# New Project: "Bendable Boiler" Santa Fe Mallet



## Lee Willis

Maxum's recent post about the homemade Big Boy made from two postwar Lionel steamers triggered a long simmering project in the back of my mind, and brought it to a boil.

I'm going to make a model of Santa Fe 1170 or 1171 - I have not decided which, by cutting apart and bashing two LC+ steamers. They are shown below. 

The photos below show Santa Fe 2-6-6-2 Mallets from 1910. Both locos had an _articulated boiler: _the entire locomotive bent, with each set of drivers rigidly mounted on one portion of a two-part, bendable boiler. 1170 and 1171 differed only in the type of joint used between the two halfs. 1170 had a type of sealed ball and socket. 1171 had a accordion-type bellows. Both locos worked well term terms of power, speed, etc., but the seal - both types - gave so many problems that Santa Fe eventually scrapped both, after about ten years. Both were big locos - for 1910, roughly the size of the first of Santa Fe Northerns, made 20 years later. 

Anyway, what pushed me over the edge is that when I measured the diameter and wheelbase of an LC+ Hudson, the drivers and that driver wheelbase were a 1:48 scale match for the 1170 class. So I can make a scale model of 1170 from two LC+ Hudsons. 

So a quick call to Pat at Pats Trains found two identical LC+ Hudsons (so both ends use the same remote). They are on the way. I will update you as I can on this.


----------



## Lehigh74

Sounds like an interesting "Lee" project. I find myself wondering how you will handle the bellows/seal between the boilers.


----------



## Lee Willis

Lehigh74 said:


> Sounds like an interesting "Lee" project. I find myself wondering how you will handle the bellows/seal between the boilers.


Probably by avoiding it and making a model of the ball and socket one, maybe . . . lotta thinking required once I get the locos on the operating table, so to speak.


----------



## Spence

This should be very interesting project. I look forward to the end results.


----------



## Bob Phillips

This will be very interesting. Do you think it will still do an O36 curve?


----------



## Lee Willis

Bob Phillips said:


> This will be very interesting. Do you think it will still do an O36 curve?


I will have to see. I'll be happy enough it will do 0-48, but its a target to shoot for.


----------



## seayakbill

This will be fun to watch the progress.

Bill


----------



## Fabforrest

In the real thing, what was the accordion made of?


----------



## Nikola

Lehigh74 said:


> Sounds like an interesting "Lee" project. I find myself wondering how you will handle the bellows/seal between the boilers.


Slinky. There are cheapo plastic ones that would be perfect.


----------



## Vincent

If he manages to get that thig running on steam instead of electricity...


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Lee, I predict you'll have to take the boilers off for this project, no trying to do it all without any disassembly! 

This will be a neat project, a most unusual build, can't wait to see what you come up with.


----------



## Lee Willis

Fabforrest said:


> In the real thing, what was the accordion made of?


It was metal. The baffle was a large set of V crosssection hoops riveted together into a long accordian cylinder (seems like it would never work but apparently it did - sort of). The interior of the baffles tended to get filled up with cinders and soot and when the loco went around the curve the clogging there would cause the accordian to pop rivets - at least according to the story about it in _Iron Horses of the Santa Fe Trail.. _

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



gunrunnerjohn said:


> Lee, I predict you'll have to take the boilers off for this project, no trying to do it all without any disassembly!
> 
> This will be a neat project, a most unusual build, can't wait to see what you come up with.


Yes. I already have planned that. Not sure I will even use the original bodies at all, or not.


----------



## Vincent

Fabforrest said:


> In the real thing, what was the accordion made of?


No, No, No


----------



## Lee Willis

Seriously Vincent. You gotta be a genius to find stuff like this on the internet. How cool.

Thing is. I remember that from w a y b a c k w h e n.


----------



## Dennis461

*Hurry..Hurry read all about it!*



Lee Willis said:


> It was metal. The baffle was a large set of V crosssection hoops riveted together into a long accordian cylinder (seems like it would never work but apparently it did - sort of). The interior of the baffles tended to get filled up with cinders and soot and when the loco went around the curve the clogging there would cause the accordian to pop rivets - at least according to the story about it in _Iron Horses of the Santa Fe Trail.. _
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. I already have planned that. Not sure I will even use the original bodies at all, or not.


This article explains construction, including the design which prevented cinder filling the V's. And as I understand it, the water inside the two boilers did not 'communicate'. It would have been a difficult job having the firetubes run through both boilers.
http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/blwmal00.Html


----------



## hokie71

That is an impressive article, an eye opener for me.


----------



## Norton

A couple of thoughts Lee. You could use flexible pipe for the joint. Available in metal and plastic.










This item may be of interest.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/6308049500-lionel-Lm-class-A-1234-frame-and-boards/163052084936?hash=item25f6a95ec8:g:dFYAAOSw3UZa-xz3

Pete


----------



## cole226

Lee, I knew you wouldn't be able to let this one pass. 

should be a interesting build. but I do see it getting done.:thumbsup:


----------



## Lee Willis

I was looking at flexible pipes early today at Lowes. Also thought of hoses for shop vacs. Not sure yet what or how I will do it. That is part of the fun.


----------



## cole226

how bout that! I just came in from the shop to suggest the shop vac hose.


----------



## Lee Willis

I think of the two, the shop vac hose might work better. I think the loco will tolerate only a little bit of bending stiffness there and I want as little as possible. I'll plan to go back when I have no time (translation: when my wife isn't with me) to prowl the aisles at Lowes some more, and maybe at a toy store or two (if I can find any still open) to see if there is some tool or fitting or child's toy that might have a bellows with even less stiffness. I remember when I was a kid, there were vacuum cleaner hoses that had almost no tension in them - very flexible, much more so than today's modled plastic hoses. If I could find one of those the right size . . .


----------



## cole226

seems like I've seen one with a fabric cover. just can't remember what on.


----------



## Nikola

Lee Willis said:


> I think of the two, the shop vac hose might work better. I think the loco will tolerate only a little bit of bending stiffness there and I want as little as possible. I'll plan to go back when I have no time (translation: when my wife isn't with me) to prowl the aisles at Lowes some more, and maybe at a toy store or two (if I can find any still open) to see if there is some tool or fitting or child's toy that might have a bellows with even less stiffness. I remember when I was a kid, there were vacuum cleaner hoses that had almost no tension in them - very flexible, much more so than today's modled plastic hoses. If I could find one of those the right size . . .


Shark and other upright vacuums have what you want. They are designed to contract completely for easy storage alongside the upright section of the vacuum. I'll bet that the diameter will be perfect. You should be able to scrounge one easily enough. (The diameter on the one on my vacuum is just under 1 5/8", and it is softly flexible as you describe.)


----------



## cramden

Just a thought, maybe a pre-heater hose from a VW or Audi. They came in a flexible paper as well as metal in different diameters. They also used smaller diameter hoses of the same material for defroster vents. Remember these?http://1967beetle.com/air-cleaner-pre-heat-hoses/


----------



## Dennis461

here you go
https://www.ameriflex.net/custom-products/metal-bellows


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I think the flexible plastic hose they used to sell for stuff like bathroom vents in the right size might work, it has very little resistance to bending.

Here's something, it appears to come in a variety of sizes.

38mm 1.5" Silicone Air Ducting Flexible Brake Cold Induction Intake Pipe Hose


----------



## Lee Willis

There seem to be a lot of options. I'll probably get several and try them out.


----------



## papa3rail

This looks like a pretty cool project Lee.You might look into carburetor preheat tube as another option.


----------



## Lee Willis

papa3rail said:


> This looks like a pretty cool project Lee.You might look into carburetor preheat tube as another option.


This is looking like an idea worth trying. For one thing if you compare the carb preheat tube to the photo of ATSF 1171, it looks very much like it, with a high number of "fins" per inch. I willd definitely try it, although I don't think I will know if if that, or something else, will work, until I see it work.

Edit: Wow. Amazon sells gobs of them. Some are even already made of black metal. I will wait until I get the locos and can measure the boiler diameter and make more detailed plans to decide on the diameter. 

As Peppard used to say on the A-Team: "I love it when a plan comes together."


----------



## Nikola

Carb preheat tube is very stiff and will crack if continually bent. If either end connection is loose to the boilers, it could work as that is what will hinge (does not need to seal anything).


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Like Nikola says, that is a very stiff tubing, and it will break after flexing 40-50 times. Probably not the stuff you'd want to use.


----------



## Vincent

Nikola said:


> Carb preheat tube is very stiff and will crack if continually bent. If either end connection is loose to the boilers, it could work as that is what will hinge (does not need to seal anything).



I don't know, Nikola. Lee's pretty big on realism, and if he can figure out a way to get steam into the boiler...


----------



## Lee Willis

Guys, I know about carb pre-heat tubes, used them waaay back when, just had not thought of them - that is what is so good about this forum, you get a whole wide range of ideas, quickly. Those tubes are stiff, and I think maybe they are too stiff, or not: I know they they are made to flex a very tiny bit, vibration from the engine, etc. and it is not much more that I need them to flex here. I can try them. I would limit the operation of the loco to O-72 curves, which would mean very little bending, if it meant I could use a more realistic bellows. Meanwhile I will look at other options. There are many - something has to work well. Just a matter of finding it. 

I really appreciate all the suggestions, and if there are any more . . . 

I must say though, that if I was building a static display model only, that carb pre-heater tube would be hard to beat.


----------



## PatKn

I am really looking forward to this project.

Another challenge is the pipes that go on the outside of the articulated joint. When the engine bends the outside pipes expand and the inside pile contract. Since the engine has to bend both ways, the pipes have to be able to both expand and contract. They look like straight pipes so there is no rubber hose bent to allow expansion.


----------



## Lee Willis

PatKn said:


> I am really looking forward to this project.
> 
> Another challenge is the pipes that go on the outside of the articulated joint. When the engine bends the outside pipes expand and the inside pile contract. Since the engine has to bend both ways, the pipes have to be able to both expand and contract. They look like straight pipes so there is no rubber hose bent to allow expansion.


Yes, I've been worrying about this a bit. I think I have a solution that might work. Or it
might not. This is not going to be a simplle model to build - that is about the only thing I am certain of right now.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Lee Willis said:


> This is not going to be a simplle model to build - that is about the only thing I am certain of right now.


That is a very true statement!  It would be easier as a display model, but a running model will be a challenge.


----------



## Lee Willis

gunrunnerjohn said:


> That is a very true statement!  It would be easier as a display model, but a running model will be a challenge.


The irony is, that it will very likely be a shelf queen, simply because with about 100 locos (I have about 144 now , but I'm counting AA and ABA sets, etc., as only "one loco" even if two, three or four units), and a maximum of four locos I can run at one time, it is likely to get very little time on the layout, and essentially be a "display only model." On the other hand, making a display-only model would not be a big challenge. So if it can't make it around the layout well, then I failed in some way, no matter how good it makes. 

My goal is that it is easy to set up and run, too. One thing that ought to be cool is that it will be a fairly big Mallet, but should have no significant boiler stick out, because it bends in the middle, somewhat like an A-A set of diesels does. 

I've actually thought about making it two separate units, a front and rear, that clip together so they _appear _ to be one unit. If I went with the ball and socket type "hinge" in the boiler rather than the bellows, as in loco 1170, I'd probably do that. But I like the look of the bellows more. Really makes it clear what is different about the loco.

EDIT UPDATE: Hard to believe, but tracking data says these locos (and the black bonnet diesels I ordered) are out for delivery. I shoudd get them by 4PM today!!! This is sunning. I ordered them Friday afternoon, and they left Pat's Trains at 3:06 PM last Friday. Wow. Tomorrow, I can get my first hard look at what I face here.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Lee, I use the same logic for my pistol collection. Yes, a vast majority of them have lived all their life in the safe, only a handful get shot more than once. OTOH, anything in my collection is capable of firing, or it's not in the collection. 

I think what you face is a challenging project, but it'll be interesting to see how you pull it off!


----------



## PatKn

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Lee, I use the same logic for my pistol


You have a bendable stock pistol? 

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Lee Willis

PatKn said:


> You have a bendable stock pistol?
> 
> Pat
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


I figured maybe he meant he has the incredibly rare if famous Goloneshev bendable-barrel pistol that shoots around corners. Like ATSF 1170 and 1171, it didn't work too well either, tending to "leak" at the bend, with interesting consequences for the shooter.


----------



## Fabforrest

The guys on Mythbusters (the original one) bent a rifle barrel up to 90 degrees and it functioned pretty well.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

PatKn said:


> You have a bendable stock pistol?


Yep, for shooting around corners.


----------



## Vincent

Lee Willis said:


> I figured maybe he meant he has the incredibly rare if famous Goloneshev bendable-barrel pistol that shoots around corners. Like ATSF 1170 and 1171, it didn't work too well either, tending to "leak" at the bend, with interesting consequences for the shooter.


Another problem involved building up enough steam pressure to fire the bullet. Shoveling coal into that pistol barrel was pretty difficult.


----------



## rkenney

Fabforrest said:


> In the real thing, what was the accordion made of?


The bellows was made of fifty rings of resilient steel, riveted at the inner and outer edges.

The Santa Fe railroad bought six of these 2-6-6-2 locomotives from Baldwin over a two-year period, hoping they would ride more easily than the long rigid locomotives they were intended to replace. This proved not to be the case, and of course... there was trouble with the bellows.


----------



## Lee Willis

rkenney said:


> The bellows was made of fifty rings of resilient steel, riveted at the inner and outer edges.
> 
> The Santa Fe railroad bought six of these 2-6-6-2 locomotives from Baldwin over a two-year period, hoping they would ride more easily than the long rigid locomotives they were intended to replace. This proved not to be the case, and of course... there was trouble with the bellows.


Santa Fe tried hard, though, to make them work, and to experiment with different types of Mallets and almost bizarre arrangements of wheels, cylinders, and boilers. I am impressed by their willingness to experiment - nothing ventured, nothing gained.


----------



## Lee Willis

*A Small Amount of Progress*
It has actually been a week since these puppies showed uup on my front porch, but it was today before I got away from other stuff to work up in my workshop. These are the two LC+ steamers that will be modified into the ingle "bendable boiler" Santa Fe 1170 class loco. 

All I had time for today is to take them out of the box, check them, set them up, and verify both work, and that yes, since they are identical models, same SKU, etc., they will operate together with the same remote. They do, running at exactly the same speed without even being connectied, etc. 

I'll probably have the bodies off later today or tomorrow and then take some time playing with them before starting in on the cutting and such in earnest.


----------



## Guest

This sure will be an interesting project, Lee. Please keep us posted.


----------



## Lehigh74

They look great double headed.

It just dawned on me, but LC+ is probably the best way to double head steam at a “reasonable” price.


----------



## Spence

This is becoming an extremely interesting post. I'm looking forward to the progress.


----------



## Lee Willis

Lehigh74 said:


> They look great double headed.
> 
> It just dawned on me, but LC+ is probably the best way to double head steam at a “reasonable” price.


Yes, it works great. These two as shown will orbit the layout for over and over and never get more than a foot or so out of position relative to one another, for an hour, with the same remote, so nearly exactly the same speed do they run.


----------



## Lee Willis




----------



## Spence

An the journey begins. I look forward to the progress.


----------



## Lehigh74

That would really stink if you can’t use both motors. Defeats the purpose of having two LC+ engines on one control. I wonder what it would look like if you kept more of the front boiler (cut it off at the cab) so the front motor can be inside the front shell. Wouldn’t be prototypical, but might not look TOO bad.


----------



## Vincent

I'm not an expert Lee, but two motors might cause wheel-spinning problems if you can't get them perfectly coordinated. One quality motor should be enough to do the job.


----------



## TexasSP

Maybe 2 smaller 380 size motors might work?


----------



## Lee Willis

Lehigh74 said:


> That would really stink if you can’t use both motors. Defeats the purpose of having two LC+ engines on one control. I wonder what it would look like if you kept more of the front boiler (cut it off at the cab) so the front motor can be inside the front shell. Wouldn’t be prototypical, but might not look TOO bad.


I'm considering that, but I want to keep fiarly close to scale and prototype, and I'd be moving the bellows area of the boiler about 6 to 8 scale feet. Still . . . I'm thinking about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Lee Willis

Vincent said:


> I'm not an expert Lee, but two motors might cause wheel-spinning problems if you can't get them perfectly coordinated One quality motor should be enough to do the job.


Well, it doesn't with them running nose to tail, so I don't think it will here.

But you are correct, one good motor (and it is)would be enough.


----------



## Lee Willis

TexasSP said:


> Maybe 2 smaller 380 size motors might work?


I'm not going to try that. These motors are set up to coordinate with the LC+ speed control and I think I'd be fiddling with too much to try that.

A FINAL POINT TODAY. Very likely the front-most motor will fit under the rear boiler front when the loco is going straight. The question will be if it will on a 72 inch curve, if so I can live with it at that, although I would like it to do 60" too. I will complete the running chassis with two motors and only then see if I can find a way to keep the second engine.


----------



## Wood

I'm reading and following this. Someday, I'll be tinkering with modifying equipment and there is no better place to learn the tricks then here. Thanks for posting this step by step.


----------



## Big Jim

I guess you could use a K-Line loco with the back facing motor for the front engine.


----------



## Lee Willis

Big Jim said:


> I guess you could use a K-Line loco with the back facing motor for the front engine.


Nope, it would not be LC+ so the motor would not coordinate with the speed of the rear motor. Also not sure I could find one with exactly the same size drivers, etc., as this one.


----------



## papa3rail

I think the one motor would be sufficient and it looks like it will be the only way to get the prototypical look your after.Great thread .:appl:


----------



## Lee Willis

I made some progress today. After spending a couple of hours measuring and thinking about options, I used a bandsaw and cut both loco chassis a bit here and there. Below you see the two units spaced together as they will be when made into one loco. They are not connected physically here, they are just close together and because they run at exactly the same speed with LC+, they stay that way. I ran them back and forth for a while to test them. 








Here is a closer look at the junction between the two. 








Here is the good news. This is a photo from above when they are on a 72" curve. It looks like I may be able to keep the forward motor and still fit it in a a boiler shell of the rear section. Not sure. But I am working toward keeping two motors.


----------



## Norton

Lee, I posted this yesterday but for some reason the post was deleted. You could gain more clearance by machining the flywheel at a taper. I was able to do this without removing the flywheel from the motor. If you have a lathe or know someone who does its realtively simple. The larger motor on the right below had its flywheel machined to fit in a starter set 0-8-0.










Pete


----------



## Lee Willis

Thanks, Norton, but I am going to avoid _any _modification of the motors, etc. They have an unusual flywheel with a very disc shaped mass and a plastic lower portion for the speed control sensor, etc. I show it below. 

I am loath to make any mod to the motors or electronics, or even remove and re-install (whihc might affect tolerances and drift) since right now both front and rear sections run at exactly the same speed when controlled by just one remote. 

If push comes to shove, before having to do without the front motor, I will try various tricks that would result in a slightly less prototypical appearance, the move obvious to put a big sand done right where the motor top juts up, or use a wider boiler, etc. 

Beyond the obvious reason for having two motors (twice the power) another reason to figure out how to make this work is that with the second motor installed I will get the chuffing from the front board from that front motor - I'd like to have eight chuffs per revolution. I know from other projects that if I remove the motor the LC+ board shuts down to idle because it does not see the speed sensor reading and I get nothing for sound, so . . .


----------



## Lee Willis

More progress, and perhaps a small victory as far as keeping both motors. The two chassis are now physically (but still not electrically) connected. The combined articulated chassis behaves itself well on 72 and 60 inch curves. I have not run it on anything tighter, yet, but will try 48 later today. I ran it around the Mainline 2 a couple of times, at very low speed (about 8 scale mph) and it tracks well and does not bobble or tightened up in curves in changes in incline. It looks very smooth and natural as it moves. 

Below you see the connection I made between the two chassis. Note I put the pivot point under the rear of the motor, at a point where it looks like its position will minimize what room the motor needs to swing inside the boiler shell. 








Here is the loco on a 60 inch curve








And here it is from above. This is a 60 inch curve and I think I can make this work out. Going to try hard, I can tell you. 









I plan to spend the rest of the day thinking and measuring and doing some wiring (electrically connecting front and rear section pickups, "putting away" the smoke unit and headlight wires for the back unit, etc. Perhaps putting the rear boiler shell back on. 

This project is a lot of fun, and many other projects (the cathedral, etc.) will just have to wait. This is way too much fun!!


----------



## Spence

That’s an added plus that this project is a lot of fun for you. Sometimes projects tend to be more like work then enjoyment.


----------



## Lee Willis

Spence said:


> That’s an added plus that this project is a lot of fun for you. Sometimes projects tend to be more like work then enjoyment.


That's true, and a few times I just stopped and killed a project when that happened. This is fun. I actually had the boiler shells (both) cut and mounted briefly - it looked good! but felt I'd better wait and think about things for a while before proceeding.


----------



## rdmtgm

I am glad your having fun doing, because I am having fun watching!
Randy


----------



## Nikola

If it gets too tight, extending the wheelbase by as little as 1/8" will make a big difference. You can also play with the pivot point.


----------



## Lee Willis

All done for today, and this weekend, since I have to write a report tomorrow (but I get paid $$$ which will buy trains! ).

The bodies, suitably cut, on them, just sitting loose. I ran them about 20 feet like this - didn't want to go to fast or far with them loose. No problems. Looks pretty good!!










Here you can see the junction in a 72" curve. There is almost 1/8 inch clearance - I can get more by grinding the inside of the boiler shell. 








BTW, the bodies are there for the weight and to form the buck for the body that will be visible when the model is done. I will grind done all domes and surface features smooth and then cover the boilers with a new shell, plastic or acrylic tube, covering the whole thing, adding a bit of scale thickness to the boiler, then add dones, pipes, etc. There will be nothing of the original bodies visible when it is done. Also build a new cab about 3/8 inch higher and wider than before, etc. etc.


----------



## Lee Willis

All done for today, and this weekend, since I have to write a report tomorrow (but I get paid $$$ which will buy trains! ).

The bodies, suitably cut, on them, just sitting loose. I ran them about 20 feet like this - didn't want to go to fast or far with them loose. No problems. Looks pretty good!!










Here you can see the junction in a 72" curve. There is almost 1/8 inch clearance - I can get more by grinding the inside of the boiler shell. 








BTW, the bodies are there for the weight and to form the buck for the body that will be visible when the model is done. I will grind done all domes and surface features smooth and then cover the boilers with a new shell, plastic or acrylic tube, covering the whole thing, adding a bit of scale thickness to the boiler, then add dones, pipes, etc. There will be nothing of the original bodies visible when it is done. Also build a new cab about 3/8 inch higher and wider than before, etc. etc. 








I feel really good about today's progress. Tremendous day!!


----------



## papa3rail

Nice progress.


----------



## Vincent

I'm impressed. 

But my wife fears that you are a bad influence on me.


----------



## Wood

Phase 1 has worked out. Building a completely new boiler was not in my mind. I thought you were only going to add a flex joint between the two. Looking back on the post, I can see that would not work out. Plastic or acrylic tube. This, I've got to see.


----------



## Nikola

How robust is that hinge plate? I can see it failing if anyone ever attempted to pick the entire shebang up by only one of the engines.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I really can't wait to see this done, it will truly be a one-of-a-kind masterpiece! :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Lee Willis

Nikola said:


> How robust is that hinge plate? I can see it failing if anyone ever attempted to pick the entire shebang up by only one of the engines.


Well, it is plastic and so it would break before anything else, yes. 
But no one else will be picking it up but me. It seems robust enough for now, and I would accept that in the final product if necessary. But I may end up making the loco into two separate pieces, that clip (electrically) and latch (physically) together or not. We'll see how it goes.


----------



## PatKn

Real nice, Lee. I can't wait to see it finished.


----------



## Lee Willis

PatKn said:


> Real nice, Lee. I can't wait to see it finished.


Niether can I, but it's going to be a long haul. Lotta work yet to go. I hope to get time later today to work on it, but . . . only time will tell.


----------



## Lee Willis

Lots of progress today in a four hour session up in thh trainroom, but nothing to take photos of. Cutting and reconnecting wires, so the smoke on-off switch in the rear unit controls the unit now in the front chassis and stuff like that. 
I remounted the speakers from both tenders in tandem in one tender, and re-arranged the wires in the tender-loco connector so each set of drivers now chuffs through one of those speakers in that single tender. IT REALLY SOUNDS GOOD LIKE THAT, WITH TWO UNITS CHUFFING IN ONE TENDER!!! WOW!!

Began making the single axle pilot and rear trucks.

Stuff like that.

More of the same tomorrow. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some folks were wondering about the "acrylic and plastic boiler shell" plans I discussed. I've done this before, not building an articulated, but bashing an LC+ steamer into a scale size steamer using this same approach. I found these photos below, of a scale size Adriatic I built on an LC+ Hudson chassis. It is a fantasy loco I built just to be scale size (its the same size as a Legacy Southern Crescent Pacific) and look good.

The original semi-scale LC+ Hudson body is inside a new scale body that _entirely_ covers it: everything you see on the outside is new and scale size. The acrylic tube fits around the semi-scale LC+ boiler, which was ground down and smoothed, and is now scale diameter. I will do the same here. New domes, etc. The top photo below shows the loco before priming finishing and painting. The bottom one is when done.


----------



## Wood

Thanks for showing that acrylic tube. I do remember that Adriatic project. Great dealing. Please post a video of your Mallet build. Wanna hear that sound.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Sounds like this is going to be a real masterpiece, having the two sound systems will be super cool!


----------



## Big Jim

Why the third six wheel truck under the tender?


----------



## Lee Willis

Big Jim said:


> Why the third six wheel truck under the tender?


Why not? I was making a fantasy loco and I thought a Centipede tender would be cool. This was the closest I could get to work with the parts I had.


----------



## Krieglok

That third truck looks pretty cool. The centipede tender is a neat idea as it makes the locomotive unique. 

Tom


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Lee Willis said:


> Why not? I was making a fantasy loco and I thought a Centipede tender would be cool. This was the closest I could get to work with the parts I had.


Obviously the rivet count was off Lee, you'll have to work on that!


----------



## Lee Willis

More progress. Lots of little changes and additions/cuts on the chassis, completion of the front and rear trucks, re-arrangement and testing of all the re-wiring, etc. Lots of testing of it and how smoothly it runs, etc. 

A good hour on the two-part body, cutting and grinding, then fitting it so it fits just so as I want it and sits naturally, level, flat and without wobble, without screws holding it down (I will screw it down eventually, I just don't want the screws to have to do anything beyond making an already perfect fit tight. 

Top view below shows the bare chassis on top, after about one hour of test running. Bottom shows it with the bodies on both ends. You can see I have cut away and ground down a lot. It runs smoothly with the bodies off - a good sign, and even better with them on. I ran it for another hour with them on. Smoke lights and both sound systems all worth as I want. It is a sweet chassis.








Here is a different view . . . 








Here it is on a 60 inch curve, the sharpest I've tried and will try. It runs well on this, but whether I can get the bellows/joint to work ona 60" I do not know. 








Next step is to leave it alone for a day or two and think, then start doing the model building of the bodies for both ends. It will look like something like this. Still not sure what the join between the two will be or how well it will work.


----------



## Vincent

We have a work of art in progress here.


----------



## Wood

Lee Willis said:


> *Next step is to leave it alone for a day or two and think,* then start doing the model building of the bodies for both ends. It will look like something like this. Still not sure what the join between the two will be or how well it will work.
> View attachment 457272



That's the secret! Think... 

Quite interesting. Thank you for posting all of this.


----------



## Big Jim

Lee Willis said:


> Why not? I was making a* fantasy* loco and I thought a Centipede tender would be cool. This was the closest I could get to work with the parts I had.


I guess it does leave a lot to one's imagination! I don't think that I can squint that far.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Lovin' it Lee, nice progress! :thumbsup:


----------



## hokie71

Fun project and interesting. Lee, are you using any special tools for the cutting and grinding other than a dremel and files?


----------



## Lee Willis

hokie71 said:


> Fun project and interesting. Lee, are you using any special tools for the cutting and grinding other than a dremel and files?


A bandsaw with metal cutting blade and a bench sander with an 80 grit belt, I used both to do the cuts and make the boiler surface of the original body smoother. 

The new boiler shell arrived today. It is three foot long acrylic tube with an outside diameter of 2". It will fit over the existing boiler now ground down smooth, and be almost exactly the scale diameter for 1170's boiler (the tube is a scale 1.5 inches - 3 mm - too wide).


----------



## Fabforrest

Lee, will that stuff take paint OK?


----------



## Lee Willis

Fabforrest said:


> Lee, will that stuff take paint OK?


Well, sanded well with #400 paper to scuff it a bit and then primed with Rustoleum gray primer, yes, very well.


----------



## HarborBelt1970

This is truly, deeply ambitious project. The acrylic tube should work fine in terms of taking a painted surface; the metalwork would be beyond my capabilities (or imagination). Very keen to see the progress!


----------



## Lee Willis

The photo below shows the boiler tubestrial fitted onto the loco bodies, all fitted to the chassis, as it is going through a 72" curve. The junction of the tubes if right over the pivot point where the boiler "bends" and on the inside they come within 1/8 inch and are about 3/8 outside. 

A LOT of work went into what appears very simple: two cut tubes that slip and hold (quite firmly) onto the boiler and fit. These are only prototypes. They don't fit perfectly and I will cut new ones after some experimentation with these.

THE Next step is to figure out a function bellows or boiler ring to close the gap butr flex enough to work around curves. THAT is going to b a challenge, because the dang motor is right on the inside of that junction.








Anyway, it is going smoothly if sucking up lots of time. It took two hours to cut and fit the rear boiler tube alone.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

The motor flywheel is a bit if an issue, it obviously has to clear the inside on the sharpest curve you'll be navigating. I love this project and I'm looking forward to seeing it with the flexible section.


----------



## Lee Willis

The flexible section concerns me a lot because the motor is right there and almost any thickness in the boiler walls I "use up" with a bellows, etc. is going to eat into the clearance (now only about 1/8 inch on a 72" curve) around the motor in a curve.

I may end up modeling the other bendable boiler one, that used a compression ring instead of a bellows. Progress will be slow while I experiment with various bellows and rings, until I find a match.


----------



## Wood

It appears to me that the flywheel is very close to the front portion of the rear tube. The bellows bend will be at it's "most" 1/2 way between the two tubes, which is the bottom of the motor . You might even be able to add a 3/16th" to the rear tube and not have any bend on that fly wheel.


----------



## Lee Willis

Yes, it is down to fraction of an inch and I will have to proceed slowly. So I'm going to just stare are it and think about it for a few days before doing anything else.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I figured with that motor there the flexible part would be the tricky part.  I have faith in you Lee, you'll come up with something.


----------



## BWA

If the pivot point between the two chassis, is directly under the centre of the flywheel (where the motor shaft exits the flywheel), there should be virtually no sideways movement of the flywheel at all, it will always sit exactly in the middle of the rear boiler, and, always have the same clearance, whether on a straight or curved section of track.......

From your earlier pics, it seems a do-able thing......


----------



## Lee Willis

The pivot point is about 1/2 inch back from the motor flywheel: only place I could get a strong mechanical connection between them that would work for the chassis. 

I think I can build a junction that will work. I am fairly sure I can build one that looks good. The concern I have is if I can do both one that works well and looks good.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Always a conundrum Lee.


----------



## TexasSP

Lee, possibly a new flywheel could be made, longer but smaller in diameter to keep weight and effect the same. 

However, I would bet since the to locos are matched, you could get away with beveling the flywheel on the lead unit as the rear unit would compensate for any minor loss.

Rethought and removed my last statement.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

This is LC+, replacing the flywheel is a major deal, it has the encoder ring attached. Tapering the flywheel is a possibility to allow slightly more clearance, but that's probably as far as you can go and still keep the speed control.


----------



## TexasSP

I did not realize that. Certainly complicates things. Where is the encoder ring on the flywheel?


----------



## Lee Willis

Texas SP, the encoder ring is near the top. I have decided not to touch or cut anything.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Here's a close picture of a typical LC+ Steamer motor & flywheel.


----------



## Lee Willis

*MAJOR PROGRESS, EVEN IF IT LOOKS HOKEY*

*Short version:* I know how I can make an acceptable looking junction that works because a very crude prototype works - the loco went all around the layout at slow and fast speeds with it installed temporarily. 

*The rest of the story:* I went to Lowes and an Autozone yesterday and bought a bunch of air duct, vacuum cleanerr hoses, other flex hoses, and auto parts that were all about 2" diameter round and bellows-like. _ NONE WORKED._ All had at least one problem - they were too thick to fit and leave enough clearance for the flywheel, or they were too stiff to bend enough to allow the loco to could bend so it would stay on the track around curves. Some had both problems. One was just two big and then too thick, and then too stiff. Ugh. Some many options, but so little success!!. 

But the photo below shows a proof of concept that works, taking a different approach. What you see is a very thin piece of white styrene sheet, only about .01 inch thick, fitted between the rear boiler shell and the acrylic boiler tube. It is firmly held there but just juts into the back of the front boiler tube where nothing holds it in place. I admit, right now its sloppy, neither boiler tube nor this junction is really cut to fit precisely righo, and all are out of alignment etc by as much as 1/8th inch. But I can take care of all that later, in the final set of parts. Now that I know what works, I just have to build it more precisely. THAT I can do.. 








Here is the loco chassis with this trial junction set up, going through a SIXTY inch curve, through which it runs smoothly. What happens is that the inner plastic junction piece, being only .01 inch thick, deforms slightly as the loco goes around the curve. The loco doesn't seem to mind the tiny bit of pressing that piece does on the boiler shell as the plastic deforms, and the junction looks good enough as it does - no really wide visible gaps opn up - particularly when it is all painted black, I'm sure it will be acceptable. 








What I intend to do next is make new boiler shells very precisely matched so they meet perfectly at the junction . Then make the inner plastic junction piece more precisely and fit it well. Once I have that made, I will place small rings around the thing inner junction piece like below, so it looks more like a junction. 









I have a lot of work to do, but this is the top of the hill on this project: at this point, I know I can make it work well enough. 

Still a lot of work left to be done, but . . .


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Interesting, I'm eager to see what this looks like finished.


----------



## Lehigh74

Good solution. You could even do without the small rings that make it look like a bellows. You could make it more like 1170 instead of 1171. Your solution made me think of the vestibules on a Lionel 751 M-10000 set. Similar solution to a similar problem. With lots of use, the paint wears off the vestibules.


----------



## Lee Willis

Sorry about so many typos below. I'm working under a timeline to do this and get an errand for she-who-must-be-obeyed done this afternoon. 

I am very pleased with this project. It's working out fine.


----------



## PatKn

Great job, Lee. Can't wait to see the final product. 

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Nice solution Lee, with it all painted up, I suspect it'll be a very good fix for a rather sticky problem. Love the idea of the magnets, what a clever way to have a split personality locomotive.


----------



## Wood

I'm in the PA woods and this may be posted twice. With limited access, it did not show up. I posted:
"Yes I like this! The originals had a very small bellows and it appears your piece will work sussessfully."


----------



## Guest

We all knew Lee would figure this out.


----------



## Lee Willis




----------



## PatKn

Wow. I never knew these engines existed even though dome were never built. Fasenating stuff.

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## papa3rail

This project is so cool.:thumbsup:


----------



## BWA

All round very cool.......


----------



## Lee Willis

It is beginning to look like a locomotive now. Tomorrow I have to build and wire the headlight, moving it from behind the boiler front where it is on the LC+ chassis to above the boiler in front, and complete the cab.


----------



## Spence

I’m curious Lee. Do you keep track of your hours involved when you do a project? I’m sure the hours will add up when this one is done.


----------



## Norton

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Here's a close picture of a typical LC+ Steamer motor & flywheel.
> 
> View attachment 458040












John, I have never worked on a Lionchief engine. Is that a set screw holding the flywheel on? If so that would make modifying the flywheel even easier.
I know Lee said he wasn't going to touch the flywheel but it would not be a big deal to taper it and the modification would not affect speed control at all.

Pete


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Well, the Pentaplex would have been an incredible monster if you could have pulled off. I like this project too, can't wait to see it all painted and cleaned up.


----------



## Lee Willis

Sorry, I forgot to attached the red arrow pointing to the magnets, they are hard to see but the small stack to the right of center.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

You're really racing ahead on this one, a man on a mission!  It's a lot easier to imagine this all painted and looking cool and unique, what a great project!


----------



## Vincent

Lee, inspired by your example, I decided to build an articulated locomotive from two wind-up steam locomotives.

I, uhm, er, ah, am pleased to report that I still have all of my fingers, and that's the only good news I have.


----------



## PatKn

Boy, that's a cool looking locomotive. I can't wait to see it painted.

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Big Jim

How's "Ol' Slinky" coming along?


----------



## Lee Willis

Big Jim said:


> How's "Ol' Slinky" coming along?


Between work (actually interesting), stuff to repair here at home, the inevitable interruptions due to all the appointments I need to service and maintain my "aging infrastructure" and severla other projects that momentarily pushed it aside, it has sat, untouched, for several weeks. 

Just this morning I completed those projects and promised myself I will clean up things and get back to it tomorrow. 

or the next day!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

We look forward to the videos of it running down the rails hauling an insane amount of freight cars.


----------



## Lee Willis

Fabforrest said:


> In the real thing, what was the accordion made of?


Steel: it was assembled out of many disks of steel sealed together to form a bellows. It could only bend a bit, but that was enough.


----------



## Lee Willis

I got some quality time in with this puppy yesterday and this morning. 

I made a lot of progress although there isn't much exciting to photograph. I filled in on both sides as needed to get a good look - the white plastic seen here on the side of the front part of the loco. Took two hours per side to fit precisely - all scratch built.








I also have spent a good deal of time making tiny cosmetic improvements - gap filling etc all over the body, and making some pumps, valves and such seen below with the sand domes. 








I have a lot to do - it will take several more weeks I think.


----------



## Spence

This project certainly has been labor intensive.


----------



## Lee Willis

Spence said:


> This project certainly has been labor intensive.


Oh, and it will get much more intense. So far this is a like building a house - the sticks and walls go up quicly and it looks so much like a house. then it sits for months looking much that same as everything inside is finished. 

I have a long step by step plan that means several more weeks, after the week I have to take off for business.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Can't wait to see the end result, you're putting a lot of effort into this build.


----------



## Wood

Lee, Is the piping coming from junk parts found on a parts kit frame that you saved from another model? If so, that's cool and helpful.


----------



## papa3rail

Now we're getting to the good stuff ,nice job Lee.:thumbsup:


----------



## PatKn

This is going to be a great looking locomotive.


----------



## Lee Willis




----------



## Vincent

Lee, if nothing else, this is an excellent series on how to build a locomotive.


----------



## Dano

I just caught up with this, Lee. Great looking project! I may steal this. I have a glut of 2046s that I could use and since they have the motor over the drivers they should be relatively easy to join together. My biggest problem would be having two that run in sync and my 36" curves!
Ah well, that's for another day.


----------



## Lee Willis




----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Love all the detail Lee. Interesting about the cab, so even the experts screw up from time to time.


----------



## Wood

A job and a half.... Great progress and thank you for your posts.


----------



## Guest

Very impressive project, Lee.


----------



## Lee Willis

gunrunnerjohn said:


> Love all the detail Lee. Interesting about the cab, so even the experts screw up from time to time.


Not sure I'm an expert as much as just persistent . . .


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Well, persistence pays off at times.


----------



## Dano

Making the cab removable is a super idea, Lee!


----------



## Lee Willis

Just an update because it has been two weeks and no word. That is because I haven't made much progress. At my company, I had to work full time and travel for a week, real downer except it was sort of fun to travel on someone else's dime. And it can get hot in the attic workshop even with my tiny window unit on, so I don't like to work much up thereon 96 degree days after 2 PM.

Anyway, I have made a little progress, but very little. I'm now waiting on some long thin brass rod for railings and pipe. Here is is with some of the external boiler piping in place, but not a lot, yet. Hope to get the headlight installed today or tomorrow, and that those brass rods get here soon. The end is in side, though.


----------



## PatKn

It's getting close. Starting to look like a locomotive. 

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Spence

Boy is that going to be a long one when it’s done.


----------



## Vincent

Lookin' sharp!


----------



## Guest

Big, big project. Only a very skilled craftsman would attempt this project.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Lee, you are doubtless going to have some of the most unique locomotives of anyone I know. That's really coming along nicely!


----------



## Vincent

I'm looking forward to seeing the videos.


----------



## PDDMI

Lee...Time to order one of these...hope you have room for it in your trainroom, because it appears as though you might need it...


----------



## CSXJOE

Saw the engine in person the other day, very impressive.


----------



## Lee Willis

CSXJOE said:


> Saw the engine in person the other day, very impressive.


Thanks. Yeah, it was nice you visited. I enjoyed showing it to you.


----------



## Lee Willis

Progress of sorts. The basic loco is done and finished a two-hour run pulling 12 cars on the layout this morning. Still a lot of details to add (including that headlight) and the cab interior to complete, etc. But at this point it has moved from the workshop downstairs to my desk. I've got most fine modeling tools here. I'll be working on it more often now, as I add lots of detail. Getting close!


----------



## PatKn

Can't wait to see it finished. Great work, Lee.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Very cool, this will truly be a unique locomotive!


----------



## Lee Willis

*The Model Building is Done*

It is looking very good, I must say. I'm letting filler and all harden for a day and a half and will then sand the filler a bit and mask and prime it this weekend. Probably final paint late next week. 

A good deal of finish modeling after it is painted, but still. 

Damn it looks big and complex!! Just like I hoped it would.


----------



## Lehigh74

Looks like a lot of work has gone into it. Must feel good to be in the home stretch.


----------



## Wood

Yup, it sure does look "big and complex". Nice job on many parts, but the hand rails and the strapping stand out and look great. Nice spacing and alignment. It looks like a walk up porch on the front of the boiler.


----------



## rdmtgm

truly amazing work!


Randy


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Very neat with all the added detail, it will be an impressive beast when you're done. Hell, it's pretty impressive right now!


----------



## Scotie

Never had thought about the hand rails, how do they "bend"?


----------



## Lee Willis

Okay, this is the last posting here. The model building is done. It is in primer now, and when it's painted and finished (probably two weeks, one just to let paint harden, etc.) I will post all about it. 

Here it is masked and ready to paint.








I had two tender bodies, given I started with two LC+ locos, so I sanded and primed and will paint both: I can't decide if satin or semi-gloss paint will look better, so I will paint one of them with each and after a day or two, decide which looks better. Cab is removable, as you see, so I paint it separately.








The loco itself just after primer went on. It is still shiny and wet.


----------



## Spence

It looks good in primer. I'm assuming your using rattle cans!


----------



## Lee Willis

Spence said:


> It looks good in primer. I'm assuming your using rattle cans!


You assume right. I've learned to work with them, always Rustoleum gray primer, usually Rustoleum enamels, sometimes their fast drying lacquer though.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

This is going to be a truly unique piece, can't wait to see the finished product. One of the more impressive builds I've seen Lee, you're really setting the bar pretty high!


----------



## PatKn

This is an awesome looking engine. Can't wait to see the final product. 

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## papa3rail

That thing is looking pretty cool Lee,nice work.


----------



## Lee Willis

I am heartbroken to report that the bendable boiler Mallet is no more. Something went horribly wrong with the paint, and slowly it crazed and bubbled, as if acid had been poured on the surface, all over the loco. I tested trying to remove the paint by hand and brush with thinner and start over, but whatever went wrong actually ate some of the plastic and softened and distorted it. 

So it is one very frustrating failure. I said I would report the project warts and all, and this is a pretty big wart, but after working for several hours on trying to clean it up, and gave up. Hopeless.

I had fun building it and it was so close to done, but . . . not going to start over. It's the type of project that is fun the first time but work the second. 

Anyway, that is the full report. All gone.


----------



## papa3rail

Well that sucks Lee. Sorry to see all your splendid efforts go to waste.It was a cool idea.


----------



## PatKn

What a shame. You were close to completing a fantastic engine. That's what sometimes happens. Thanks for sharing. 

Pat

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## seayakbill

WOW, big time bummer. Was looking forward to see it in action.

Bill


----------



## Spence

I am so sorry to hear of the demise of this project. As far as I can remember back (Not counting the "Simple Grren" fiasco) this is your first major failure.


----------



## Big Jim

Lee Willis said:


> Something went horribly wrong with the paint, and slowly it crazed and bubbled, as if acid had been poured on the surface, all over the loco. I tested trying to remove the paint by hand and brush with thinner and start over, but whatever went wrong actually ate some of the plastic and softened and distorted it.
> ...All gone.


If you would have used a proper model paint that wouldn't have happened! 
I've tried to educate you forumites about that, but, my warnings fall on deaf ears.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

That is truly a bummer Lee, I was really looking forward to seeing that one completed!


----------



## Lehigh74

The tone of your post is incredibly composed after such a heart-breaking fiasco. If that had happened at my house the aftermath would probably have been some very colorful language…and possibly a flying mallet.

You said you are not going to start over, but maybe in time you will change your mind. You have put so much into it and it would be a super nice and unique loco…assuming of course that it didn’t have any flying lessons.


----------



## Lee Willis

Thank you guys. I wrote that in a moment of extreme dis-appointment. 

I have no idea what happened. My mistake was not testing the new can of paint first. I had a new can of paint, Rustoleum satin black, which is BAD. I've used it successfully before many times (e.g., my painting of Lionel's brass hybrid, for example, which two forum members saw when they visited, and commented looked really good). Anyway, I had used the paint before and didn't bother to test the new can before using it. 

I tested the can again later this morning on some scrap plastic. Whatever solvent is in it not only eats away at primer but softens plastic, warping thin (.04 plastic sheet and crinkling it. Amazing. But my fault. I found an older can with paint still in it, and tested that, and its fine. So I have no idea what is wrong. Two identical looked cans, one is toxic, the other fine paint. My bad luck, but I should have tested the new can first, so it's on me. 

As to the loco. I am trying to find a way to clean the mess off. But it is really bad. Many small plastic parts are ruined/warped, eaten away. Its like an acid hit them. I want to try to save it, but boy, I 
don't think I can.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Just think Lee, you know how you did it, so rebuilding should be quicker. hwell: Seriously, this is a major bummer, I was so looking forward to seeing this baby in action. I do hope you can save it.


----------



## seayakbill

Lee, set it aside for a month or two. It will be a great winter project to get it back on the rails.

Bill


----------



## Lee Willis

An update. I would not say I am optimistic but I have some hope. Still not sure it can be saved, but I spent all morning cleaning off the "goo" that had been paint and primer - actually had to scrape it off using small plastic chisels I made from sheet styrene - I did it as best I could, and removed most of the warped, puffy plastic where the paint actually melted or puffed it up. It was a huge mess, but I think with some light sanding and a few days of repair, maybe . . . . 

Here you see it doing so test runs a few minutes ago. I have a few days of sanding and repair and reattch many parts that came lose, make new ones where I have to, and all that, then a day to mask it (takes over an hour) and then prime it again (along with something to later test the paint with), then based on how that looks when dry and hardened at least four days, try to paint it again, but this time test the paint itself right before i spray it!

I am really ready for this project to be over, sort of sick on working on it now.


----------



## Wood

I am with all the rest Lee. It was a great project and learned a lot from reading your techniques and viewing your progress through your pictures. One more lesson learned - test the paint. RustOleum - that is unbelievable, it is such a good paint.


----------



## Vincent

I'm sorry to hear that, Lee.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I am hopeful that you can save it Lee, it's really a bummer that happened, I'm sure I'd be pretty sick right after that as well!


----------



## Dano

Sorry for your tribulations Lee, that just sucks on so many levels. I had a similar thing happen with a hobby paint (thank you Jim!) that I had been using just fine and then it attacked and savaged whatever plastic a Lionel tender shell was made from. 
I hope you are able to save it.


----------



## Guest

I am sorry for all the trouble you are having, Lee. I would not have tested a paint that I know from experience is safe on plastic. A paint that attacks both plastic and primer is unexpected.

I'm glad that you may be able to save the project. Rustoleum must have changed the formula for the paint or added ingredients not used previously. Or they screwed up at the factory and it's a bad can.

Good luck with the project. I hope you are able to complete it and enjoy running the loco for very many years.


----------



## Lee Willis

Thanks for all the encouraging words guys. 

I spent 14 hours on it yesterday, until late last night. It was a huge Ugh! cleaning it up, then repairing many tiny pieces that were eaten/warped. Really messy, intricate and slow. Then three hours more early this morning. The job wasn't absolutely perfect, but its in primer now (for only about three hours now), so back to about ten days ago as far as compleeing it. Inspecting it closely a few places a a bit rougher than they were originally and will need sanding and cosmetic attention, but I think it will be okay.


----------



## Guest

Very nice work, Lee. It looks really good.


----------



## Vincent

Looks like a success, Lee.


----------



## Fabforrest

What paint will you use this time?


----------



## PW Trains

Lee,

Looks like you saved it from the scrap heap. There is no quit in you!


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I'm sure it's easier to see any "warts" up close, but it looks pretty good in the picture. I'm glad you decided to give it one more chance as it truly is a unique piece!


----------



## Spence

Well we saw that engine primed once before and look what happened. We’re all hoping this time that it turns out to be a great success.


----------



## Vincent

Fabforrest said:


> What paint will you use this time?


 Shoe polish. It can't be worse than the last brand.


----------



## Nikola

Lee Willis said:


> .......I tested the can again later this morning on some scrap plastic. Whatever solvent is in it not only eats away at primer but softens plastic, warping thin (.04 plastic sheet and crinkling it. Amazing. But my fault. I found an older can with paint still in it, and tested that, and its fine. So I have no idea what is wrong. Two identical looked cans, one is toxic, the other fine paint......


Sorry for the issue but what you report kind of makes sense. Due to VOC regulations and consumer demand for paint that dries 'instantly', the solvents in newer spray paint - including Rustoleum - is different. Whatever they used is 'hotter' for the thin styrene, and there you go.

There are several ways to prevent. One is to use spray paint that is formulated for plastic. One is called Fusion and I believe it is either Krylon or Rustoleum.

Another is to use a sealer, as used in the automotive trade. Probably out of the practical range for the home hobbyist.

A third is to use a known good primer in extremely thin, dry coats with absolute curing in between. Top coat with more thin, dry coats and let cure. Finish with a wetter coat to permit it to flow out.

Lastly, use a water-based paint. These are becoming more and more available.

Glad to see you are rebuilding. It is a setback but this piece is too unique to abandon.

"We have the technology - we can rebuild him (it)."

EDIT: Thorough - and I mean thorough - curing of the primer before topcoating is absolutely critical, especially when the topcoat has a different solvent than the primer. The primer will skin so that it feels dry to the touch, but the thick wet coats are not cured all the way down. Topcoat is and the hotter topcoat solvent dissolves some of the primer, two different solvents cure differently, and voila! This is how wrinkle paint works. Two different solvents that cure at different rates, with different shrinkage, and the pigment cures wrinkled. Add in the thin styrene that is susceptible to the hotter solvent and - sadness.


----------



## Big Jim

Back when Floquil used to be Floquil, it was a lacquer. They made a sealer called "Barrier" and it worked great. Since Floquil is gone, I have been using a sealer from Scalecoat when I am working with lacquer on plastic. I don't know if it is still available.


----------



## c.midland

Lee, Please be careful on your second time around, unless you are absolutely sure it's that can of paint. My experience with Rustoleum tells me not to rule out the primer. It may seem dry, but under the surface, it may not be cured. The solvent in the paint may be incompatable with the primer. In other words, the primer by itself may be okay, and the paint by itself may be okay, but the two together are caustic. Rustoleum is a very inconsistent product.


----------



## Lee Willis

It will cure a week before I touch it. That always seems enough. But first I will test the paint on a clear plastic box like diecast cars come in, that I sprayed at the same time with the same can of primer. 

I used a new can of primer, too. I suspect Rustoleum changed the primer formula on me, although that can of paint seems mildly toxic, like it had way too much of something it it. I have a new can (and a very old can of it I can also fall back on, if I have problems.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

I'm still looking forward to seeing this completed, I'm really glad you didn't have to abandon it.


----------



## HarborBelt1970

*Nothing worth doing is easy*



gunrunnerjohn said:


> I'm still looking forward to seeing this completed, I'm really glad you didn't have to abandon it.


Same from me. I’ll add just a little from my own recent experience in case it helps.

1. Trying to use paints and related products, especially thinners, from different suppliers does not always work. Anyone who has experimented with an airbrush has very likely found that certain thinners and airbrush cleaners can cause monumental problems if used with paints other than those they were specifically designed to match. 

2. Here you have spray cans of the same brand (Rustoleum) and they have not worked on plastic. Yes, the formulas have changed but in essence Rustoleum is a metal paint, right? Metal is a lot tougher and less temperature-sensitive surface than plastic, of which there are innumerable varieties and styrene is only one. Styrene will disolve if certain types of adhesives/solvents are applied to it and indeed I think that it must be designed to do that. 

3. Rattle can spray paints are a lot more user-friendly than the more specialized railroad-specific airbrush paints I have tried. But I have stuck with those that say explicitly on the label that they are suitable for plastics. As pointed out earlier in this thread, Krylon makes plastic primer (in white and gray) and many finish paints that are described as suitable for plastic. These have given me no trouble at all; same goes for Testors paints and Amazon will deliver either to your door in a vast variety of finishes.

4. In your position, I’d stick with the primer you have used and let it set up for several days. If the finish over that is intended to be some kind of semi-gloss black, I would not trust to a hardware store generic product but use one that is described as suitable for modeling. Here Testors (and Krylon) seem to me to have the edge.

Good luck!


----------



## C.Vigs

Good luck Lee, and I hope things work out the second time around. I'm sure we've all had projects set back by elements out of our control; I know I have. 

~C.Vigs


----------



## teledoc

Lee, I’m glad you didn’t give up on such a unique project, and with some luck, it should be a sight to behold. As far as the topcoat, my choice “Hands Down”, is KRYLON. If you can find it in the “Fusion” Satin Black, you will not be disappointed with the results.

I have had Nothing but problems with Rustoleum paints, when dealing with plastics. As mentioned above, Rustoleum was primarily designed for METAL, not plastics. I personally, Will Not use Rustoleum for anything but metal!!!!:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## c.midland

Lee, even though you're giving the primer a week to cure, make sure after that time it has really cured. Again it may seem cured, but it may not be. Either prime something else or find an a hidden part of your model and try to scratch or scrape a little primer off. If it comes of easily, gooey, or anything different than a powder, I wouldn't go any further. In other words, don't rule out that the primer may be bad! 

As stated above, Krylon is a little more consistent, though still a cheap paint. If you've ever noticed, you see a lot more Krylon in craft stores than rustoleum. Think Rustoleum for "industrial" man-type projects, and Krylon for "household" projects.

I've been in the aircraft paint industry for 20 years, and the automotive paint industry before that.


----------



## njrailer93

c.midland said:


> Lee, even though you're giving the primer a week to cure, make sure after that time it has really cured. Again it may seem cured, but it may not be. Either prime something else or find an a hidden part of your model and try to scratch or scrape a little primer off. If it comes of easily, gooey, or anything different than a powder, I wouldn't go any further. In other words, don't rule out that the primer may be bad!
> 
> As stated above, Krylon is a little more consistent, though still a cheap paint. If you've ever noticed, you see a lot more Krylon in craft stores than rustoleum. Think Rustoleum for "industrial" man-type projects, and Krylon for "household" projects.
> 
> I've been in the aircraft paint industry for 20 years, and the automotive paint industry before that.


I second that. I only use testers dukl cost which is a rustoleum product. Everything else I use is krylon. I’ve also had luck with Lowe’s brand


----------



## mrich_30047

Lee:
What is the status of this project?


----------



## Lehigh74

mrich_30047 said:


> Lee:
> What is the status of this project?


https://www.modeltrainforum.com/showthread.php?t=173426


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

That would be done!


----------

