Kato BigBoy pic - large screen cap for detail

[Dwight in Toronto]

If I  wanted to stuff two decoders in there, they should be sound decoders (since each engine would need its own chuff sounds, and theoretically go in and out of sync).

I’m wondering if ESU’s 58731 (‘Kato Japan’) might be a good match in this build?  Pete, I know you are intimately familiar with this decoder - what do you think?

I have 3 N scale steam locos - Kato GS4, Model Power 4-6-2, Dapol ‘Hall’ class 4-6-0 - each of which I equipped with 58731 tender installs.  Although it only has 3 powered outputs, they are usually sufficient for steam lighting applications.  The two “legs” can be trimmed back, while still providing sufficient solder pad territory for track and motor leads, which makes for quite a compact little sound decoder.

[peteski]

I’m wondering if ESU’s 58731 (‘Kato Japan’) might be a good match in this build?  Pete, I know you are intimately familiar with this decoder - what do you think?

I have 3 N scale steam locos - Kato GS4, Model Power 4-6-2, Dapol ‘Hall’ class 4-6-0 - each of which I equipped with 58731 tender installs.  Although it only has 3 powered outputs, they are usually sufficient for steam lighting applications.  The two “legs” can be trimmed back, while still providing sufficient solder pad territory for track and motor leads, which makes for quite a compact little sound decoder.

That decoder is like any other DCC sound decoder, but the size and outline of its circuit board was designed for plug-n-play install in Kato models which have that type of interface (like GS4).  This model has no such interface in the tender. The tender is basically identical to the centipede tender that FEF-3 has.  Similar width to GS4 tender. So the decoder will fit, but will have to installed by wiring it.  Not sure what advantage you have by using this decoder instead of lets say Loksound 5 nano.  Looking at the dimensions, nano is smaller than 58731, but thicker.  However thickness is not a issue here. There is plenty of room in the tender for a decoder, speaker and likely even a keep-alive module.

Yesterday Tjack757 posted a clear cutaway view of the tender.


Plenty of room there.  Even more room if you trim those 2 cylindrical protrusions which are securing the metal weight in the center (and glue the weight in).

[peteski]

A bit pissed off the lettering isn't silver am I .

Richie, this model is made specifically to depict the loco as it appeared in 2019 2021, after it was restored.  Was the lettering on that loco silver?  If yes, then (going by how meticulous Kato is about every model, and especially this top achievement and pride-and-joy of Mr. Kato) I'm very surprised.

EDIT:  I simply read what is written on the locos box.  If they did really get the lettering color wrong, then shame on them as the prototype is around, and could have been viewed in-person (or question about the lettering color could have been asked and answered by any of the thousands of people who have seen the loco up close when it was making its rounds through the country).

[Dwight in Toronto]

That decoder ………….  was designed for plug-n-play install in Kato models which have that type of interface (like GS4).  This model has no such interface in the tender. So the decoder will fit, but will have to installed by wiring it.  Not sure what advantage you have by using this decoder instead of lets say Loksound 5 nano.

Thanks Pete.  Yes, I realize how the 58731 is intended for plug-&-play in certain Kato models. 
I was trying to point out that it is a handy little decoder in its own right, and can still easily be used where no such P-&-P interface exists (I mentioned the Model Power and Dapol locos as examples). 

I’ve installed several Nano’s and Micro’s, those being the wired versions.  I suppose that the only advantage with the 58731 is in fact related to wiring - with only 3 outputs, there is less of it!   
You only solder in the wire leads you need (and don’t have extra, unused lengths getting in the way, not to mention wasted outputs, as you would with a Nano in a steam loco).

And I’m not sure about this, but seeing as the 58731 is less endowed with outputs and wires,  perhaps there are vendors who sell it at a lower price than a Nano or Micro (?)

Anyway, it was just a thought. 

[up1950s]

Richie, this model is made specifically to depict the loco as it appeared in 2019, after it was restored.  Was the lettering on that loco silver?  If yes, then (going by how meticulous Kato is about every model, and especially this top achievement and pride-and-joy of Mr. Kato) I'm very surprised.

I did not know that Pete , thanks . I modified my original post.

[robert3985]

A bit pissed off the lettering isn't silver am I .

Pete proved me wrong later on . Now I am pissed at UP for the white . With Big Boy chalked on the smoke box door my guess now it was to replicate the as delivered paint . But 4000 was the one with the chalked door not 4014  . 4000 had the radiators on the porch and was coal fired , and didn't have front engine chain lubrication . So the white was totally uncalled for by the UP . After all these of trying to get manufactures to follow UP standards of steam locos having Aluminum Leaf lettering , UP does this and sets us back 80 years on that effort . Well they got 4014 resurrected , so I guess I have said too much again .

Sooo...are you saying that the lettering on UP's excursion 4014 is white?  I've seen it several times in the flesh, and believe me, I would have noticed if the lettering wasn't Aluminum, since that's one of my main gripes about some model Big Boys and other N-scale UP steam.

Truthfully, it's difficult to tell from photos if the lettering is White or Aluminum.  In my photos and videos I took of 4014 and 844 when they were doubleheading to Ogden, in my photos the lettering looks exactly the same on both engines, and I know for a fact that the 844's lettering is Aluminum.

Also of note, is that the paint on the wheel journal covers, which I know to be Aluminum, looks white in my videos and photos...but, I know for a fact that they are Aluminum.

I am surprised that KATO got the lettering wrong as it's pretty common knowledge that UP's Steam Engine lettering is always Aluminum, even if it looks "white" in photos, but it doesn't when seen with the naked eye.

As for the rest of your points, KATO has not created a "Big Boy" in N-scale, but has replicated the restored 4014 in N-scale.  Since there are major difference between the restored 4014 and Big Boys in service in the 1940's thru the 1950's, and, since KATO doesn't make any US prototype freight cars (except for a very few generic ones)...I assume this model was conceptualized to be the most accurate model of the restored 4014, and is designed to be perfect for  present-day UP Excursion Service, pulling a variety of KATO water bottles and passenger cars...with maybe a shiny KATO 844 FEF-3 double-heading behind it....but not for pulling a long block of PFE reefers.

Since UP is UP, they were not striving for nor is it the Steam Department's obligation to restore their steam engines to original specifications.  The 4014 was definitely a rush job, and I was actually surprised that UP had got it running in time for the Sesquicentennial, but upon close inspection, is was pretty obvious that it still needed some work, such as supplying front cylinder covers, and the angles on the boiler covers looked/look "wrong"...because they are much simplified from the original boiler covers.

/>
Additionally, the tender is 3985's tender, and is not a Big Boy tender, which was deemed to not be restorable in time for the Sesquicentennial.  No, Challenger tenders and Big Boy tenders are not the same, although they look similar.

As for historical accuracy, if your layout is running Big Boys in the 1940's thru the 1950's, the KATO model isn't for you.  Both the Athearn Big Boy and the BLI Big Boy...not the BLI Excursion 4014, nor their Kenefick Park Big Boy, are the ones to get.

My layout, which is dated in a ten year period between 1947 thru 1956, the Big Boy versions that fit my era must have at least two necessary feature (1) no handrail-mounted aftercoolers on the pilot (these were removed after 1944 on all twenty of the 'early' run Big Boys #4000 thru #4019) and relocated.  The last run of five Big Boys #4020 thru #4024, came from ALCO with Wilson Aftercoolers behind louvered doors at the front of the pilot. (2) First run Big Boys had their dynamos originally under the cab, but quickly moved them to the top of the engines when road-grime and rock damage proved that the under-cab location was no good.  I think all N-scale Big Boys have the dynamos up top, but, I check new versions when they come out to make sure.  I also prefer no wooden planks on top of the tender around the water hatches, and I wish that manufacturers would realize that on later Big Boys...all of them, the water hatches were eventually extended to make watering up easier.

Since the KATO model is oil-fired, has the wrong tender, no ash pans, modern boiler cladding, and modern steam pipes running from the rear cylinders to the front, I won't be purchasing any of these to run on my layout.  This is okay, since I'm very happy with my Athearn and BLI models, and I only pull trains of a maximum length of 9'5" anyway...about 30 40' cars and a caboose.

Cheerio!

Bob Gilmore

[woodone]

Has for the lettering on the prototype? I sure do not know if it is white or silver.
I saw the locomotive about three years ago when it made a trip through Arizona.
I got a bunch of pictures of it about 19 miles outside of Yuma AZ.
All the photos look to be white. has a matter of fact there is one picture that you cannot even see the lettering.
Wrong angle or something, but you cannot see any lettering at all.
I saw the same? loco in Sacramento at the rail museum.
That was a long time ago, I sure do not recall the lettering at that time.
I am happy to have the model.
Looks good to me.

[Chris333]

I have no idea and don't care, but it looks silver to me:

[Jbub]

Sooo...are you saying that the lettering on UP's excursion 4014 is white?  I've seen it several times in the flesh, and believe me, I would have noticed if the lettering wasn't Aluminum, since that's one of my main gripes about some model Big Boys.

Truthfully, it's difficult to tell from photos if the lettering is White or Aluminum.  In my photos and videos I took of 4014 and 844 when they were doubleheading to Ogden, in my photos the lettering looks exactly the same on both engines, and I know for a fact that the 844's lettering is Aluminum.

Also of note, is that the paint on the wheel journal covers, which I know to be Aluminum, looks white in my videos and photos...but, I know for a fact that they are Aluminum.

I am surprised that KATO got the lettering wrong as it's pretty common knowledge that UP's Steam Engine lettering is always Aluminum, even if it looks "white" in photos, but it doesn't when seen with the naked eye.

As for the rest of your points, KATO has not created a "Big Boy" in N-scale, but has replicated the restored 4014 in N-scale.  Since there are major difference between the restored 4014 and Big Boys in service in the 1940's thru the 1950's, and, since KATO doesn't make any US prototype freight cars (except for a very few generic ones)...I assume this model was conceptualized to be the most accurate model of the restored 4014, and is designed to be perfect for  present-day UP Excursion Service, pulling a variety of KATO water bottles and passenger cars...with maybe a shiny KATO 844 FEF-3 double-heading behind it....but not for pulling a long block of PFE reefers.

Since UP is UP, they were not striving for nor is it the Steam Department's obligation to restore their steam engines to original specifications.  The 4014 was definitely a rush job, and I was actually surprised that UP had got it running in time for the Sesquicentennial, but upon close inspection, is was pretty obvious that it still needed some work, such as supplying front cylinder covers, and the angles on the boiler covers looked/look "wrong"...because they are much simplified from the original boiler covers.

/>
Additionally, the tender is 3985's tender, and is not a Big Boy tender, which was deemed to not be restorable in time for the Sesquicentennial.  No, Challenger tenders and Big Boy tenders are not the same, although they look similar.

As for historical accuracy, if your layout is running Big Boys in the 1940's thru the 1950's, the KATO model isn't for you.  Both the Athearn Big Boy and the BLI Big Boy...not the BLI Excursion 4014, nor their Kenefick Park Big Boy, are the ones to get.

My layout, which is dated in a ten year period between 1947 thru 1956, the Big Boy versions that fit my era must have at least two necessary feature (1) no handrail-mounted aftercoolers on the pilot (these were removed after 1944 on most of the 'early' run Big Boys #4001 thru #4019) and the last run Big Boys #4020 thru #4024, had their aftercoolers behind louvered doors at the front of the pilot. (2) First run Big Boys had their dynamos originally under the cab, but quickly moved them to the top of the engines when road-grime and rock damage proved that the under-cab location was no good.  I think all N-scale Big Boys have the dynamo up top, but, I check new versions when they come out to make sure.  I also prefer no wooden planks on top of the tender around the water hatches, and I wish that manufacturers would realize that in later Big Boys, the water hatches were extended.

Since the KATO model is oil-fired, has the wrong tender, no ash pans, modern boiler cladding, and modern steam pipes running from the rear cylinders to the front, I won't be purchasing any of these to run on my layout.  This is okay, since I'm very happy with my Athearn and BLI models, and I only pull trains of a maximum length of 9'5" anyway...about 30 40' cars and a caboose.

Cheerio!

Bob Gilmore

I've often been tempted to switch modeling eras, specifically to late steam or transition. I love both Pennsy and UP transition era equipment and BLI would likely get a crap ton of my money due to what they've produced. If they offered more of their loco's as stealth units, that temptation would only increase as I think their electronics are crap.
Man, the more I think of it...........

[nightmare0331]

I am watching this with some interest (mainly curiosity), but the Kato HO P42 has a two motors (one in each truck), and the instructions indicate that a single decoder can handle it, though it seems counter-intuitive to me:

http://www.katousa.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/HO-P42-DCC-Modifications.pdf

I put that tutorial together years ago.

On the HO P42 wiring two coreless motors was really a non issue as the current draw is pretty low.  I installed both LokSound and Soundtraxx in a couple thousand of them over the years and they work well enough.

Enjoy!

Kelley.

[peteski]

I put that tutorial together years ago.

On the HO P42 wiring two coreless motors was really a non issue as the current draw is pretty low.  I installed both LokSound and Soundtraxx in a couple thousand of them over the years and they work well enough.

Excessive current draw is not my worry.  I'm wondering how  the decoder will handle BEMF feedback from 2 motors.  After all BEMF is what allows for smooth motor control from almost zero rpms, and also compensate for any load on the motor.

[Chris333]

How do you simulate wheel slip with both engines going to one decoder 

[Jbub]

How do you simulate wheel slip with both engines going to one decoder 

Take the traction tires off the front engine. I'm sure that would do it.