Hi Jace; I frequently see AF boilers for sale on Ebay and presumably at shows (I haven't looked too hard there), so it isn't necessary to sacrifice a "collectible" engine to get the boiler. Stripped of the cast on detail, many for the AF boilers are pretty accurate. The AF C&NW pacific boiler is probably closer to a real U.S.R.A. boiler and domes than the AM model boiler. I think it would be a heavy rather than a light boiler. The key point was that if people were planning to go through the complication of all or part Hi-rail layouts just to run the AF steam, or planning to change/replace wheels on it, why not use the existing AM drives?
You could scratch build a new boiler from brass or even plastic, but many of us are more comfortable working with existing shapes. I've seen plenty of kitbashed models in HO as well as S that probably were much more work than building the same model from sheet and strip styrene, but the builder was more comfortable starting with an existing car or engine and modifying it. As long as it gets the project done, it's all good. I forgot that the SHS consolidated had such large drivers. If they are the same as a USRA mike, then all the better (except that they become harder to find and more expensive than the brass ones...) John mentioned the BTS models, which provide alternate 2-8-0 and 0-6-0 drives. The older Putt/Rex small steam also shows up once in a while for 0-6-0/2-6-0 or 0-4-0 types. One of the great things about Frank Titman in the Herald was that when he wanted something, he figured out how to make it rather than moaning that someone should produce it commercially. He often used AF parts, together with SSL&S or other scale pieces, and produced may wonderful models that captured the feel of their prototypes even if some dimensions or details were not as precise as a modern Chinese made RTR model. Pieter E. Roos --- On Mon, 11/15/10, JGG KahnSr <[email protected]> wrote: > I must still be foreign to the S scale ethos, but my > initial mental question is "Why bother?" > Those who really LIKE the AF superstructures presumably > like them BECAUSE they are AF, so the more stock they are, > presumably the better. And I suspect there are still > sufficient AF collectors around that only a real junker > would offer > a cost-effective conversion. Anyone with a serious > interest in scale would need to rework the AF > superstructures so > extensively that scratchbuilding would make more sense, as > one would end up with a better result for about the same > effort. People back in the early days of true S scale > did conversions because there really were no alternatives > except the > Rex kits (and AF was more plentiful and inexpensive back > then, too), not because the results were really satisfying. > > The AM locomotives do seem to be relatively > moderately-priced and offer possibilities for cross-kitting > or kit=bashing into > something else, but at even the best prices I've seen for > SHS 2-8-0's, few would want to start major revisions on one > merely > to end up with a freelance product (and I think the E-27's > were already 63" drivers, the same as USRA 2-8-2's, so how > would > that be a "low-drivered" conversion?). > > As always, the problem is S scale is that there are > relatively few steam locomotive types available, other than > brass. The more > I enjoy my two SHS 2-8-0's, the more I am impressed with > Don Thompson's careful choice of prototype as suiting a > major gap > in S scale--a mid-size road locomotive based on a real > locomotive but credible in a number of other road > names. I have turned > over in my mind what a follow-on prototype might be, once > the shake-up in the PRC is over (and the world economic > picture > stabilizes) and he and Mike are again able to think about a > major investment in time and other resources, and it is > surprisingly > hard to come up with one which would fit the merchandising > parameters of S scale. Perhaps USRA types, but I > believe Overland > has done the light 2-8-2 and 0-8-0 and River Raisin is > projecting the 0-6-0. What seems to make the most > sense might be an > SP 0-6-0 like the old Roundhouse/MDC kit, as it is very > different from a USRA but many other prototype roads had > quite similar > pre-WWI small switchers. Everyone pretty much can use > a switcher, but the question might be whether the market > could absorb > a quantitiy of $5-600 ones, as it is doubtful the actual > cost of production for an 0-6-0 would be much less than for > a 2-8-0. > I'd guess that all the research and engineering that went > into the 2-8-0 would be transferable to another steam > locomotive, requiring > only (ONLY?) research on a specific prototype and then > cutting the new dies. > > Jace Kahn > > General Manager > Ceres & Canisteo RR Co./Champlain County Traction Co. ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
