Hi,



I grew up as a small boy, with the sounds, sights and smells of the moving mass of machinery that was the railway locomotive, on a daily basis. In New South Wales, my birth state, there were nearly 600 2-8-0s which were built from the 1890s. School days were spent in Queensland, where I found 4-8-0s were the mainstay, built from the 1880s. Small wheels and boilers, and large domes, chimneys and cabs predominated. So I can easily identify with a German 2-8-0, which derived from the 0-8-0 Prussian designed G8 freight locomotives. These date back to 1902 (1920 DRG class 55.25-56) and showed a mechanical simplicity, and a reliability in traffic. From 1934, to enhance their availability, the DRG modified over 600 of them, becoming Class 56.2-8. The addition of a leading single axle pony truck (making them 2-8-0) enabled higher speeds, and the engine could then be used for passenger work. In addition the average axle load was lower, so that these locomotives could be used on branch lines. The conversion entailed moving the boiler forward and raising it somewhat. These converted locos became Class 56.

I have a model of the Class 55.25-56 (55) from start set #29840, so my addition of the Insider class 56.2-8 (56) #37563 invited direct comparison.
The tender on my models of the 55.25-56 and 56.2-8 are identical. The 56 tender has a centre pick up slider of new design, not on my other Marklin engines.
Without a caliper, but with a ruler, the boiler dimensions are equivalent. The cab roof may be 1mm longer, and does have a large ventilator box on top, which is not on the 55. The chimney, safety valve, bell, generator, side ladder, and sand and steam domes are in exactly the same relative positions. The steam line for the dynamo now takes a different route on the 56. The boiler casting does have some small changes, which I personally view as very minor improvements. For example the sand lines which were molded into the casting on the 55, are now extra plastic fittings which are clipped into receptacles. This may enhance the look to some, but in reality I am quite happy with the molded-on versions.

The major departure from the construction of the class 55 is the way the boiler is positioned on the drive train. The builders of these locos simply repositioned the frames and wheels backwards under the cab and boiler, which were moved forward. The overall length of the engine remained unchanged. The last coupled axle is now almost back under the cab, which means there is now no longer a large air cylinder obvious in that position. The driving cylinders have the same relationship to the 4 driving axles as the class 55, with connecting rod to the third axle, and valve gear the same. Because the cylinders are now backward of the smokebox, the path of the exhaust piping has to be bent in an S, and Marklin have accomodated this hidden though necessary fabrication work, with an oblong box above the running board. This may be quite protoypical but in the absence of real photos, I have no way of telling. With the drive train sitting further back, there is now room for the pony truck in the front, with buffer and front plate showing subtle differences to the class 55. It is very difficult to ascertain if the boiler sits higher on the frames than the 55.



I notice that the sound decoder has a very fast recovery from power interruptions, usually less than a second. This is in contrast to earlier Marklin models which I own. In fact, the sound characteristics are up a level I believe. The exhaust has a crispness, and a subtlety as well, where you can hear the back draft wheezes of a steam design from the early 20th century. Do I also sense that you get a sharper bark as the locomotive comes under load, or is that my boyhood imagination?

To date I have successfully changed many function outputs on my Marklin locos using the 60212 (CS1). Usually, I change chuff rates and volumes. I phoned my friendly Insider contact at Marklin to discuss why I was unable to change some of the advanced sound settings on #37563. Apparently many of the function control of the latest decoders are not supported by the CS1.

In all, I think it is a splendid model. I am rather taken with smaller engines which suit the traffic I run on my layout.
Marklin have again succeeded in producing a model that should also have appeal in Poland, Austria and the eastern section, where they were also used through to the 1970s.

I have no real interest in dismantling the loco, so I have written this review based on cosmetic and running observations. More technical details are available on Marklin's website and publications.

The accompanying (though optional) freight car set #46192 (please see photo in Rolling Stock review section), has loads of real wood stacked in 3 gondolas of different designs. The stacking is done quite properly as in the prototype, to ensure the loads do not move around in transit. A load of logs is also supplied on an Rr20 design stake car. In all, the loads are very nicely done. A sliding top Kmmk gondola rounds out the set. While earlier models by Marklin of this car had metal end platforms, the plastic version on this one seems flexible and robust, and will not readily break. The sliding tops are metal.

To evaluate the loads, I made the following measurements of the cut timbers in the 3 gondolas:
diameter 3mm (10" or .26m)
length 1 - 18mm (5'2" or 1.56m)
length 2 - 25mm (7'2" or 2.17m)
length 3 - 30mm (8'7" or 2.61m)
A forum member may be able to give me further clues, but I can only assume these timbers were carried for pit props (coal mines), or for vineyard trellis material, or for fuel, or for further manufacture (matches, toys, furniture, household building or general carpentry).

Hand assembly of these timber loads would have been quite time-consuming (I estimate 3 minutes using ready formed materials, and then glue drying time), and I wonder if they were done by machine, or perhaps on a conveyor basis, person to person.

regards
Kimball

Edited by user 26 April 2013 09:05:38(UTC)  | Reason: Added photos and altered text

Kimball, where was the main maintenance yard in Brisbane ? Roma Street or Brisbane station

John

Yes, John, Dave is correct, it was called Mayne Junction where four lines radiated.
It was the engine stable, carriage sidings, and sorting sidings until about 1980.
Now it is a diesel service area, and EMU service area.
There was a station there till about 1980, until it got moved southward and combined with the old Bowen Hills station, which was on the southern side of the tunnel.

regards
Kimball

Hi Kimball, there's a 3rd option.....

Buy the Marklin 60801 sound programmer

https://www.marklin-user...01-Sound-Programmer.aspx

(Not sure how mature the product is as yet, so it may not as yet do everything you want)

Which is why I put the rider in my post "(Not sure how mature the product is as yet, so it may not as yet do everything you want)"

There is 'talk' that with time and software updates it may be on a par with an ESU Lokprogrammer, but for Marklin decoders. Time will tell.