What is the #1 missing product

[Sumpter250]

Number 1...........

Rolling stock with the "repeatable" part of the road number,+ matching decal/dry transfer for the remaining numbers. ie. box cars numbered 89000-89685 would have the 89 in place, and 000-685, as add on decal/dry transfer. (sufficient 1's - 9's, to complete the number)

[Russ Bellinis]

Number 1...........

Rolling stock with the "repeatable" part of the road number,+ matching decal/dry transfer for the remaining numbers. ie. box cars numbered 89000-89685 would have the 89 in place, and 000-685, as add on decal/dry transfer. (sufficient 1's - 9's, to complete the number)

That idea is so obvious. I've complained at my local hobby shop for years that manufacturers should help us out a bit by offering decals with their cars to make more numbers than they offer. The response has always been-"Manufacturers don't care about model railroaders, just model railroader's $$$."

[nkp_174]

I've always appreciated the manufacturers whom offer many different numbers on the cars. I'm sure that they figure that most will either not care enough to change it, or take care of it on their own. I usually have more issues with the shopping date than the car number...as have 1951 cars behind my pre-1950 locomotives drives me crazier than clone cars. Of course, both are easily fixed with either an eraser or paint and some dry transfers.

As a note back to the 57" drivered 2-8-0s.

I do not know the breakdown of 51" drivers, 57" drivers, or 63" drivers, but there were over 21,000 2-8-0s that operated on US railroads. By comparsion, EMD produced a total 7638 F-units...with the most common model being the F7 which constituted over half of the production run. From what I've been able to find over the past several days of looking, as well as from previous reading, medium (54"-58)" drivered 2-8-0s were the most common.

In the post steam era, what are the most famous SG 2-8-0s?

The LS&I 2-8-0s are very well know...none more so the than the one on the Western Maryland...a 56" drivered 2-8-0. Similarly, there are many green Southern 2-8-0s that have been offered. Guess what...the southern didn't paint their freight engines green...but they re-acquired a pair from the Tweetsie (which had a standard gauge operation during & after the 3' operation) and made them famous as the green 2-8-0s. Both of these have 57" drivers.

As a footnote, the standard Harriman 2-8-0 (UP, SP, IC, Alton) was a 57" drivered locomotive as were the Pennsy's H4, H5, & H6 classes (actually 56"). The MDC Harriman 2-8-0 kit was not an accurate model...and it didn't have the correct size of drivers. The UP never owned a 63" drivered 2-8-0...most of theirs were 57" (a few classes were 51").
Interestingly, Sierra Railway #28 has tiny 48" drivers.

I'll probably build my 57" drivered 2-8-0s either from USRA 2-8-8-2s, USRA 2-10-2s, or from scratch. If a manufacturer rides in on a white horse with a white hat, I'll gladly use their engines as a basis. With 3 of the unpopular USRA light 2-10-2s on the market, 2 UP FEFs, 3 SP GS-4s, and such, I would think that the most common steam locomotive type of all time would warrant production. It is not possible to model most railroads local operations without them.

[Mileswestern]

Frankly how about the Baldwin 90 ton Logging 2-8-2's and a really nice, well balanced and detailed 2-6-2 and 2-6-0? I'm surprised bachmann hasn't touched the Baldwin loggers, because they seem like a perfect addition to their lineup of locomotives. In reality they sold quite well to a somewhat standard design and there are still plenty of surviving examples of these low-drivered workhorses.

Also a nicely detailed 2-6-2T would be great for branchlines or surburban commute service.

[nkp_174]

Miles, nice idea! A nice complement to the shays/heislers/climaxes and 2-6-6-2ts! It would fill that void quite nicely.

[nachoman]

Frankly how about the Baldwin 90 ton Logging 2-8-2's and a really nice, well balanced and detailed 2-6-2 and 2-6-0? I'm surprised bachmann hasn't touched the Baldwin loggers, because they seem like a perfect addition to their lineup of locomotives. In reality they sold quite well to a somewhat standard design and there are still plenty of surviving examples of these low-drivered workhorses.

Also a nicely detailed 2-6-2T would be great for branchlines or surburban commute service.

absolutely 100% agreed. I am not a logging expert, but my guess is most logging operations used small rod engines and not geared engines. Yet, if you want to model a logging operation in HO, you have the bachmann 3-truck shay. I don't know if the rivarossi heisler is available anymore, but I know the spectrum climax is out of production, and the ones they did make have gear problems and replacement parts are unavailable. For rod type logging engines, the options are slim. There is the bachmann 0-6-0t that would look okay, the Mantua (model power) 0-6-0t and 2-6-6-2. The MDC 2-8-0 and may work okay, but somehow it doesn't quite have that "logging" feel to it. Of course, you can pick up an out of production MDC 0-6-0. But, there are zero 2-8-0s available that would suit a logging line, and the only 2-6-2 (a common logging wheel arrangement) is the bachmann USRA 0-6-0 with pilot and trailing trucks added. Everything else has too big of drivers.

If you want to model non-geared logging operations in HO, you are pretty much up that inevitable creek without a paddle (unless you buy brass).

To further add - HO is severely lacking in slide valve steamers.