# D&RGW Bumble Bee Mistakes!



## Dylanfreeski123 (Apr 13, 2008)

Hi all


I'm sorry this does not necessarily pertain to largescale, but I must raise some questions to the forums.

Okay, so we all know that Aristo entirely butchered their "bee" version of C-16 #268 with the wrong tender, smokebox front, etc... I am wondering why the Broadway limited model of the 268 in On30 also has some errors that may not be so obvious, but still quite bother me. I was thinking about buying one because it has DC compatible sound and all those great features but then I started comparing photos to the prototype. I am wondering what designer thought the real locomotive has an air tank on the tender AND under the engineer side running board?? This seems like a pretty important detail not to research since they put so much time into the rest of the engine. Other issues include black stripes on domes (instead of brass), straight handrail on smokebox front (should be curved), bell, number plate is silver instead of yellow, sun shades on the cab, no cylinder for the flanger, the list goes on.

All in all, would it be too much trouble to try and delete the air tank and straighten out the running board? Also, does anyone know if the loco is quality in terms of drivetrain and such?

Thanks!


----------



## gigawat (Apr 4, 2012)

Wow... you have great attention to detail! 

I love the bumble bee... and I have been dying to get a live steam version. Accucraft made a nice one. 

Can you share some of the actual real prototype pictures of the real #268? I would love to see those. I have tried looking with google, and don't really find any real authentic photos.

All I can find is this: http://www.ghostdepot.com/rg/rolling stock/locomotive/268 locomotive.htm

Thanks!


----------



## SD90WLMT (Feb 16, 2010)

Search for David Fletcher's - awesome bash of an Aristo C-16, his second bash into the #268 unit you mention here... 

8 days of rework and it was done!! cool looking loco, btw!! 

Dirk - DMS Ry.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

The drive of the Aristo unit or the On30 model? I can't speak for the small one, but the Aristo drive works well enough. My dad's got one on his railroad and it runs very well. I added a bit of weight to it so it could pull 4 - 5 cars up the steep (8% in one spot) grade. 

BTW, good to see you posting! Whacha been working on? 

Later, 

K


----------



## Dylanfreeski123 (Apr 13, 2008)

I actually have been entirely uninvolved in modelling for years but I'm going off to college so I thought I'd like to have a locomotive before I'm completely broke. 

Here are probably the best online photos of the real 268...
http://www.drgw.org/data/steam/history/drg268.htm

This is the model I am looking at purchasing...
http://www.broadway-limited.com/522...yon30.aspx

There are obvious differences between the two if one studies them for a few moments, but I might be able to live with it. But yes I am looking at the On30 version. However, I have seen Fletcher's bee and I think it looks immaculate! My dad also repainted an Aristo bumble bee to the black and white scheme with the herald on the tender that looked great, but sadly I destroyed it when I was a little kid.
I just wanted to see if anyone could offer feedback on the model but it looks decent for the price.


----------



## Andre Anderson (Jan 3, 2008)

Dylan, 

The drive on the BLI is pretty good, I have four of them in various schemes and have had no problems with them. As to why the model may be different from the real one is that BLI only makes one version and it is kind of a morph of several C-16's, not any one in particular. It was made for the On30 crowd where exact detail is not that important to most. A good running locomotive with sound is. For those of us that the detail matters we change it. A little history, before the BLI C-16 a C-16 would cost between $1200 and $2000 depending on who made it and what the level of detail was so those of us in On3 and On30 looked at the BLI as a great investment, we could use it as a C-16 or the basis for a kit bashing project. I have converted two to On3 from On30 because I was able to get them at a very reasonable price. So My advise is get one and modify to suit your needs, this way the finished model will be yours and not like everyone else's.


----------



## David Fletcher (Jan 2, 2008)

Hey Dylan, 
What you studying at College? Guys, Dylan and I went up to Alpine tunnel together back in 2001, when he was 7 or 8, plus rode the Cumbres etc. we had a fun time. 
Dylan the simple answer to your question as to why the Broadway loco is not a match for 268 is that this model was based on 278, 1950s, including the larger c18 tender given to it, straight hand rail to front etc, all they did on the model was change the domes. the problem really is that the 4 c16s that made it to the late 40s all of them were totally different by then. Model cos just paint up all liveries on the one model type. This one was 278. 

As for Aristos, that was the 1989 Delton c16, taken from the 1880 Burnham drawing of no 42. All they did to modernize it was change the stack and domes and move the air tank (aristo didn't even move the tank). It was intended as a low cost model version, without the need to totally retool the 1880 version. 
David


----------



## RP3 (Jan 5, 2008)

The Accucraft live steam Bumble Bee had its own issues -- some of which may have been copied by other builders, thereby perpetuating the errors. First, it had an air tank under the Engineer's running board but this was needed for an operating lubricator oil tank. Later models (K-27,etc) incorporated a lubricator tank in the cab -- eliminating the need for a fake tank outside. There is no smokebox front handrail because it fouls the marker lamps when the door is opened to light the burner. For the same reason there is no flanger cylinder on the pilot deck. In operation, this model looked good but was a disappointing runner. The boiler wouldn't maintain much pressure and many of the early models had seriously defective chassis mechanisms. Mine had to have the entire chassis replaced courtesy of Charlie Chin may he rest in peace. My recent experiences with a new gas jet suggest that the steaming deficiencies could have been solved too with better parts. 

Hope this slight thread diversion will be considered acceptable to all since it was mentioned in an earlier posting to this thread. If not, I apologize. 

Ross Schlabach


----------



## placitassteam (Jan 2, 2008)

I don't have an Accucraft Bumble Bee but I do have a fairly early live steam C16. It is the sweetest running of my 4 locomotives, in fact I run it so much that it is getting worn out. It will be shopped this winter so I can do a total overhaul including ball bearings on the driver axles and rod bearings. Then it should be good for the rest of my life with only minor maintenance!


----------



## RP3 (Jan 5, 2008)

Hey Winn, you might want to think twice about ball bearings on the rods. For one thing, they will glaringly show up any quartering error you might have in the drivers and for another, side rods need play to allow drivers to move side to side and up and down with curves and track irregularities. A better option might be to only put ball bearings on the big ends of the main rods instead. 

Ross Schlabach


----------



## Dylanfreeski123 (Apr 13, 2008)

Well Mr. Fletcher I haven't chosen a major yet, but possibly art or English of some kind I think would be appropriate. You should come back for a visit sometime! I hear my dad is going down to chase a train this fall on the Cumbres with the 315 and 463 both! After looking over your first and second generation 268's I think I will go for it and try to modify her. Do you know of anywhere that I could get a cylinder for the pilot deck in O scale, or something that could be changed to look similar? Also, speaking of rods, I noticed the rods are also incorrect; as the real 268 has a rounded axis point on the driverod and the model has a more rectangular one... if that was stated properly? But yes, I must agree it sounds like a steal for the price, especially for all of you who remember the days of only brass locomotives.


----------



## placitassteam (Jan 2, 2008)

Ross, Thanks for the input. I really wasn't sure about bearings on the side rods but I think putting them in the main rods would be good. My biggest problem is that the axles have worn instead of the bearings! There was a discussion of this in another thread.


----------



## stevedenver (Jan 6, 2008)

It is great you have an eye for detail

However, heres a bit of reality, about many modeling hobbies.

For mass produced items, often details are compromised, for a variety of reasons.
This can be simply the designers, the marketing folks (its good enough to sell to 99% of our market) 
or production considerations and costs.
For example, the dome color is likely black because they don't need separate printing steps or colors, or, they too had the same b and w photo and guessed.

Sometimes mass models will be correctly detailed, and then offered in a variety of schemes, road numbers etc, that don't match the prototype model.

Simply, for engine specific accuracy, one must often buy brass models.

As a guy who was once sensitive to the things you mention, 
and lamented and also asked, why 
and who also has been running LGB for decades, (never ever seemed to get any US scheme correct for a very long time)
it is either a good thing or a bad thing, but, 

simply, ive learned to compromise and let things 'go', and not to obsess over inaccuracies, as I once did.
I have less of a modelers mentality , and more an operator's. I now see past, or, more accurately, I see what is somehow supported with my knowledge of prototypes.

This took me almost twenty years.

I detail and re-paint things when I think it will make the model a closer approximation, or gives the overall feel of a prototype, and other times, things are so off, I don't even try, such as my own LGB Bumblebee _Mogul._ 
It will never be a consolidation without huge changes, never be properly proportioned, has the wrong domes, etc, but
It still is yellow, and looks great among the plants in my garden puling a few DRGW mineral brown cars, or stock cars.


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

Steve, I started back in 1980 with LGB. If I wanted "G" trains I had to accept compromises. It wasn't intill I started into 1:20.3 years later that what I bought was remotely accurate scale wise. I love my LGB, it sustained me for a long time. I'll give a lot of credit to Bachmann for their K-27s. They did a good job matching the engines to the prototype number. This may be the first insidence, that I am aware of a mass manufacturer making subtle changes in a model to be more correct. I apologize to any English teachers out there, as more correct is not correct, but it says what I needed to say. 

Chuck 

PS My Bumblebee LGB mogul is now lettered for "Denver Rio Grande and Western", Everything else is unchanged.


----------

