[DKRickman]

For the record, the tender is a seperate car.

I've thought about building this, just for the heck of it.. what does everyone think?
And yes, if I build it, I'll have to make the loco & tender a single rigid unit.. but I'll still make it look like separate cars.

 

[Jerry Barnes]

That's neat! Jerry

 

[Scottychaos]

very cool!
you should definately build it!

I bet you could make it even shorter!
here is my intrepretation of the same engine:

click here for full-size:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/scottychaos/short.jpg

Originally I had it without the pilot truck, but IMO it looks much better with it..much better balanced
(visually and physically) with that little wheel up front..

and the steam dome inside the cab is totally prototypical! many small engines were built that way..
opps..I forgot the bell..was going to mount it on the tender..
a sand dome is not vital..many engines didnt have one.
(another "opps"..I left the sand line in place! (in front of the driver)..oh well..)

I love these little freelance engines!
I photoshopped a few variants on the Big Hauler a few years ago..cant find the pics at the moment,
but here is a photoshopped "short" Bachmann On30 forney:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/scottychaos/2-2-4.jpg

Scot

 

[DKRickman]

Scot,
I love it! Nice job on the Forney.

Did you make that 2-2-0 drawing after mine, or completely on your own? Great minds think alike (or "all s**t runs downhill", as my dad says). I agree that the pilot truck balances the engine, but I just like the idea of an 0-2-0 - see if anyone notices!

I decided to make a smaller narrow gauge version of the loco..
(I've edited this post to reflect having resized the NG image - they're both to the same scale now)

Here's the original, and narrow gauge versions.

I should have shortened the firebox, but it gets the point across, anyway.

 

[vsmith]

Posted By Scottychaos on 08/28/2008 10:34 AM
very cool!
you should definately build it!

" border=0>
I bet you could make it even shorter!
here is my intrepretation of the same engine:

click here for full-size:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/scottychaos/short.jpg
Originally I had it without the pilot truck, but IMO it looks much better with it..much better balanced
(visually and physically) with that little wheel up front..
and the steam dome inside the cab is totally prototypical! many small engines were built that way..
opps..I forgot the bell..was going to mount it on the tender..
a sand dome is not vital..many engines didnt have one.
(another "opps"..I left the sand line in place! (in front of the driver)..oh well..)
I love these little freelance engines!

" border=0>
I photoshopped a few variants on the Big Hauler a few years ago..cant find the pics at the moment,
but here is a photoshopped "short" Bachmann On30 forney:
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u45/scottychaos/2-2-4.jpg
Scot






Theres a prototype for everything:
http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/SanGabrielphoto.jpg
Los Angeles & San Pedro RR #1

 

[CCSII]

It needs four wheels on the engine and four wheels on the tender, or to be a Forney. Try putting a single wheelset on a piece of track and giving it a push!

 

[DKRickman]

Posted By CCSII on 08/28/2008 12:52 PM
It needs four wheels on the engine and four wheels on the tender, or to be a Forney. Try putting a single wheelset on a piece of track and giving it a push!




That, sir, is precisely the reason for making (at least in appearance) an 0-2-0 with a single axle tender - because it's impossible!

As I mentioned in the original post, if I build it, the engine and tender will of course have to be rigidly connected in order to stay on the track. But they can be built to look like separate units, so that at first glance, it looks like a completely impossible machine.

That's why I put it in the "whimsical trains" forum.

 

[Jerry Barnes]

That little motor with a gearbox that Hartland sells would be perfect for it. You can pull off the wheels that are on it and slip on whatever size you want. I have some big 2 3/4" brass ones I got off ebay that would work perfectly for that. I used it on my Rocket Car.

 

[DKRickman]

Jerry,

I was thinking the same thing, but..

What is up with the Hartland web site? I remember having seen such parts there in the past, but all I can get at now are the specials in the members' section, and a single row of pictures and a phone number on the parts section.

 

[cjwalas]

Reminds me of my favorite 0-2-0, based on the Bruce Bates cartoon;
http://www.bates-r-us.org/birdwater/Models/models.htm
You MUST build this!
Chris

 

[CCSII]

Posted By DKRickman on 08/28/2008 1:42 PM
Posted By CCSII on 08/28/2008 12:52 PM
It needs four wheels on the engine and four wheels on the tender, or to be a Forney. Try putting a single wheelset on a piece of track and giving it a push!

That, sir, is precisely the reason for making (at least in appearance) an 0-2-0 with a single axle tender - because it's impossible!
As I mentioned in the original post, if I build it, the engine and tender will of course have to be rigidly connected in order to stay on the track. But they can be built to look like separate units, so that at first glance, it looks like a completely impossible machine.
That's why I put it in the "whimsical trains" forum.




See what happens when you just look at the pictures?

 

[Torby]

Yes! An 0-2-2! Build it!

 

[Guest]

Posted By DKRickman on 08/28/2008 3:16 PM
Jerry,
I was thinking the same thing, but..
What is up with the Hartland web site? I remember having seen such parts there in the past, but all I can get at now are the specials in the members' section, and a single row of pictures and a phone number on the parts section.




They Have changed up operations a "bit" call the phone number for parts...it will give you the specific times he is avail to chat and for you to order...Super Nice Folks!

cale

Nice Idea/Concept BTW!

 

[leftyfretguy]

Scot!
Looks like a good idea for a bagrs!!!! could you build it by Ridge Road?/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue.gif
Matt

 

[Scottychaos]

Posted By leftyfretguy on 08/30/2008 9:55 PM
Scot!
Looks like a good idea for a bagrs!!!! could you build it by Ridge Road?/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue.gif" border=0>
Matt





Sure! no problem! /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/blink.gif

Matt,
are you going to make it out to the train races?

Scot

 

[leftyfretguy]

I will if you have this new bagrs ready!!!! (yes I will be there)

 

[cjwalas]

By way of warning, I'd like to show you a couple of fotos of a foreshortened 0-2-4 I did a couple of years ago. It was originally going to be a 2-2-4 Mason Bogie, but I got lazy!

The reason I show this is because of the especially short rod from the wheel to the valve gear;

BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL! This distance is critical and you can easily wind up with complete binding if you don't watch out! This one works and works well, but it took a bit of fiddling to get it there.
Having said that, I can't wait to see a whole slew of newly modeled foreshortened locos here!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/tongue.gif
Chris

 

[Guest]

i just stumbled on something interesting:

this was the first toy loco ever produced by marklin:

 

[Schlosser]

The toy company Little Tykes put out a ride-on engine-tender plus two cars. The child sat on the tender and 'steered' (read hold on to) the engine. All were one axle outfits but with rigid (vertically) coupling; they could swivel but had to remain level. So an 0-2-0 engine with an 0-2-0 tender is not impossible.

I still have them, battery operated, and kids love to ride them. The wheels run inside the 'rails' of the track so trying to make switches is quite a problem.

Art

 

[Torby]

Didn't they also make a pedal power train that runs on a track? I couldn't convince Susan that the boys needed one. They already had a pedal tractor.