It's not brass and it still needs a coonskin number plate but Proto 2000 0-6-0 is the finest running locomotive on my 1947-1950 roster. I simply added a Lenz Silver decoder with Back EMF and changed the lamps per the mfr instructions. It will literally crawl and I have not adjusted any of the CVs on the decoder. I would be interested in any other experiences with the Proto 2000 0-6-0 along with any modifications I can make to make it look even better (Don W.?). I am no steam expert and appreciate the help. In the photos you will see #3803 in Merriam after it has crossed Johnson Drive heading south to Lenexa with the local. The north bound frieght is waiting for the Rosedale dispatcher to clear him into KC and is holding just short of the grade crossing at Johnson Drive. Ship IT on the Frisco! Rick
Howdy Rick, I had a similar experience after installing a Tsunami in my 3800. It didn't pull as much as I'd like, so I put it on the work bench to add weight. Sigh, unknown to me, I must have bumped a bottle of CA and it tilted against the valve gear. It wicked enough CA to turn the gear into a blob. I tried getting new parts, to no avail, so it is in the box waiting for a miracle. I sure miss it. It ran so nicely in the yard. Best Regards, mike
Mike, Don't give up on getting the parts from Walthers. I have even given them a call directly telling them what I needed and received parts free of charge within a few days. That's too nice a model to keep it out of revenue service. Last resort would be to pick one up (cheap hopefully) at a swap meet . . . . . I am fortunate enought to have a few of the Overland brass coonskins for number plates on my steam engines. I understand that Brian Marsh is no longer making Overland parts. I found that #3803 will pull 20 cars on level track and still get decent traction. Maybe I should add some weight to mine . . .. Ship IT on the Frisco! Rick Rick
Were all the 3800 series USRA 0-6-0's oil burners like Rick's 3803. Have a Proto 2000 with sound located for purchase, but it has a coal tender. John
Locomotives arrived as coal burners, but all were converted to oil. see: http://www.frisco.org/vb/showthread.php?p=17404#post17404
All of the 3800s were delivered to Frisco as coal burners. In the Frisco archive is a letter to Mr G. B. Perkins, dated April 4, 1925 describing conversion of numerous (about 28) locomotives that were converted to burn oil and the appropriate AFE (authorization for expenditure) file number. On the list are engines 3800, converted in June 1923, Rick's engine 8303, converted April 1923, 3805, converted May 1923, all on AFE 3144. A family friend observed prior to WW2 that there were many oil bunkers sitting around the Springfield West Shops and was told the price of coal had dropped, so some engines had been converted back to coal. It may have had more to do with reassignment of engines to a coal burning division, but the story may be true. So far I have not seen a drawing, or even a diagram of the non-USRA tenders. I have tried to sort out the origin of the 1940s era tenders by looking at rivet patterns and end steps. There may be at least 3 varieties, or origins of those tenders. It appears Frisco may have used retired 4-6-0 tenders, or perhaps nothing more than the tender frames with new tanks. In any case the Proto-2000 model and Rick's model are beautiful and the tender is certainly close enough as is. I have a photo 0f 3802 in Birmingham (about 1948) and in Springfield on 9-10-1950. Larry Buffington (Lee's son) started about 1950 and commented that this engine was serviced at the brand new diesel shop rather than the round house to the east. Otherwise the 3800s appear to have been stationed at Tulsa in modern times. John Sanders
Attached is a sperad sheet of 3800 photos and notes. I do believe the tender trucks on most of the engines are similar to those under the 1613 Russian decapods. John Sanders
This is what I did to mine. I also installed a decoder in it. I thought about doing the tender as a Frisco, but instead just removed the numbers and replaced them with the correct height ones (24"). Not a bad little engine. I hope I don't get flamed too badly for owning a plastic engine. It was a freebie or I wouldn't have it.
Friscomike, all is not lost. All you need is some CA debonder. I'm pretty sure that you will be able to get the running gear freed up!
Howdy folks, I just wanted to report that I had good luck with Z-7 Debonder on the valve gear of my Proto 0-6-0. The CA had soaked into the valve guides, links, crossheads, etc and took a bit of work to get it off. The way the debonder works is that it turns the CA to a gel. You need to brush and scrape the resulting gel off. Thanks for the tips to remove it; worked like a champ. Thanks folks, mike
Mike: In your opinion would that debonder be alright to use on plastic? I have a couple of models that I purchased that the previous owner got a little over zealous with the CA. I have never used a debonder before. I have always just used a razor knife to get my fingers apart. Ha ha! Bob Wintle
Howdy Bob, I used it on the plastic bits of the valve gear with no problem. In fact, most of the parts I debonded were plastic. The Z-7 bottle says it will not harm plastics. I think the active ingredient is probably acetone held in suspension by a gel of somekind so it won't evaporate. The bottles are a bit pricey, but in my case, was worth the gamble. CA is hard and brittle when dry, so removing it is down to filing or grinding. The debonder gives a nice alternative. I used a brass wire brush and tip of an Xacto knife to clean the valve gear after using the debonder. Try it.... I've used fingernail polish remover to debond my fingers...until I saw the active ingredient was acetone. I had some so now keep some handy to clean up with. Best, mike
The debonder does not contain acetone, that it why it is safe with plastics. The debonder "undoes" the polymer chains of the CA glue on a molecular level. Just like the glue, it was orginally developed during WWII for the U.S. Military by Eastman Kodak to use as a "field fix" to stop severe bleeding by closing wounds until soldiers could be delivered to a field hospital. That is why it needs moisture to bond and bonds so well to skin. There's your trivia for the day!
Maybe that explains something that I just ran into. A good friend of mine passed away several months ago. His daughter recently called me to "come and get his trains". We had built a layout together back in the late '70s. He built several Ramax and similar freight cars, using the "super glue" of the day. To my dismay, upon opening the boxes, nearly every car had fallen apart ! Would this have been a moisture issue, or did it never bond to begin with? I can't really tell. Looking at the stuff, it seems that it could be either.
Many plastic injection molded parts have a thin coat of a mold release agent on the surface. This helps get the part out of the mold. It could be that over time, the early "super glue" just plain lost its grip due to the release agent still being on the surface. I also built the Ramax ACF Center Flow hopper kit and I recall the plastic being a bit "greasy" due to the agent on the surface. I never did anything about it, and the Ramax is still in one piece, but I used solvent cement. I imagine the solvent would have cut through the film with no problem. Ken
Aside from moisture, surface texture is significant in CA bonding. Many plastics will not allow a bond with most CA glues, especially the early formulations. I have some CA that was sold by a company CoolChem, that is the first that I have ever found that will bond to HDPE (milk jugs), any metal, and rubber (you can't get the joint to break). They have a special primer felt pen for plastics that you rub on the surface before applying the glue, followed by an spray activator (smells like Zip Kicker) that set off the chemical reaction. Here is their website: http://www.coolchem.com/ These guys have the same formulation supposedly: http://www.cypox.com/home.html?gclid=CMHsr5zJ-ZkCFSAhDQodXXdyFw
