Would you buy a dummy steam engine if it were made available?

Yes, I certainly would. I would definitely purchase dummies of the following models, so as to doublehead them with the powered versions I already have:

1) PRR post war (modern pilot) K4s.

2) C&O K-4 2-8-4.

3) WM 2-8-0.

IT would need to have sounds, so you get that out of sync chuffing.  But yeah I would.

Certainly! As a helper engine on the rear, there would be little fear the train compressing or being pulled apart. With sound and smoke would be even better.

What if it were plastic rather than die cast?

ironman1 posted:

What if it were plastic rather than die cast?

Do you really think that any manufacturer would make new and completely different tooling, just to produce a dummy "plastic" model, when they already have the tooling for diecast models?

I'd pass as well. I like the diesel dummies though.

I would if they had lighting, smoke, chuff. Not necessarily a whistle.............Paul

I could see Menards doing it.

heck, you can buy some of the early issue mth premier [and lionel] steamers w/p1 so cheap ,i would pull the moter out and make it a dummy......i have the 1997 nyc hudson, they are going $200-275  on ebay  right now adays.-Jim

Just wait, eventually one of your steamers will create it's own dummy.

It is probably more cost effective to turn an engine with a blown board into a dummy then get it fixed.

A dummy steam locomotive would cost almost as much as a powered steamer.  Manufacturer/Importers have analyzed this option over the years and have found it uneconomic to do with the price point they would have to charge.  Putting sound and lights in the dummy would make it even tougher to sell at retail.

That is why you have not seen the companies offering them. It is simply not doable at a price customers would tolerate.

Ed Boyle

Well, there you go folks,,,,,,Ed explained that perfectly.

I do like double heading steam with all that sound and smoke.  However, I currently have no diesel dummies and I probably would not buy a steam dummy.  I have no dummies primarily to get sound in all my units so I have no 'dead' engines, the extra power is a plus when pulling long trains.   

I agree with JIM BERGER.I have done this with diesels.Gut older conventional Engines out and use them for dummies.They are even better than the ones you buy.They have pickups that you can wire lights up to.Dummy steam engines would cost a fortune to make,package,ship,market,whse.,etc, etc... as has been mentioned by ED.Just my opinion.Nick

paul 2 posted:

I would if they had lighting, smoke, chuff. Not necessarily a whistle.............Paul

I agree.

Nope

Cool idea, but after reading Ed's straight from the sources' mouths report I'd say grab some older PS 1, etc for real cheap and gut 'em!!

What I don't get then is why are diesel dummy's any less cost prohibitive than steamers?   By producing more product your tooling costs per unit sold drop.    The newer products are much better looking than that of say 10yrs ago, and having a dummy available would surely enhance one's layout it they were similar locomotives and just numbered differently. 

I still believe the manufacturers are missing the boat on this one.  I believe there is a pent-up demand for items like this. 

 I heard the same type lame excuses when I was pushing Right of Way Industries and Lionel to produce an articulated engine back in the 90's.  Initially they didn't think there was a market for it and it would be too costly.  But low and behold when RW produced the first articulated engine B&O 2-8-8-0 they were sold out!   Later they did another in conjunction with the Henry Ford Museum, which I had helped facilitate.  Guess what they sold those too.   Only then did Lionel and MTH and then Sunset (was pushing them to do an Allegheny as well) jump in.

Just because the accountants did the math doesn't mean they are 100% correct in their assessment.  Most times those fellows lack the vision to see ahead because it is clouded by all of those numbers. 

The circuitry for lights and smoke could be an aftermarket add on for those who desire it.  Even simple lighting could be added without much difficulty.

There wouldn't be any real need for warranty on them other than being delivered in one piece to the purchaser.  

It is true that if you look around you can find some deals on older locomotives that may not be in running condition.  But they aren't the same as what you can purchase today wrt detail.   It's also true that if you run some of your trains long enough they will become dummy's in due time due to circuitry issues.

"Just wait, eventually one of your steamers will create it's own dummy."

Ahh . . . ain't it the truth??? My "wait" was ruefully short!

I love the look of double-heading steam locos, but I'd have no interest in a dummy steamer.  

By the time you load it up with the features I'd want... namely details, sounds, lights, puffing smoke, whistle-steam and rear electrocoupler... It would have just about everything except the motor, and probably come darn near the price of the fully equipped powered locomotive anyway.  So for a few bucks more, I'd want the flexibility of having the powered version.

David

I have zero interest in a dummy steamer, or other locomotive at all.

A powered die-cast steamer pulling a dead weight dummy die cast steamer, seems like a really bad idea.  Diesel dummies, unless you have some of the cast body old O scale ones, are mostly if not all, plastic, and fairly light weight.  As for putting a die cast dummy steamer on the end of the train, as a "pusher",  I would expect your train cars to want to take the short cut across the curves, unless they are all weighted up to a pound or ?,  where, then,  your powered version can't pull all the dead weight.

Yep, I've always liked the idea, as I run conventional and couldn't really use two powered ones in a train.  Plastic would be fine, to save weight.  Is there a reason that plastic couldn't be shot into a mold used for diecast?

As Ed and others intimated, the main cost of a steam loco model is the machinery and the "superstructure"; the motor and boards and wiring are relatively smaller cost items. If nice steamers were more pop-the-body-from-the-mold models like diesels (I am oversimplifying, I know - but I'm not wrong) it might work (I'd be interested, at a price point). Losing the motor, gearing and boards would actually make the loco noticeably, but not greatly, lighter. A very simple steamer (especially the boiler - the "body") like the Williams-WBB/low-end RK/low-end Lionel Traditional product would be the likely candidates, but would you want these locos on your layout? They are mostly not very convincing models for us Hi-Rail-types.  I would pass on these, in most cases.

Grampstrains posted:

I imagine a dummy steam engine would cost almost as much as one with a motor.  So I would probably  prefer a second power unit

with a different number.

 Joining this late, but as already said, it wouldn't be any cheaper. 

ironman1 posted:

What if it were plastic rather than die cast?

Most wouldn't be able to tell the difference.  Before people post 'yeah I could" take this in to cosideration.  There was a thread recently on this exact subject-plastic or die-cast.  Most who declared never buying plastic or vice versa couldn't identify correctly which was plastic or die-cast in the thread.

I wouldn't think twice about plastic-beautiful stuff in HO and the same thing is possible in O, though I don't think it'll happen due to the 'stigma'.

bigtruckpete posted:

Cool idea, but after reading Ed's straight from the sources' mouths report I'd say grab some older PS 1, etc for real cheap and gut 'em!!

PS1 steam is so cheap that it's a great buy for stuff like this.  I buy'em for the mechanisms.

I'd buy dummy steam-would be fun to cut'em for stuff I want to build.  You could make them as simple or complicated as you want, ie, basic or sound/smoke.  

Besides, sitting in a round house no one would be able to tell if it was powered or not...but, as stated, they wouldn't be cheap.

BTW, where did the multi-quote feature go?

American Flyer had Tinplate O dummies in the 1930's for double header sets.

AHM sold a dummy plastic 0-8-0 IHB with optional motor kit in the 1970's.

Menards  has a dummy loco in their burnt engine house model.

Then there is also Lego brick train kits.

Hot Water posted:

ironman1 posted:

What if it were plastic rather than die cast?

Do you really think that any manufacturer would make new and completely different tooling, just to produce a dummy "plastic" model, when they already have the tooling for diecast models?

This topic comes up every so often.  Unfortunately, the tooling and molds are the big ticket (cost) items in manufacturing.  This is the big obstacle to steamer dummy units.  It seems to be more acceptable to have plastic shells for diesels locomotives.

George

Reminds me of when I was doing HO. I bought a second-hand 2-6-0 with a tender drive (I think Model Power but I'm not 100% sure). I gutted the tender drive as I didn't think it was a great running loco anyway. It kept the headlights and everything else running, but not a motor. It made for a great dummy steam engine and I always wondered why you couldn't buy dummy steam like you can dummy diesel.

Now that said today, I model a short line with a very short main line run. I have zero need for a dummy steam loco now...

Nope

The idea brings up the concept of the modular kit packages like the live steam hobby, (buying parts "bundles" and spreading the cost over time) but I don't think it would work with the electronic complexity or the availability issues for a similar O gauge model.

Tender drive is an option too, giving powered or dummy choices. Either way it's possible, but would it be a tough sell for manufacturers and hobbyists in O 3-rail?

Reverse-engineering or stripping older shelf queens may be the way to go. A few after-market adaptations with optional tender drive would be interesting beasts.

I would prefer that the diesels come without dummies.  Now that the electronic e-unit is a standard item, you don't have to worry about getting the mech e-unit in sync.   I would not purchase a dummy steamer, and as has already been mentioned, the piece cost would be nearly the same.  The packaging, handling, marketing, overhead, and bmc would all still be there minus the motor and gearing.  Of course, there is nothing stopping someone from building some dummy steamers themselves and marketing them to fill that gap in the product market.  Many businesses have been started and flourished by filling a niche in a market.

I like the idea but I have no personal interest

I don’t understand the premise that new tooling and molds would be required.

Depending on how far back in time, one would think the tooling and molds would still be around; and if from China my experience is nothing is thrown away.

Also how you contract for something to be built can include that the buyer owns the tooling and molds.

I think it gets back to demand, overall margin and priorities with people available to do the job

NO........ On second thought, It would be a good way to have a prototypical modern day UP steam operation

David,

Would you purchase a car with NO ENGINE…!!!????

Does anyone here ever run steam pushers on there layout, and do you experience any problems with pusher holding back or pushing too hard?

ironman1 posted:

Does anyone here ever run steam pushers on there layout,

Yes, when I was a member of the Independent Hi-Railers, Midwest Division modular layout group.

and do you experience any problems with pusher holding back or pushing too hard?

No.

CAPPilot posted:

I do like double heading steam with all that sound and smoke.  However, I currently have no diesel dummies and I probably would not buy a steam dummy.  I have no dummies primarily to get sound in all my units so I have no 'dead' engines, the extra power is a plus when pulling long trains.   

I agree with you on this.I have had double header from time to time.The sight of two steam locomotive pulling a long train pretty fast.I did not do it all the the time.Here is a double header in the lead a mth railking berkshire the rear is a kline mike .Well take a look for your self.Any way no dummy for me.I think williams  had a dummy hudson. But I could be wrong thou.

redonionite, you would be surprised how difficult it is to "own" manufacturing tooling in a foreign country.   Even more surprised at how impossible it is to get the tooling you legally own out of the foreign country it is sitting in.   Not my opinion, just my 37 years of experience.

At one point in time, I would have been interested.  But, as the layout has grown, and with it the chance to run longer trains, I would say definately NOT INTERESTED.

Last summer I picked up a second TMCC K-Line scale B&O Mikado, especially to double head it with the one I already owned.  Looking forward to running them together.  If I really want to get crazy, I could add my 3rd Rail B&O T-3 as a helper!

Jim