G Scale Model Train Forum banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

· Registered
1,643 Posts
Posted By StanleyAmes on 01/12/2009 7:31 PM
Posted By Dougald on 01/12/2009 9:47 AM


My concern with valve gear is simply ... is the fault on the loco revied just an isolated example and others are correct ... or are all the locos faulty in their assembly
On the issue of kitbashing the loco ... it should be kept in mind that the prototype as proposed is a tiny loco. I do not think that the loco would look scaled correctly with the saddle tanks removed unless the boiler were expanded. In that context the lack of supports and the sizing of the electronics etc should not be an issue. On the other hand if the bashed loco were to represent 1:24 scale then it would be a bigger issue. But is hard to fault the manufacturer for not taking that aspect into account.

Regards ... Doug


Bachmann has a video of the 2-6-6-2 which includes several slow motion shots.


at about 2 minutes there is a good slow motion shot which shows the eccentrics. To me they appear to be working properly and working the same as the prototype video.

In the locomotive I have all 4 eccentrics are the same as in the video and the operation is very smooth.

The photo on the onetotwentypoint me blog shows a very funky eccentric


I am amazed that this locomotive would even operate for a single wheel recolution.

Both the locomotive I have and the one in the Bachmann video were likely assembled by more trained individuals then the typical production locomotive so one would expect fewer problems. Both of these locomotive do provide two examples of how Bachmann intended them to operate.

So if the operation in the video is wrong then they are all wrong. If the operation in the video is correct then the locomotive reviewed is likely an assembly problem which hopefully is an isolated one.

Stan Ames

First off, let me say I don't own one of these engines.
No intention of doing so.
However, I have been following the threads, videos and even the review as posted on the blog.

On your video:
The first part of the video is dark.

Crossing over the paperclip on the track, the front engine has the eccentric pointing forward of the axle.
The rear engine has it pointing aft of the axle.

You even bother to LOOK at the prototype video of 110?
Next, in the Bachmann Video YOU linked:
The "pan" shots down both sides, on white table, no track.
Engineer's side, both eccentrics point.....forward of axle.

On the Fireman's side, lead engine, forward.
You tell me where the rear engine is pointing.

Then, just after the description of the Super Socket, nice, slow pass of the engineer's side.
The reverse links barely pass the horizontal.
And BOTH of them APPEAR to IMPACT the vertical links behind the reverse link proper!

Your statement that the one you and Bachmann have are better assembled is totally flawed.
That means YOU and BACHMANN are showing engines not of the same quality as those sent to the consumer.
How do you think the consumer will feel?

Whoever the Techincal Advisor is needs to be fired.
Obviously doesn't have the expertise to tie his own shoes.
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.