But that wasn’t the prime reason, it was a side effect of the enlarged firebox. But I agree moving the cab all the way forward might have alleviated alot of the problems but probably would have scared the crews in fear of crossing collisions and head-ones.
Michael Moran said:
Stan I don’t think it will be available by then If interested I am a Piko dealer and I am selling them for $400. They did use the motor assembley and tender from their 260 this saved them on retooling all which helped to keep cost down.
Mike
Thanks, Mike… I re-read the first post and realized the release date is in June… However, thought maybe a “pre-release” model would be available for viewing at the ECLSTS…
Recall also that on the SP’s cab forwards, the entire boiler was reversed, so the smokestack was at the rear. Moving the cab all the way forward would put the engineer on one end next to the smokestack and the fireman on the other end. Bad enough having to shout halfway down the boiler, but put the engineer next to the smokestack when the loco’s hauling down the rails? That’s not exactly an environment conducive to effective communication.
Later,
K
True, K, but with a little foresight, they could have built a real cab forward, not a Rube Goldberg contraption. 
Stan they might I have a picture of one from pre production run that may be shipped over for the show It would be in Piko’s booth
Mike
Steve Featherkile said:
I’ve always wondered why they only went half way, when visibility was the issue, and built the Camelback, instead of building a cab forward?
There are actually 2 types of “Camelbacks”
Winans built his to put more weight over the drive wheels to increase tracton
Anthracite burning camel backs were due to the Wooten Boiler which burned the culm (Dusty waste normally not used by the coal mines) This design saved the train operators big bucks back then as they were using what was considered “waste”
I remember reading there was eventual legislation banning them because of mechanical accidents which often ‘wiped out’ the lower part of the cab when they busted a drive rod.
An LGB Porter mod will be my narrow gauge ‘camelback’. No wide firebox but I’m running on a budget too!
Andrew
Vic Smith said:
Steve Featherkile said:
I’ve always wondered why they only went half way, when visibility was the issue, and built the Camelback, instead of building a cab forward?
Visibility was never the issue, it was firebox size. Reading and a few others tried burning anthracite coal which burned slower and hotter than regular coal and was cheaper and more plentiful, but it also required a much larger firebox grate area to burn properly. So much large if left no real room for a cab where the engineer could see forward, so they moved the cab midway on the boiler. Yeah crews hated them, they lived in constant fear of a broken siderod or thrown tire. They were hot as hell in summer and the fireman lived a life of exposed misery. Later almost everyone of them was rebuilt with a regular cab and they just lived with the reduced forward visibility, much the relief of their crews.
Regular sized anthracite coal can burn in any engine, Camelbacks were designed to burn the coal dust which needed to burn in the larger boiler spread out so that it didn’t just get sucked out the exaust with the smoke
More engineers of camelbacks actually died from falling out of the train window trying to ride the window sill then those killed by rods breaking. Was one of the first locos to be required to have a dead mans cut off switch and the reason it was eventually outlawed by the FRA
Naw, would never have worked, that. The wheels ain’t connected up, are they?
tac, who notices these little details.
Another example of the designer knowing that he would never have to operate the durn thing.
Well one thing about it. It is a new type of loco offering. Later RJD
Exactly RJ, I doubt most people that buy LGB and Piko are rivet counters anyways, lol
There is question as to scale of their product well they state on the German site that the G scale line is 1:22.5
Mike
Michael Moran said:
There is question as to scale of their product well they state on the German site that the G scale line is 1:22.5
Mike
They have yet to produce any engines and/or cars that are 1:22.5.
In PIKO’s case my “G - wie Gummi” moniker for such product applies even more deservedly than with LGB.
Well Hans I am only stating what they claim is the scale they are producing. People were asking so I searched and that is what I found
Mike
Michael Moran said:
Well Hans I am only stating what they claim is the scale they are producing. People were asking so I searched and that is what I found
Mike
Mike,
Wasn’t aimed at you! Squarely aimed at yet another mfg who tries to bamboozle the customer with BS. LGB used to claim that they went to great length to research the RhB prototype, but with a very few exceptions they never managed to hit the 1:22.5 scale.
PIKO apparently follows closely in those foot steps.
The real corker is the fact that they manage proper proportions in the smaller scales, but serve up gobbledigook in LS. And the consumer laps it up without a problem and great heaps of money change hands. So it goes!
Much of Piko’s stuff is based on standard gauge prototypes. The European stuff comes in right around the 1:26 mark when compared to the prototype. The 0-6-0, 2-6-0, etc (while freelance) scale out to 1:29 when the model is compared to similar prototypes. Note that European loading gauge (overall size) is smaller than US, hence when the models are enlarged to similar sizes as the US stuff (which is similar size to LGB’s “1:22.5” narrow gauge stuff), the European stuff ends up being a larger scale.
Later,
K
Piko is also using the old MDC/Roundhouse molds for their American freight cars. These were actually 1:32nd scale, or close to 1:32nd. So the rubber scale bounces on.
Exactly; the length is one scale somewhere between 1:24 and 1:32, the width is something different and the height is also different. It all depends which item is compared to the prototype.
A nice example are the “Silberlinge”
length over buffers: prototype 26400mm
lob of HO (1:87): 303mm (303)
lob of G (1:??): 817mm which happens to be 1:32
Back in the Dark Ages of HO it was quite common that the scale of the length would be 1:100 i.e. a 15% error. PIKO’s Silberlinge have a 23% error if one would take 1:26 to be the actual scale. In other words farther back than the HO Dark Ages.
But it doesn’t seem to matter 
to those who are 
.