Yea, that the way all trucks are. Ever see pictures of topped cars, the trucks are off somewhere else, because the car rests on the truck with just the pin keeping them aligned.
I just never understood why they chain the trucks to tenders but not to boxcars. The chain has to have enough slack for the trucks to swing, so I can’t see where it would hold the truck on to the bolster pin. But maybe it would if the tender were to really bounce, I am not sure.
Devon Sinsley said:
John
Thank for that diagram. That will help place the ejector. I am starting to get the picture think.
As noted the Ejector is located on the engine. It was a stand pipe affair that used a venturi to create a vacuum.
Seen just in front of the cab…
See clear as day!
Info sez good for 10 cars before leaks defeated it.
That other doo-hickey(in the previous pic) is the Diaphragm that pulls the rod.
John
John,
Thanks. I actually meant the place of the vacuum pot not the ejector. Interestingly the ejector had all sorts of placements. Outside the cab as in your photo and on my #4 (my avatar) was one location. Inside the cab either hanging from the roof, on the front cab wall, and on the boiler right by the injector on the engineer side. Exhausting them was another interesting experiment as they were a loud sort of screeching affair fro what I understand. I can’t see where your photo is ejecting too (although it seems like the steam dome but that doesn’t seem right). But on the #4 it exhausts into the smoke box
It is the pipe that dumps into the smoke box above the builders plate. They also exhausted through the cab roof with a muffler. On one loco in my stable it does neither and I have been told that it cold also be exhuasted into the ash pan. On my #4 above you can see the Vacuum pot right nder the cab window.
John Caughey said:
Devon Sinsley said:
John
Thank for that diagram. That will help place the ejector. I am starting to get the picture think.As noted the Ejector is located on the engine. It was a stand pipe affair that used a venturi to create a vacuum.
Seen just in front of the cab…
See clear as day!
Info sez good for 10 cars before leaks defeated it.
That other doo-hickey(in the previous pic) is the Diaphragm that pulls the rod.
John
John I have been looking at your photo, do you have a higher resolution photo of this little beauty. I think I am in love. That is just a neat loco and woulf be fun to model for a fictitional logging railroad I have tucked away in my mind.
A Bachmann 2-4-2 would make a great starting point for this loco.
Sorry, she popped up when I was doing an Eames search. There was mention of the Maine 2 footers as a place to get a pic…
My concern was the appliance not the loco.
John
John Caughey said:
Sorry, she popped up when I was doing an Eames search. There was mention of the Maine 2 footers as a place to get a pic…
My concern was the appliance not the loco.
John
thanks anyway. There is enough there to get a good idea. Since it isn’t my prototype I can take the liberty to make it how I want.
John Caughey said:
Sorry, she popped up when I was doing an Eames search. There was mention of the Maine 2 footers as a place to get a pic…
My concern was the appliance not the loco.
John
I wish you wouldn’t have mentioned the Maine two footers. I had never heard of them and it is right down my road. I like the obscure and different and after looking at pictures they are obscure and different. I might just have to make my logging railroad a two foot gauge. In 1:20.3 rails would be 1.18 inches apart. O scale track is 32mm or 1 1/4 inch so would work fine or better yet hand lay some tack and then come down and join my 3 foot in a dual guage scenario. I will have to file this away for further consideration.
Thanks John
Focus, Devon, Focus!! Keep it simple.
There are guys who use 45mm gauge track to represent 2’ gauge. They got that way because they were interested in the Maine 2-footers. Which are very tempting. The little Forneys are notorious for requiring surprisingly wide-radius curves, by the way. I’m not sure why.
Two-foot gauge got its start in Wales with the slate quarries, and there are several equally tempting and well-preserved little railways there.
Those modellers use a scale of 7/8" to the foot. There is even a Yahoo group, which I confess I belong to. I must be out of my mind. But it’s only to lurk and listen in. I don’t recommend that you wander off on this tangent, but if you insist, Here’s the link:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/7-8InchScaleTrains/conversations/messages
But I repeat my former admonition, find your focus, stick with it, and don’t get sidetracked. Enjoy the variety, but know in your heart of hearts, when all’s said and done, where your own real, deepest interest lies.
Ask me how I know this… Cheers!
Devon, I agree with John… Focus! Besides, nearly all of the logging railroads in Washington and Northern Idaho were Standard Gauge, because the logs were just too big for that whimpy narrow gauge stuff.
John and Steve. . . 
Your no fun. But your right I must focus. And the only reason I would stick to doing it in 1:20.3 is so it is still the same scale as the rest of my layout. And yes there is only one narrow gauge in our area that I know of anyway and I am already obsessed with it.
So back on task with the Arch Bar Truck. I have been struggling trying to understand how the actual brakes are applied when the actuator (vacuum pot) sucks in and pulls the rod. I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person but this one is just stumping me. But with that said I think i finally got it. Here is a picture of what I think is going on.
Is this right? I was having trouble with understanding how moving a rod in one direction could apply force in opposite directions as well as allowing movement between the bolster and side frames. The shoe hangers are attached to the side frames to keep them in the same motion as the wheels which means nothing can be attached to the bolster although I do believe by the drawing and pictures I have seen the adjustment is attached to the bolster but is allowed to move up and down so not rigidly attached.
Have I got it figured out finally? If this is so then I can finally say I think I have complete understanding of how a truck works and will model it with confidence. If not please enlighten me.
As we like to say… you are on the right track!
John
The Forneys need wide curves because the drive wheels are ridged to the frame, and the trailing truck swivels under the bunker. That’s why the Manson Bogie was developed. The drive wheels also swivel on a Mason Bogie.
Devon, yes, keep your focus. I kit-bashed a Forney and scratch-built passenger cars for it, then lost my focus and ended up with all kinds of equipment that never ran on the P&CS. If I had kept my focus my layout might be done by now.
Yes I hear you. There is more than enough work to be done for the Coeur d’Alene Railway and Navigation Company. Four locos, two coaches, and a few flats and box cars. and that is just the trains. There is buildings, scenery, track, my trestle. and since I like to scratch build everything focus is a good plan. Oh yeah a steamboat also.
And moving up to the top of the pile quickly is Miks Build Challenge 2015… Have you let Mrs. Clause know about the pin nailer yet?
Dave Taylor said:
And moving up to the top of the pile quickly is Miks Build Challenge 2015… Have you let Mrs. Clause know about the pin nailer yet?
Yes I have let her know I need one. And since we are scratch building Arch Bar trucks for the 2015 challenge I should have a great head start right 
I don’t think I have the skills to build an arch bar truck! I have a hard-enough time building buildings!
Devon Sinsley said:
Dave Taylor said:
And moving up to the top of the pile quickly is Miks Build Challenge 2015… Have you let Mrs. Clause know about the pin nailer yet?
Yes I have let her know I need one. And since we are scratch building Arch Bar trucks for the 2015 challenge I should have a great head start right
Wishful thinking young man!