Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Where users can chronicle their builds. Start one thread and continue to add on to it.

Moderators: Harold_V, WJH, hwboivin3

clifwst
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 12:36 am
Location: central Kentucky

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby clifwst » Thu Dec 24, 2015 1:00 am

Looks like you might need to rename again;

IE 2-4-4 to 0-4-4

User avatar
Fender
Posts: 2411
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 8:33 pm
Location: Chattanooga TN

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Fender » Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:13 am

Glenn Brooks wrote:Charlie, one thing to consider, if you remove the front truck the drivers will impart a lot of wear to the aluminum rail in the curves. I had a 4-4-4 once apon a time with a poorly machined front truck. It derailed constantly. So finally took it off and ran as an 0-4-4. It was a Christmas train for the public. So couldn't just park it. After 3 weeks the outside rail was really, badly worn. The front trucks definitely help guide the front of the engine around the track. Also, one of wheels on the front truck was a slightly smaller diameter than the other three - definitely a cause of some of the problems.

Another thing to consider, might be turning all the (front truck)wheels to a smaller diameter, thus lowering the truck and giving more clearance with the frame. This might entail rebuilding/ shimming the vertical connection with the frame, but might allow more turning radius. Just thinking off the end of the chart here...

Glenn


I can see how this could be a problem, but don't think it will be in the case of Charlie's Rust Bucket. Firstly, you say this was a Christmas train ride, so I assume it ran on fairly tight radius oval or circular track, where most of the track was on a curve, and ran many laps while it was set up. All of this would contribute to the wear you describe. Secondly, the way Charlie's engine is designed, it's basically a 4-4-0 running in reverse. In fact, many forneys were designed to run "cab forward", with the pilot (cowcatcher) on the tank end and even the headlight pointing to the rear (see attached photo). So I don't think it will be any worse off than a conventional 4-4-0 running backwards.
Attachments
B&B Hinkley 0-4-4.jpg
Dan Watson

keith6233
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 10:36 am

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby keith6233 » Thu Dec 24, 2015 12:32 pm

I have been running one of these for 4 years so i think i can comment from first hand experience.
By fitting longer and much heavier springs and longer studs to the pony truck and new nylon rubbing pads to the top plate the pony tuck steers the engine nicely relying on the friction between the pads and stretcher .

I also have a 0-4-2 and it is not as smooth through the bends as Lyn.
Attachments
14030638456_7de45ed52e_n.jpg
14030638456_7de45ed52e_n.jpg (47.01 KiB) Viewed 2308 times

User avatar
Pipescs
Posts: 1796
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Lester Alabama

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Pipescs » Sat Dec 26, 2015 9:13 am

By fitting longer and much heavier springs and longer studs to the pony truck and new nylon rubbing pads to the top plate the pony tuck steers the engine nicely relying on the friction between the pads and stretcher .


Morning Keith,

These are all the things Scott and I discussed while we were doing the tow test.

My problem is aggravated by the fact that I modified the 2-4-2 Lyn into something that it was a stretch to say the least.

For those of you who have never seen the Lyn kit, the original was a short frame with the original four drivers individually sprung with leaf springs.

The leading and trailing trucks were what I would call a simple Lionel type truck. They are identical in construction with hinge points and a simple pin in a slot to limit their travel to the right and left. The pin is in the middle of a pad that is the load bearer which carries the front load of the engine.

DSC_0712.jpg


The people that have run the Lyn all tell me that they have successfully modified the truck springs and pins to split the load of the engine between the drivers and trucks.

I went a different route not really giving any thought to the front truck at all.

The first mod I did was add the rear truck. The center of the truck is twenty inches aft of where the original Lyn truck was. It has no springs, only a pair of equalizer bars that look like the springs. This allows it to roll over a pencil sized object on the track without derailing.

DSC_2956.jpg


The center of the truck is 43 inches from the centerline of the four drivers.

The drivers are no longer sprung but are equalized so that the four drivers can move as the trailing truck wheels do.

DSC_3166.jpg


So, what I ended up with is a 3 point suspension. The rear truck and the left and right driver pairs all being independent with no serious weight on the front driver. I believed that the weight of the driver and the small springs would keep it in place on the rails. I was so wrong in my thoughts.

The issue is that while I believe the truck would stay in place due to its weight, I did not take into account the fact that with the rest of the engine is fixed. My weight keeps the rear truck down on the track so the center point of the drivers becomes the fulcrum of the teeter totter and all the up and down movement is at the front truck. As designed the Lyn was never meant to do this.

DSC_1149.jpg


When we went to unload the engine onto the track the first thing I noticed was that when the engine hit a rise, the truck would hit the slotted plate, and lift the drivers off the track. All this due to them having no springs and the rear truck becoming the fulcrum. When topping a rise the front truck would hang from the fame and then derail when coming back down. I believe as you say a longer pin would help this but it would require major surgery at this point to change up the slotted plate and frame sides to give clearance for the amount of travel needed. It would actually need over 2 inches of vertical travel

A lot of rambling here and I may not have explained it well

PS. The first photo of the trucks is why I call her the Rust Bucket by the way
Charlie Pipes
USMC Retired

Current Projects:

2.5 Baldwin 2-4-2/2-4-4/0-4-4 Conversion (What ever)
Little Engines American Restoration
Bobber Caboose

Cary Stewart
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:54 pm

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Cary Stewart » Sat Dec 26, 2015 7:38 pm

Bottom line - no weight on the pony truck. As the King Fish might have said, "Do the term lead weights on the front strike a familiar not?" Another thought is the use of tungsten welding rod. It is twice the density of lead. Cary

User avatar
Pipescs
Posts: 1796
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Lester Alabama

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Pipescs » Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:31 am

Bottom line - no weight on the pony truck.


Morning Cary,

I wish I could agree but sadly the issue is that I took an existing design that works on tracks in England but will not work on our rolling tracks here. Talking with English modelers they undoubtedly put a lot more work into keeping their radius large and tracks level.

Weight will not cure my issue.

672_WWF_7_elevation_neg_med.jpg


If you look at the Lucky 7 (another English design) you will see that the lead truck is equalized with the main drivers and that the rear truck is also equalized. They are all three sprung.

The rust bucket has none of this. It, as Fender says is a simple 4-4-0 running in reverse. I pretty much copied the suspension on the Little Engines American and am planning on running it backward.

Larger springs between the truck and frame would add weight on the truck. On level track that would be fine. Trouble is that with a fixed rear truck and driver height, all the changes in track height have to happen at the centerline of the lead truck.

When we towed the engine down a hill to the point that the lead truck would start to rise, having no equalization with the main drivers, it simply lifted the nose to bring the main drivers completely off the track

Vertical movement on the front truck is less than a half inch and I would have to cut away over two inches of frame for it to clear on various parts of our track. It would also really need to be equalized with the main drivers.

Not willing to go there.
Charlie Pipes
USMC Retired

Current Projects:

2.5 Baldwin 2-4-2/2-4-4/0-4-4 Conversion (What ever)
Little Engines American Restoration
Bobber Caboose

Cary Stewart
Posts: 447
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:54 pm

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Cary Stewart » Mon Dec 28, 2015 9:10 pm

Yup. It's complicated. There is another discussion on equalization under Live Steam. Dick Bagley and I had an interesting discussion about whether the springs should be working of solid. His opinion was that working springs was a waste of time but equalization was very important. Almost all 2-6-0s I have seen have the pony truck equalized to the first drive axle.
Cary

User avatar
Pipescs
Posts: 1796
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Lester Alabama

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Pipescs » Mon Dec 28, 2015 9:43 pm

Bagley and I had an interesting discussion about whether the springs should be working of solid. His opinion was that working springs was a waste of time but equalization was very important


I have to say ,with my limited experience, I would have to go with you friend Bagley

Larry Kombrink never built any engine after the American with springs. Only Equalization. I also understand Allen Models switched at some point away from springs.

In my case my logic centered around the fact that the operators weight would be directly over the rear truck. This meant a larger variable on the weight disposition of the engine which has an extremely long wheel base. Having no springs on the drivers or rear truck ensures no matter how much the operator weights the weight on the drivers stays consistent and the engine sits level on the track.

Of course, having never operated locomotives, I had no idea the height variation on a club track. It came as a shock to me to see the nose of the engine apparently moving up and down as the engine rolled along. Of course what was a happening was the front of the engine (not being supported by the lead truck) was simply staying where it was in relation to the rear truck and drivers until the lead truck rose up and lifted the whole frame off the drivers.
Charlie Pipes
USMC Retired

Current Projects:

2.5 Baldwin 2-4-2/2-4-4/0-4-4 Conversion (What ever)
Little Engines American Restoration
Bobber Caboose

User avatar
Pipescs
Posts: 1796
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Lester Alabama

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Pipescs » Mon Dec 28, 2015 9:55 pm

One solution to the this problem would be to copy the lead truck design out of Don Young's Lucky 7 Forney.

Lucky 7 Lead Truck_5.jpg


In the drawing you can see how the lead truck is tied to the drivers. When it starts to rise it pushes both front drivers down to lift the entire engine and keep traction.

This solution would require building a new truck and modifying the frame to allow the lead truck to equalize with the main drivers.


Luckily for me, I really do like the shorter version 0-4-4T after Fender sent me the drawings and photos. But more importantly it greatly simplifies the engine and will get it on the track sooner. I am starting to work on the saddle design to go to a ten inch pipe for the boiler. More for looks than anything as the original Lyn ran well on a nine inch (According to English Modelers)
Charlie Pipes
USMC Retired

Current Projects:

2.5 Baldwin 2-4-2/2-4-4/0-4-4 Conversion (What ever)
Little Engines American Restoration
Bobber Caboose

User avatar
Pipescs
Posts: 1796
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Lester Alabama

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Pipescs » Tue Mar 15, 2016 3:15 pm

Kids, school, and work are staying in the way, but it is coming along.

I have sent off for an estimate from Richland LLC in Tenn. to cut the pipe and the various sheets for the boiler.

The brake shoe casting for the trailing truck brakes came out fine and I have started at looking into machining it.

The smaller one is for the American by L.E.

DSC_4000.jpg



Does anyone have a lot of experience with using brake banding glued to the face of the shoes using glues such as J B Weld?
Charlie Pipes
USMC Retired

Current Projects:

2.5 Baldwin 2-4-2/2-4-4/0-4-4 Conversion (What ever)
Little Engines American Restoration
Bobber Caboose

User avatar
makinsmoke
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 12:56 pm
Location: Texas Hill Country

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby makinsmoke » Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:29 pm

Charlie,
Tom Bee uses a five minute epoxy.

Brian Hilgert
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:35 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Converting a Baldwin 2-4-2 LYN to a Baldwin 2-4-4

Postby Brian Hilgert » Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:05 am

Does anyone have a lot of experience with using brake banding glued to the face of the shoes using glues such as J B Weld?


What are you using for actual brake banding? I got a sheet from Mcmaster -Carr but I cant seem to bend it to fit the curve of the shoe. It is way too stiff. I have heard people using serpentine belts for brake material.


Return to “Build Log”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest