# 4-6-0 configuration



## clemshpk (Jul 15, 2010)

Through some research on the I find the train used for Petticoat Junction, The Wild Wild West and Back to the Future part 3 is a 4-6-0 Locomotive operated at Sierra Railroad, Jamestown, California; manufactured by Rogers Locomotive and Machine Works. It is different as there is a larger gap between the 2nd and 3rd set of drivers. There seems to be lots of HO locos with this configuration but I have never seen one in large scale. Has anyone any info of one either currently manufactured or out of production?


----------



## Treeman (Jan 6, 2008)

Take a look at Accucraft Moguls.


----------



## joe rusz (Jan 3, 2008)

Number 3 is a standard gauge locomotive(4 feet, 8-1/2 inches), not a narrow gauge (3 feet, mostly) engine. And it runs on the Sierra Railway, not Railroad, which is another line. True, Accucraft has just introduced a 10-wheeler based on a Southern Pacific protoype, but it too is narrow (3-ft) gauge. From the photo on the Accucraft site I couldn't tell if it has that same, unusual wheel spacing (3rd driver father away from 2nd, than 1st). Bachmann makes a Mogul (2-6-0) with the same wheel spacing, so if ya can change out the pilot truck, maybe you could make yerself a 4-6-0.


----------



## Michael Glavin (Jan 2, 2009)

I'm very confident the engine used in the TV series of The Wild West was in fact a 4-4-0... I don't recall what was used for the movie. Sounds like a 4-6-0. 

Michael


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

No one has made a 4-6-0 with the uneven driver spacing in large scale. Hartland and Bachmann both make 2-6-0s with the wider spacing between the #2 and #3 axles, but that's as close as we get. 

Later, 

K


----------



## DKRickman (Mar 25, 2008)

I'll chime in, too. I can't answer the question of model availablility (sound slike others have done so adequately), but on the subject of the real thing... 

The engine used in the Wild West movie was definitely a 4-4-0 - she resides in the B&O museum in Baltimore, MD when not living the life of a Hollywood star. 

The wide spacing between the #2 and #3 axles was not unusual or odd in any way. It's an older design - essentially it's a 4-4-0 (which had the firebox between the main axles) stretched with an extra axle up front. Newer designs, particularly those built with a wide, shallow coal burning firebox and those built at a time when folks weren't paranoid about keeping the CG as low as possible, could have the drivers equally spaced because the firebox was over the rear axle instead of in front of it. 

If all you want is something similar, you could move the rear axle back on a Bachmann Big Hauler or Annie (make new or modified side rods, of course). If you want an accurate model of Sierra Ry. #3, then I suggest you read through the various MasterClasses and start construction of your own. It's not that hard, and the results are worth it.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

you could move the rear axle back on a Bachmann Big Hauler or Annie 
Errr... I guess you could, but that's the driven axle and therefore is the trickiest one to move. I looked long and hard at that operation in order to make an EBT 4-6-0, which also had the wide gap due to the firebox between the two rear axles. 











As you like pics, here's the three old steamers at the B&O, with the 'Wild West' 4-4-0 (actually "William Mason".)


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 16 Jul 2010 07:38 AM 
you could move the rear axle back on a Bachmann Big Hauler or Annie 
Errr... I guess you could, but that's the driven axle and therefore is the trickiest one to move. I looked long and hard at that operation in order to make an EBT 4-6-0, which also had the wide gap due to the firebox between the two rear axles. 















instead of moving the rear driver backwards..how about moving the middle and front drivers forward!  that should be fairly easy..just need a new longer connecting rod, a frame and boiler extension, then whatever mods you want to do.. rear driver mechanism is essentially untouched.. some very quick and dirty photoshopping:


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

Scott, 

You are probably on the right track, but given all the mechanical issues, like the screws for attaching the boiler to the frame, it would be easier to keep the frame where it is and move the back axle under the cab. 

I finally figured out how the motor and axle are held in - there's a pin through the gearbox under to footplate - you just knock it out with a rod. The coupling rods can be extended with some brass square/rect tube with pins through them.

So how about a 2-8-0 instead?


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Pete Thornton on 17 Jul 2010 09:56 AM 
Scott, 

You are probably on the right track, but given all the mechanical issues, like the screws for attaching the boiler to the frame, it would be easier to keep the frame where it is and move the back axle under the cab. 




maybe..but its really hard to say which would be "easier"..
you could still keep all those boiler attachments though..
basically think of it this way:

"cut the locomotive in half between the middle and last driver,
expand the two halves away from each to create a gap of an inch or so..fill in the space with new frame and boiler extensions."

virtually everything on either side of the cut can remain as it was..

thats a simplification obviously..but thats the basic gist of my idea..

Scot


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

basically think of it this way: 

"cut the locomotive in half between the middle and last driver, 
expand the two halves away from each to create a gap of an inch or so..fill in the space with new frame and boiler extensions." 

virtually everything on either side of the cut can remain as it was.. 

thats a simplification obviously..but thats the basic gist of my idea.. 

Hmm... Having chopped a few of these around, I'd say that's way overkill.










From this pic, you can see the slot that the axles occupy - the bottom plate holds it in. All the firebox parts are nicely moulded, and the screws for the cab/boiler go through the holes in the top.

It would be easy just to cut a new slot for the axle further back, and make a new hole for the pin holding the gearbox in alignment with the frame. Trim the sand lines so they clear the wheels, extend the pickups on the bottom plate, trim the stuff behind the axle to clear the gears, and you're done. Except for the rods, of course.


----------



## Tom Leaton (Apr 26, 2008)

I would not do it. It would be simpler, and more in line with history, to take a Bachmann spectrum woodburner 2-6-0 and give it a longer front end. The drive wheel spacing would already be correct. 
I suspect that you don't see a lot of these modeled because, on mainline railroads in the US, the irregular drive wheel was a short-lived transitional design. These locos were soon replaced with larger engine types. 
Further, I would not try to re-space the axles of a Big Hauler in the way the photos suggest because, as shown, the result would have the wide driver space too far forward of the firebox location. Instead, look at a narrow gauge D&RG 4-6-0 as an example of typical between-the-drivers firebox location. 
Just my 2 cents 

Tom


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Tom Leaton on 17 Jul 2010 11:48 AM 
I would not do it. It would be simpler, and more in line with history, to take a Bachmann spectrum woodburner 2-6-0 and give it a longer front end. 




Not if your goal is to model this: 











The Big Hauler is clearly a much better starting point than the Spectrum mogul..
it all depends on what you are trying to model..

someone simply wondered how a Big Hauler could be converted to that style of driver spacing..
a few good options have been presented..
the much older (older prototype) Spectrum mogul doesnt really apply, for this specific discussion.. 

only because of the goal of the 'bash..

but for a different prototype, yes, the spectrum mogul could probably be converted into a 10-wheeler..
but even then, there would have to be some frame stretching to slide in the extra pilot wheelset..
so some cutting and elongating would have to happen either way..Mogul or Big hauler..
so using the Mogul isnt necessarily any simpler..just different..




Scot


----------



## BarrysBigTrains (Sep 4, 2008)

I have built all of the versions you have mentioned.

Some years ago I received a batch of SS laser cut siderods which had been done wrong, two of the axle openings were too close together. I sent them back for the correct type, but saved a few and they ended up with Dave Goodson (TOC).

And I believe he still has those locos today.

Because I build a chassis in a custom aluminum extrusion I can build any wheel set up you like. Early on I couldn't build the proper siderods for the wheel layout, but now I can, including mainrods of any dimension, and variations on the valving.

It costs a bit more, but can be done, including 2-6-2, 4-4-0, 2-6-0, 2-8-0, etc. Of course all of these are repowered as well.


Barry - BBT


----------



## clemshpk (Jul 15, 2010)

I stand corrected on the use of a 4-6-0 and a 4-4-0 in the TV Show Wild Wild West... 

For the pilot episode, "The Night of the Inferno," the producers used Sierra Railroad No. 3, a 4-6-0 locomotive that was, fittingly, an anachronism: it was built in 1891, and Grant left office in 1877. Footage of this train, with a 5 replacing the 3 on its number plate, was shot in Jamestown, California. Best known for its role as the Hooterville Cannonball in the CBS series Petticoat Junction, Sierra No. 3 probably appeared in more films and TV shows than any other locomotive in history. It was built by the Rogers Locomotive and Machine Works in Paterson, New Jersey. 

When The Wild Wild West went into series production, however, an entirely different train was employed. The locomotive, a 4-4-0 named the Inyo, was built in 1875 by the Baldwin Locomotive Works in Philadelphia. Originally a wood-burner, the Inyo was converted to oil in 1910. The Inyo, as well as the express car and the passenger car, originally served on the Virginia and Truckee Railroad in Nevada. They were among V&T cars sold to Paramount Pictures in 1937â€"38. The Inyo appears films including High, Wide, and Handsome (1938), Union Pacific (1939), The Marx Brothers' Go West (1940), Meet Me in St. Louis, (1944), Red River (1948), Disney's The Great Locomotive Chase (1956) and McLintock! (1963). For The Wild Wild West, Inyo's original number plate was temporarily changed from No. 22 to No. 8 so the train footage could be flipped horizontally without the number appearing reversed. Footage of the Inyo was shot around Menifee, Calif., and reused in many episodes. (Stock footage of Sierra No. 3 occasionally resurfaced as well.)


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

If you are not that big on rivit counting I'd go with the Bachman Big Hauler. There should be plants around to use for the bash and cheap. I have one that would make a good candidate for such a conversion. Later RJD


----------

