Mark, did "the bird" talk about the sound decoder that will be used? I reserved a B&O 2-8-2 with dcc/sound.
No mention of what sound decoder will be used. But since MRC only sells one N scale steam sound decoder (#1956), my money would be on that one. Cheers, -Mark
BLW listing says "Industry leading MRC DCC and Sound" however the current MRC steam sound decoders says they have 2 whistles and 2 bell sounds but BLW's info says 17 whistles, 8 bells, 10 chuffs, plus brake squeal, air release, blower hiss, and more. Maybe a new decoder?
As I recall, BLW currently lists separate tenders available. They are all marked "sold out" versus "reserve." I have a Vandy tender from Model Power that I purchased a few years ago, but never got installed.
They did for awhile. I am not sure if it was only the short Vandy or if there was others. But I did find them at both my LHS when it was still there and that big supplier up near Baltimore and still have one bought separate in it's small jewel case that ended up grafted on the back of my Micro Ace loco. They had pick-ups but were not wired and used that same hokey drawbar as their tenders that came with their locos.
This was not on my 'want list' but I ordered a B&O with sound. This will be my first sound equipped engine and the on line price was fairly reasonable I thought. So I'll give it a try.
.......especially since MP's Vanderbilt is based on an SP prototype...............although it is too small for P or Mk classes. Most of those were six axle. Still, it is based on an SP prototype. I would hope that they would take it from the B&O 2-8-2 and replace it with the USRA standard. The B&O Q-4 had a Vanderbilt, although it looked more like the Rivarossi/C-C Vanderbilt than the MP. The Q-4 was a heavy mikado of unique B&O design, that had sixty-four inch drivers, as opposed to the sixty-three of the USRA light 2-8-2. B&O equipped most of the Q-4s with steam lines and signalling devices so that they could be pressed into passenger service, if necessary. When the Q-4s appeared, B&O had extensive commuter service in the Washington/Baltimore area as well as Pittsburgh. There were also local trains in other areas. Still, I would prefer them with the USRA standard tender. I have a MP USRA light 2-8-2 that lost its tender that I got in a trade, and a B-mann SPECTRUM tender lettered for B&O, so as soon as I finish a few other things, I will make the connexion. The B&O did have USRA light pacific originals, class P-5, and a class of USRA light copies, class P-6. The P-6 did have a Vanderbilt, although, again, it looked more like the RR/C-C than the MP. MP issued the pacific in B&O with either tender as well as some incorrect numbers (some were correct, some wuzzint). It appears that MRC is not going to go to an all wheels live tender or separately applied handrails on these. The changes that they have announced are, however, welcome and will be an improvement. If MRC does re-issue the eight wheeler and mogul, the all wheels live tender will be necessary. I would expect that even the eight wheeler would receive a traction tyre, which would severely compromise the electrical contact, even with live pilot wheels. The MP mogul will stall even on straight and level at speeds less than thirty five SMPH with the stock tender. With the B-mann or Kato the stalling goes away. The thing is a real puller with the all wheels live tender, as well. The B&O had originals of the USRA light 2-8-2. In fact, the first USRA locomotive was a light 2-8-2 delivered to the B&O. You can go to the B&O museum and see the thing (although I understand that it does not run). B&O did put some longer tenders on a few of these, even some Vanderbilts, in 1956, as it was dismantling steam facilities, so that locomotives could go longer between water and fuel stops. MP did issue these tenders separately. I bought one for a bashing project on a Kato 2-6-0. It had a three axle tender with four of the six wheels live, so I expected that it would serve. Sadly, the thing stalled at speeds less than forty SMPH, even on straight and level. I recall reading that several people tried to affix the MP Vanderbilt to the B-mann 2-8-0 to model an SP C-class. Some C-classes did have this particular tender or something that was close enough to it that only someone who knew what he was looking for could tell the difference. Everyone stated that with the half wheels live tender, the B-mann 2-8-0 was an extremely poor runner. Anyone who managed to get it to run properly with the MP tender had to make all the wheels live. This prompted a run on Kato caboose or 2-8-2 tender trucks. I am surprised that as a manufacturer of power supplies and controls, MRC can not understand the value of an all wheels live tender. There is the cost factor, yes, but I would think that the success of the B-mann, Athearn and Kato large power as well as B-mann' smaller power would demonstrate that N scale modellers will pay for decently operating steam locomotives. The list on the B-mann mogul and ten-wheeler is not low; the street prices are not low, either. N scale lacks a decently operating pacific as well as a "modern" eight-wheeler (there are decent nineteenth century moguls and eight-wheelers). There is a good heavy mikado, but no good light. I would pay for a decently operating models of any of the above. I do not operate too much big steam, but I did buy B-mann's EM-1, as it is B&O specific. As it is a good runner and puller, I did not mind giving my CC number to meet its fancy price tag.
Southern Pacific took these short tenders and added another 'wrap' into them and changed the trucks to make some of those longer tenders. I bought several shells from MP and did exactly that.
So these are available now? Not a bad price at all. Looks as if they made some improvements and it makes me wonder about the sound. Did MRC make improvements to their sound? I remember sometime ago that it had a lot to be desired... Well, I think it was MRC....
...and their sound used to really suck. Hopefully this will be a big improvement for them but it will be hard to surpass some of the sound decoders currently already on the market.
Brokemoto, I respectfully must post that I disagree with your comment. At least in my experience with two of these locomotives from the non-dc release ( which I recently had converted to dcc with sound) they are excellent running locomotives. I model B&O and those were THE Locomotives on the branch line in Illinois I model. I did YouTube video of them. Several people who saw the video are now motivated to get dcc and sound in their 2-8-0s.
I use a lot of MRC sound decoders in HO. No experience with their steam myself, but I find the current Diesel decoders to be acceptable. Not up to par with some of the more expensive options out there, but quite good for the price.
Roger, I suspect that you misunderstood me. I stated that with the half wheels live tender, which is what the MP is, the B-mann 2-8-0 ran poorly. I was remarking on how some SP modellers tried to make SP C classes out of these by swapping the B-mann stock coal tender for the half wheels live MP Vanderbilt tender. Do keep in mind that the MP Vanderbilt tender is based on an SP prototype. SP usually ran that particular tender behind eight wheelers, moguls and ten wheelers, but some consolidateds did have them. I never meant to state of imply that the B-mann 2-8-0, with its STOCK tender is a poor runner; marry, sirrah, it is an excellent runner. It runs so well with its stock tender that it is one of the standards against which all N scale steam is measured. I have several copies of it and am happy with all of them. Do keep in mind that the stock B-mann tender on its SPECTRUM 2-8-0 is all wheels live. The MP Vanderbilt (and USRA standard, for that matter) has only half the wheels live. Putting a half wheels live tender behind the B-mann 2-8-0 will give you an excellent illustration of Miranda's Maxim as explained by ke: "The poor performance of many N scale steam locomotives is almost alwys directly attributable to poor electrical contact". As you are no doubt aware, the tender in the B-mann 2-8-0 is an important component of the electrical contact. If those two stiff wires in the drawbar do not seat properly against the split contact pole on the locomotive, you will see sputters, stutters and stalls. In fact, in many cases, you had to pinch in the wires when you first took it out of the box. B-mann gave its B&O version of the SPECTRUM consolidated an E-27 number. E-27 was the most common class of 2-8-0s on the B&O. It looks nothing like an E-27. It looks more like an E-60 than any other B&O class, which was a Buffalo and Susquehanna locomotive. Some of those did migrate to other parts of the B&O after B&O swallowed B&S. Another funny thing about B-mann's numbering of that thing is that the Western Maryland has an ALCo number on it, but the model is supposed to be a Baldwin "catalogue" 2-8-0. WM did have a class of 2-8-0s that looked something like the B-mann; Baldwin built one subclass, ALCo the other. I do not know what class of 2-8-0 B&O ran in that part of Illinois. I would not be surprised if it were E-27, as that was the most common class. There were some Q-3s that ran on Illinois branch lines, as well, but I do not know if they ran on the one that you model. The Q-4 was mostly a mainline locomotive, although you could find it on coal branches, as the mass of that commodity required heavier track. On the Old Main, Camden Line and Metropolitan Sub, you did see E-27s, E-60s, Q-3s and Q-4s. Metropolitan Sub, in particular, was very busy, thus it had heavy track. Camden also had heavy track, as that was (and is) the Washington-Baltimore main and it connects with the line to Philadelphia. In many cases, B&O preferred to run westbound trains originating either in Baltimore or Philadelphia down to Washington, over the Ivy City Wye and out the Metropolitan Sub, as opposed to using the Old Main.
