless it's inaccurate for your prototype. It is definitely
on the large end of the 4-6-0 tender scale, but especially if it has a plastic body, cut it up, cut it down, make it yours -
be a model railroader. But check the TMCC boards that you're going to install first.
D500
SRR Ten Wheeler #949 rostered in Mobile was dressed in the Green'n Gold livery. Featured in Model Railroader several times as the prototype for engines in an HO article.
SRR Ten Wheeler #949 rostered in Mobile was dressed in the Green'n Gold livery. Featured in Model Railroader several times as the prototype for engines in an HO article.
This should stir you memory, Bob:
http://www.greatlittletrainsofwales.co.uk/
http://www.greatlittletrainsofwales.co.uk/
quote:Originally posted by Bob Delbridge:
Thanks guys!
When I was 5 we went over to the UK to visit our relatives. My mom was from Wales, so we took a trip to where she was born. I recall riding a very small train while there, but have no idea what gauge it was. Looked like a park ride like we'd see over here.
Brian,
THANKS!
My mom was born in Bangor, Wales. The Welsh Highland Railway cars shown in Caernarvon (Caernarfon) sure look like the passenger cars we rode in.
THANKS!
My mom was born in Bangor, Wales. The Welsh Highland Railway cars shown in Caernarvon (Caernarfon) sure look like the passenger cars we rode in.
Got a e-mail from Bachman saying the locos were shipping to dealers today. Now to save some money!
I will buy the B&O and maybe one of the black ones. I'm interested in adding detail. Early next year I will add the new Aristocraft TE. It will be a nice little project. As a matter of interest, there was some comment on the size of the tender, being too big. If you look at the Bachmann N gauge version, the tender appears to be of the same proportions. So, perhaps the tender size is really just a subjective thing.
picked up a Williams C&O 4-6-0 today. It is not a bad looking engine.it is nicely detailed with cast on details, shame the handrails weren't seperate parts and stand away from the boiler,cab detail is there and cryes out for a couple of figures and a throttle . paint was great, especially the russia iron on the boiler. drive wheels are spoked and see through, drive rods are horendous, much like the cheap ones used on lionel scouts, bachmann deffently could have put a little more work into them. tender is oversized to hold all the electronic gear, and would be very hard to replace with a smaller one or by chopping up the circut boards, so it is doable. locomotive is nice and heavy with cast boiler, and performance is actaully fairly stunning, after a several hour brake in period, it ran very smoothe and at slow speeds, i pulled 5 lionel madison strasburg cars with it, and it deffently looks great with these cars. whistle is nice sounding and long, bell was good, smoke unit was awsome, deffently can put some smoke out, clean to the end of the 5 passenger cars while running. since i got it for $199. i am happy with what i picked up, now to figure out what to do with the drive rods and crossheads. hope someone comes out with a upgrade kit for it. this wold be a fun loco to really detail out
About the same feelings I have for my Ten Wheeler. The tender is too big for SOME Ten Wheelers but not all.
A better crosshead and drive rods would be nice....and maybe someday I'll look at them...but now...they're OK....
The other thread......
WBB $-6-0
A better crosshead and drive rods would be nice....and maybe someday I'll look at them...but now...they're OK....
The other thread......
WBB $-6-0
Who are some of the hobby shops that are stocking the 10 wheelers?
Thanks for any info.
Al
Thanks for any info.
Al
picked mine up off of E- bay for 199, and free shipping
Al
A week ago I purchased two--Santa Fe and Southern versions from Mario's Trains in Winchester, Virginia. Mario was offering them at $170 each with free shipping.
I have already removed the headlight[unscrewed] and bell[cut off] as a start on modifying the Santa Fe for the Atlantic & Yadkin style and livery.
A week ago I purchased two--Santa Fe and Southern versions from Mario's Trains in Winchester, Virginia. Mario was offering them at $170 each with free shipping.
I have already removed the headlight[unscrewed] and bell[cut off] as a start on modifying the Santa Fe for the Atlantic & Yadkin style and livery.
I found another Seaboard Ten-Wheeler, take a look:
You guys that have the WBB version, do you think it would be impossible to convert it into what this engine looks like?
You guys that have the WBB version, do you think it would be impossible to convert it into what this engine looks like?
I've posted separately that I am very impressed with mine -- it is such a good runner. The larger tender does not bother me -- I think some did have monster tenders -- but its weight does -- its plastic way too light and stringlined when I tried to pull a lot of cars with it. But some added weight (about 50 pennies) will fix that.
I am looking at buying another and bashing it into an updated, later version of the baldwin 10 wheeler, as this model is way too early for my layout's time period (early 50s). The loco pictured is closer to what I want to model although I also plan to cut down the sanddomes and stack a bit so it will fit under a very low overpass I have on a tight loop I barely squeezed onto my layout.
I am looking at buying another and bashing it into an updated, later version of the baldwin 10 wheeler, as this model is way too early for my layout's time period (early 50s). The loco pictured is closer to what I want to model although I also plan to cut down the sanddomes and stack a bit so it will fit under a very low overpass I have on a tight loop I barely squeezed onto my layout.
Lee, I agree with you. This WBB Baldwin is one smooth runner. The thing that really impresses me though, is how it coasts. It will roll on even without a load, for about a foot when you cut the power abruptly, that's very cool.
Mine got a real work out yesterday when my new Lionel Penn Flyer set 0-8-0 did not whistle or smoke....this after the CW-80 was bad too!!!! But my Christmas 'gift' was my WBB Ten Wheeler and it was the star of the day.....ran and ran....
quote:Originally posted by Dave Allen:
I also am going to try the Train Engineer control in it.
Dave - was wondering if you had a chance to put the Train Engineer system to the test yet?? I'm holding out for the 'rumor-has-it' addition of sound - so am just trying to get a feel for how the system is performing for others.
quote:Originally posted by Mark440:quote:Originally posted by Dave Allen:
I also am going to try the Train Engineer control in it.
Dave - was wondering if you had a chance to put the Train Engineer system to the test yet?? I'm holding out for the 'rumor-has-it' addition of sound - so am just trying to get a feel for how the system is performing for others.
Mark, I'm waiting for the new smaller receiver board, supposedly being released in the next month or so. However, going on what Ben (Bluelinc) has said over the last 18 months, it's sounds like a very good and reliable unit.
It took some time for me to fully appreciate the benefits that impress me, namely the direct radio control from the handheld to the loco, with absolutely no range problems. I also like the optional idea of on-board battery power. It means I can take my trains to the club or anywhere and just drop the on any track and run them despite what other system might be being used. I have many great conventional locos that just don't get track time anymore, that's going to change.
I received my 4-6-0 last Wensday and I sure do like the way it runs, fly wheel is doing it's job on starting and stopping.
As for the tender being large, it is very close to the size of the one on the Railking 2-6-0. I placed a 2666 lionel tender behind my ten wheeler and I beleive you could adapt a Lionel tender if you want a smaller tender.
As for me, I like the tender, it is large for longer runs on my layout.
I attached my 4 route 66 flats to it with a C & O business on the tail end am very pleased with the looks.
Al
As for the tender being large, it is very close to the size of the one on the Railking 2-6-0. I placed a 2666 lionel tender behind my ten wheeler and I beleive you could adapt a Lionel tender if you want a smaller tender.
As for me, I like the tender, it is large for longer runs on my layout.
I attached my 4 route 66 flats to it with a C & O business on the tail end am very pleased with the looks.
Al
