|
|
Post by thebessemerkid on Oct 11, 2014 17:56:25 GMT -8
I've seen sites claim different fuel capacities also: www.geocities.ws/guilford_350/alcocs6.html
Note that site lists 15'3" as the height for C628(sic), C630(sic) and C636(sic) So this would indicate that the only reliable way to ascertain actual measurements in the field. To date, the only one claiming field measurements is Bowser. They are within an hour or two of the last remaining C636's in the country, so it certainly seems possible. Can a locomotive vary in height with fuel? Yes. It can also vary with wheel size, they do wear. I'd expect new vs old springs might enter in also, although they may have more impact on equalization than ride height. That site doesn't even get the model designations correct, so how good is the other info? Full vs. empty fuel tank changes a loco height maybe 1". Wheel wear approx max 0.5". Old vs. new springs? No change. That's precisely my point. There is all sorts of info on the net, good, bad or otherwise. Absent going and verifying measurements, it means little. As for variations in height, the point is there are variables. How great they are is also in need of verification. As an Engineer I will state that when writing specifications, we include conditions under which they are taken. So we'll see what the prototype measures, compare it to the model and figure out what needs adjusted. |
|
|
|
Post by Chad on Oct 11, 2014 17:57:44 GMT -8
I look at it this way. If I don't like it, I don't buy it. If I do like it I buy it. Pretty simple. No need to complain just go with what you like. One thing I always keep in mind, NO model will be perfect, just ain't gonna happen. If what is offered at a price you are willing to pay and you like it great. If not it's an easy choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcjones on Oct 11, 2014 18:00:50 GMT -8
Mark,
Right on....
Goin to have to strip an IC unit since Bowser didn't do any decorated undecorated's. I'll work with the tank then.
Over and out....I'm done.
JL
Vancouver WA
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark R. on Oct 11, 2014 18:08:41 GMT -8
Then I strongly suggest you start your own business, do all the measuring / design work, work with the fine folks in China and build the perfect engine and sell it for $100. That should make EVERYbody happy .... If you seriously think this engine is crap, I strongly suggest you don't buy it as it will continually make you miserable every time you look at. When you have a minute, please post a few pictures of the "perfect" engines you DO have - I'd love to see them. Mark. Nonsense. I own a business and I consider customer feedback important. If a customer tells me what makes them buy a product and what makes them not buy a product, I consider that valuable data. Folks here saying what makes them buy or not buy ALCOs from Bowser is a good thing. Of course it's valuable data .... as future reference. Bowser is not going to recall all these engines to correct a ride height issue. They may correct it on a subsequent run (if cost effective), but what they have released now is what we get - we live with it, fix it or pass on it. Mark. |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 11, 2014 18:38:09 GMT -8
"Then I strongly suggest you start your own business, do all the measuring / design work, work with the fine folks in China and build the perfect engine and sell it for $100. That should make EVERYbody happy ...."
I was waiting for this, the battle cry of the good enough crowd.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Oct 11, 2014 18:47:08 GMT -8
 Dave, actually that is the denial cry of the "we want a Genesis C-636" but until that happens the Bowser unit should be acceptable to many that want a C-636 now. we also want a Genesis SD40-2,,,,couldnt resist that one. Spikre 
|
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 11, 2014 18:49:25 GMT -8
Well, a lot of us want a Genny SD40-2.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2014 18:52:41 GMT -8
I look at it this way. If I don't like it, I don't buy it. If I do like it I buy it. Pretty simple. No need to complain just go with what you like. One thing I always keep in mind, NO model will be perfect, just ain't gonna happen. If what is offered at a price you are willing to pay and you like it great. If not it's an easy choice. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark R. on Oct 11, 2014 18:59:07 GMT -8
"Then I strongly suggest you start your own business, do all the measuring / design work, work with the fine folks in China and build the perfect engine and sell it for $100. That should make EVERYbody happy ...." I was waiting for this, the battle cry of the good enough crowd. Dave Or those who still enjoy getting their fingers dirty. I would have no problem doing the fuel tank modifications and bolster modifications. As a matter of fact, I actually enjoy doing that and ending up with something better than the RTR crowd is satisfied with. Mark. |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 11, 2014 19:04:39 GMT -8
Sorry Mark, for this price point, you shouldn't have to rebuild the model.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by Spikre on Oct 11, 2014 19:20:52 GMT -8
 Dave, a lot on ALL Forums want all HO to be Genesis. but that's not ever going to happen, is it ?? for NOW the Bowser C-636 is the Only Plastic Bodied C-636 in Town. and seems to be decent enuff for the Other Half. Spikre 
|
|
chuckc
Junior Member
Posts: 57 
|
Post by chuckc on Oct 11, 2014 19:24:16 GMT -8
"Then I strongly suggest you start your own business, do all the measuring / design work, work with the fine folks in China and build the perfect engine and sell it for $100. That should make EVERYbody happy ...." I was waiting for this, the battle cry of the good enough crowd. Dave Or those who still enjoy getting their fingers dirty. I would have no problem doing the fuel tank modifications and bolster modifications. As a matter of fact, I actually enjoy doing that and ending up with something better than the RTR crowd is satisfied with. Mark. Great. Please do tell us how you would evenly take 1/16th of an inch of those wide bolsters. |
|
|
|
Post by Chad on Oct 11, 2014 19:27:27 GMT -8
I look at it this way. If I don't like it, I don't buy it. If I do like it I buy it. Pretty simple. No need to complain just go with what you like. One thing I always keep in mind, NO model will be perfect, just ain't gonna happen. If what is offered at a price you are willing to pay and you like it great. If not it's an easy choice. Really, that the best you could come up with. WOW, I do fell sorry for you. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark R. on Oct 11, 2014 20:00:18 GMT -8
Sorry Mark, for this price point, you shouldn't have to rebuild the model. Dave I'm not going to disagree with you, but .... right or wrong, it's here and it is what it is, there's nothing we can do about it now. They are not going to recall them all to correct the ride height. With any luck, IF there is another run, hopefully our findings will be taken to heart and corrections made. Atlas corrected the too short wheelbase on their RS11, Athearn corrected problems on their Genesis GP9, and others based on findings after the fact. Even so, all these "wrong" engines still sold just fine - as will this initial run of the C636. I'd bet my last dollar there are a lot more people who this ride height / fuel tank problem doesn't bother than does. Mark. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark R. on Oct 11, 2014 20:05:29 GMT -8
Or those who still enjoy getting their fingers dirty. I would have no problem doing the fuel tank modifications and bolster modifications. As a matter of fact, I actually enjoy doing that and ending up with something better than the RTR crowd is satisfied with. Mark. Great. Please do tell us how you would evenly take 1/16th of an inch of those wide bolsters. Personally, I would strip the trucks down and mount the bare frames squarely in a move-able XY vice and use an a square end cut bit in my drill press to mill off exactly what I needed. Mark. |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 11, 2014 20:27:44 GMT -8
Judicious use of a milling machine and a new fuel tank would do wonders.
Dave
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2014 22:07:43 GMT -8
Really, that the best you could come up with. WOW, I do fell sorry for you. "that the best"? And you fell? Are you ok? |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 11, 2014 22:25:32 GMT -8
Judicious use of a milling machine and a new fuel tank would do wonders. Dave I swear there's a real business opportunity here. A proper fuel tank for this C-636 ('cause you can bet Bowser won't do it!) The bigger fuel tanks for the Atlas SP&S C-424's and C-425's A proper fuel tank for the Atlas UP SDP35 And a proper fuel tank for the "other" Atlas SDP35's You can see where I'm going, here. And not 3D stairstepping, please. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Doom on Oct 11, 2014 23:59:54 GMT -8
Judicious use of a milling machine and a new fuel tank would do wonders. Dave I swear there's a real business opportunity here. A proper fuel tank for this C-636 ('cause you can bet Bowser won't do it!) The bigger fuel tanks for the Atlas SP&S C-424's and C-425's A proper fuel tank for the Atlas UP SDP35 And a proper fuel tank for the "other" Atlas SDP35's You can see where I'm going, here. And not 3D stairstepping, please. Ed And new aftermarket motors for all of the above, as any future releases will have that new wimpy motor.  |
|
|
|
Post by lvrr325 on Oct 12, 2014 3:37:56 GMT -8
I'm going to keep mine, as it fills a hole I never expected I'd be able to buy in a more or less mass produced plastic model. It has to come apart for a decoder anyways, if it's not hard to take a few scale inches out of the bolster/gearbox then I'll mill it off.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChessieFan1978 on Oct 12, 2014 4:47:08 GMT -8
Here are some shots from the C636 I cracked open, showing the truck assembly and kingpin. As I mentioned earlier, my hi-ad C630 rides at a nearly identical height to my C636, and the parts (including the frame) look identical. So, I don't think there's any change in the height or frame/truck assembly from the C630 to the C636. You can clearly see the block atop the truck gearcase that forms the truck bolster. This is the part that seems that it might be a relatively easy fix. While I had 'er cracked open I also took a shot of the motor since there were questions earlier about that. Not sure if you can tell much by a picture, but here it is.     Well I'm gonna wait and see. If someone does this I'd like to see the results. I wonder if it will hurt operational performance. Don't get me started on that motor though. You would have to add material on the topside for the worm gear covers. Looks like I will have to shave off that plate to lower it! |
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Oct 12, 2014 5:38:42 GMT -8
I'm going to keep mine, as it fills a hole I never expected I'd be able to buy in a more or less mass produced plastic model. It has to come apart for a decoder anyways, if it's not hard to take a few scale inches out of the bolster/gearbox then I'll mill it off. Please keep up informed of your modifications |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2014 6:17:52 GMT -8
Numerous folks here have documented the prototype cab and platform heights and measured the model cab and platform heights and have demonstrated that both are 4 -6" too high on the model. I've seen nobody document the opposite. The "documents" that people are basing their assertions on are at best secondhand. UNTIL SOMEONE ACTUALLY TAKES OUT THEIR TAPE MEASURES AND MEASURING STICKS AND MEASURES AN ACTUAL PROTOTYPE LOCOMOTIVE WE CAN NOT SAY FOR SURE THAT BOWSER SCREWED UP. So for anyone close to the few survivors, you have some homework. GET ACTUAL MEASUREMENTS. Bowser may have well screwed it up, so far the evidence seems to indicate they got some stuff wrong, other than the fuel tank, which they admitted on Facebook. As far as the fuel tank, the explanation that Bowser gave was absolutely hilarious. This is addressed to Bowser....you did such a work of art in the C430....including the fuel tank. So how come the C636 which has been on the burner for over two years, is getting picked apart like a flock of buzzards on fresh roadkill? |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Oct 12, 2014 6:55:08 GMT -8
The "documents" that people are basing their assertions on are at best secondhand. The dimension I presented for the overall height of an SP&S/BN C-636 was taken from a reproduction of a page from an SP&S diagram book. I expect the reason SP&S included this dimension was for clearance purposes. That would imply they would have wanted it to be correct. The deck height would be pretty easy. And the fuel tank clearance, too, though somewhat unpleasant. Getting the cab height (accurately) is going to be, I think, awfully difficult. So I expect the number I presented will be the best available. Ed |
|
chuckc
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by chuckc on Oct 12, 2014 7:17:31 GMT -8
Well I'm gonna wait and see. If someone does this I'd like to see the results. I wonder if it will hurt operational performance. Don't get me started on that motor though. You would have to add material on the topside for the worm gear covers. Looks like I will have to shave off that plate to lower it! Just to add some more info, I measured my Bowser C630 with the Tri-mounts and my Bowser C630m with the Dofascos and I believe both are within 1" of what they should be. That's a good thing. Back to the problem, I wonder how thick that plate on the Hi-ads is? What percentage of that plate would need to be taken off? The problem for me is that I don't have a milling machine so now what? How much are they? I would suggest instead that Bowser manufacture a new piece for their Hi-ads. Didn't they recently just manufacture an entire new cab with a new roof line for their ALCOs? Both the Bowser C630s with the hi-ads (that nobody previously complained about) and now the C636s are about 4+ inches too high. If we had previously complained about the C630s with the hi-ads, perhaps now we would have the correct height on the C636s. Again, I believe Bowser should manufacture the new part. People who have already bought their C636s and C630s with Hi-ads could replace the part. Future C636s and C630s with Hi-ads would then be the correct height. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2014 7:45:57 GMT -8
The "documents" that people are basing their assertions on are at best secondhand. The dimension I presented for the overall height of an SP&S/BN C-636 was taken from a reproduction of a page from an SP&S diagram book. I expect the reason SP&S included this dimension was for clearance purposes. That would imply they would have wanted it to be correct. The deck height would be pretty easy. And the fuel tank clearance, too, though somewhat unpleasant. Getting the cab height (accurately) is going to be, I think, awfully difficult. So I expect the number I presented will be the best available. Ed It has been stated that Bowser actually measured one of the survivors. Now if a third party were to actually measure one of the few remaining C-636's and those measurements show the Bowser model is incorrect, then Bowser doesn't have a leg to stand on as far as the "correctness" of the model. I also don't doubt the measurements by the Spokane, Portland & Seattle, though some will in their unwavering defense of Bowser and will take issue with the SP&S and BN. Bowser, according to their Facebook page is defending the dimensions of their model. It would be nice to have some real concrete evidence to show them they are highly (sorry no pun intended) incorrect. However, I think even if the model is shown to be wrong those who are not accepting the errors are spitting into the wind as far as getting corrections done. |
|
chuckc
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by chuckc on Oct 12, 2014 7:53:04 GMT -8
The dimension I presented for the overall height of an SP&S/BN C-636 was taken from a reproduction of a page from an SP&S diagram book. I expect the reason SP&S included this dimension was for clearance purposes. That would imply they would have wanted it to be correct. The deck height would be pretty easy. And the fuel tank clearance, too, though somewhat unpleasant. Getting the cab height (accurately) is going to be, I think, awfully difficult. So I expect the number I presented will be the best available. Ed It has been stated that Bowser actually measured one of the survivors. Now if a third party were to actually measure one of the few remaining C-636's and those measurements show the Bowser model is incorrect, then Bowser doesn't have a leg to stand on as far as the "correctness" of the model. I also don't doubt the measurements by the Spokane, Portland & Seattle, though some will in their unwavering defense of Bowser and will take issue with the SP&S and BN. Bowser, according to their Facebook page is defending the dimensions of their model. It would be nice to have some real concrete evidence to show them they are highly (sorry no pun intended) incorrect. However, I think even if the model is shown to be wrong those who are not accepting the errors are spitting into the wind as far as getting corrections done. Some additional sources for ALCO dimensions mentioned in the following link. www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=150402&start=0 |
|
|
|
Post by Mark R. on Oct 12, 2014 9:36:15 GMT -8
Numerous folks here have documented the prototype cab and platform heights and measured the model cab and platform heights and have demonstrated that both are 4 -6" too high on the model. I've seen nobody document the opposite. This is addressed to Bowser....you did such a work of art in the C430....including the fuel tank. So how come the C636 which has been on the burner for over two years, is getting picked apart like a flock of buzzards on fresh roadkill? You want the real answer ? The C430 is new from the ground up and completely tooled in China. The C636 was cobbled together from C630 parts by a toolmaker in the US who kept dragging his feet. Look at the chassis, you can see it's the same C630 chassis with the sides milled out so the C636 air tanks would fit. I would be surprised if Bowser ever uses them again. Mark. |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 13, 2014 5:53:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by ChessieFan1978 on Oct 13, 2014 7:55:06 GMT -8
Bowser just posted on Facebook that they will reproduce a new Larger fuel tank for the C636. It will be available on the 3rd run to be announced about 6 months out.
|
|
