Steam & Excursion > Any Bad 4-8-4s?

After reading the thread about best 4-8-4s, it seems almost all lines liked and used them well.   Were there any poor performing 4-8-4s that fell out of favor? 

Other than a certain Reading T-1, you mean?

I don't know that they were bad/poor performing or whether they were just found to not suit their needs, but CP bought two 4-8-4s and never repeated the order. 

Gordon

The Atlantic Coast Line 4-8-4s were SERIOUSLY out of balance when first delivered by Baldwin.

I also mentioned this on the original thread. the February, 1975 issue of Trains magazine had an excellent article by the late Robert A. Le Massena titled: "Was there ever a super 4-8-4 that included an index of the most popular 4-8-4's.Anyone with the Trains 70 years DVD can have access to this article.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/17 16:45 by rev66vette.

Tominde Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> After reading the thread about best 4-8-4s, it
> seems almost all lines liked and used them
> well.   Were there any poor performing 4-8-4s
> that fell out of favor? 

The Atlantic Coast Line R-1 class Northerns had dynamic augment problems.  

From steamlocomotive.com:

"In 1937, the ACL received 12 new Class R-1 4-8-4s from the Baldwin Locomotive Works. They were assigned road numbers 1800 through 1811 and were immediately put into passenger service. These new 4-8-4s began to handle trains with as many as 21 heavyweight cars, eliminating the need for double-heading and running extra sections of many of the Richmond, VA to Jacksonville, FL "Specials".The ACL was very disappointed with their R-1s, and returned them to Baldwin for better counterbalancing of the 80 inch drive wheels. It seems the R-1s, as delivered, had a bad dynamic augment. It was so bad that it was even worse than the Norfolk & Western's J class 4-8-4s with their low 70 inch drive wheels. Even after Baldwin checked their math, and put new disk drivers on the ACL R-1s, they still had unacceptable amounts of dynamic augment at high speeds. As soon as the ACL could replace them with EMD E-3 and E-6 diesel electrics, the Standard Railroad of the South put its latest and largest steamers in freight service."


Not sure I agree with the part about dynamic augment problems with the N&W J.  

The ACL R-1 was one of the nicest looking 4-8-4's ever put on rails, though.


 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/17 11:05 by sgriggs.

---

Beautiful locomotive I agree. And i like the big tender with the 4-axle trucks.

Posted from iPhone

CPR_4000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Other than a certain Reading T-1, you mean?
​The Reading T-1's were great locomotives in their day.  They were basically built from older 2-8-0 locomotives in the Reading shops and they were very powerful engines helping the Reading to make money, and by being home built from older engines, the Reading saved a ton of money in acquiring newer more powerful locomotives.
John

ClubCar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> ​The Reading T-1's were great locomotives in
> their day.  They were basically built from older
> 2-8-0 locomotives in the Reading shops and they
> were very powerful engines helping the Reading to
> make money, and by being home built from older
> engines, the Reading saved a ton of money in
> acquiring newer more powerful locomotives.

I was referring to the infamous oil-fired one from Washington State. As to the T-1's being rebuilt from 2-8-0's, I think the consolidation boilers had a course added (and maybe a new firebox?) but other than that, they were pretty much new locomotives from the boiler down and the cab back. They certainly seemed to work well in fast freight service.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/17 13:53 by CPR_4000.

Don't you bad mouth a RDG T-1 around me !!!!

perklocal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't you bad mouth a RDG T-1 around me !!!!

Why? Have you worked on them?

He has. As have I and currently do. Coming in 2018! Photo by Rod Miller.

Chris Bost
Leesport, PA



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/17 16:13 by RBMN-ENGR.

---

Didn't those big ACL tenders end up behind older N&W 2-8-8-2s?

The 3751 class locomotives were a bit of a lemon as built.  They were extensively rebuilt and were retired being much different than when Baldwin first released them. 

Steve

Dynamic augment? You mean a vibration or pounding forces?

holiwood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't those big ACL tenders end up behind older
> N&W 2-8-8-2s?

 

---

CarNutandTrainNut2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dynamic augment? You mean a vibration or pounding forces?

Bending rails.

Brian

The Western Maryland 4-8-4's don't seem to get a lot of press.  I would speculate that the reason would be that they were relatively obscure engines, and had short careers due to rapid dieselization rather than their being bad engines.

Comments?

Mary McPherson
Dongola, IL
Diverging Clear Productions

MaryMcPherson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Western Maryland 4-8-4's don't seem to get a
> lot of press.  I would speculate that the reason
> would be that they were relatively obscure
> engines, and had short careers due to rapid
> dieselization rather than their being bad
> engines.
>
> Comments?

My understanding is that they were excellent locomotives and very well-liked by their crews.  They were victims of early dieselization so they had a short life spent far out of the limelight. 

Gordon

The Western Maryland 1400's were my favorite northerns.  Designed for a specific task that they did well.  Plus they had a very tough look which I really like.