Welcome to the forum   
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Share
Options
View
Go to last post in this topic Go to first unread post in this topic
Offline BrandonVA  
#1 Posted : 02 June 2016 20:28:17(UTC)
BrandonVA

United States   
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,533
Location: VA
Hi all,

Just received Marklin 37935. I wanted to share a quick overview and initial impression:

Prototype: ATSF (Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe) Mikado (2-4-2) "Express Freight" Steam Engine. Santa Fe Classified these as "4000" class Mikados. They were built between 1921-1926 and scrapped between 1950-1954. Ep. III.

4060 earlier in her career:
UserPostedImage

Model: mfx+ sound decoder, factory weathered.

Packaging: The sleeve for the (long) box is relatively unmarked. Seems more plain that most Marklin boxes. Otherwise it's standard fare. included are two figures in a small bag, a fireman and an engineer.

Thoughts:
This is my first Marklin US Mikado, so I do not have a basis from past models (UP, NYC, etc). The factory weathering looks decent, not as overdone as some Marklin models. As the prototypes were scrapped in early ep. III, the weathering does not feel unrealistic to me. These most likely would not have been cared for later in service as diesel units quickly took over as the fleet mainstay.

The locomotive of a decent weight, feels good in the hand. Marklin say they have improved the tender spacing on this model. As previously stated, I have no comparison, but it looks good. The overall detailing on the locomotive is excellent, many fine details.

The locomotive runs very smoothly and quietly. The sounds are excellent, better than most. The operating sounds, bells and whistle are not the generic sounds used for most steam locomotives, and they sound like a US locomotive. The chuffing sound is big and heavy, sounds really good.

Overall I like this locomotive a lot. The only improvement that could be made is the headlight. The light is is white LED, I think a warm white LED would look more period-correct. However, I would still recommend this model based on my current experience :)

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage

-Brandon






thanks 20 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
Offline RayF  
#2 Posted : 03 June 2016 14:58:36(UTC)
RayF

Gibraltar   
Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15,838
Location: Gibraltar, Europe
Looks good!

Thanks Brandon!
Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways
Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by RayF
Offline BrandonVA  
#3 Posted : 03 June 2016 16:09:41(UTC)
BrandonVA

United States   
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,533
Location: VA
Did some tests on pulling power last night after breaking in the motor (15 mins medium speed in each direction with no load). The locomotive has four powered axles, two traction tires on the back axle as per Marklin's standard and a non-articulated chassis.

Results:
Can pull 15 Marklin tin-plate 4-axle US boxcars up and down a short 2% grade with no issue. I did not try more.

In a loop (approx 240 degrees), on R2 curves it starts to slip at slow to medium speeds (FS44 and under on the CS2) with more than 9 Marklin tin-plate 4-axle US boxcars. In this area of my layout the cars pass through a sort of S curve (straight section in-between), which is hard for this heavy US rolling stock (see attached photo of trackplan). Around FS56 on the CS2 it can pull through the curve fine, which is probably modeller's "full speed".

I think due to the axle arrangement, traction tires, and non articulated frame this is to be expected. The locomotive has a good weight, I don't think that's impacting traction (like BR41 3792 which is a little too light in the traction tire axle). I don't expect this locomotive to pull as much as a 3 unit dual motor Marklin F7 set. I think with plastic boxcars it would pull more, but I have no US plastic stock to test. I also suspect at R3 or larger this would not be an issue. 9 cars is still a pretty good express freight train for me. My layout intended for shorter German trains, I would plan R3 and larger on a US layout if possible.

curve.JPG

Santa Fe all the way!

UserPostedImage

-Brandon
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
Offline Mark_1602  
#4 Posted : 03 June 2016 16:41:27(UTC)
Mark_1602

Luxembourg   
Joined: 24/09/2014(UTC)
Posts: 704
Location: Luxembourg
Hi Brandon,

Looks great, especially the weathering! Thanks for the review and the photos. Do you know why the tender of the prototype on your photo had six wheels, whereas the tender of the Märklin model only has four? The road numbers are the same. Was this Mikado used with different tenders during its lifespan?

I used to have Märklin's UP Mikado, but I noticed a kind of unusual noise in R3 curves, which I use to test locomotives on an oval. The pulling power is definitely reduced in curves, even with R3, so I guess that R4/R5 curves might be the best bet for Märklin's Mikado.

Best regards,
Mark
Best regards, Mark

I like Märklin items produced in the 1960s or early '70s, but also digital locos & current rolling stock.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Mark_1602
Offline BrandonVA  
#5 Posted : 03 June 2016 19:17:40(UTC)
BrandonVA

United States   
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,533
Location: VA
Originally Posted by: Mark_1602 Go to Quoted Post
Hi Brandon,

Looks great, especially the weathering! Thanks for the review and the photos. Do you know why the tender of the prototype on your photo had six wheels, whereas the tender of the Märklin model only has four? The road numbers are the same. Was this Mikado used with different tenders during its lifespan?



Mark,

I suspect Marklin just used the tender tooling they already had. However, I don't know the date that photo of 4060 was taken. My guess would be in the late 1920s or early 1930s based on condition and livery, possibly even at delivery (although no way to be sure). The tender looks smaller than many US tenders in this photo. I would guess that as depot locations with water and/or coal decreased, tender sizes also would have increased.

I can't find if 4060 ever had a different tender, but photos can be found of other ATSF 4000 class Mikados with different tenders. Santa Fe had 101 of the 4000 class, I think it's plausible they could have changed over their lifespan. You may also notice that some have "Santa Fe" painted on the tender, while others just sport the road number.

Here is 4075 sporting a tender that looks very much like Marklin's, although it's impossible to see the wheel arrangement (Trinidad, CO, 1948):
UserPostedImage
Source: http://railpictures.net/photo/443480/

Here is 4100 (Clovis, NM, 1939):
UserPostedImage
Source: http://www.rrpicturearchives.ne...wPicture.aspx?id=3840032

4103 (1949, Kansas City):
UserPostedImage
Source: http://www.steamlocomotive.com/berkshire/?page=atsf

4196 (undated):
UserPostedImage

Another thing you'll notice is the dome configuration varies from locomotive to locomotive, but most have one more than the Marklin model. Most of the later photos from the 40s show more piping, etc on the locomotive than the original picture posted of 4060, I am sure there were a few rebuilds and upgrades. A lot of mileage would have been put on these in the early 40s.

-Brandon
thanks 5 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
Offline rbw993  
#6 Posted : 03 June 2016 20:27:53(UTC)
rbw993

United States   
Joined: 19/08/2008(UTC)
Posts: 954
I believe the MArklin Mikado is a model of the USRA (United States Railway Administration) Light Mikado. There were two USRA Mikado designs; ligt and heavy. They were very common as during WWI the railroads were restricted to building these and other standard designs. They were also good locomotives so they were built after the war as well.

The Santa Fe never owned any USRA Mikes as far as I can tell. For reference: [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USRA_Light_Mikado]

As a side note, the Pennsylvania RR did own a few but quickly got rid of them after the war and went back to their own standard designs.

Regards,
Roger

thanks 5 users liked this useful post by rbw993
Offline BrandonVA  
#7 Posted : 03 June 2016 22:34:35(UTC)
BrandonVA

United States   
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,533
Location: VA
Originally Posted by: rbw993 Go to Quoted Post

The Santa Fe never owned any USRA Mikes as far as I can tell.


Roger,

Good insight. It seems like you've got it. The second post here has a lot of information:
http://cs.trains.com/ctr/f/3/t/171536.aspx

So perhaps it's a little bit of a cheat, but they don't look too far off. I'm willing to accept it.

To bring into this topic from your link, USRA "Light" Mikado (looks to match Marklin tooling as you suggest):
UserPostedImage

Also, USRA "Heavy" Mikado:
UserPostedImage

-Brandon
thanks 6 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
Offline grnwtrs  
#8 Posted : 06 June 2016 00:24:31(UTC)
grnwtrs

United States   
Joined: 18/06/2005(UTC)
Posts: 669
Location: El Sobrante, California
Brandon,

I am ordering mine (37935) today, along with the F-7, and the look alike e103( BR 112db) My first elec was the 3053.

I really like the UP stuff, especially the alco's A A's. I'm still looking looking for the one with the SP badge
I've missed the SP a couple of times, maybe someday I will get lucky.

Thanks for the great pics' and the through review.

regards, gene
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by grnwtrs
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

| Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.712 seconds.