Kato F2 & F3

[jmlaboda]

"Kato's never done an F2."

Actually, they have.  While not doing any schemes accurate for the F2, they were indeed done... read comment below.

"Arn't we just considering an F2 and an F3 Ph1 the same carbody?

"Based on the artwork, there looks to be differences between this shell and the Phase 1 shell.  And I think there are things on the Phase 1 that wouldn't be on an F2 (as-delivered)."

Both units were built concurrent with each other with the F2s and earliest F3s sharing the same erection floor.  The difference was mainly in the engine and the horsepower, the F2s being a match for the FTs while the F3s were 1500.  Aside from the ACL and RI shells having steam generator equipment the shells should be identical (depending on if dynamic brake and non-dynamic brake differences are ignored).

[Sokramiketes]

Prototypically speaking, they could look the same.

Based on the artwork, there looks to be differences between this shell and the Phase 1 shell.  And I think there are things on the Phase 1 that wouldn't be on an F2 (as-delivered).

Jason

I guess I'm not following you...  Kato has released these F2/F3 Ph1 Shells before.  Are you saying that the Kato shell isn't prototype, or that you think there should be two different shells from Kato for an F2 and an F3 Ph1?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I'm kinda tempted by those ACL units, if for no other reason than to encourage them to take more chances.

[wcfn100]

Both units were built concurrent with each other with the F2s and earliest F3s sharing the same erection floor.  The difference was mainly in the engine and the horsepower, the F2s being a match for the FTs while the F3s were 1500.  Aside from the ACL and RI shells having steam generator equipment the shells should be identical (depending on if dynamic brake and non-dynamic brake differences are ignored).

Yes, prototypically, they could look the same.  But this is about the model.

Based on the artwork, this shell differs from the Phase 1 F3. 

Without a good pic of the phase 1 and using just the artwork for the new model, I'm going to leave it there for now.

I'm in for the RI set.  I think this is he first money Kato has gotten from me since the first run of the CZ.

Jason

[MVW]

What does "DCC friendly" mean in this particular instance?

If it means a drop-in decoder, I'll be droppin' in for a pair in the C&NW scheme.

Jim

[wcfn100]

I guess I'm not following you...  Kato has released these F2/F3 Ph1 Shells before.  Are you saying that the Kato shell isn't prototype, or that you think there should be two different shells from Kato for an F2 and an F3 Ph1?

I'm going to just backpedal for now and just go with what I can show.

Here's an Atlas F2, look at the rear most vent.  That matches the as-delivered F2's I can find pictures of.



Here's a proto pic for those who require it.



Compare that to the artwork posted which has four small square openings like an F3.  This appears to be a modification done on many F2s.

Here's the one I'm looking at doing.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=406226

But just on that, both shells are still F2s - just not the same.

Jason

[robert3985]

What does "DCC friendly" mean in this particular instance?

If it means a drop-in decoder, I'll be droppin' in for a pair in the C&NW scheme.

Jim

Better get Mr. Wallet ready because Kato F's are a true "drop-in" for a non-sound decoder.  Several companies make them, but the one I'm familiar with is the Digitrax DN163K0B, which can be installed in about five minutes.  If you want sound (not the best, but can be re-programmed) the Digitrax SDN144K0A will work, is a bargain, with the board being a drop-in, but chassis modifications for the speaker will need to be done.

In both installs, the two wipers that bend up over the top of the decoder board and are held in place by the Kato "clip" should be tinned and then soldered to their respective pads on the board for added reliability, then the Kato "clip" put in place to hold the board in position.  Be extra careful to get the iron on, then off quickly so as not to melt the Kapton tape wraps which the two wipers bend over.

MRC makes a true drop-in sound decoder, but I can't recommend any MRC decoders as my experience with them in my early Challengers and Big Boys was really bad.  Lately, the vast majority of decoder problems my LHS is contacting me about in N-scale have been with MRC decoders.

If you're concerned about the quality of sound coming out of your F-Unit, I'd do a non-drop-in ESU Loksound install with a speaker in the fuel tank or in the rear of the chassis where there's some "meat" to provide speaker support after you mill the proper sized and located hole for a 10mm speaker.

[pjm20]

What does "DCC friendly" mean in this particular instance?

If it means a drop-in decoder, I'll be droppin' in for a pair in the C&NW scheme.

Jim

This is from BLW: " Drop in DCC compatible with the Train Control Systems K0D8 series decoders"

[garethashenden]

Well isn't that typical. The Boston & Maine had more F2s than anyone else but Kato can't be bothered to do it. Just like the RDCs. Saves me money though.

[Flagler]

I really need Kato to run some SP Black Widow units & bloody nose units

[wm3798]

I've never had a problem with Kato's truck mount coupler.  Gives you better distance between units, and if you're running ABBA or even AA, you're not in conflict with body mount rolling stock because the nose is body mounted.  Nice selection of road names.

Lee

[davefoxx]

I've never had a problem with Kato's truck mount coupler.  Gives you better distance between units, and if you're running ABBA or even AA, you're not in conflict with body mount rolling stock because the nose is body mounted.  Nice selection of road names.

Lee

Meh, not nearly as close as this; Body-mounted Unimates on IM units:

[MVW]

Thanks for the decoder info, Bob and pjm.

Jim

[NorsemanJack]

Meh, not nearly as close as this; Body-mounted Unimates on IM units:

I've never been satisfied with the coupling distance out of the box for either Kato or IM F units.  The body mount unimates are a definite upgrade for the IM units.  OTOH, a similar fix for the Kato's is to drop in the dummy close coupling Kato coupler (I believe from the bethgons) or one of the truck mount unimates.  I've done both modifications, and the Kato is actually a bit easier/quicker.

[jmlaboda]

I see what you are talking about about the rear grill... finding photos of these units in their original form are hard to find... but they are out there.  Many,  like RI 49, were rebuilt to varying degrees which makes it a bit harder to find them.  Here are a couple more shots of the engines with the smaller rectangular grill...

Atlantic & East Carolina 400
Atlantic Coast Line 325 modified but with small rear vent
Atlantic Coast Line 330 modified but with small rear vent
Chiicago Burlington & Quincy 153A
Minneapolis & St. Louis 147 as originally built
Minneapolis & St. Louis 147 rear vent rebuilt
Nacionales de Mexico 6200
New York Central 1605

Definitely not something easily fixed... and I suspect that because of the rarity of photos the mistake is more common than it should be.  I am not ashamed to be able to say, "I stand corrected!!!"  I am one who is willing to learn from my mistakes.