At 02:42 PM 3/15/01 EST, you wrote:
>In a message dated 01-03-15 07:37:52 EST, you write:
>I purchased some 1/8 od stainless from a local supplier that I bent cold,
Coming from the large scale end of the hobby, where the size of steam
supply passages are a consideration (not a worry, just a consideration) the
feeling is that the steam supply path should be kept as large and
unobstructed as is reasonably possible. I'm still bothered (but not to
the point of losing sleep) seeing the small steam supply lines we use, but
1/8" seems to handle the traffic.
Last year, when breaking down a 0-time Pannier which had refused to
run due to a steam passage blockage, I took the opportunity to drill
additional steam passages in the block, essentially doubling the area, and
to mill relief into the cylinders and heads to provide a completely
unobstructed steam path. Except for blocking off the rear burner nothing
was changed. Its first runs last fall at Larry Herget's were in a word,
astounding, for a new loco, for their length and smoothness. I ain't sayin
it was the erection crew, I ain't sayin it was the engineer, and I ain't
sayin it was the alterations, but SOMETHING sure was different than usual,
as can be attested by those who the runs.
Realistically I doubt whether this alone would have resulted in
such an improved performance on a first outing, at least without treating
everything else all along the steam path, but I'm going to start paying
more attention to steam passages and see what difference, if any, that will
make in other engines.
Cheers,
Harry
