ATSF 4-8-4 Northern kitbash.

rome91 May 12, 2019

Tags:
  1. BarstowRick

    BarstowRick TrainBoard Supporter

    7,431
    496
    91
  2. bremner

    bremner Staff Member

    4,763
    2,097
    76
    The 3700 class was a mountain, 3751 was the first 4-8-4 on the Santa Fe
     
  3. rome91

    rome91 TrainBoard Member

    28
    12
    2
    I reckon he meant the 3700s in that post.
     
  4. BarstowRick

    BarstowRick TrainBoard Supporter

    7,431
    496
    91
    I meant to mention this earlier. Every one of my B-mann Northerns ran well right out of the box. In time and it didn't take long, they would literally tear themselves apart. Longevity was not a question any more.

    I bought an HO GS4 Daylighter for my son as a Christmas present. Keep in mind I've never seen a child take care of his toys like he did. Before the day was over it was sitting in pieces on his under the bed layout. Once during the day I put it back together and hoped it would stay together. Not going to happen. At a later date, I replaced it with the Louisiana Trip commemorative run. He knew better then to take it out of the box. The last I heard he still has it, as a shelf queen.

    Then when B-mann put out the N scale version of the Santa Fe Northern, I bought one and had the same experience. Took a bit longer as in a day or two. I tried everything I could think of. CA glue Zap-a-Gap. The plastic just wouldn't stick to the metal. I started a letter writing campaign as well as several phone calls to B-mann. Safe to say to no avail.

    I spent money on their warranty and even when they were good enough to replace it. Can you guess the outcome. I thought so.

    Here's a story I like to tell. While in Dayton, Ohio and working for a local hobby shop. I was approached by a youngster who wanted his Santa Fe HO Northern with sound, fixed. I contacted a fella in Baltimore, MA. He did something, to help me. He had a still in the box version of the same locomotive. His! He switched shells and sent it back to me. When I test tracked it for the young man it ran perfectly. In less then a week he was back in my face heart broken. At that point I had no place to turn to as there wasn't anymore units...available. I repaired it the best I could. Can you guess the rest of the story. Yep! Noting: That wasn't the fella's fault in Baltimore, he went beyond the call of duty by giving us his own personal unit, NC. I can honestly conclude or say we both tried.

    His father came unglued at me on the phone. Yammer, yammer, you son of...and I think my mother got involved in this discussion as well. Seems to me my middle finger was doing something odd the whole time I was on the phone with him. Using a 70's show, Red expletive D-As !! He finally settled down when I told him the whole story. Responding, so there's nothing more I can do. That's right sir! As Kelso, would say (same show) "Burn."

    You know what I've been watching on TV while recovering from Oral Surgery.

    You also know the rest of the story.
    Mine isn't the only one out there.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 5:28 PM
  5. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    1,496
    592
    25
    Yeah, some of us understand the generalities some are posting in this thread. But it's getting to the point of misinformation, and there are probably people reading who want to learn about these wonderful engines. So...

    Santa Fe 3700 Class: Fifty-one dual service 4-8-2 Mountains built by Baldwin between very late in 1918 and 1924, and scrapped between 1952 and 1955 (inclusive). Not USRA Heavy Mountains but not much different, with 69" spoke drivers and weights ranging from 338,000 to 375,000 pounds.

    3751 Class: Fourteen 4-8-4 Northern built by Baldwin in 1927-1929 with 230 psi boilers and 73" spoke drivers, and weighing about 423,000 to 432,000 pounds. Rebuilt in 1938 with cast steel frames and 80" box disc drivers, raising their weight to 464,700 pounds, and improving their looks and performance considerably.

    3765 Class: Eleven Baldwin Northerns built in 1937-1938 with nickel-steel 300 psi boilers, 80" drivers, and "square" tenders on six axles with 20,000 gallons of water capacity. Weight was about four hundred short of half a million pounds. Most had their boilers replaced.

    3776 Class: Ten more of the same built in 1941, but with tenders carrying 25,000 gallons of water on four axle Buckeye trucks. The last two were the only two that came from Baldwin with roller bearing rods, as newer units were built during the war when roller bearings were desperately needed elsewhere.

    2900 Class: Thirty war babies with minor detail changes, carbon steel boilers, and weights of 510,700 pounds.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 7:14 PM
  6. BarstowRick

    BarstowRick TrainBoard Supporter

    7,431
    496
    91
    Oh gosh, and I'm tailing in her behind Actpulsa's presentation.

    Valid points. All of them. Allow me to elaborate. I'm going to mess with your reality.;)

    As a youngster hanging out, when allowed, at the Barstow Train Yard. I would listen to the Rails talk about the various locomotives. It was obvious to me that not every 3000 class was the same locomotive and I asked my granddad, a steam locomotive engineer, what was going on. His response we call a 3000 class because that's how it's numbered. Then he pointed to a large locomotive resembling a 4-8-4 but not quite, actually a 4-8-2 and called it a 3000 class because, can you guess? That's the number on the locomotive. As noted here it was a Mountain. Then he pointed to the Northern that just pulled the Chief in and called it a 2000 class. A what? It was a 4-8-4 but had the larger drivers and longer tender. Used primarily for passenger service. I can find exceptions to that. Okay, are you confused yet? I was. Then a freight pulled into town with a 5000 class locomotive on the front. But wait! That's a 4-8-4 Northern, and of course it's a 5000 class because? You are catching on. Yes, the number on it. :rolleyes:

    In retrospect the locomotives were different. Dependent on the design builder and the era built. If you look at the pictures that document these locomotives, you'll find a different placement of the domes on top or a larger sand dome. As well as driver sizes and the steam plumbing. So, all I can say is when you think you have it figured out, with everything pigeon holed. Here's the problem you may not be wrong but you may not be right 100% of the time. Easy for me to say, "Yeah right!" Like that's going to happen. o_O

    Although, we model railroaders do pretty good at pigeon holing and over defining everything. Remember, not everything is as it seems to be. Huunh!? Now you know as well as I know. We rail-fans and toy train enthusiast like to think we have everything figured out. Do we? I told you I'd mess with your reality. Do you get my drift?:confused:

    I love to watch my stoves drift down grade. Now there's a generic term (stoves) you can use and seldom be in trouble with. Unless...o_O:ROFLMAO::D

    Now, after taking you on a confusing journey. If you don't mind I need to get back to finding me a really good 4-8-4 Northern, not to expensive and I don't care what class it's in.:sneaky::cautious::LOL:
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 7:28 PM
  7. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    1,496
    592
    25
    You've clearly slept since 1955. :D

    All the Santa Fe steamers in the 5000s were 2-10-4 Texas type monsters.

    Cheer up. At least you're not old enough to remember the actual 3000 Class steamers--the Techachapi Mallets.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 7:35 PM
  8. BarstowRick

    BarstowRick TrainBoard Supporter

    7,431
    496
    91
    I saw a 2-10-4 Texas Type Monster. Dang that's cool. And I didn't even know it. You messing with me?:confused:

    Your Assessment and explanation is right on. Things happened on the 1X1 foot scale that on occasion defied logic, as you and I see it. Exceptions, there's always exceptions. You heard me say, If you look around long enough you will find a prototype... For example, did they put the wrong tender on that locomotive? The one I saw. That happened a lot and the numbers got a bit blurred. Was it being delivered. Not likely. Or did they renumber it at some point? Guessing to early for the tender to have been renumbered.

    Yes, I've gotten some sleep and spent hours reading books on the Santa Fe. Especially those written by Chard Walker. He had it right. As to some of the others. I often times found myself shaking my head as the authors reality...well...more research needed.

    Speaking of Chard Walker, he documents in his book. One of the helper engines hung around Cajon Pass with a Pennyslvania, type of tender. More then likely an error, but on whose part?

    My research along with yours confirms the list you provided as being correct. You can depend on it.
    I have no intention of arguing with you. To much respect for that.

    Just messing around and sharing a Rails perspective. They didn't care what locomotive they were driving, who made it and/or what model it was. They found it easier to refer to it by it's number. If you get my drift. :LOL::ROFLMAO::D

    Now tell me (after all this chatter) Kato has put out a Santa Fe 4-8-4, Northern. Like the FEF, Union Pacific, Great Northern :sneaky: oop's:rolleyes: Northern they put out.

    All together now.We want a Northern, we want a Northern. A Santa Fe Northern. Hurry up Kato before it's to late for me to enjoy it.

    In the meantime we will be watching to see how the OP's project turns out.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 8:04 PM
  9. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    1,496
    592
    25
    That's interesting. I'd like to see it. The Atchison had three surplus Pennsy Mikados during WWII, when they were desperate enough for power to buy second-hand engines. They and the EsPee also bought some Boston & Maine Berkshires with external Coffin feed water heaters.

    History can be interesting stuff. People don't appreciate what U.S. railroads had to accomplish, and did pull off, during the gas and rubber rationing of WWII.

    Yeah, BM isn't any better in HO. Bought a beautiful Texas from them years ago and loaded it with lead shot. Put it on a sixty car train at the club, and it pulled real nice--until it pulled the coupler out of its tender.

    Of course, that could be fixed better than new. But the old girl was kind enough to develop more problems...

    That is a nice boiler and cab in the OP. I think I'd be fitting it to a Con-Cor/Kato chassis, though.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 8:35 PM
  10. rome91

    rome91 TrainBoard Member

    28
    12
    2
    acptulsa - the closest kato chassis would be a GS4 chassis, which is what this shell was made for, actually. I didn’t have the money for one on me and already had multiple spare bachmanns so I chose that instead. A kato/concor 4-6-4 stretched could also work, but the wheels are too large in diameter I believe.
     
  11. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    1,496
    592
    25
    Actually, they're probably about perfect. But perfect is bad. Model trains require more flange than real ones, and more flange requires more wheelbase.

    So perfectly sized driver centers throw the wheelbase, and the proportions of the whole model, off. What can you do?
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2019 at 9:41 PM
  12. BarstowRick

    BarstowRick TrainBoard Supporter

    7,431
    496
    91
    I was sure my research had some 2000 or as referenced here as the 2900 class, 4-8-4's.
    The reference mentioned here had me thinking.
    By war babies I automatically think of the GS class, 4-8-4's as made by Lima for Southern Pacific. Several railroads received these WP, being one of them but I don't think Santa Fe did.

    Here is a link we might find interesting in. Santa Fe 4-8-4 in the 2900 class.

    2925 4-8-4.jpg
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019 at 2:36 AM
  13. BarstowRick

    BarstowRick TrainBoard Supporter

    7,431
    496
    91
    Here is a video of one of the surviving 5000 class.
    Just in case you weren't sure what Acptulsa and I were discussing.



    Don't I wish Kato would put out one of these.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019 at 5:52 AM
    SP-Wolf likes this.
  14. rome91

    rome91 TrainBoard Member

    28
    12
    2
    Hallmark made a 5000 class in the early 90s. Spookshow has an article on it.

    Also, maybe tomorrow I’ll get some more pictures in.
     
  15. r_i_straw

    r_i_straw Staff Member

    17,558
    10,558
    222
    I'm lazy. ;) No major work here other than modifying the tender trucks for all wheel electrical pickup and adding a decoder.
    [​IMG]
     
    SP-Wolf and BNSF FAN like this.
  16. chinapig

    chinapig TrainBoard Member

    114
    3
    14
    Regarding replacements for the split gears on the Bachmann chassis, James' Trains does 3D printed replacements. See his blog post of May 6th here.

    https://jamestrainparts.com/

    I haven't tried them personally.

    Cheers, Ted
     
  17. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    1,496
    592
    25
    War baby steamers had four main characteristics. Materials were restricted by the government, so they were almost always heavier than engines of the same design built just a year or two earlier. For example, the 3776 were not the heaviest Northern types when they were built, but the 2900 Class were and are. They also lack certain useful options, like roller bearings. None of them are passenger engines, though many (like the Northerns) are dual service.

    There were also roads, like the Santa Fe, buying steamers even though they had decided to dieselize. Diesels were made, but in limited numbers. Copper was one main reason; motors and generators required a lot of it. God only knows how the War Production Board decided who got them. The B&M got enough EMDs to retire both steamers and electrics, even though the Santa Fe was hauling massive loads across the Mojave Desert to Long Beach, San Francisco and San Diego. They needed those diesels.

    But most of all, the WPB made innovation a dirty word. Only proven designs could be built. So, roads that always ordered custom designs to their specifications wound up buying what they could. The Frisco bought copies of Burlington Northerns. Even the mighty Pennsy bought Texas types of a C&O design. They looked funny wearing the Pennsy name, but no Belpaire fireboxes.

    That the Santa Fe didn't have to worry about. They had proven their new Northern and Texas types of 1938. When they could get approval to order new engines, they didn't need to order "foreign" designs. But they felt the pinch, too. They never bought secondhand engines except when they first started and during WWII. They were a real innovator with Mallets back in 1909-1911, but their designs were all garbage, and they swore the type off. They never ordered another articulated locomotive from Baldwin. During the war, however, they bought a batch of used Mallets from the N&W.

    Desperate times call for desperate measures.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019 at 5:16 PM
    BarstowRick likes this.
  18. Hytec

    Hytec TrainBoard Member

    11,537
    1,520
    146
    The B&M received early EMDs because they were a direct route with the New York Central from mid-west manufacturing plants to Portland, ME where a majority of war material destined for Europe was shipped. Portland was rarely, if ever mentioned by the media as a port of material handling to lessen the possibility of submarine interception of the convoys. Whereas ports further south in New Jersey, Maryland, etc. were often in the news to deflect attention away from Portland. One war time poster I distinctly remember was "Loose Lips Sink Ships". I believe there was a greater volume of war material destined for Europe because we were supplying our own troops plus those of Great Britain, Russia, and to a lesser extent mid-Eastern countries.

    [​IMG]
     
    BarstowRick and acptulsa like this.
  19. DCESharkman

    DCESharkman TrainBoard Member

    3,516
    422
    51
    Hank,

    Thanks for the history lesson, WWII was over 15 years before I was born.
     
    BarstowRick likes this.
  20. acptulsa

    acptulsa TrainBoard Member

    1,496
    592
    25
    Absolutely. They also had a lengthy tunnel they had electrified years before (the Hoosac), and both the catenary and the electric locomotives needed help. A few FT sets allowed them to operate trains through, eliminating a bottleneck, retire the electrics and recycle the catenary wire. That's a pretty compelling argument for letting that sale go through.

    But the Santa Fe was enabling us to fight the Japanese by hauling millions of tons across the Mojave, and they had helped GM develop the FTs so they didn't have to haul millions of gallons of boiler water into the desert just so their steamers could get across. Also compelling. You're right about Portland and those diesels killed two or three birds with one stone. Still, it's odd to see eastern roads selling power surplus when western roads were begging for more.

    And then there's the New Haven's dozens of dual service diesels. Were they critical to the war effort? They hauled a lot of passengers at a time when the S.P. was plastering the southwest with billboards that asked, is this trip really necessary? In the end, the majority rules a democracy, and that corner of the country has quite a population. I think that tended to factor in more than it should have.

    The War Production Board did a tough and thankless job. But I don't think they were immune to political influences.

    But then there's Australia, China, India and the other end of Russia. I suspect you're right, but we had nothing to gain by underestimating Japan. America has had a bad habit if doing that for a long time, and we pay for that time and time again.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2019 at 8:34 PM
    BarstowRick likes this.

Share This Page