G Scale Model Train Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Am I the only one who has noticed that there is a slope to the Cab Forward?  If you look at it from a side ways profile you will see that smoke box is higher than the fire box, maybe 1/4" or more....For now I just painted out the white walkway stripe.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
True, most likely do to the piping and the very large coupling connections under the smokebox.  Might be able to adjust to bring it with in reason as to being more level headed.  One the list of retrofits and adjustments for us.

EDIT:

After taking a second look, it seems that the very small discrepancy in boiler height is caused by a combination of the pilot truck not sharing an equal amount of weight distribution (baiscally it is loafing around the track, serving no purpose) and the saddle holding the rear engine causing this slight rise.  Granted that a 0.25" rise in the boiler equates to 8" in real life, which there is a high probability that this was done to keep the crownsheet covered while traversing the grades on donner pass.  Much like the angled boilers on Cog-rail engines (think Mt. Washington).  More to the point, why should we be concerned about this small discrepancy in the boiler slope?  This is a case of rivet counting at best, something that should be taken in moderate doses. 
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
" EDIT:
After taking a second look, it seems that the very small discrepancy in boiler height is caused by a combination of the pilot truck not sharing an equal amount of weight distribution (baiscally it is loafing around the track, serving no purpose) and the saddle holding the rear engine causing this slight rise.  Granted that a 0.25" rise in the boiler equates to 8" in real life, which there is a high probability that this was done to keep the crownsheet covered while traversing the grades on donner pass.  Much like the angled boilers on Cog-rail engines (think Mt. Washington).  More to the point, why should we be concerned about this small discrepancy in the boiler slope?  This is a case of rivet counting at best, something that should be taken in moderate doses.  "


I love the "rivet counting" term that seems to always be applied by folks who for one don't even recognize discrepancies and or just don't give a crap about them. But there is a difference between Aristo-Craft and Accucraft, not to mention the extra '0' in the price. And that line about the "crownsheet covered while traversing the grades on donner pass" is total B.S.!!!

Try again toy people!   
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,378 Posts
Discrepancies- well, they happen all the time in our scale from screws to height of the pilot height off the rails.  Some of which are helpful in function others based on restriction of ability to manufacturer a part.  For example, the cab forward never had a safety in the cab.  My understanding is the cab safety was a result of modelers feedback wanting the turret to be more prototypical on the top of boiler.   Thus the "rivet counters" put into place a discrepancy.

So one must determine the priorities relative to function and/or fashion.  This requires a realistic look at the situation to determine if a correction is necessary or possible.  In this case, if one was to drop the smokebox gap that quarter of an inch then the piping under the smokebox door will rub and prevent movement of the boiler and monkey deck.

It is one thing to point a finger at discrepancy, that is easy to do.  What is much more productive is to convey the solution both in regards to function and/or fashion.

As to the slight tilt of a boiler to protect the crown sheet, sounds logical going up grade but I have no idea if SP would have factored in a slight alignment for areas such a Donner Pass or any portion of their various routes it would be easily done based on the saddle for the front (smoke box) engine.   To determine that one would have to get under the boiler and measure several reference points firebox to smokebox on level trackage (or have access to the builder/shop plans as to actual installation).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
RE: AC-12 Cab Forward "slope"

Discrepancies- well, they happen all the time in our scale from screws to height of the pilot height off the rails. Some of which are helpful in function others based on restriction of ability to manufacturer a part. For example, the cab forward never had a safety in the cab. My understanding is the cab safety was a result of modelers feedback wanting the turret to be more prototypical on the top of boiler. Thus the "rivet counters" put into place a discrepancy.

So one must determine the priorities relative to function and/or fashion. This requires a realistic look at the situation to determine if a correction is necessary or possible. In this case, if one was to drop the smokebox gap that quarter of an inch then the piping under the smokebox door will rub and prevent movement of the boiler and monkey deck.

It is one thing to point a finger at discrepancy, that is easy to do. What is much more productive is to convey the solution both in regards to function and/or fashion.

As to the slight tilt of a boiler to protect the crown sheet, sounds logical going up grade but I have no idea if SP would have factored in a slight alignment for areas such a Donner Pass or any portion of their various routes it would be easily done based on the saddle for the front (smoke box) engine. To determine that one would have to get under the boiler and measure several reference points firebox to smokebox on level trackage (or have access to the builder/shop plans as to actual installation).


Do you have one of these Cabs?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
684 Posts
RE: AC-12 Cab Forward "slope"

Well, seeing as how Charles happens to be my father, and I am staring the engine in the nose, so to speak, then yes, we do have one of these, an AC-11 to be more exact. The search button is your friend, see my review of the AC-12 that arrived in my shop for R&D.

Since you seem to think that my opinion is nothing more than...as you quote, BS... then perhaps you would care to live up to your panhandle and enlighten me on the subject of non-sloped boilers, of which nearly every engine had some sort of slope to the boiler to accommodate for fluctuations in the chassis. I cannot claim great knowledge on the subject of sloped boilers, only I do know that they were most likely put in place on many engines, although unnoticeable to the untrained eye. Looking at the running boards creates an optical illusion that can cause one to think that the boiler is not on the level, and measuring a thin piece of flat metal, sure to develop some sort of bowing and warping, is just as inaccurate. Should you wish to be more of a rivet counter, than perhaps you should measure from the center of the boiler diameter to the base of the rail to get more accurate data.

To reiterate what was said previously, if you are a true stickler for scale, then perhaps you should gut the whole cab and make a scale working backhead. I'll take function over fit any day.

I love the "rivet counting" term that seems to always be applied by folks who for one don't even recognize discrepancies and or just don't give a crap about them. But there is a difference between Aristo-Craft and Accucraft, not to mention the extra '0' in the price.


Where did you get that I was turning this into a manufacturers debate? Last I checked, I do have a working knowledge around steam and the various manufacturers in this hobby, some of which have long disappeared from the scene. I DO recognize the slight discrepancy in our engine, but am I going to do anything about it? Probably not. To call me full of **** when you have obviously not given any solid evidence as to the prototypical accuracy or inaccuracy, is B.S. all by itself.


EDIT:

I got around to taking out my drafting tools, and got my large caliper and builders square out.  The boiler itself is Perfectly level, save for a 1/32" tolerance difference in my tools.  The problem lies within the running boards, as I stated above.  There is a 0.25 ince rise in the running board starting just before the cylinders on the front engine and running to the smokebox. 
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,378 Posts
SPGeek
I believe this link will clarify our effort to address the discrepancies of this worthy offering  by Accucraft:

http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/forumid/11/postid/4091/view/topic/Default.aspx

At this point we are working to develop radiant burner tents, better truck bolts and nuts, upgrade of the oiler for better flow to both engines, etc. 

I wish you well with your Cab Forward and the desire to change the apparent slope in accordance to your need to make it more accurate according to your standards.  My standards are more to the nature of functional abilities which are good at this point but can be made better.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,054 Posts
First of all, I don't know how any one can compare an Aristocraft piece of plastic junk with a maginificent machine like the Accucraft Cab Forward.  There ain't no comparison period.

Secondly, before I would start criticizing a model I believe I would do my research into the prototype and get some accucrate data.  Cab Forward models have been made in pratically every scale imaginable in both brass and plastic by numerous manufacturers so there should be plenty of information out there.  I personally don't care about fractions of fractions of an inch in deviation.  I have seen the model perform at Diamond and looked it over in detail and it's simply a georgous piece of work.  Accucraft worked on this engine for years before bringing it into production.

If you really want to count rivets here is the link to the drawings.  However, I doubt anyone that thinks Aristocraft compares to Accucraft would spring for plans costing $214.  

http://www.livesteamlocomotives.com/drawings/sp_ac-12_4-8-8-2.htm
 

·
TDY to Earth
Joined
·
1,483 Posts
RE: AC-12 Cab Forward "slope"

SP Geek

Since the product in question is not up to your exacting personal standards and expectations, and apparently the only immediate solution to this terrible latent defect of the product is to paint over a white stripe, I offer the following solution:

Box up the piece of junk and ship it to me. I will be more than happy to be the owner of two "crummy" Accucraft Cab Forwards. I will be delighted to compenste you $4000 US, since obviously, IYHO, it isn't worth nearly what you paid for it. Be happy that you are being offered such a generous amount.

Smile

Dr Rivet
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
RE: AC-12 Cab Forward "slope"

First of all Ryan, I don't think that your opinion is B.S.....In fact you are the only person who gave a very probable explanation as to why the smoke box end of the Cab Forward is stuck in the air an extra 1/4", as you had pointed out due to the "piping and the very large coupling connections under the smokebox". I just hate the term "Rivet counting", but to you my apologies.

Secondly John, I do know and have done my "research" regarding this engine. I have been a Southern Pacific freak since I could walk, believe me....I know SP equipment. And the comment about Aristo was just an example. (I just expected this engine to be proportioned)

And lastly Jim (AKA Dr. Rivet) No Sir you cannot have this Cab of mine for it would give you two of them and quite frankly that is just being a little to greedy don't ya think.......hahaha...........Not to mention that I love this piece of machinery, I really do.

FINAL STATEMENT --------------------------------------> I am just looking for some advice on how to correct this little problem.

Thank you
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
352 Posts
RE: AC-12 Cab Forward "slope"

SPgeek, how about telling us something about yourself? If your looking for help, that would be a good start. You seem to know about others posting here. Maybe we would like to know about you. Anyway, welcome aboard.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top