Railroad Line Forums
Railroad Line Forums
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Model Railroad Forums
 Early Rail Forum
 Promised Update...

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List

* Forum Code is ON
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

  Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C    R E V I E W
OK Hogger Posted - 06/02/2016 : 8:48:01 PM
I'm BAAAaaack!

As threatened, here's an update concerning my first fledgling efforts at creating the Colorado & Pacific's first "kit-bashed" steam engine. At this point, I'm just experimenting with the basic components that I hope to make work for my first late-1870s/mid-1880s Mogul.

Here's a pic of the first combination (on the right):

Obviously, I'm starting with the venerable Pocher "Reno". It's sitting on a modified MDC/Roundhouse Old Timer 2-6-0 frame. The stack/cylinder center lines match up, so that works. (At this point, the stack is a Tyco "General" stack which may, or may not, be used.) The boiler will need just a bit of "massaging" (filing the inside edges) to allow it to snuggle down over the frame to sit lower. The "Reno" cab fits fine, should I decide to retain it. At this stage, there were a few more questions I must address:

* Can I use the Pocher cylinder/guides assembly (with new scratchbuilt main rods/side rods)?

* Can I get a Sagami 16x30 to fit inside the rear portion of the boiler? (Or do I need to go smaller?)

* Should I retain the MDC/Roundhouse 72:1 step gear ratio (using an NWSL gear set), or go with the NWSL 45:1 MDC gear replacement set? Experimentations/decisions/ ahead. I hope to answer those questions "soon".

Next, for gits n' shiggles, I experimented with what a 60" driver version would look like by using Mantua 60" drivers (that's what they measure using my dial calipers) installed into an MDC 63" driver Mogul frame. Here's the result:

Don't like it. This is supposed to be a "freight hog" and this looks like a passenger engine.

So, I then decided to piddle n' diddle some more with the 52" driver version, so I detached some more parts from the Pocher assemblies. (Wow, Pocher was way ahead of their time in devising complicated assembly procedures! Would make the "Ah so. We Chinee!" mfg folk proud!)

I massaged the boiler so it would snuggle down more on the frame and added a leading truck using a modified MDC lead truck assembly with a NWSL 26" flush end wheelset. I also modified the Pocher cylinder/pilot assembly and it fits fine. However, I think I would prefer the longer pilot version that came with the Pocher "Genoa" instead of the short version on the "Reno".

Anyway, here's what this combination looks like:

Ah... NOW we're getting somewhere! I like the overall lines and "stance".

What I don't like is the "bulk" that the MDC cover plate creates because it extends up PAST the front driver. To me this makes the frame look too "thick" between the front driver and cylinders. (Compare that area on the Jupiter in the pic above.)

So, I think I will be cutting off the MDC cover plate back toward the center axle. This ought to result in a "deep firebox" look which is definitely desired, but create more "space" under the frame for the front driver. (I will use a thin piece of brass screwed to the frame w/small a pair of bolts/screws to hold the front driver set in place.)

I then got the happy idea to try an MDC "Old Timer" cab on it to see how that looked. Here's a pic of that experiment:

Nope. Ain't happening. Looks like it's been "modernized" in the mid-late 1880s and I don't want to go there. I want it to look more "original". So, that attempt was a dud.

Now, from here I learned that a 16x30 Sagami round can will NOT fit the Pocher/MDC combination. It will fit the MDC frame (have done so in the past) but will NOT fit the Pocher boiler, even after using the dremel to remove the ridge inside the Pocher boiler that's up at the top. (Hits the boiler taper before the can motor is far enough forward for the MDC frame.)

So, this means I need to find an alternative motor. Thus far, it looks like the NWSL 12mm x 25mm is the most likely option at this point. That combination will require an adapter bushing for the shaft to retain use of the NWSL MDC regear sets available.

Which brings up this question:

Have any of you any experience re-gearing an MDC Old Timer from the stock 72:1 step gear to a NWSL 45:1 step gear? If so, what were the performance changes?

Okay... I think that's it on the updates for now.

Any input most welcomed!

15   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
OK Hogger Posted - 04/08/2021 : 10:02:25 PM
Hi Frank!

Thanks for the additional info! I like the looks of the Moguls pertaining to this mini-topic.


I have two Arbour Models "Brooks" Mogul kits that have 56" drivers (it would be nice to have a 56' driver Mogul), but I'm thinking of staying with MDC-based mechanisms, which means either 51" or Mantua 60". (I don't think I'm interested in using MDC's oversized/larger than "63 inch" drivers.)

Thought about using the Arbour boilers on MDC mechanisms... but I'm uncertain if I'll do that. I may just sell the Arbour Moguls and put the funds from their sales into my MDC-based bashes.

Gloucesterman Posted - 04/07/2021 : 5:04:10 PM
The Hoosac Tunnel Line train is indeed headed by an Eastern Railroad locomotive. Number 96 was one of only four moguls used on that road, as most of its business was conveying passengers up and down the coast between Boston and Portland, and it didn't need heavy motive power. Three of the moguls, including this one number 96, were built for it by the Rhode Island Locomotive Works (the fourth one was another RI Works engine but built in 1871). According to the Eastern's 1884 annual report, all three of the 1878 moguls weighed 77,050 lbs.and had 55 1/2 inch drivers with 18 x 24 inch cylinders. As of December 1883, however, the Eastern was leased by its long rival, the Boston & Maine, and so by 1884 it's likely the B&M repainted at least the markings and changed the number.

OK Hogger Posted - 04/07/2021 : 09:31:06 AM
Hi Scott!

Yes, a larger scan of that page would be nice. I think my email address is available at my RR-Line "Profile" page. If not, holler back and I'll get it to you.


CNE1899 Posted - 04/07/2021 : 08:45:32 AM
I have the MR cyclopedia. Here is a Brooks 2-6-0 from 1883. The one caption states these locomotives were made 1870s to the 1880s.
The other pictures are of a Dickenson and a Rogers.
I can send you a bigger image if you are interested. I also have one of an early 2-8-0 and 4-4-0.


OK Hogger Posted - 04/05/2021 : 5:56:34 PM

Shipped from the UK on March 4th. Arrived at Customs in Chicago on the 11th, arrived here today. SO... about 1 month to the day?


Boy, do I understand about convoluted rosters. (St. Louis & San Francisco is a labyrinth!) So the above loco is a product of RI in 1878. Cool! Thanks!

jbvb Posted - 04/05/2021 : 5:27:36 PM
Andre, the history of ERR and B&M locos in the 1800s is complicated. Numbers were re-used as locomotives were scrapped and replaced. A 1931 roster scanned by the B&MRRHS says #96 was an 1878 Rhode Island 2-6-0, scrapped 1889. They say there is a better, much revised roster done in the 1960s but I haven't found it.
railman28 Posted - 04/05/2021 : 5:25:49 PM
So how long did they actually take?
OK Hogger Posted - 04/05/2021 : 5:00:49 PM

True dat! The figures add a bunch to the pic.



That's HUGE for me. SO relieved.

railman28 Posted - 04/05/2021 : 4:42:49 PM
my favorite part of this picture is crew in it. Their dress, their attitude to being in the picture, The guy sitting on the brake wheel.

Great stuff.

OK Hogger Posted - 04/05/2021 : 3:04:58 PM
Hi James!

So ERR #96 (engine pictured) would be a bit earlier build, or was it of the same 1881 batch?

jbvb Posted - 04/05/2021 : 2:27:43 PM
At that point, the Eastern and the B&M were the major freight routes from Boston to Maine. ERR #96 appears to have been sold or scrapped before the 1911 cutoff date of 'Minuteman Steam', but ERR #98 was built by Rhode Island in 1881 with 17x24 cylinders.
Michael Hohn Posted - 04/05/2021 : 1:37:59 PM
Two of the boxcars shown are for Midwest railroads.
OK Hogger Posted - 04/05/2021 : 12:26:45 PM

Yup. SO much can be learned by looking closely at pictures like these I posted. Yet, they also create many questions!

deemery Posted - 04/04/2021 : 3:43:36 PM
Besides the different railroads (all members of Hoosac Tunnel Line Fast Freight Line), note the different heights and the different door openings (some open to the left, others to the right.)

OK Hogger Posted - 04/04/2021 : 3:14:57 PM
Early Rail groups.io had a post of a very interesting photo of what is presumed to be the "Eastern RR" ca 1880s. Here's a small version formatted to fit this forum:

And here's a link to the photo that can be expanded:


What an exquisite photo! Via the zoom feature the photo can be expanded and really studied.


Railroad Line Forums © 2000-2020 Railroad Line Co. Go To Top Of Page
Steam was generated in 0.12 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000