# Bachmann Mallet



## bobgrosh (Jan 2, 2008)

I was over on the Bachmann board looking for information on the Mallet. 

I was surprised that there was only one topic concerning the Mallet, and that one was about the space above the circuit board, something I would assume I would need to know in order to fit a DG583AR decoder. 

After trudging through the first page of posts and not finding an answer to that simple question, I went to page two..... AND GOT A MESSAGE THAT THE TOPIC WAS REMOVED. 


In fact, I didn't find any topics about the Mallet. What happened. Has Bachmann canceled the loco? 

What did I miss? 

B0B


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

Well, the prototype was never built, so maybe Bachmann is following prototype practice to its logical conclusion.


----------



## R.W. Marty (Jan 2, 2008)

Actually, the prototype was built, in 1:20 scale, and was at the National Narrow Gauge Convention in Portland, Oregon this past week. I must add that it looks really good. 

I popped the top on the boiler and the on board electronics are rather extensive. For me, these electronics, really don't matter past the point that I will be paying for something that I have no use for. When it gets here it will be 100% gutted and converted to battery, AirWire, Phoenix sound, and bulbs not LED's. 

Bob, 
The fact that the thread went away over on the Bachmann board is not to surprising. It was getting pretty testy 
over there yesterday. 

Later 
Rick Marty


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

the 1:1 prototype was never built is what I believe our friend from Ventura meant. 

I thought it was funny.  

Wow, Bachmann pulling threads... guess they are upset. 

After all the hoo-rah about the standard socket, I can understand why Tony is po'd... 

But someone predicted that the standard would change with the next loco, actually two people I believe, Stanley and TOC. 

Funny.... 

Regards, Greg


----------



## astrayelmgod (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg sez: 
"I thought it was funny. " 

Tnanks, Greg. I'm glad ONE person is thinking on his feet.


----------



## bobgrosh (Jan 2, 2008)

Well Gee. 

I asked the Bachmann if they made any changes to the board. 

His answer.... "Ask Digitrax" 

Why would Digitrax know if Bachmann changed their board? 

I don't get it. 

But I called Digitrax and asked. 

Digitrax's answer... "Why the H___ are you asking us?" 

This brings to mind the three truck shay. 
I ordered one with the Quasinami. Paid the Quasinami price. 
The dealer ordered A Quasinami Shay and an analog shay for his store stock. 
He got shipped two analog shays. But billed for one each. 

Eventually the dealer ate the difference in price. Bachmann told him just to have his customer order the board. 

When I called Bachmann to order the board, they said to call SoundTraxx. 

SoundTraxx's answer... "Why the H___ are you asking us?" 

OK, I think I get it now. 
The broken tender, USP's fault, or mine for accepting the box in the first place. 
The Decoder shorting out when in the Kay, (but works in other locos), Digitrax's fault 
Missing Quasinami, dealer's fault. 
Unable to supply the missing Quasinami, Soundtraxx's fault. 
Crumbling parts on my original first run shay, China's fault. 
Bent axle on the Kay, USP did it. 
Cracked plastic gears in my two truck shay, China's fault. 
Loose counterweights. China's fault. 
Burned out smoke generators, My fault. 
Dead sound card in the Big hauler, Ray-o-Vac's or Duracell's or maybe Wall-mart's for leaving them on the shelf too long. 
Kay lugs down on curves, blame all those newbies who want to run fast. 
Firebox won't flicker on decoder FX output. My fault for expecting fire instead of the provided rock concert. 
Bulbs won't work in marker lights. My fault for not liking the space alien eyes. 
Chuff won't work, just call SoundTraxx, Phoenix, Digitrax, MRC LGB, Massooth or pay the extra 100 for one that is designed for the optical chuff. Guess that must be my fault for being so cheap or wanting functions that one doesn't provide. 

Looks like Bachmann is a perfect company and never makes any mistakes. 

Guess that should make me feel confident when ordering a Mallet.


----------



## DKRickman (Mar 25, 2008)

You know, I like the way the model looks. Not that I'd ever buy one, but that's beside the point. 

I like big logging engines. I like articulated engines. I like tank engines. Heck, I like pretty much anyhting steam powered. My first thougth when I saw that engine was a pair of moguls (I also like kitbashing and scratchbuilding). So, for me, the model would have a lot of potential, and I really don't care what flavor of electronics are inside, as I'd simply replace them as part of the project. 

But, as I said, I won't buy one. Why not? Because when an engine costs the greater part of $1,000 after purchase, shipping, and electronics replacements to make it run, it had darn well better be EXACTLY what I wanted in the first place. Kitbash fodder shouldn't cost more than a couple hunderd, at the most. So, to me, every engine on the market should either run perfectly out of the box, or be priced about the same as a Big Hauler or comparable. Why would anyone bother with an expensive engine that doesn't work, and work perfectly, as designed, all the time?


----------



## Snoq Pass (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By astrayelmgod on 09/15/2008 6:08 PM
Well, the prototype was never built, so maybe Bachmann is following prototype practice to its logical conclusion.




That just might be....../DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/blink.gif


----------



## Jim Francis (Dec 29, 2007)

So the Bachmann Mallet is a model of a prototype that was never built? 

Big deal! 

There were many 2-6-6-2T logging mallets built for standard gauge track that looked much like the Bachmann Mallet. 

There were also 2-8-8-2 tender Mallets proposed but never built for the D&RGW and the C&S. 

There was even a Bayer Garrett proposed but never built for a logging RR in British Columbia, Canada. 

Lots more possibilities for future models. 

Will I ever own a Bachmann Mallet? I don't know. I sure like the looks of it. I don't care about the socket/electronics in it as I would have to strip them out anyway. 

Time will tell. 

Jim


----------



## Ian Pooley (Jan 2, 2008)

Hi all, 

On the topic of the authenticity of the model, why not consider that outside the U.S. Baldwin exported lots of prototypical metre gaute 2-6-6-2's to Brazil. For instance there were four outside frame units built in 1909 and 1910, 4 more built in 1910 and 1912, 6 inside frame units built in 1911, 2 built in 1913, 2 more built in 1913 and 1919 with piston valve gear, 2 built n 1924, 5 built in 1935, 1937, and 1940, and 14 built in 1946 and 1950. The last of these units was retired in 1980. That makes 39 completely prototypical 2-6-6-2 locomotives that the Bachmann kit could be adapted to. 

See "Locomotivas articuladas" by Eduardo J.J. Coelho. 

Ian


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Serbia also got some 30" gauge 2-6-6-2 Mallet locomotives from Baldwin, not sure if any are still in service on the infamous "Sargan 8" or not? 

SCRATCH....sorry, ALCo, not Baldwin was the builder of these.


----------



## rwjenkins (Jan 2, 2008)

I don't think anyone was questioning "the authenticity of the model", just making a joke that perhaps the disappearance of the discussion threads about it on the Bachmann forum are an indication that, like the prototype, the model won't be built either. But, since we're on the subject, how do the dimensions of the proposed narrow gauge logging Mallet design compare to any of the standard gauge prototypes that actually were built? Perhaps it could make a good conversion project for those adventurous souls who model 1:20.3 standard gauge.


----------

