Hi, The misnomer could have also stuck because it's fun to call the 4-8-4 a Challenger. the Hudson already had a name - Hudson (I call it a poor-man's Challenger).
Tim Brown ----- Original Message ----- From: jayhoo64 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 12:32 AM Subject: [S-Trains] Re: Since when is a 4-8-4 a "Challenger?" Thorin Marty asked: >Why is the AF Northern called a "Challenger" when we all know a >Challenger is a 4-6+6-4? A good question. For the record, it should be noted that Gilbert did not (repeat) DID NOT call their UP FEF-1 "Little 800" class 4-8-4 steam loco a "Challenger." The name "Challenger" was given to the SETS that the loco came with. This is probably because, as someone else already noted, the UP ran a "Challenger" service, and Gilbert sometimes named their sets after designated services that the prototype railroad offerred. Gilbert also made sets called "Pacemaker" after the NYC's Pacemaker service, and of course, these sets came with the NYC Hudson steamer. So how did the myth of Gilbert's misnomer begin? Gilbert may have planted the seed for the confusion by the way they listed the locos for separate sale. If you look in a Gilbert catalogue from, say, 1953, on page 40, you'll see the 4-8-4 listed as "No. 336 THE CHALLENGER 4-8-4 LOCOMOTIVE AND TENDER" (caps theirs). It might appear that Gilbert is indeed calling the 4-8-4 a Challenger, but wait... If you check the listing for the Hudson, it says "No. 326 THE PACEMAKER 4-6-4 LOCOMOTIVE AND TENDER." Wa? Pacemaker? When did Gilbert ever call the 4-6-4 a Pacemaker? Nobody has ever accused Gilbert of that, the Hudson has always been known as "Hudson." Wassis "Pacemaker" stuff? Well, Gilbert DID list the Hudson SETS as "The Pacemaker" because the NYC ran a Pacemaker service. What Gibert was doing was referring the reader to the SETS that the Hudson came in. So "Pacemaker 4-6-4" doesn't mean that Gilbert is calling the Hudson a Pacemaker. Gilbert was saying, "This is the 4-6-4 loco that comes in the Pacemaker set." In the paragraph describing the loco it is correctly referred to as a "Hudson." Likewise with the Northern. When Gilbert listed the Northern as a "Challenger 4-8-4" they were saying, "This is the 4-8-4 loco that comes with the Challenger SETS." The loco is described correctly as "This big Northern type loco..." in the paragraph that followed. There was no confusion with the Hudson because the NYC didn't have a Pacemaker class of loco. But since the UP did have a Challenger class loco, many with sloppy reading comprehension confused the loco with the service, and ASSUMED Gilbert had "done a Lionel", leaving a few axles off of their model. But Gilbert always had it right. Omitting axles from steam locos was Lionel's game, not Gilbert's. The real question is; How did this myth go on for so long? I think it endured because many writers of everything from hard-bound books to club newsletters failed to do primary research, and just regurgitated each-others "data." Poor scholarship is the problem, as well as presumption. Let's not forget, the designers of these "toys" grew up in the steam era. Smitty and his boys new the difference between a 4- 8-4 Northern and a 4-6-6-4 Challenger. Gilbert respected his customers enough to believe that THEY knew the difference as well. Chuck F. S-Trains list sponsor: http://www.americanflyertrains.com All the Flyer you desire...books and accessories too! To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] S-Trains list sponsor: http://www.americanflyertrains.com All the Flyer you desire...books and accessories too! To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
