New Kato Poll

[GhengisKong]

I'll be impressed if they produce any of the models that won their polls. To date, have they actually produced any of the "winning" entries?  I haven't kept track of all the polls, but I have NOT seen a Rocket or a PCC yet.  And in the case of the announced 20th Century, the version that won, IIRC, had a Hudson on the front end (not that I will complain about a Kato E7, but to make me happy, they would need to produce it in C&EI- and I rather expect that the Whippoorwill is a long way down their list of streamliners. LOL)

I'm still waiting for the E7s and the Rocket with TA, too. But if what @arbomambo says is correct, I'd bet the BigBoy is the closest of any of the polls to production fruition.

[C855B]

Late to this part of the discussion, but as far as a Kato Big Boy goes for me, personally... I have two Athearn BB's and one Challenger. Of the three, only one is runnable. Challenger has been back to Athearn once, they didn't fix it. Second Big Boy didn't even last 15 minutes - some "doing me a favor" club member re-railed it and stretched the traction tires, and they are an enormous project to replace. IOW, Athearn makes very nice shelf queens.

And how's this? I have three consistently reliable steamers, a second-run Bachmann J and two Kato FEFs. Everything else (the Athearns, a B'mann Connie) wants to self-destruct. Not in the market for a Kato Big Boy should it ever materialize, but I suspect it would be higher (much higher) on the reliability chart in general. Anyway, you might forgive me somewhat for being burned out on N steam. Just sayin'.

[thomasjmdavis]

Well, I know that the More/LIK GS-1/2/6 would work for the 73" driver and wheelbase, as I've been looking for similar dimensions for a Rock Island R67 4-8-4 I want to build. But, that is prohibitively expensive and a waste of a beautiful loco.  As for the other one, if you could stomach the Con-Cor GS-4 mech, it's drivers are undersized at a scale 76" and it's wheelbase is a scale 21'6"

Ghengis- Thanks for the info on the CC drivers -the 76" would be close enough for me- although the wheelbase is a bit long, that is still within about an 1/8 inch scaled down, so visually, I think it would probably be acceptable. Is the Con-Cor mech for its GS-4 different from the mechanism for the S-2?  I was under the impression that all the Con-cor 4-8-4s were essentially the same under the hood. I have been watching for a Con-Cor (at a reasonable price), thinking that I might be able to make it work with some modification.  With that driver size, it would be one less thing to modify.

I read up on the Bachmann class J, but according to Spookshow, the drivers are too small (for my purposes anyway- even measured across the rather large flange) and wheelbase short). Wondering if they run ok on code 55.

[GhengisKong]

Ghengis- Thanks for the info on the CC drivers -the 76" would be close enough for me- although the wheelbase is a bit long, that is still within about an 1/8 inch scaled down, so visually, I think it would probably be acceptable. Is the Con-Cor mech for its GS-4 different from the mechanism for the S-2?  I was under the impression that all the Con-cor 4-8-4s were essentially the same under the hood. I have been watching for a Con-Cor (at a reasonable price), thinking that I might be able to make it work with some modification.  With that driver size, it would be one less thing to modify.

I read up on the Bachmann class J, but according to Spookshow, the drivers are too small (for my purposes anyway- even measured across the rather large flange) and wheelbase short). Wondering if they run ok on code 55.

Spookshow said the mech is the same except that the GS-4 has bearing blocks added that limit radius to 19". Also, I spoke'd drivers for S-2 version. Not sure if the driver diameter is different for the spoke'd version or not.

[EspeeGoldenState]

There is a reason why a 2-10-2 is called a Santa Fe, and it's not because a marketing guy in NYC thought it sounded like a cool name.  ATSF liked them so much that they cut their 2-10-10-2s in half so they could have even more of them.  But given the way N scale manufacturers think, we'll probably see the 2-10-10-2 first.  Maybe that would still work- Max and Drasko could figure out for us how to cut them in half, and someone could 3D print the extra cabs, tenders and front/rear trucks.

I would probably buy some Santa Fe steam- assuming that someone announces it pretty soon. 

Uh the 2-10-10-2s were built from 2-10-2s and the experiment was unsuccessful, and thus they were rebuilt back to 2-10-2s. Sure 2-10-2s were developed by ATSF, but if they liked them so much where did they take 20 of them and make a 2-10-10-2 in the first place?

Chris

[Point353]

Sure 2-10-2s were developed by ATSF, but if they liked them so much where did they take 20 of them and make a 2-10-10-2 in the first place?

Reduce engineer/fireman crew needs by half?

[DKS]

Dear kato, youll sell more steam engines than that dumba$$ rail grinder...…………………………………………… especially when modelers would be more inclined to buy 2 steamers than 2 rail grinders.
and make it not a Bigboy since we already have 2 plastic and 2? brass models!!

drasko

FWIW, I voted for the rail grinder because, quite frankly, Kato has never produced a steamer I was interested in, and I don't expect they ever will. True, they'd sell far fewer rail grinders than any steamer, even (yet another stupid) Big Boy, so I know my vote was made in vain--although in the impossible chance they did make a rail grinder, I'd buy one. Bottom line, I don't give a rat's behind what Kato makes next. They'll make whatever they make, poll or no poll. So effing what? Why do we perpetually generate these multi-page speculation feasts?

[CBQ Fan]

I wouldn’t think the rail grander would be mutually exclusive from any steam locos. Feels like they are fishing with this one to me.

[Leggy]

Nevermind I can't read   

[Point353]

Kato has never produced a steamer I was interested in, and I don't expect they ever will.
Why do we perpetually generate these multi-page speculation feasts?

Because venting some steam about one's favorite loco that will never be made is healthier than the stress that would result from internalizing the frustration.

[mmagliaro]

Spookshow said the mech is the same except that the GS-4 has bearing blocks added that limit radius to 19". Also, I spoke'd drivers for S-2 version. Not sure if the driver diameter is different for the spoke'd version or not.

Driver diameters are the same.  I swapped GS-4 "teardrop" drivers from a newer Con-Cor into an older Kato S-2 version and they fit perfectly.  I did have to pull each driver off its axle, remove the Con-Cor bearing, and push the driver back on, in order to have them fit into the older Kato frame, but the axles, gears, and driver diameters are identical.

[ljudice]

The grinder would appeal to all 1990-present modelers - more than any steam loco....

[nstars]

The last Kato engine I bought was a GG1 in 2009. Since then there hasn’t been any Kato engine I’ve been interested in. They may run good, but it’s often a prototype (west coast) I’m not interested in and in most cases I also haven’t been impressed in the detailing or the paint job. The 20th Century Ltd could be the first one in a long time, but unfortunately most likely with a E7 and not with the Hudson. The Hudson would be a lot more interesting than another Big Boy. So no vote from me.

Marc

[James Costello]

The grinder would appeal to all 1990-present modelers - more than any steam loco....

If you're considering lifespan only then ATSF #3751 trumps it......

[peteski]

The 20th Century Ltd could be the first one in a long time, but unfortunately most likely with a E7 and not with the Hudson. The Hudson would be a lot more interesting than another Big Boy. So no vote from me.

Marc

I didn't have any dogs in this race, but I still voted for Li'l Joe: An interesting locomotive I might buy for my collection.