Murph, two C-19s, D&RGW 340 and RGS 41, are alive and well at Knott’s Berry Farm in Buena Park, California. Some great photo ops there, if you’re willing to pay to see 'em. Maybe if you talk to the right people, ya might get a tour or something, as happened one year when the Big Train Show was still at the Queen Mary.
EBT #7 is a “C-19” but looks very different. I believe the WP&Y had three of them, very similar. Carson & Colorado #13 looks the same.
Still Colorado, but 346 was leased to the C&S. I’ve never seen a picture of it with C&S lettering, though it appears the D&RGW logos were painted out on the tender. She was wrecked and rebuilt by the C&S. Interesting note, there’s evidence she was equipped with “half” flanges on the center two “blind” drivers.
One interesting example was a locomotive built for the London, South Park, and Leadville Railroad in Colorado in 1883, which was repossessed, and sold to the Black Hills & Fort Pierre in South Dakota, and finally shipped to the CB&Q in Kansas.
I’m doing some research on the London, South Park, and Leadville Railroad, and I’ve driven the roadbed. All 2 miles of it, including the connection to the C&S in Alma Junction. It certainly appears to have been another C-19 clone.
Robert
EBT #7, close to “as delivered”
(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/eastbroadtop/EBT7/EBT708.jpg)
Earliest known photo after it was sold to the Ohio River & Western, where it became their #14, later #9669 when the PRR took full control.
(http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/eastbroadtop/EBT7/EBT709.jpg)
Here’s a link to some similar locos on the White Pass - scroll down to #5 http://home.comcast.net/~WPYphotos/early-steam/early-steam.html Also the Pacific Coast Railway had two, Tweetsie had one, Uintah, … Lots of 'em. Some slight variation in dome placement, driver spacing, etc., but all can be very easily modeled with this loco. If you’re a freelancer, let your imagination run wild! Later, K
Hi
C-19 345 was used in the train crash scene in the movie Denver and Rio Grande along with C-18 319.
It would appear that 345 was used as a stunt double for 268 and painted in the Bumble Bee color scheme, however it probably carried the number 268 and not 345 as depicted by Bachmann.
Try googling the movie there is all sorts of information around. http://www.blackstonemodels.com/new/c19/c19historyind.php?l=345 for one.
Mick
Thanks, Kevin.
I think I like the one on the far right of the WP links … with the KMR boxcar. The cab just seems so … tiny on the originals. Same is true of the EBT … once it goes to the steel cab it looks a lot friendlier to me.
Chaps,
The C-19 was the Baldwin 10-26 E class, drawing 2. That means these were the 2nd design of the Baldwin 2-8-0 with 16" cylinders, thats all that means. Its a standard design, used pretty much identically across a lot of roads, and some additional with minor changed such as the drawing 5 version. They were only minorly customised in the ordering process with regard to paint, tender, brakes, wheel diameter and headlight sizes, plus other finishes issues, like brass or polished steel etc. The specs pretty clearly show the customised elements.
I’ve uploaded a drawing of paint style 103 from the book I’m working on, which coincidentally shows the D&RG 10-26 E dr2 (C-19!) on the same page as the EBT 2-8-0 of the exact same class and drawing. You can see as far as as-built, the two engines were very close in design, with only minor cosmetic differences including paint, even though both used style 103, the EBT’s version was closer to style 50, since they kept the wheel art. The EBTs paint style really represents an earlier paint style over the more modern D&RG paint scheme - the D&RG’s engines look like this EBT verison a couple of years before. The tenders are obviously different, but not much else.
As to the C-18, a whole different class, which reflect more the change in NG design than anything else. The C-18s were from the mid 1890s, with the main axle as the 3d axle, with much less angular movement of the main rod = greater proportion of the piston action to actual engine performance, mostly bought about by change in firebox design concept over those 15 years which enabled the power axle to be moved to the 3rd axle. The axle spacing of the C-19 reflects the 1880 engineering, placement of main rod and eccentrics, as does the wheels spacing of the C-18 from 15 years later.
Here is the link to the Class 70 and EBT 2-8-0 as built. enjoy the picture. If you find a load of faint grey construction lines over the drawing, close the drawing but leave adobe open, then re-open the drawing and the colours will come back solid and clear. Its a quirk I’ve not gotten to the bottom of!
Here is the link to the PDF:http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/davidfletcher/Style%20103-2-8-0-1880%20Model%20(1).pdf
David.
PS I might even have a go at back dating the Bachmann model, that ‘as-built style’ with the planished iron and polished steel bands is pretty slick!
Doubled up message for some reason.
Quote:Thanks for the drawings! I agree, a backdated C-19 might definitely be in the cards. I got the diamond stack already. (I never noticed it was delivered with a diamond stack.) Yet another "look" in the life of #7. She's up to at least 5 now.
I might even have a go at back dating the Bachmann model, that 'as-built style' with the planished iron and polished steel bands is pretty slick!
Later,
K
Robert Murphy said:
C-19 345 was never painted in the bumblebee scheme. C-18 #319 was painted in the bumblebee scheme, number #268, and used as a stand in for the real C-16 Bumblebee and was recked for the movie. The C-19 series, all ten of them, were built by Baldwin in 1881, the C-18’s are all ex-F&CC locomotives purchased when that railroad went under, and were built in 1895, 1896, and 1897. For those that didn’t know, C-19 #346 is alive and well at the Colorado Railroad Museum, and by alive and well, I mean still steamed up once a month and used to pull trains! Pretty good for an old girl who’s over 130 years old! BTW, Caboose Hobbies price is $874.44. Robert
Robert Actually there were three locomotives painted up for the movie. C19 345 shows up twice in the movie as a stunt double for C16-268. Once in the rock slide scene and the second time in the head on crash with 319. Its real hard to tell the C-16 and C-19 apart. The only tell tail sign is that the 345 has fluted domes. The first photo is one of C-16 268
(http://www.tttrains.com/largescale/images/C-16.jpg)
The second photo is of C-19 345 at the end of her life.
(http://www.tttrains.com/largescale/images/C-19-1.jpg)
Its a great movie Stan Ames
Kevin Strong said:
It’ll be interesting to see one side-by-side with a 4-6-0. I think it’s going to dwarf the 4-6-0. I know the cab on the C-19 I’m scratchbuilding is a fair chunk larger than the 4-6-0 cab, being taller and wider by nearly 3/4" or more. I don’t have a built-up 4-6-0 to compare, but when I put the cab and boiler next to my C-19, it towers over it. My model is a good bit larger than my 4-4-0 and 2-6-0, which (in my opinion) are at the upper size limit in terms of 1:20.3 stuff that still “looks good” with the 1:22 and 1:24 equipment. … K
I can take a pic if you want - both (Accucraft C-19 and original Big Hauler) are right here on the shelves. Here’s my Accucraft C-19 disguised as EBT #7.
Stan, it might be a good movie, but I’d probably cry at the part where the loco is wrecked…
BTW, the C-18 class were locomotives bought from the Florence and Cripple Creek when that line went under. They weren’t ordered by the D&RG.
Robert
I have to say that I think this is a great model from Bachmann. Sure Accucraft did one, but you can only find them in the resale market now, because I’m pretty sure Accucraft sold them out.
I see this being a great locomotive for people to bash with. I for one will probably purchase one for the idea of modifying it to resemble a Black Hills & Ft Pierre or Deadwood Central 2-8-0. I would definately not cut up my Accucraft C-19 for the same purpose!!!
We should be happy, not too long ago I read many people lamenting about no new products in the Large Scale Market. Well Bachmann has answered your call with this and quite a few others and at lower prices. Good for Bachmann.
Well i guess i am one of the first to get one of these and i thought i would share some pictures of C-19 RGS #40 next to an Accucraft RGS #41 shown sitting outside my yet to be finished Silverton Northern engine house
(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/rgsnh/C191d.jpg)
(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/rgsnh/C193d.jpg)
(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/rgsnh/C1906.jpg)
(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/rgsnh/C192d.jpg)
I can not run it yet as my Airwire and Phonix Stuff is still in Transit here is a shot at the board
(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/rgsnh/C194d.jpg)
and the tender fan-just bairly
(http://freightsheds.largescalecentral.com/users/rgsnh/C195d.jpg)
Suffice to say that there is not a lot of room for batteries in the tender, so i think the Bachman electronics will have to go along with some of there steel weights the big test will be to see if the speeds come close to matching so it can double head or be a midtrain helper Of note there were few loose pieces in the box, the sand dome lid handle is a very loose fit, as is the steam dome cap. the whisle and pop valves are the only items that seem to be out of scale when compared to the Accucraft model. on item that has me puzzled is a sloped extension offf the front of the running board, not there on any of the prototype photos i have looked at to date, maybe something on the Knotts engines? The connectors between tender and loco also do not have the nasty retainer clip that we have on the K27. the cab sunshades i think will need some work for me to get in the house as the stick out further than the K27 also.
There generally is not a lot of room for batteries when you add in all that extraneous garbage. Every customer who ever brought or sent me a loco from that manufacturer with that stupid space hogging stuff in it demanded I remove it. Most folks think I just removed it because I believe it stupid…but, I stocked plug-in units for them, and I still have every one of them. NOBODY wanted it.
One can only wonder at how many engines have not been sold because folks don’t want the extra stuff in it.
Reminds me of the thread on passenger cars, and how some folks want a basic car. No way with this outfit! You get all the doodads whether you want them or not.
I do have a lot of fun with newbies who come by at an operating session, and the discussion turns towards the Ames Super Socket With Integrate Production Electronics, and they don’t know…so I dig the box out and hand them one.
Appalled, every one of the are.
Al Pomeroy said:
Well i guess i am one of the first to get one of these and i thought i would share some pictures of C-19 RGS #40 next to an Accucraft RGS #41 shown sitting outside my yet to be finished Silverton Northern engine houseSuffice to say that there is not a lot of room for batteries in the tender, so i think the Bachman electronics will have to go along with some of there steel weights
the big test will be to see if the speeds come close to matching so it can double head or be a midtrain helper.
Al
RCS of New England has installed RC in the Bachmann C-19 using their plug in board and thus Don has some experience with Battery placement. I believe he kept the weights.
Don uses standard Battery packs and 12 NiCads will likely provide the best performance.
The tenders have two posts. One for the short shell and one for the long shell. I believe Don removed the undeeded post. You can also likely remove the Fan in the tender as I doubt you will need it.
I do not use standard packs and instead use individual cells with tabs and had plently of room.
There are also extra posts in one of your bags to raise the board which also gives you a lot more room.
I am sure Don Sweet can provide you some assistance in battery selection and placement.
Also the QSI Titan board plugs in the socket and works well with Airwire.
Hope that helps
Stan
Oh Boy ! TOC and Stan back on the same post. Just like old times…
Stan Ames said:
AlRCS of New England has installed RC in the Bachmann C-19 using their plug in board and thus Don has some experience with Battery placement. I believe he kept the weights.
Don uses standard Battery packs and 12 NiCads will likely provide the best performance.
The tenders have two posts. One for the short shell and one for the long shell. I believe Don removed the undeeded post. You can also likely remove the Fan in the tender as I doubt you will need it.
I do not use standard packs and instead use individual cells with tabs and had plently of room.
There are also extra posts in one of your bags to raise the board which also gives you a lot more room.
I am sure Don Sweet can provide you some assistance in battery selection and placement.
Also the QSI Titan board plugs in the socket and works well with Airwire.
Hope that helps
Stan
Amazing.
So, the one person who made the statement long ago that we all needed to go to one socket (or which there are what, three versions?) so we wouldn’t have to use “high priced installers”, and we now have to use someone to install the stuff?
Individual cells?
So much for dropping in a pre-made pack, eh?
How many boards does QSI have to mate with all the various versions of the Ames Super Socket With Integrated Production Electronics? Including the original designed by Lewis?
Never ask the question unless you know the answer, right?
Except I have all the e-mails.
Congrats Al, I am soooo Jealous!!!
Can we NOT get into this? Im about done with the bitching and crap posts from EVERYBODY on MY forums. Play nice. Im about ready to pull the plug on the whole site. ENOUGH!