Subject:
|
Re: Has anyone made an American 4-4-0 with BBB wheels?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Jan 2005 18:04:51 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
CJMASI@*NOGARBAGEPLEASE*saynotospamRCN.COM
|
Viewed:
|
2465 times
|
| |
|
|
Steven Barile wrote:
> Thanks! I hope you didn't think I meant that you are the "boy" in this analogy!
> I have been coping your work for years! :D
>
> Initally I had the cab further back but the MOC (LEGO selective compression
> etc... tight radius etc...) called for this positiong, othwerwise the cab would
> swing way out around a curve and not stay coupled to the tender so well, you do
> what you gotta do. In the pic of the line drawing it's not to far off as is...
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/SEBarile/Engines/260DRG/linedrawing.jpg
>
> As for the tender, I wish I had more med Orange for more detailing, maybe as
> more comes out I'll revisit it. I did try mixing the oranges but that was a
> little to painful on the eys! I thought maybe it would "fake" a shadow etc...
> but instead it just looked like a fashion nightmare!
>
> Now that I look closer at your tender how are the leading and trailing wheels
> attached? Can you back thru a switch? (I had this kind of an issue before).
Oh, sure I ask you about a few nit picky details and you go right for
the "does it work" jugular vein. Just kidding. Actually, it doen't get
run that much, so I did some preliminary testing. I ran it backwards
over a point with five 8-wide coaches (no pictures of these yet) behind
it. It didn't seem to have a problem, but I have discovered that running
on the mostly flat and level basement floor does not necessarily mean
that there won't be problems running on the less than flat and level
tables at a layout.
On the other hand, I do know what you mean with respect to going
backwards with that kind of wheel set hanging off a motor. For example,
my SD40-2 will often pop its trailing wheelset off the track when
pushing its 8-wide load backwards (2 flat beds, 2 double stack container
cars, 3 box cars, 1 tanker, 1 hopper, and a caboose). Sometimes it
corrects itself when the train reverses to go forward, but if I push too
hard, it will derail.
I think that if I pushed the 4-4-0 steamer just as hard is the SD40-2
then I might start seeing the same problem. The one thing that helps the
tender is that the weight of the frame of the tender sits squarely on
the last wheelset. The last wheelset on the SD40-2 sits below some
plates that can be easily pushed out of the way. However, I don't think
that I'll have to worry about my 4-4-0 ever pushing a huge train. The it
simply does not produce the same tractive effort as the SD40-2. After
all, the SD40-2 weighs in at 1,000,000 mg (that is a kilogram to me and
you) and the tender doesn't weigh nearly that much.
By the way, I didn't think that you were trying to imply that I was the
boy in the men/boys women/girls thing. I just thought it was funny to
say that it would take a real man/woman to design the piston and
connecting rods since most "real" men and women think we are nuts :)
Chris
> SteveB
>
>
> In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:
>
> > Steven Barile wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Yes, the piston and connecting rod design certain can seperate the men from the
> > > boys (& women from the girls). In fact that's where most of my time was spent on
> > > the Bumble Bee! And BTW thanks for the confession! :)
> >
> > Yeah, the men go home, but the boys dig deeper into their LEGO bins for
> > just the right part :)
> >
> >
> > > Here's a few pics and a few words:
> > > http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/6849
> > >
> > > SteveB
> > > PS I hope you don't mind me posting my MOC on your thread!
> >
> > Ha ha, my thread. This is actually Jonathan's thread asking for examples
> > of MOC's using Big Ben Bricks drivers. Sure, your design is a 2-6-0, but
> > that has the same munber of wheels as a 4-4-0, so its mostly the same,
> > right?
> >
> > Anyway, I like your engine. I noticed that your cab starts above the
> > wheels. Is that more prototipical than mine or does it depend on the
> > specific model? I started my cab between the wheels because that is how
> > I thought the 4-4-0's did it. It doesn't leave much room in there for
> > minifigs though. I hope someone will correct me if the cab should start
> > above the wheels on a prototypical 4-4-0. I am also curious about the
> > leading truck. Are they locked to the frame on real 2-6-0's or do they
> > swivel? In the eng, I think you came up with an interesting and cool
> > solution to a sticky problem.
> >
> > As far as the tender goes, well tenders are tenders. They are square
> > boxes. That is why I did the crazy 8 to 7-wide thing on my tender. The
> > change in width two plates from the bottom makes the squareness of the
> > tender more bearable for me. At least yours breaks up the orange box
> > with some nice striping.
> >
> > Of course, your engine looks great with your houses in the background! I
> > like the how you found a way to use those ever present and somewaht
> > annoying yellow window inserts:)
> >
> > Thanks for sharing,
> > Chris
> >
> > >
> > > In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > steve barile wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Nice work Chris! Can you explain a little about your driver links. It looks like
> > > > > the piston rod is static and that technic element slides along it...???
> > > > >
> > > > > SteveB
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the exclamation point, and, yep, you got the piston thing
> > > > right. I wanted a round cylinder. In the picture that I was using, the
> > > > cylinder looked like a cylinder with a box on top. I choose to emphasize
> > > > the cylinder instead of the box. However, an axle cannot move freely in
> > > > and out of the 2x2 rounds that I used for the cylinder. So, I decided to
> > > > slide the drive rod on the piston rod. It's a cheat, but it is not an
> > > > _obvious_ cheat :) If you look very closely at the technic elements, and
> > > > think very hard about the sizes and shapes of those elements, you might
> > > > come to realize that I did something very, _very_ bad :( I couldn't
> > > > think of anything else, and boy that slope is slippery. Luckily, the
> > > > NELUG guys still let me run it even though it is an unpure, modded
> > > > abomination.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > PS I just finished a 2-6-0 Mogul in Rio Grande Bumblebee livery (Med Orange,
> > > > > Black & Gray). Pic to follow tonight.
> > > >
> > > > I look forward to seeing it.
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > In lugnet.trains, Christopher Masi wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > In lugnet.trains, Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Building an American 4-4-0 seems like the perfect use for the new BBB
> > > > > > > wheels, anyone done it yet? (I plan to give it a go myself when I can
> > > > > > > afford to get some BBB wheels to do it with :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yep, and surprisingly if you google "American 4-4-0 LEGO" you get a bunch of
> > > > > > hits. One is mine :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://users.rcn.com/cjmasi/lego/trains/engines/american_4-4-0/american_4-4-0.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Has anyone made an American 4-4-0 with BBB wheels?
|
| Thanks! I hope you didn't think I meant that you are the "boy" in this analogy! I have been coping your work for years! :D Initally I had the cab further back but the MOC (LEGO selective compression etc... tight radius etc...) called for this (...) (20 years ago, 31-Dec-04, to lugnet.trains)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
