# A look at Bachmann K-27, Accucraft K-27 and Kiss K-36



## TOM_1/20.3 (Mar 28, 2013)

Hello Everyone,

My collection has expanded somewhat. Yesterday the Kiss K-36, that I had bid on on eBay, arrived.

Although not quite the same model I wanted to see how it stacked up to my Bachmann K-37 and Accucraft K-37.




When I first took the K-36 out of the original box (locomotive was screwed to the base from below with 4 screws), I thought some of the journal covers were missing.

Here the lead truck: 












Upon closer examination I however realized that they were on hinges and had just flipped up. 










In comparison the Bachmann with plain steel wheels












and Accucraft with black center wheels











All four driving axels have flanged wheels, however since three of the four can slide sideways the minimum negotiable radius is only 75cm (2 and 1/2 feet). Bachmann is similar with flanges. The Accucraft has no flanges on the two center drive axels. Both however require 120 cm (4 foot) radius.


The weight of the Kiss is about 11.5 kg (25 lbs), Accucraft is heavier at 13 kg (28.5 lbs).

Although the Kiss is supposedly only 1/22.5 scale, the difference is not really noticeable. Measurements show the frame width is 5 and 1/4 inches, same as the Bachmann. Accucraft's is 5 and 3/8 inches. Tender width are the same at about 4 and 1/2 inches.

Anyone know if the Kiss may actually be modeled in 1/20.3???

I set all three on a table and took some pictures.

From left to right, Bachmann K-37, Accucraft K-37 and Kiss K-36 










From back to front, Bachmann K-37, Accucraft K-37 and Kiss K-36 












From right to left, Bachmann K-37, Accucraft K-37 and Kiss K-36 











From right to left, Bachmann K-37, Accucraft K-37 and Kiss K-36 

Although not so obvious on this picture, the Bachmann's coal load looks very "plastic". Accucraft and Kiss coal looks real. Accucraft's chunks are much larger. 











The real difference shows itself in the details (as already seen in the lead truck).

Here some views of the boiler detail.

Bachmann: 










Accucraft:











Kiss












And the cab:

Bachmann:











Accucraft:











Kiss:











Another nice touch on the Kiss is the tender coupling with a small bar that allows coupling and uncoupling without lifting the tender:











All three are great locomotives, but I am absolutely partial to the Kiss.
It has a ESU Loksound decoder installed.
I will report more when I get some track down on my layout.
I can't wait to run them all.

Have a good night.

TOM


----------



## steam5 (Jun 22, 2008)

Tom 

Thanks for the pictures. A quick note, you have a Bachmann K-27 and Accucraft K-27, not 37. 

Alan


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Tom

I was confused about the Ks when I started modeling Colorado Narrow Gauge (HOn3) back in the late 60s. An easy way to remember the classification of the Ks is by their numbers,

K-27 (450s and 460s)

K-28 (470s)

K-36 (480s) 

K-37 (490s) 

The only picture I could find of a K-27 (#453) in my books that showed the pilot wheel, shows it without the external journal. Identical to your two K-27s.

Chuck 

PS the only K Bachmann has made is the 27. I believe Accucraft has made all four. 

Note added later: The 27 was the smallest (Shortest). According to John Norwood in RIO GRANDE NARROW GAUGE, the 27s were 58' 9 5/8" (#s 462, 463, 463) long. K-28s (#s 473, 476, 478) were 62' 9 1/2" long. K-36s, all locomotives in the series were 68' 0 3/4". The biggest of all (in weight and tractive effort, even though it is a little shorter ) is the K-37, at 65' 2 15/16" (all in series). All lengths are coupler face to couple face (pilot to rear of tender). 


'


----------



## K27_463 (Jan 2, 2008)

Due to the model comparison errors, much of this post has mistakes. The pilot of the k27 is correct-with inside bearings- as B mann and AccuCraft modeled it. K27 were designed right at the turn of the 19- 20 century. The much later (30 years) design of the k36 means many upgrades-including outside journals. So, both pilot designs are accurate, but from very different real prototypes. Also, the size differential would be very apparent as a k36 will dwarf a k27 when presented in the same scale. Because the 27 is far smaller in actual size in real life, but is modeled here in the larger 1:20 scale, the 1:22.5 k 36 looks similar, when in reality it is much longer and larger. 
However, it is great you have all three, enjoy the kiss model, they are rare. Accucraft has made all 4 k classes, comparison of a k36 in 1:20 would be easily discernible. 

Jonathan 
www.rctrains.com


----------



## TOM_1/20.3 (Mar 28, 2013)

Sorry about the mistake with the numbers. It was quite late when I wrote the post and was stuck in the 30's when the Kiss arrived.
May thanks for the information.

TOM


----------



## TOM_1/20.3 (Mar 28, 2013)

I just checked the Kiss K-36. It measures 38 inches coupler face to couple face. 

At 68 feet in the original the scale of the Kiss would come out to 1/21.47. 

TOM


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

Sorry for a late reply to this posting, but I only just found it.

Very nice looking K-36. I see you got the Durango & Silverton version #482. I only know of two other versions; D&RGW #489 and Cumbres & Toltec #487...although I have not seen photos of the Cumbres & Toltec version.

The KISS K-36 is advertised as being 1:22.5 scale. It might be off a bit for true 1:22.5, but it certainly is much smaller then a comparable 1:20.3 K-36. Kind of why I like 1:22.5 scale. Smaller and more forgiving with tighter radius track.

I'm not exactly sure how rare the KISS K-36 locos are but they are definitely hard to find especially in the US. I had to get my D&RGW version from Europe.

I modified mine to get it a little more prototypical looking. This includes; changing the red class light lenses to clear, painting the tender steps and rerailers aluminum, adding steam gauge and air pressure decals to the backhead, a water bag, and crew figures. I also changed to Kadee couplers to match the rest of my equipment. It also was converted to battery power, Airwire control, and Phoenix sound. 

Sure is a great looking loco. She runs well too.


----------



## TOM_1/20.3 (Mar 28, 2013)

Hi Matt,
You did a nice job. I also wish to add a Kadee coupler on the tender since mine only has the LGB coupler. Which Kadee is the correct one to use?
Thanks
TOM


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm not sure if there is a "correct" Kadee for the K-36.

I used a Kadee 906 for the tender coupler. And a heavily modified (cut up) Kadee 905 for the pilot.

And I had to make a coupler pad out of styrene to mount the Kadee 906 on the tender. 

I did the coupler conversion a few years ago so I can't remember exactly what was required. But I seem to recall I had to cut off the existing tender coupler mounting pad. And I don't think that was easy to do as it was brass. So unfortunately not the easiest of conversions.


----------



## TJH (Dec 27, 2007)

sorry to resurrect this old thread but I just happened on it and I find it fascinating. That Fn3 K-27 scales pretty closely to a k36 in G. The part I find interesting is that even in traditional areas where F scale looks out of proportion to G like height and width the two models remain pretty close. I wonder if the K27s resemblance to her larger brethren like a K36 or K37 would almost help it fit in better with G scale rolling stock than smaller F scale engines like the Connie which have an obvious look of being a small locomotive, whereas the 36s and 37s have a tendency to dwarf rolling stock anyway. The K27s (to me at least) look like a big engine at first glance. It wasn't until I saw them next to k36s that I realized the size difference in real life.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

You'd likely want to shorten the domes, stack, and probably lower the cab just a bit as well, but otherwise--yeah--it wouldn't be too difficult to get a 1:20.3 K-27 to be close to the proportions of a 1:22.5 K-36 or K-37. It's not going to be perfect, but it would have the appearance, at least. I did a similar thing with a B'mann "Connie." I shortened the stack and domes, and gave it a smaller cab. It now looks like a very hefty outside-frame 2-8-0 in 1:22, instead of a medium-sized 2-8-0 in 1:20.

Side-by-side with my 1:20 2-8-0:









Out on the line:









Later,

K


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

San Juan said:


> I'm not sure if there is a "correct" Kadee for the K-36.
> 
> I used a Kadee 906 for the tender coupler. And a heavily modified (cut up) Kadee 905 for the pilot.
> 
> ...


Who did your conversion to your K-36 and I purchased the Cumbries and Toltec from Gold Coast Station......LOVE that engine the sound is super that came with it.....I have been lusting after it for a few years!
It is 1:22 scale, and built better then any plastic engine I have ever owned....and I have quite a few.
Soo the 2 1/5 curve is 5" radius that the Kiss K-36 will make?

Thanks

Bubba


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

Madstang said:


> Who did your conversion to your K-36
> 
> Bubba



Jonathan Bliese of *Electric Steam Model Works* did the Airwire conversion of our KISS K-36.

I tackled the Kadee coupler conversion.

It can negotiate an LGB R2. According to online sources is a 1560mm diameter. Converts to a 2' 6" radius or roughly 5' diameter.

I tested my K-36 a circle of R2 track when I first got it. And surprisingly it went around. Looked ridiculous though. On my outdoor layout I don't have curves as small as an R2.


----------



## Madstang (Jan 4, 2008)

Thanks, I have not decided if I am going to tackle the AirWire conversion my self.........I have plenty of time, I hope to make up my mind.

Good to know about the curve, as my smallest curve is 8' on my layout, so I should be fine.....thanks again.

Bubba


----------



## David Fletcher (Jan 2, 2008)

Well I finally managed to find one of these 1:22.5 scale KISS K-36s as well (#489, Rio Grande), and it is stunning. Does indeed go nicely with the Aster LGB K-28. I really liked the photos of the KISS when they came out, but were well beyond my buying power at the time, missed out on the D&S one on Trainz/Dash last year and then this one came up! Grabbed it.

Thanks for posting the photos, its a great model indeed.
David.


----------

