0-6-0 Saddle Tank Steam Engine

shortpainter Sep 11, 2020

  1. rray

    rray Staff Member

    7,112
    3,435
    123
    Use the 88001 mechanism. At this point in the game, I really don't think anyone cares about exact dimensions, rather just having something that looks more generically American than the Marklin 8800 is a MAJOR WIN. A cow catcher instead of buffers, and black wheels instead of red is a HUGE step forward. A slope back tender is also an identifying mark, as are 3 domes instead of 2. Almost all American steam switchers have both a forward and a reverse sand dome on either side of the larger steam dome.

    I am not opposed to seeing a coal pusher tender either, as I like both the slope back or the coal pusher styles. And I can tell you this, if Marklin can sell thousands of what they call an F7 with bogus trucks, stretched body, and following absolutely NO actual dimensions, or MTL can print any roadname they want on that tiny east coast style caboose and unload them for decades as their only caboose offering, then, a Pseudo USRA 0-6-0 on their 8800 mechanism would also be a win win win.

    I win, something that is as close as I will ever see in my lifetime is made available, manufacturer wins, as people want them and will buy them even if they never build them just to have one in their collection, and Z Scale wins, as now Z Scale can finally say they have a USRA style 0-6-0 switcher that looks recognizable and appropriate for our steam era layouts.
     
  2. Kurt Moose

    Kurt Moose TrainBoard Member

    6,166
    4,072
    108
    Amen! I have a Marklin square tender off of they're 2-8-2 with the Zeletory conversion I may put behind one, for a GN version.;)
     
    bostonjim likes this.
  3. Curn

    Curn TrainBoard Member

    684
    286
    26
    I didn't realize Marklin had redesigned the motor configuration in the 88001. To add to the variety, the new starter set versions have a vertical can motor.

    https://static.maerklin.de/damcontent/7b/40/7b408a1750156a2c8d3dd34416bd3c421521727445.pdf

    With the 88001 chassis, a USRA 0-6-0 could be made. Availability of the chassis is the only limitation as it has only currently been sold as 88001, and set 81352. But will likely be made into the future.

    The saddle tank or pseudo-USRA tender will work well for the 8800 and stater set chassis.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2020
    Kurt Moose and Chris333 like this.
  4. CNE1899

    CNE1899 TrainBoard Member

    102
    165
    6
    I used the Marklin 8805, but had to heavily modify the chassis to get the motor horizontal to fit in the 0-6-0 camel back. I did a overlay of the USRA 0-6-0 using the motor arrangement for the camel back. In the vertical orientation the motor can be glued in with no mods, but it doesn't fit in the boiler.
    CNJ_B-3a_13.jpeg
    Screen shot 2020-09-16 at 9.47.00 AM.png
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2020
    bostonjim, Kurt Moose and rray like this.
  5. shortpainter

    shortpainter TrainBoard Member

    233
    756
    14
    Nice! That would fit the Marklin chassis much better. Any more info on that one?
     
  6. ubiminor

    ubiminor TrainBoard Member

    22
    51
    2
    Indeed it is not possible to use the Br89 chassis as is Screenshot 2020-09-16 at 19.12.15.png The sugar-cube motor has to go. if one wants to settle for a bit less pulling force the 6mm 4.5v motor would probably fit.
    I have used plenty of them in my projects and they perform better than one would think
     
    bostonjim likes this.
  7. CNE1899

    CNE1899 TrainBoard Member

    102
    165
    6
    ubiminor,

    The motor I am using is 6 mm 6 volt, might be a bit more power.
     
  8. ubiminor

    ubiminor TrainBoard Member

    22
    51
    2
    I guess we use the same motor, it is sold by different Chinese sites with nominally different voltage ratings.
    In any case I checked and indeed it would not fit under the roof..., unless it is mounted slanted.
    Screenshot 2020-09-16 at 22.34.42.png
    the best accommodation though is like the one you have made, that means introducing 2 idler gears and mounting the motor horizontally into the boiler.
    Another option that might also be viable is to use a bevel gear couple
    Screenshot 2020-09-16 at 22.52.18.png

    This way a simple replacement to the sugarcube motor could be realised, without much tampering of the original chassis.


    The ultimate solution would of course be to replace the chassis with a 3D printed one. so also the exact wheel arrangement could be achieved (by replacing the 4th M0.2 19t gear with a M0.2 25t gear).
    A little nice project.
     
  9. Chris333

    Chris333 TrainBoard Supporter

    2,511
    152
    45
    Changing one of the gears between the drivers would make one wheel spin faster than the other.
     
  10. tracktoo

    tracktoo TrainBoard Member

    269
    154
    10
    Actually, as an idler gear, it wouldn't change the speed of the two axle gears. An idler gear only bridges space and transmits the gear action from one gear to another, one tooth at a time, no speed change. Any size idler gear that fits will transmit the action of the two gears in a one to one fashion. Actually, any size and any number of idler gears won't change the speed of the final drive. The ratio will always be whatever the ratio of the first (driver) and last (driven) gear are. Any gears in the middle are just filling space, passing the action through, one tooth at a time.

    If you want to use an intermediate gear to alter the ratio it must be two different tooth counts mounted to a single shaft, spinning in unison. These are sometimes referred to as compound gears. In this case the first and last gear ratio is altered by whatever the ratio of those two gears (or more) are.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2020
    Chris333 and CNE1899 like this.
  11. Curn

    Curn TrainBoard Member

    684
    286
    26
    Rudy, I don't seem to have any plans for NP #924. I would just use the New Haven plans, move the cab up and maybe stretch it a bit to cover the motor. Actually your saddle tank is pretty close if you remove the saddle tank and enlarge the diameter of the boiler a little. You will just need a clever way to clip on the shell and attach the tender. Like these modified plans: short060.jpg
     
  12. ubiminor

    ubiminor TrainBoard Member

    22
    51
    2
    NP plans are available at the NPRH.
    In particular a simplified drawing of NP924 is here (linked).
    [​IMG]
    The NP924, an ALCO L-5, is actually preserved in Snoqualmie, WA some pictures are here
     
    CNE1899 likes this.
  13. JoeS

    JoeS TrainBoard Member

    2,718
    317
    47
    I rather like that new haven loco. It appears that a shell like that could be used on the chassis with no modifications really?
     
  14. rray

    rray Staff Member

    7,112
    3,435
    123
    But the New Haven model only has one forward sand dome (a puller), and most switchers had both a forward and a reverse sand dome, with a larger steam dome in the middle, which is why I would suggest the USRA design, it covers many more railroads.

    With 2 sand domes, the switching operations would allow both pushing and pulling, where a single sand dome switcher is pulling only, and would not get the traction to push a decent cut.

    Just saying... I will be happy with any non tank styled tender steam switcher. :D


    EDIT: It just occurred to me, if the domes and smokebox were separate glue on parts, then you could make the model to represent many more railroads. NP had the longest smokeboxes, due to the low grade Lignite coal they burned, so the NP needed to burn more of it hence longer smokeboxes.

    Coal Energy Density: On a carbon scale from peat moss to diamond, East Coast Anthracite, is the hardest and densest, like Diamond, where Pacific Northwest Lignite is relatively soft and spongy. closer to Peat Moss or Charcoal, and nowhere near as energy dense...but it is very cheap to mine and ship, you just need to burn lots of it to get the job done. That is why NP had special larger fireboxes and smokeboxes, hence longer locomotives that East Coast railroads. Midwest railroads like the UP had middle of the road density coal from strip mines, Bituminous and Subbituminous, both grades of which have higher energy densities than Lignite.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2020
    Kurt Moose, bostonjim and CNE1899 like this.
  15. Curn

    Curn TrainBoard Member

    684
    286
    26
    JoeS, We will see if Rudy can come up with something for an unmodified chassis, but I suspect there will need to be some modification to attach the tender.

    Rob: Re Domes/Sand: When I shortened the NH drawings, I added a sand line to drop between the 2nd & 3rd driver. This is what many single sand dome engines have, like NP 924 so that the can do push or pull operations. I worry that with 3 domes on things will look a little crowded, or the domes will need to be unrealistically thin, for a 8800 chassis shell. But if we end up with something that looks like the Piko G scale 0-6-0, it will be good enough.

    Didn't Kim Vellore solve this design constraint when he attempted to make the laser delrin raster/white metal kit? What ever happened to that project? The photos all seem to have disappeared.

    The Piko G 0-6-0 is pretty close to our aim. Faux-American locomotive. Sticking 3 domes one will look like this.
    Pikolargescale060steamlocomotive.jpg
     
    bostonjim likes this.
  16. ubiminor

    ubiminor TrainBoard Member

    22
    51
    2
    Once again the 6mm motor does not fit
    Screenshot 2020-09-17 at 17.44.48.png

    However, just shifting the cabin 1.5 mm forward
    Screenshot 2020-09-17 at 17.49.25.png

    It seems to me that the easiest and best looking combination would be the unmodified NH 2416 with the bevel gear transmission.

    In the meantime I found also a USRA 0-6-0 drawing, but it is tiny.
    060drawing740.jpg
     
  17. z.scale.hobo

    z.scale.hobo TrainBoard Member

    184
    131
    11
    Kinda reading this in passing so didn't read closely on size needed.... but have you seen the new small Märklin motor used in the upcoming VW T1 motorized rail maintenance car?
    https://zscalehobo.com/marklin/296142.html
     
    Chris333 likes this.
  18. CNE1899

    CNE1899 TrainBoard Member

    102
    165
    6
    ubiminor,
    I agree that the best looking combo is the unmodified NH 2416/bevel gear.
    I had considered beveled gears for the camel back, but not sure I will be able to replicate the lower speed/higher torque of the worm gear.
    I am not proficient in gearing, so is there a bevel gear set-up that can accomplish that?
     
  19. CNE1899

    CNE1899 TrainBoard Member

    102
    165
    6
    Not to confuse the thread more, but if we are talking about steam that will fit an unmodified 0-6-0 Marklin chassis, the Reading camel back is a good candidate. I did not use this as I wanted a CNJ prototype.
    Only a few minor alterations to the boiler and smoke box are needed. The chassis might need to be shortened a bit for looks.

    (EDIT)Just realized this does not help the western rail modelers.
    Screen shot 2020-09-17 at 1.49.15 PM.png
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2020
    Kurt Moose likes this.
  20. ubiminor

    ubiminor TrainBoard Member

    22
    51
    2
    The bevel gear combo just serves to turn the motor shaft by 90 deg. There is still a worm at the end. It is a construction meant to replace the Märklin motor without changing too much in the chassis.

    This is an interesting locomotive! I'll put it on my to do list.
    Ciao
    Gianfranco
     
    CNE1899 likes this.

Share This Page