New Atlas N-Scale 4-4-0 confirmed

[peteski]

WOW, what a difference.  Shame you even have to make these!

+1 (on both statements)!

I really can't figure out who at Atlas was asleep at the wheel when they approved those toyish shallow spoke inserts.   That is just plan strange!
Maybe they will re-do those on a second run (which will hurt David's business but will alleviate need to do all the work needed to install the retrofit inserts).

[delamaize]

Hot damn, count me in for a kit!!

[DKS]

HOT!  Did you cast them?

Yes, they are cast in black resin. They press-fit right into place, almost no work.

David,
  Did you promise us a replacement fuel load for the tender if one wishes to install a dcc decoder as shown earlier in this topic?

I did say I would look at doing this. Not sure if I'd roll it into the same kit, since not everyone who wants the wheel inserts needs a DCC cover, and vice-versa. Still mulling it over.

[rogergperkins]

Cover is of far more interest to me than wheel insert.    My 2 cents' worth.

[Mark W]

Cover is of far more interest to me than wheel insert.    My 2 cents' worth.

And far easier to just scratchbuild.  Mine literally took no longer than two
minutes.  The wheel inserts are more marketable. 

[peteski]

Although the NZT 4-4-0 Upgrade kit has a ways to go before it's ready for prime time, it's far enough along that I can show you this (before, above; after, below):

David,
You know, since you are going through the trouble of doing this, you might as well make it accurate.  In most cases the size of the wheel counterweight is larger on the wheel to which the main rod connects to.  This means that the front driver's counterweight should be larger than the one on the rear driver. The one Atlas molded spans 3 spoke slots. That is pretty large and I would say this would be correct for the front driver. But the rear driver's counterweight should be smaller. I guess it should only fill the space between the adjacent spokes.

Here are some examples:


Different arrangement on UP's #119:


The Jupiter replica has no visible counterweight on the rear drivers:


Maybe you could mold and include several counterweight variations in your insert set to make it possible to model different locos.

[Chris333]

I assume since the Atlas model is a perfect match for it except for the stack that this is what it's based on:

[peteski]

Cover is of far more interest to me than wheel insert.    My 2 cents' worth.

This shows my DCC install. No cover needed. Not visible unless you are looking at the tender from the rail level. I'm still working on the writeup.

[Chris333]

Figured I would throw this into the mix as well.

Since the tender side frames are solid they do not have a bolster. When I see all that air under there it doesn't look right to me so I added a simple black painted strip styrene bolster to act as a view block:

[DKS]

David,
You know, since you are going through the trouble of doing this, you might as well make it accurate.  In most cases the size of the wheel counterweight is larger on the wheel to which the main rod connects to.  This means that the front driver's counterweight should be larger than the one on the rear driver. The one Atlas molded spans 3 spoke slots. That is pretty large and I would say this would be correct for the front driver. But the rear driver's counterweight should be smaller. I guess it should only fill the space between the adjacent spokes.

Maybe you could mold and include several counterweight variations in your insert set to make it possible to model different locos.

Thanks, Peteski, but it is accurate. There are plenty of examples of locomotives where the counterweights are identical, and some are larger than those on the Atlas. (Indeed, among the reference images I have, about half have identical counterweights.) Also, they are quite a challenge to manufacture, so I'm not about to make the kits more expensive for the modeler by including variations. But thanks for the suggestion all the same.

This shows my DCC install. No cover needed. Not visible unless you are looking at the tender from the rail level.

Regardless, a wood load for the tender would be appropriate for those locos having the diamond smokestack, as opposed to coal, where the straight stack would be used. (Easy enough for most folks to scratchbuild, but it may still be difficult for some to do.)

[rogergperkins]

I have been considering DCC, based on David post: "Peteski, are you mounting the decoder over the motor? I ask because I've been contemplating making a cast part that looks like a wood bunker with wood to cover the decoder."  Mark W's post that he mounted the DCC decoder over the motor and comment that the top of the tender is removable leads me to believe that is a nice option for installing the decoder. 
If I understand what I have read, an alternate tender part could be made to cover the decoder and replace the original one.
I have lost track of this discussion; must be somewhere between the spokes. 

[DKS]

I have been considering DCC, based on David post: "Peteski, are you mounting the decoder over the motor? I ask because I've been contemplating making a cast part that looks like a wood bunker with wood to cover the decoder."  Mark W's post that he mounted the DCC decoder over the motor and comment that the top of the tender is removable leads me to believe that is a nice option for installing the decoder. 
If I understand what I have read, an alternate tender part could be made to cover the decoder and replace the original one.
I have lost track of this discussion; must be somewhere between the spokes. 

Peteski mounted it under the tender; he's just being coy about it because he's publishing an article on the process.

[peteski]

Thanks, Peteski, but it is accurate. There are plenty of examples of locomotives where the counterweights are identical, and some are larger than those on the Atlas. (Indeed, among the reference images I have, about half have identical counterweights.) Also, they are quite a challenge to manufacture, so I'm not about to make the kits more expensive for the modeler by including variations. But thanks for the suggestion all the same.

Regardless, a wood load for the tender would be appropriate for those locos having the diamond smokestack, as opposed to coal, where the straight stack would be used. (Easy enough for most folks to scratchbuild, but it may still be difficult for some to do.)

David,
my post had a rather different tone than I intended. It wasn't meant to critique your effort but simply a request that for you to correct Atlas' model.   But obviously I did not do good enough of a research to recognize that some of these locos did in fact have visually identical counterweights on front and rear drivers.  I should have known better. After all, we live in Ed's world!    Now I've been shown that the Atlas' model has its counterweights represented accurately, and so do your replacement spoke insert. 

I would still have liked to see you producing variations of those inserts. Maybe as a separate insert upgrade kit?  In the hindsight, asking for variations of the counterweights was really the main purpose of my earlier post.

[DKS]

The ND-022 Atlas American Upgrade Detailing Kit from NZT is now available. They are in stock at MB Klien and Stonebridge Models.

[Lemosteam]

Hi David, any chance of showing a pic of the rear cab wall and glazing on your website?  Quite interestied to see your design!

Hope you don't mind but I Nd-022 a plug over on the HOn30 Yahoo Group!  They seemed very interested in it when I posted a link to this thread.  Happy sales!