If I remember correct, the 5000-Class 2-10-4's and the 2900-Class
4-8-4's used the same boiler.

Bob Nicholson (Hafta' dig down deep and find my Book on them)


--- In [email protected], "raisinone" <raisin...@...> wrote:
>
> Bill:
> Good post...  Most of the prototype railroads did try to out stupid 
> each other at one time or another.  Seems to follow that we do the 
> same on occasion...!
> 
> One minor correction, the PRR borrowed AT&SF 2-10-4's for use on 
> the "Atchison, Topeka & Ohio".  These were 5000-series locomotives as 
> opposed to AM's 2900-series 4-8-4. They were used to haul heavy coal 
> and ore trains on the Sandusky line - not something suited to a 4-8-
> 4.  My understanding from different research is the PRR crews liked 
> them, referring to them as "the western engines", but they were much 
> different from the PRR 'J's.  They had more trouble starting the 
> heavy trains but once rolling had more horsepower than a J1 to move 
> the train faster.  The Pennsy classed then as J1(o.f.) for 'oil 
> fired'.
> 
> Would have been a neat S scale locomotive, but I wouldn't hold my 
> breath on that anymore...
> 
> Jim K.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Bill Lane" <bill@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > Ed has Co-opted my "Mighty" phrase for his NYC affliction. I guess 
> that
> > could be a slight form of flattery! Here in the company of friends 
> we all
> > have our own flavor of what road we follow for whatever reason. For 
> most I
> > would suspect it is because it was the road that they were closest 
> to when
> > growing up, or became interested in trains.
> > 
> > I will openly admit that the PRR was frugal at times and very 
> conservative
> > as well. Many of the key locomotive classes were 20+ years old at a 
> time
> > when other roads were still researching and experimenting with new 
> steam
> > locomotives of their own. The PRR was forced to put stokers on their
> > locomotives. It was cheaper and easier to put another fireman in 
> the cab. If
> > he died or quit, get another one. A stoker was a capitol expense 
> that could
> > break down or need maintenance.
> > 
> > The PRR was constantly improving their locomotives with shopping 
> and newer
> > appliances, but mostly they were still the same old 20+ year old 
> locomotives
> > by the 40s & 50s. (That was my first awakening at age 16 looking 
> though
> > Pennsy Power - realizing that the main PRR classes originated in 
> the 20s and
> > 30s)  The PRR T1 was probably the largest group of steam locos that 
> PRR
> > built later in an attempt to refine and modernize their steam 
> power. Their
> > success has been highly disputed on both sides. They were dropped 
> from the
> > rosters rather early in comparison to the age of other classes. I 
> have heard
> > that they sat dead for a few years until the trusts were paid for 
> as they
> > could not scrap them before that.
> > 
> > I am not overly familiar with what other roads did at that time, 
> (later 40s
> > to early 50s) but I know N&W refused to give up the steam fight 
> until very
> > late. Most of us know of the circumstances that came to be to 
> produce the
> > PRR J1. I have wondered if the war restrictions were not in place 
> if the J1
> > is what would have gotten built instead of the PRR's steadfast self 
> reliance
> > mentality. If I could wave a magic wand and see ANY PRR steam 
> locomotive
> > alive and well in 2008, the J1 would not even be in my top 5. The 
> #1 would
> > probably be the I1 followed by the M1 or K4.
> > 
> > The Santa Fe locomotives (The 2900s?) that were leased on the PRR 
> are
> > coincidentally the loco that American Models made. They WERE 
> supposedly
> > liked by the PRR crews because they were significantly more modern 
> then many
> > other PRR classes. There was quite the article on them in the PRR T 
> &HS
> > Keystone a while back.
> > 
> > So, MIGHTY is what we all think it is and get to shoot friendly 
> occasional
> > jabs at each other.... 
> > 
> > Finally, the original premise I posted a few days back WAS - S Scale
> > locomotives made in BRASS by mainstream builders for specific road 
> (IE, you
> > could not correctly paint a K4 for Santa Fe) The USRA locos had 
> multiples
> > correct roads with some detail changes so they DON'T count in my 
> premise.
> > Now that I have clarified things a bit, I still stand that the PRR 
> has had
> > more items specifically built in S brass then ANY other road. NYC, 
> C&O, and
> > SP would be somewhere behind but in what order I don't know. (Think 
> of ALL
> > the diesels with antennas installed by the builders before you say 
> I am
> > wrong) 
> > 
> > Let the replies fly! And enough of ENOUGH MR Lane! Change the 
> subject line!
> > 
> > 
> > Thank You,
> > Bill Lane
> > 
> > Modeling the Mighty Pennsy & PRSL in 1957 in S Scale since 1988
> > 
> > See my finished models at:
> > http://www.lanestrains.com
> > Winner of the 2007 Josh Seltzer NASG Website Award
> > Look at what has been made in PRR in S Scale!
> > 
> > Custom Train Parts Design
> > http://www.lanestrains.com/SolidWorks_Modeling.htm
> > 
> > PRR Builders Photos Bought, Sold & Traded
> > (Trading is MUCH preferred)
> > http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRphotos.xls 
> > 
> > ***Join the PRR T&HS***
> > The other members are not ALL like me!
> > http://www.prrths.com
> > http://www.lanestrains.com/PRRTHS_Application.pdf
> > 
> > Join the Pennsylvania Reading Seashore Lines Historical Society
> > It's FREE to join! http://www.prslhs.com 
> > Preserving The Memory Of The PRSL
> >
>



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to