Steam Locomotive questions

[Spitfire2865]

Hey, For all of you steamer builders, I always wonder what is the most acceptable overhang for things like cylinders or grab irons.

For an 8 wide loco, I find it hard to keep the overall width to a hair over 10 studs, Usually taking into account Technic pins to connect the driver rods.

Now my latest project is a class A Hiawatha and one of the major characteristics of it in my opinion is the overhang on the drivers and shovel nose.

Unfortunately, to get the overhang on the drivers, I had to make the entire loco max out at 10 wide all the way down the loco and maybe 12 when it comes to grab irons on the cab.

And because I build everything in 8 wide, if I decide to build the coaches to go with it, I will have to make the tender 9 wide to better adjust from 10 to 8 wide.

So 2 questions,

Is there any way I could cut the loco down from 10 wide without sacrificing the driver overhang?

And does anyone have any good techniques for making a 7 or 9 wide frame? Preferably with little to no snot work.

http://www.flickr.co...s/89954298@N05/

Here are some pictures. Sorry for the poor quality. Too tired to set up for good photos for just an experimental WIP.

Edited May 5, 2013 by Spitfire2865

[Commander Wolf]

Well, I try to stay as true as I can to the dimensions of the actual locomotive, but if I had to generalize, I'd say I like to keep small greebles at +2 and large greebles at +1 of your nominal width.

Personally, since I value accurate macro proportions over greebles (and because I think they add a lot of running resistance), I usually sacrifice moving pistons to stay in within that +2 and +1 envelope. In this particular model I think I think that might make additional sense as the pistons are already entirely covered by the skirt. That would bring you to 9. In fact, if it were me, I'd even consider not having connecting rods altogether since the skirt covers just about half of the wheels. That would bring you to 8. Just my two cents, though.

As for 7 and 9-wide bodies, I usually "hang" the body off an even-width "skeleton", which is actually connected to the running gear. This minimizes the number of the odd-width surfaces (and subsequently odd-width parts) to just the external ones, so you don't have to deal with that many. I usually just use the stud-not-in-center plate and 1x1 rounds embedded between the studs in 2xN plates to make the transition - no SNOT required. I can try to take some pics if I'm not being clear.

EDIT: You could also try to reduce the width by converting the skirts from studs-up 1xN bricks to studs-sideways plates. There might also be a big L-panel piece you can use upside down, but I'm not too caught up with new parts for the past 4 or 5 years.

Edited May 5, 2013 by Commander Wolf

[Spitfire2865]

Well, I try to stay as true as I can to the dimensions of the actual locomotive, but if I had to generalize, I'd say I like to keep small greebles at +2 and large greebles at +1 of your nominal width.

Personally, since I value accurate macro proportions over greebles (and because I think they add a lot of running resistance), I usually sacrifice moving pistons to stay in within that +2 and +1 envelope. In this particular model I think I think that might make additional sense as the pistons are already entirely covered by the skirt. That would bring you to 9. In fact, if it were me, I'd even consider not having connecting rods altogether since the skirt covers just about half of the wheels. That would bring you to 8. Just my two cents, though.

As for 7 and 9-wide bodies, I usually "hang" the body off an even-width "skeleton", which is actually connected to the running gear. This minimizes the number of the odd-width surfaces (and subsequently odd-width parts) to just the external ones, so you don't have to deal with that many. I usually just use the stud-not-in-center plate and 1x1 rounds embedded between the studs in 2xN plates to make the transition - no SNOT required. I can try to take some pics if I'm not being clear.

EDIT: You could also try to reduce the width by converting the skirts from studs-up 1xN bricks to studs-sideways plates. There might also be a big L-panel piece you can use upside down, but I'm not too caught up with new parts for the past 4 or 5 years.

Yes please take some pictures of your odd wide frame. Its for the tender if that wasnt clear in my original post.

And I thought of doing a snot skirt but I dont have that much orange and have no idea how strong the skirt would be.

I wish to keep the rods as half of its rotation you can see them moving. If it was more covered in the prototype I could remove them but Im not sure now.

I cant make the locomotive 9 wide as I cant do the front nose section otherwise. Once you start doing odd wide, its hard to link it to something fixed at 4 wide such as the motor bogie I am using.

I might just forget the class A and go for an F7 Hiawatha. Would give me an easier time with the contouring. And I could even keep it to 8 wide as there is no need for overhang on the drivers.

[Hrw-Amen]

I usually build stuff with an aim of going 7 studs wide as my standard, but often when overhang is required they go to 8 studs wide. I am pretty sure that you could get an overhang in just 8 studs wide if you used some plate techniques as Commander Wolf suggests. I think the trick maybe to build a 7 wide body to sit on the standard 4 wide wheel frame and work from that.

The trick is to use a layer of jumper plates to get the half stud offset. As it is only one plate it does not add much to the overall height and you can easily make the transit back to normal even stud width within one brick depth as you are then working in plate height, not bricks.

Building an odd number wide body is quite easy really as long as you have enough of those jumper bricks to support it.

[zephyr1934]

Looks like a good start. There is no way anyone could get all of the features of the prototype shrouded Atlantic perfectly into a Lego model. The trick is to find the best compromises. If you did studs out tiles, you would have a hard time getting the thin maroon stripes without using stickers. One thought I have is perhaps you could omit the lower stripe past the wheels (or do it with stickers?), then use studs down orange 1xnx1 panels to get a little more space on the inside. I'm not sure it gets you enough though. Second thought I have is move the shroud up high enough so that the rods are fully exposed, but just barely. So the top of the wheels are still covered. Thus, the studs up shroud and the rods are both in the same row of studs and the whole thing is 8 wide. Or if you do have to pull the shrouding all the way down to where it belongs, then omitting the side rods and only having connecting rods is probably a good compromise. I think you can build it in 9 wide, using a 1x plate instead of the 2x plate in the center of the nose. Then if you wind up with a 9 wide loco, use an 8 wide tender to ease the transition to the cars. Many of my steam engines are 8 wide, with 7 wide tender and 6 wide cars.

[Spitfire2865]

Looks like a good start. There is no way anyone could get all of the features of the prototype shrouded Atlantic perfectly into a Lego model. The trick is to find the best compromises. If you did studs out tiles, you would have a hard time getting the thin maroon stripes without using stickers. One thought I have is perhaps you could omit the lower stripe past the wheels (or do it with stickers?), then use studs down orange 1xnx1 panels to get a little more space on the inside. I'm not sure it gets you enough though. Second thought I have is move the shroud up high enough so that the rods are fully exposed, but just barely. So the top of the wheels are still covered. Thus, the studs up shroud and the rods are both in the same row of studs and the whole thing is 8 wide. Or if you do have to pull the shrouding all the way down to where it belongs, then omitting the side rods and only having connecting rods is probably a good compromise. I think you can build it in 9 wide, using a 1x plate instead of the 2x plate in the center of the nose. Then if you wind up with a 9 wide loco, use an 8 wide tender to ease the transition to the cars. Many of my steam engines are 8 wide, with 7 wide tender and 6 wide cars.

I dont think I could make the loco 9 wide. Im not really good at building at all, let alone offsets. I think one of the major things about the class A is the skirting on the sides so I really wanted to keep it like that. If I can figure out how to fit a 4 wide motor to a 9 wide loco, your idea would work great. But I dont think Im skilled enough to make it work reliably. I will try to rebuild what I have so far in 9 wide and see where it goes from there. I just really liked how the rods looked half hidden by the skirting. But if I can make it work, I guess the rods are an acceptable sacrifice.

Though looking at pictures of the class A, it actually looks like it would be an 8 wide if built to accurate measurements but I dont think thats even possible while keeping the skirt. I want to not rely on decals for the stripes on any parts of the loco, just so it will look decent without decals, and because I dont have any way to make decals. Haha

Oh, and what part were you referring to with the "1xnx1 panel"?

Edited May 6, 2013 by Spitfire2865

[zephyr1934]

Oh, and what part were you referring to with the "1xnx1 panel"?

I was thinking either a 1x2x1 panel (4865 or 4865b) or 1x4x1 panel (30413).

[Commander Wolf]

I was thinking either a 1x2x1 panel (4865 or 4865b) or 1x4x1 panel (30413).

Yeah, these are what I was talking about when I said "L-panel". Do they make taller ones of these yet? Like 1xNx2?

Yes please take some pictures of your odd wide frame.

Here's what it looks like in my 5AT:

The yellow part is all 2-wide sitting on 4-wide bogies. The black parts are the 7-wide stuff that's mainly just connected on top and at the ends using the jumper plates. In the red thing in the bottom studs go into the holes on the underside of 2xN plates to make the offset.

Same deal in the loco:

The structural backbone (the yellow part again) is just a bunch of 2xN bricks. The boiler is 4-wide and can thus connect directly whereas the 7-wide running boards and cab are only connected at the front and back.

[zephyr1934]

Yeah, these are what I was talking about when I said "L-panel". Do they make taller ones of these yet? Like 1xNx2?

Yes... sort of. There are 2 high, 3 high and 5 high panels, but all of the other variants have studs across the top and many also have partial or full sides.

[Spitfire2865]

Yeah the problem with those panels are the length definitely. I might go with zephyrs idea to just cut out the rods going to the pistons. Then maybe make it 9 wide.

[zephyr1934]

Ah ha! I finally found it. I knew that John Neal did a Hiawatha locomotive and while poking around for something else I found a shot of it at the top of this photo.

[SavaTheAggie]

I agree with commander wolf, lose the piston arm and go with either a 9 wide body or snot tiles with an 8 wide frame. Building a 9 wide frame on a fixed motor is not difficult, you just need to make the attempt.

--Tony

[Spitfire2865]

Zephyr- can you find any more pictures of that locomotive? Or is that the only one?

And Tony- yeah Im guna try a 9 wide frame as soon as I have time.