Hi Guys:
Has anyone a Little Hauler locomotive bash to post?
Question:
The steam cylinders appear to be too far forward as they stack is not in line with the steam cylinders.
Can the steam cylinders be moved aft such that they then will line up with the stack?
Thanks,
Norman
I don’t think there is any reason why the cylinders have to line up with the stack. They do have to line up with the drive wheel centerline.
Barry
Hi Barry:
I have not seen any prototype locomotive photos where the stack is not at the mid point of the cylinder length.
It is just that the Bachmann stack placement looks “funny”.
Maybe the stack could be moved forward and the headlamp placed on a platform.
Norman
The stack typically was centered above the cylinders for purposes of exhaust steam–as the exhaust steam ejecting vertically was used to generate draft through the boiler, a straight exhaust upwards from the cylinder block was much more efficient than anything else. It is possible that some locomotives did not have the cylinders aligned with the stack, but I don’t specifically recall any examples of such.
before I think about getting rambunctious with bashing the appearance, I’m waiting on reports of whether the drive is decent or made of that famous B’mann crumbly cheese.
It became the custom from the very earliest years for efficiency’s sake to align the stack vertically to the blast pipes, as Robbie has indicated. Our familiarity with this arrangement has since made it a matter of aesthetics as well. Here’s a web page with some very early locos on it, including the ‘Planet’ type - all share this feature. Aside from the ‘Rocket’, which pointedly did not comply with the pattern, you can’t get much earlier than that… (Scroll down.)
Hi guys:
what is the Bachmann order number for the old 1:22.5 version of the Porter ?
I am interested in bashing a Little Hauler into a Disneyland Ward Kimball 2-4-4T style of loco.
I just want the look of the loco. Exact replica is not the objective.
The Bachmann boiler appears to be a larger diameter than the Ward Kimball which is just fine with me.
The cab is correct.
The previous MIDWEST Quarry & Mining Co. Porter model had the smoke box positioned correctly.
The Little Hauler smokebox has been pulled aft, why did Lee Riley do this when a new mold was required to be produced for the Little Hauler boiler anyhow?
Why mess up the location of the smoke stack?
Photos on gscalecentral show the axle gear to be not metal.
I think the Little Hauler loco drive is intended to pull the two short passenger cars from the train set so I guess the drive is plenty strong for the intended purpose.
Of course, once adult hobbyists start adding weight to the model and hauling long consists … who knows if the drive will stand up.
I guess the solution is to remove the stack base, wrap the smokebox and then remount the stack at the correct location with an oil box headlamp.
I just do not understand why such a major design error occured.
Norman
Hi John:
The tunnel history is interesting.
I cannot figure out why the Little Hauler smoke stack placement was messed up.
Norman
Why? to keep the loco short and the headlight mount still sturdy. it’s a toy for little kids, not a model
I have added siderods and new pistons from a regular Big Hauler and handrails to the tender version. I was trying to make one ready for the next GTE but since I am not able to go this time my drive to finish it kinda fell by the wayside. I have on this same loco changed out the tender wheels to BBs and added a link /pin coupler front and rear. Once I was finished with the backhead I was going to post some pics. Maybe i’ll post pics a little earlier now.
Hi guys:
Can anyone provide the follwing measurements?
Hawaiian 2-4-2 Columbia or 2-6-0 Industrial Mogul loco:
smoke box diameter
smoke box length
boiler length
cab side body length
Little Hauler loco with short tender:
smoke box diameter
smoke box length
boiler length
cab side body length
Victor, I would be interested in viewing pics of your little hauler upgrade.
Thank you,
Norman