Black Cloud, There has to be the Best and the Better and in your opinion which is it? The Lifelike 2-8-8-2 or the Allegheny 2-6-6-2? I realize there's a big difference in price but if someone were to gift you one , which one please?
You ask a question about either having the Proto 2-8-8-2 or the Riv 2-6-6-6. I have both and love them! Either one is a great gift to get or give! For me it would come down to which RR I model. The 2-8-8-2 allows much more flexibility overall since the NW, PRR, ATSF, VGN, UP and many many others used them. I think I was more impressed by the running qualities of this model than any other that I have purchased so far (and I am a RIV fan!). Plus it has no traction tires! The 2-6-6-6 is by far the best loco RIV has ever made! It's detail is at least as good as the Proto 2-8-8-2 an may be better overall and runs really smoothly. It does have the drawback as being used on only two RRs. The VGN and C&O were the only ones using these beasts. For the money right now, the proto 2-8-8-2 for about $200, and the riv 2-6-6-6 for $370, I feel that the 2-8-8-2 is a better value overall. It's just my own personal opinion---hope it helps. I am just waiting for the Broadway Limited 2-6-6-4 to come out and see how it compares to these other two fine locomotives. BNSF4354
Pat, I here ya on spending the precious $$$ to make your own mold! Thats how it works. Look at Model Power and AHM, back in the 70's... They had bought the francise to sell Model Power designs under the AHM name! I have a Model Power C-415 thats AHM, sadly, the body is Model Power, sold under AHM, and the frame and gearing on the 2 I have is completely different! One had Model Power chassis, and the other is a half breed! It has a AGM frame, and a Rivarossi pancake motor! Crazy weird. Then, (I think this year) IHC brought out the new upgraded design of the C-415! Being IHC is the relist of AHM... So IHC got all AHMS stuff more or less... As for the Riv Allegheny and the Proto Y3, I can't comment on either really. I only ever had my hands on a Allegheny! BNSF, you ever get to run your beast of the east yet ????? I'm working on an old Arbour Allegheny, thats like a Bowser. All diecast metal... But, this kit is missing a few parts so. BUT I believe I can replace the missing parts from Bowser to get this 7 pound monster running! I'm going to install 2 inline motors into him for power reasons! If you all have seen the dual motored Athearn DD-40, take that design, and add 2 bigger can motors, and 2 flywheels, and keep both motors connected by being double ended. and then the very outside ends of the motor shafts, would then through power to the drivers... One shafter off the front motor to the front set of drivers to power it, and then the rear most shaft to power the rear set of drivers. I believe with its weight and all. I'll be pulling a Realistic HO scale Allegheny. HA! I want it to pull well.. And never hesitate to hual whatever its coupled too... ALONE! But, for plastic... The Riv Allegheny is a strong monster! I've ran "6206_S1a" Mike's Allegheny and let me tell ya, for plastic the thing will huff and puff.. and never bust a motor sweat! One day tho... I'll have an Allegheny!
Mark, I got the MDC RTR 2 truck shay in April. In is quite a nice runner, creeps slowly and fun to watch. But it is a little noisy! Mine is DCC, the encoder install is actually quite easy (but get a small one!) August, I like the LifeLike Heritage steamers myself (I picked up a Mallet on ebay for $200). IHC's are nice but not the best response curve at very slow speeds.
Locomotive2, this is a tuff choice for me. My pike will run both, as well as a future BL 2-6-6-4. If I had to make a choice, I'd have to say the Allegheny, if only for the fact that it is such a strong puller. Saw one at the train show pull a very heavy circus train at slow speed up a grade.
Thanks for your response Blackcloud. I have had a lot of trouble with steam, Riv & Mantua so I decided to forcus on diesel but once again I yielded to temptation. I liked the implied lifetime warranty on the 2-8-8-2 and the expanded electrical wheelbase but I'm not DCC so the top end speed is too slow for me. I run multi trains on the same track and the MR review of the 2-8-8-2 is 54MPH versus the 70MPH of the Allegheny. That difference to me means a lot on a my small layout. I did buy the Allegheny at 25% cheaper than Trainworld at our LHS. They had a special one day extra discount. I liked Tony's train exchange comment on this beast and the 13 wheel electrical W/B. http://www.ttx-dcc.com/technews/loconews/rivarossi.htm I use the Allegheny as a excursion hauling nine Athearn 70' since 23 Alleghenies were fitted with steam heat and signal lines to help keep the flood of troops, mail and express trains moving. I also wanted and received letter of warranty from Phil Walthers explaining the warranty terms during the first year. After the first year, repair work can be done thru an authorizied vendor in Cincinnati but I just found out that the mechanic has been off sick and for some time. Repairs of the Riv line is backed up at that shop. Here's to !Clear Tracks Ahead!
John, I thought perhaps you could help me. I have two of the Athearn 2-8-2, which as has been discussed here, are too light to pull well. Actually, they weigh enough, but the weight is not balanced. It is too far to the rear(by a lot!) There is nowhere near enough room to add enough weight to balance it, and not possible to remove weight from the back. I have changed the wire harness which comes with the loco in order to use Bachmanns nice Vanderbilt tender. I have spliced Bachmann connectors onto the wires from the loco and now have electrical pickup from the tender as well as loco. The only way I see to improve traction is to add traction tires to the rear drivers. I will not miss the electical pickup since I have added pickup to the tender. The tire will also force the front drivers downward toward the rail. My question to you is: Any idea on how to add traction tires? The existing driver would have to be machined to fit a tire, but where would I get a proper size tire? Would you be interested in tackling a job like this? Gary
Gary, Phewwww, thats a big question on doing alot for a loco, that I'm not to sure if it would actually help or not! I know the loco has all its weight in the rear, near the cab. Meaning its light on the front drivers. Sadly a traction band on the rear drivers would help, but sadly they won't force down the front drivers, you need weight to do this! All a traction band does it ulitize the weight over that driver to get traction so the wheels won't slip and will pull. HOWEVER, a traction band does NOT allow the wheels to slip if their is to much load on the loco, which will cause the motor to work harder at pulling a heavy load and possibly generate alot of heat, which can do 2 things one or the other or both. This is one, overheat the motor and burn it up.. Which reflects the power draw from the rail to the motor and makes the brushes and brush springs hot which will weaken the brush srpings and burn the brushes! This will really lower the power output to the drivers of the loco. To almost a strain to run its own weight on the tract. Not even coupled to a train! And if not burn up (this is number 2) the motor will overheat and if enough heat is made from this it will melt the boiler casting being its plastic. Destroys a complete loco instantly! I could do this, however, I think the spokes of the Athearn Genesis 2-8-2 and 4-6-2 are plastic, which means I'd have to machine a troph in the nickle plating in the wheel flange/wheel tread, fitting to except a traction band on both sides. Their is a risk to this, if done, you could do it correctly, YES, but very very slowly! To fast will cause friction and cause a ton of heat in an isolated area that can melt the spokes in the drivers and ruin a whole wheel set. This is if the spokes are plastic! I never really payed attention to the one a friend had got to see if the driver spokes are plastic or if its a cast wheel from metal. Being all that said. I'll be honest, I would NOT recommend this. Its a very risky procedure to do. It can be done if done right. However, the problem then facing you would be getting a traction band to fit the troph in the driver on BOTH sides. However, their is a way to get around the traction band fitting by filling the troph made for a band with rubberised epoxy. Then file and flatened to make contact to the rail as a band would and not have to ever replace this... But the biggest problem is machining the driver for a troph for a band or a rubberised epoxy pour into the troph. I could do this, but it take a great deal of time to do it right and all.... I just don't recommend it. Being I'd have to press the flange and wheel tread off the plastic spokes and press it into another fitting to put it in my lathe to do this, once the troph is made then press out the center fitting and repress the spokes back in the wheel flange/tread to then press onto the axle. Being that the spokes are possibly plastic, this is how it have to be done. So the plastic spokes would not be ruined from the heat, and the lathe ceter that it was pressed onto being made of aluminum means it would act as a heat sink to draw heat away from the wheel flange/tread so it wouldn't warp or disfigure the wheel flange/wheel tread in the machining process. I would love to get my hands on one of these and a 4-6-2 by Athearn that were junked from a wreck that hit the floor just to play and see if I can get an idea of how to retool the the loco to have an even balencing of weight over the entire wheel base. Being junk, I wouldn't have to worry about ruining it! It be already junk... and could try different things that would help me retool one to make it run properly. I know this isn't what you wanted to hear to make it run alot better. I just don't recommend it. Traction bands were a upgraded nightmare... Specially on motors!
Thanks for the reply John. I hadn't considered the fact that the driver centers may be plastic. I will check that tonight. I understand and agree with all your comments. I do think that the tire on the rear driver would cause some downward pressure on the front drivers while moving forward. Just due to torque. But that doesn't matter, as you say the presence of the tire itself would give me the traction I need. I am not worried about burning out the motor if the loco becomes stalled. I know it would do so, but I hope to not stall it! I am going to contact Athearn and see if I can buy a spare set ofrear drivers. I won't proceed if I can't. In that case I thought i might drill out the steel weight (have you seen the construction of this unit?) and fill the holes near the front with temp lo, which will be heavier, and leave the holes in the back empty, to better balance the weight. If you are willing and Athearn sells the drivers I will ask you to quote me for machining them and making the bands. The risk would be all mine, not yours! Thanks again. Gary
Gary, Let me know if the spoke centers are plastic, first off. This way I know what I'll be getting into! And then let me know if you can get a spare driver from Athearn. I can and would do it this way! However, I would offer to do the installation and all of the newly machined drivers, being I would machine both sides! that way you'd have 2 traction bands. You can e-mail me and all and we can discuss this off the board if you like. use the like to my e-mail address thats a link in my signature....Once I know what all I'll have to do to tool up to do this machine work I'll let you know what it will cost for the work....
Gary, Forgot to mention. I think the side rods that connect all 4 drivers per side is riveted together, with this, the traction band on one driver would not push down on the front drivers. It would only push down on the side to its end or to the rivet joint. NOW if it were a one piece rod that goes from the front driver all the way to the last driver then yes. It would put a slight bit of presure on the front driver. Being the momentum of the traction band and all would put downward presure clean to the front of the rod from the rear of it. See? I'm not exactly sure tho, if the connecting rod is a riveted 3 piece or one long solid rod. As I said I never payed to much attention to the Athearn Mikados or the Pacific. But the traction band doesn't really do to much with no weight on it. Without weight it won't get no traction.... For instance, take a rubber tire from a bicycle or even a car tire. Being rubber, push down on it, and try to slip it.. with the downward presure it won't slip... It acts as weight (the presure you apply by hand). Now take that and don't put no presure on it and try to slip it on pavement. It will slip around. See? This is how a traction band works. The traction band is on the drivers to "hug" the rail it rides on... Being a rubbery type material. Its got an artificial "grip" to the rail only with weight keeping presure on it. See? The weight helps keep the traction band in good contact to the rail and all for the traction of it "griping" the rail, to pull without leaving it slip. For instance, take a truck in winter. Ice on the roads and alot of people add weight to the trunks of their cars and beds of pick up trucks. To keep good contact and traction to the roads in winter. So it the tires will "grip" the road and not spin or side. The traction band on a train is the same therory. On the rod tho, that powered driver will only put a minimal amout of presure on the front drivers from the rear. The rod iself is free moving.. not a locked in presure additive. It won't generate enough presure to sustain the momentum of power from the motor. It takes weight to hold the train on the rails and to give it traction. This is how real steam locomotives worked. The rod momentum is far less then the momentum of power from the motor to hold the wheels down. Being free moving the rods loss alot (if not all) momentum to put presure on the front driver from the rear!! It needs more weight for this. Thats why we modelers try to keep an even balenaced rate of weight over the drivers. So its dispersed evenly and all drivers have weight above then to keep them on the rail. Its almost like having no weight in a loco, but the motor at the rear. For instance again. Take a IHC Makado, in repairing one, ( I had a custom retro fit come in the shop for remotoring with a better can motor). And I went to test run it without the boiler shell and weight in it.. All the weight was in the rear near the cab from the weight of the motor. Well on my 3 foot test track I had tested it to see if it would run.. And it did, only the rear drver stayed on the rail! It done a train willie! The rear driver with weight over it from the motor raised the front 3 drivers clean off the rail and it went flying down that 3 foot test track! Even with a traction band (that IHC does not put on their Mikados) would not have helped this! The momentum of the rods would not put presure on the front set of the drivers to hold it on the rail! See? The traction band won't help the front driver to stay on the rail.. Theirs simply not enough presure their to push down on the front driver, with or without a traction band. The band wasn't designed to add presure to the side rods! It was simply a traction design that was designed for pulling... nothing more... Besides to be a pain to replace!
John, You've got me convinced! I checked the driver centers and the good news is they are all metal. I have e mailed Athearn about availability of replacement drivers but haven't heard back yet. When I do, I will get back to you. Thanks. Gary
Gary, Let me know.. My e-mail address is in my dignature as a link.... When you find out from Athearn let me know.. I'll let you know how it will be done and what it will take etc...
John, I have heard back and they do not have the driver available seperately. They offered the whole drive for $45 plus $5 shipping. I may try to call someone a bit higher up and convince them that bringing in some rear drivers from China and making them available for modification might help their sales. Don't expect it to work but perhaps future models will be designed correctly. Thanks for your willingness to help! Gary
Gary, It was worth the try at least! Its sad they work it like that, need one wheel for repairs and you have to buy the entire loco engine bed and wheels just for one! I would have done it if you could have got the parts. Would not have been a problem. Good try tho!
Thanks guys for the many replies. I now have another. My LHS is having a sale on p2k heritage 080's. How good do they run ? And are they dcc ready ?
The LL P2K 0-8-0 runs beutifully, but needs to have pickup added to the tender wheels. As I recall (its been awhile) I removed the DCC socket in the tender and hard wired a Soundtrax decoder there. Easy to do. While the tender was apart I replaced its wheels with ones from, dang I can't remember, KayCee or something similar. They are metal with one side insulated, i added phospher bronze wipers and had used one truck pick up power from each rail. I spliced the wires from these pickups to the ones from the loco, giving me excellant power pickup. Now the loco runs thru doubleslip turnouts without stalling. Prior to adding the tender pickup, it would not. And with sound and momentum features, it is very annoying when contact fails. Gary
